There has been discussion for many years about whether a local road bridge connection should be made between Te Atatu South and the Rosebank industrial area. The latest Transport Committee agenda raises the project as a potential option – to add to the list of major transport projects considered at last month’s meeting of the Committee.

Here’s what’s said: There’s also a useful map outlining a few options for the bridge’s route:While I’m generally not one to jump on support of a transport project that is unlikely to have too many public transport benefits, I actually think there’s a reasonable amount of logic to this project. It would divert traffic away from a couple of really nasty bottlenecks: the southern end of Rosebank Road and the stretch of Te Atatu Road between Edmonton Road and the motorway. In fact, it could have been a useful alternative to the massively expensive widening of State Highway 16 currently being progressed by NZTA.

Now that the upgrade to SH16 is progressing, I think it’s unlikely this Whau Crossing project will go ahead any time soon. And I think that’s a shame – I’m a fan of transport projects that give people more options, rather than widening existing roads: where the congestion relief gains are usually quickly lost to induced demand.

Share this


  1. A Whau crossing would indeed grant more transport choices to local users, benefit the industrial area and reduce several bottlnecks in Te Atatu. It’s a sensible proposal all around, so of course NZTA will have nothing to do with it.

  2. This is something I have long said should be done as it would take pressure of both the Gt North Rd and Te Atatu Rd intersections. I grew up out west and it was always a long trip either way to the motorway and this would definitely make a difference. The problem of course is funding and under the old council structure there would have been no benefit to Auckland City so there is no way they would have helped fund it.

    My feeling is it has to go from the roundabout on Rosebank Rd but whether it then goes to McLeod Rd or Hepburn I’m not sure about, there are advantages and disadvantages for both but either way we need to consider this.

    Another thing is that while widening the motorway will unfortunately make this project more unlikely, this could be useful if we wanted to reclaim some lanes for a busway.

  3. The major problem IMO is that the Rosebank area is an area that should really be housing not light industrial. I honestly think 74 million could be better spent on bike paths not concreting over more of Auckland’s wetlands.

  4. A no brainer that has been on the books since the 1960s. This has huge potential PT benefits if combined with bus / carpool priority. Buses currently take over an hour to get to Te Atatu from the CBD and vice versa in the peak (12-13 km as the crow flies) and of course don’t go to Rosebank. Fallen between the cracks of two local authorities and a motorway focused National Roads Board / Transit NZ / NZTA for decades.

  5. Great idea, and should be considered in the context of a NW Busway, as Jarbury has advocated. If alternative access is being provided across the river, a portion of the motorway should be designated a busway.

    Ultimately, in a few years, that would mean PT-dedictaed corridors coming from the North (busway), NW (busway), west (rail), south (rail) and SSE (AMETI busway).


  6. We can try to put the Whau River Bridge into the SH16 widening project and have the RosebankTe Atatu portion kept at 6 lanes (3 each way) instead of being widened to 8 (4 each way), or better have the Te Atatu-Rosebank built as the first sdtasge of a future North West busway.

  7. Straight through the Rosebank Rd Partiki Rd roundabout and a bridge over the Whau leads pretty much directly to McLeod Rd. Looking at Google Maps only one or two building would have to go.

  8. This project would have large PT benefits. Direct access for Glen Eden, Henderson and Titirangi buses to the Waterview section of SH16 (without spending hours at the New North or Te Atatu interchange gridlocks)- would save at least 15 mins commuting time into the CBD. Now considering we are spending $900 mill to bring Warkworth 5 mins closer to Puhoi you’d have to say good value

  9. NZTA preferred option 3 (cyan), WCC option 4 (blue), both connected to Hepburn St. I think Hepburn is a better choice than McLeod. Hepburn offers a connection to a population further from the motorway, such as Glen Eden and the general area west of New Lynn. It still has a good connection via View Rd to Henderson. I think McLeod is too far North, too close to areas already well connected to the motorway via Lincoln Rd & Te Atatu Rd.

  10. Hepburn Rd may be a good option to service areas such as Glen Eden, however; those areas are already well serviced by Rata St and Great North Road. IMO there would not be a worthwhile benifit for people in those areas to travel further west on the motorway to exit at Patiki/Rosebank to cross the Whau into Hepburn.
    Te Atatu Rd has been getting progressivly worse with congestion between the motorway and the Edmonton Road round-a-bout every year. I think the only way to relieve this is by building the bridge from the round-a-bout on the rosebank peninsula to Mcleod Road, giving a direct link (and alternative route to Te Atatu Road) between Henderson (A major shopping/business centre) and the motorway.
    People heading to Te Atatu, Glendene and Henderson could then leave the motorway earlier (At Patiki/Rosebank) heading west, relieving congestion on the motorway west of the Rosebank Road, and also Te Atatu Road. Many people who live in Te Atatu work in the Rosebank Penninsula, so something needs to be done ASAP.

  11. While living in Glendene, I thought of a bridge crossing the Whau river in the vicinity of Hepburn road even before I knew of an official council project. Now I live in the Henderson/Sunnyvale and still think it would be hugely beneficial, especially for reducing congestion from Lincoln and TeAtatu roads. I also think that Hepburn road is the best crossing point because it allows more of the poorly connected areas access to Rosebank and to the motorway.

    I even wrote to the council about it and this was their reply: “Unfortunately the cost estimate for this project is very high (in the region of $100M) and the potential benefits are insufficient for the project to be considered high priority relative to other major projects in the region. It is therefore not currently budgeted for in the Long Term Council Community Plan and there are no immediate plans to implement this project in the near future. Therefore, it is not possible to provide you with any more details in regards to location, timeframe or the construction of the project.”

  12. The Hepburn Rd option has a far greater catchment area, Sunnyvale, Kelston, Glendene, Glen Eden.

    Something does need to be done about the amount of traffic on Te Atatu Rd from the Edmonton roundabout though. It is getting ridiculous. Buslanes of some sort?

  13. I think this should be revisited and prioritised. As land values increase and quality housing becomes scarcer, more professionals will be pushed into suburbs such as Kelston, Sunnyvale and Glendene. At present, the congestion is significant and worsening every day as all these suburbs, including Titirangi, all feed into one motorway access point.

    As more people in full time employment push into these suburbs, this will only worsen. I think this needs to be started SOON in order to be in place for this development.

    1. I believe that only the people living in Glendene can make a decision as to if a bridge is to be build. Statements referring to saving a few minutes does not stack up in the greater theme of things.

      Unless this single bridge solves a critical issue regarding West Auckland’s public transport Issues, I’m not for it. Nor do I believe a bridge at Hepburn Road will be used by Auckland Transport (AT). With private vehicle running costs are ever increasing, both the proposed toll system for Auckland City and ever increasing public parking, goes against feeding more private vehicles into the city.

      I would insist that a study be made by AT, into the feasibility of implementing short distance public transport, towards central transport hubs as an alternative be presented. To the Glendene community. For comments, review, further referral and a community referendum. Once this process has been exhausted, and no other solution found can the proposed bridge can be considered for a review.

      I believe that money should rather be invested to ensure that existing infrastructure continues to be improved and utilised. New development should only implemented if no current offering provides any comparable solution.

Leave a Reply