As I noted yesterday, the agenda for Thursday’s meeting of Auckland Council’s transport committee has now been published online. As well as talking about the CBD Rail Tunnel, the agenda provides members of the transport committee with a brief update on major transport projects around the Auckland region (though it is odd that integrated ticketing is listed, but then no information on it is provided – what’s up with that?)
Of particular interest is what the briefing says about the Puhoi-Wellsford holiday highway:
Officials are typically very reluctant to say things that are critical of projects. So therefore it’s quite interesting to read this – which criticises the project on a number of fronts: for its failure to address immediate safety issues, its encouragement of urban sprawl, the fact that it will use up funds that could be directed towards projects that are priorities for the Auckland region – like the CBD rail tunnel.
This indicates to me that the feeling amongst officials at Auckland Council is very much not in favour of the project. It will be interesting to see what position the transport committee takes on the project – including the contents of their eventual submission on the current proposed Puhoi-Warkworth alignment.
Processing...
maybe they should talk to POAL about how they want their cargo to arrive. Already most of the dairy traffic from Northland is railed, and Fonterra are massviely increasing freight of rail, not decreasing it.
Almost all timber/logs for export goes straight from Marsden Point near Whangarei, so not sure why thats an issue.
And with aggregate most will be destined for this project!!, which will push the price up for everyone else in Auckland doing much more economically beneficial things.
I think the holiday highway tag is sticking so NZTA re trying to invent all these other reasons why the highway is necessary.
The report should also mention that this is a toll road. The cost of the toll and the effect on traffic volumes has not been factored into the already weak BCR.
Indeed. It’s interesting to read what the business case for the Waterview Connections says about tolling (a couple of design iterations ago, but the same argument holds true in terms of tolling):
http://www.transport.govt.nz/ourwork/Documents/Business%20case%20for%20the%20Waterview%20Connection.pdf <<-- page three of this document. It's difficult seeing why the results for Puford would be any different.
surely if a $2 causes significant traffic diversion, then the motorway is not worth $2 to those people, therefore the supposed economic benefits occurring are somewhat overstated?
I would contend that the majority of motorway benefits accrue to a minority of users, ie the plumbers, engineers etc.
When motorways encourage people to drive much further to go to a megamall this is really a disbenefit because the users congest the road for those with important business. However I bet the BCR process would count this as a benefit of increased economic activity.
It’s quite interesting to note that they have made peak oil feature in there too. Nice touch. Good to see that Auckland Council is with us on this.
Several key issues were discussed at a meeting today (17 Dec) with Green MP Gareth Hughes and residents affected by the proposed Puhoi-Warkworth motorway extension. If an alternate proposal is to be lobbied for, it needs to be fully considered and documented. In my view the existing ‘Project Lifesaver’ alternative has several shortcomings or omissions, and some controversial elements. For example, wire rope barriers (WRBs) at the side of the road could cause as many deaths as they save. It would be useful to see a properly documented alternative proposal in both full and summary form.
With regard to the Puhoi Warkworth component of an alternate proposal I feel the following points are amongst those that need to be considered and agreed on:
– where should the Warkworth bypass would be routed and how will it connect with the town?
– which sections of the route should be expanded to three lanes, where, and favouring which direction?
– where does the route need to be realigned?
– what sorts of median or side barriers are most appropriate? (a concrete median barrier for as much of the route as practicable, with minimum side barriers and roadside hazards removed where appropriate)
– what provision will be made for merging and access/exit lanes or a widened shoulder for side roads on the route and residents whose properties are accessed directly from the highway?
– which of the six bridges (including the Pohuehue viaduct) between Puhoi and Warkworth need to be widened or rebuilt or realigned?
– what commitment will the government make to improving the northland rail link to ease freight congestion?
A clear and complete alternate proposal needs to be made available for public review.