A week or so ago the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) notified NZTA’s application for consent to build the Waterview Connection and to widen State Highway 16. Submissions are now open until October 15th. It’s possible to download a submission form here, and then email it to both waterview@epa.govt.nz and waterview.connection@nzta.govt.nz. There are effectively two parts to the project: the Waterview Connection, which links the Mt Roskill end of State Highway 20 with the existing Northwest Motorway (SH16) and also a significant widening of State Highway 16. All up the two projects will cost around $2 billion – by far New Zealand’s largest ever transport project. Here’s an aerial photo of where significant parts of the project will be located: The documentation that has been prepared by NZTA is pretty massive, and really needs some breaking down in order to make sense out of it. We have:

  1. A general overview of the proposal – including all the application forms. This is a pretty boring section that isn’t really worth reading.
  2. The various assessments of effects. A lot of this is either quite technical, or a summary of the various specialist reports that I will mention later.
  3. The plans, maps and diagrams. There is a huge amount of information here, though some of the more interesting plans include operational scheme plans (keep an eye out for the green bus shoulder lanes and how they abruptly end at every onramp and offramp), a plan of the rail alignment and how it is being protected and some of the urban design and landscaping plans (though they are pretty big files!)
  4. The specialist reports. Here is where the real grunt work behind the application lies, with a large number of specialist reports being prepared. Perhaps of most interest to readers of this blog will be the transport assessment and the traffic modelling information.

I have blogged extensively on both the Waterview Connection and the SH16 widening in the past – and I’m pretty familiar with the project due to the various iterations it went through last year. One particularly interesting aspect of the documentation is the transport assessment, and how it addresses what is my main remaining issue with the project – and that is whether widening State Highway 16 is a complete waste of money because it will just “induce” traffic and quickly become congested again (just like what has happened with every other motorway widening project in the history of Auckland).

While the transport assessment is over 180 pages long and requires some serious effort to read through (something I certainly haven’t done in any detail). It has a very useful summary of the findings – in particular on the matter relating to whether widening SH16 will actually have long term benefits or not. To start with, it is worth noting the transport benefits the project will almost certainly have – particularly on the local road network that through-traffic will now be able to avoid: In order to realise many of the benefits to Great North Road, Carrington Road and Mt Albert Road it will be necessary to reallocate some of the road space to more “people friendly” uses – such as bus lanes, footpaths, cycleways and so forth. It will be interesting to see whether this happens or not, as both NZTA and Auckland City Council seem to have been pointing fingers at each other saying “your problem” over these matters for the last couple of years.

Getting on to the traffic effects on the actual motorways themselves, it’s a little bit wordy – but well worth having a dig through: In short, we see the motorway widening inducing an additional 25-35% of peak hour traffic by 2026 than was the case in 2006 (I do wonder what the “do nothing” for 2026 is – might have to have a dig through the documentation). That’s a quite significant amount of extra traffic that will need to get to and from the motorway along arterial roads that are generally around capacity at the moment. Looking at the peak hour eastbound direction (AM peak), it seems that there will be a slight improvement in travel times compared to the 2006 baseline. But for the peak hour westbound direction (PM peak), traffic in 2026 will actually be more congested than it is now – even though much of the westbound motorway will be widened from three lanes to five lanes. It seems that NZTA have finally acknowledged that widening motorways does not fix congestion. (Actually perhaps not, they’re still proceeding with the project).

The cost of the SH16 upgrade is not insignificant. When the whole Westgate to Western Springs widening is added up, an NZ Herald article from last year suggested that the cost would be $860 million. That seems an awfully huge amount of money to spend on a project that seems like it won’t actually make things much better at all.

The public transport benefits of the project are talked up a bit in the section below – and sure there will be some benefit from the longer bus shoulder lanes. But it’s pretty marginal compared with the project as a whole – perhaps a million or two out of the $2 billion budget. I look forward to seeing how the public submission process, and the eventual Board of Inquiry hearing proceeds. It feels like it has been so long in the “preliminary” stages of this project that it’s quite hard to believe we’re actually now right in the middle of the actual submissions process.

In general, I find myself probably supporting the SH20 section on balance – as it should take significant pressure of SH1, should take traffic away from local streets (as long as we reallocate road space to ensure the streets don’t fill themselves up again) and will “complete the motorway network”. However, with the SH16 section, while I can understand one additional westbound lane (to avoid a merging nightmare between SH20 and SH16), the massive widening of the motorway seems completely pointless – as NZTA’s own traffic analysis shows that it will make little or no difference to congestion in the longer-run. Surely a big chunk of that $860 million could be spent more usefully elsewhere?

Share this

4 comments

  1. I do support the tunnels in Waterview and I can see them giving a huge benefit however I do question how many cars it would actually take off Gt North Rd, many of them are coming from areas not near the SH20 route so will continue to use that route.

    Its so frustrating to see so much money being put into this yet so little going towards making a decent improvement to PT. While the bus lanes are an improvement on what there is now they are clearly just an afterthought and have been tacked onto the side where they can, as you say buses will still have to battle to merge with traffic at each interchange which will just slow everyone down. We have seen the same thing with Tamaki Dr when T2 cars to the same thing to get around buses, the general traffic lane slows down. Also there is no westbound bus lane between Patiki Rd and Rosebank Rd.

    I wonder how much it would cost to put a proper busway in, it surely wouldn’t be as much as the Northern one as most of the costs with these sorts of projects is the setup which is being done as part of the wider works.

    Lastly one big problem I see is people who don’t understand the technical reasons for it will see the 5 lanes westbound and call for that width on the whole motorway, in a way it is a way that NZTA can keep continuing to widen other areas to alleviate bottlenecks they create.

  2. One thing I’ve been mulling over is the large swale type section of width they are building along one side, as I understand it this is a large permeable run-off zone intended to filter motorway stormwater before it works it’s way into the harbour.
    My question is (for any civil engineers out there), could this space still serve the same function if a railway was built on top? Given that railways are built on a base of permeable ballast building a rail line there might actually improve the function of this structure.

  3. “Lastly one big problem I see is people who don’t understand the technical reasons for it will see the 5 lanes westbound and call for that width on the whole motorway, in a way it is a way that NZTA can keep continuing to widen other areas to alleviate bottlenecks they create.”

    Actually, the different lane numbers are intentional, because the projected demands are unequal over the lengths too. While the modelling can always be wrong and reality turn out different, I am not so suspicious of NZTA that they would sneak in 5 lanes just to create future bottlenecks.

  4. Spent too many hours on a recent flight from Vancouver to Auckland reading through the documents. Jeez they certainly are thorough… I’ve never seen anything like this amount of info in any type of RMA application before. Three things:

    1. The e-book file format is flash, and probably is great on a decent sized desktop monitor with a proper mouse but sucks on a 15 inch laptop for ploughing through large documents (like 885 odd pages of the AEE)
    2. Pg 53 of Pact A-C of the AEE mentions that “the Constellation to Albany Highway upgrades remain” – I’m taking this to mean that the NZTA intends to upgrade this section of SH18 to full motorway, with motorway connections to SH1. They may be more references to this buried later in the documents…I missed them. Pg 54 has a good diagram showing future lane numbers on the WRR.
    3. On Page 128 of Part D of the AEE the NZTA gives projected figures on traffic flows both with the WRR complete and without the WRR. Interestingly the Auckland Harbour Bridge daily vpd count will is not expected to change with or without a completed WRR.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *