While all of the physical works for AMETI are happening in Panmure at the moment, it’s the future stages that will be the most interesting as that is when a new busway is built that will connect the Panmure Train Station to the Eastern Suburbs. Auckland Transport are still working though many of the finer details however the overall idea seems to be fairly similar to what we have seen before. With that in mind I thought I would have a look at some of the new details that have come out which are primarily the result of an open day held two weeks ago. This primarily relates to what is known as Phase 2 which is the section from Panmure to Pakuranga and is shown below.

Phase 2 map

AT expect that by the end of the year they will have their preferred scheme sorted out allowing them to start the process of lodging the notice of requirement with construction likely to begin in 2015. For this post I will move south from Panmure to Pakuranga.

As you may have seen, the plan is for a busway to start at the Panmure station and head south on the Northern side of the road through a signalised intersection which would replace the Panmure Roundabout. It will then head down Lagoon Dr, still on the Northern side but one thing I wasn’t aware of is that while Lagoon Dr will be widened to accommodate the busway and a shared path, the plan is to narrow the general traffic lanes down to one each way.

Lagoon Dr

Moving south there will be a new bridge built over the Tamaki River to carry the busway as well as a much improved walking and cycling path. It will remain on the northern side of the road all the way until Ti Rakau Dr and a number of the intersections from local streets will be closed. All up it should hopefully mean that buses will be able to get from Panmure to Ti Rakau Dr fairly quickly with little disruption. Further my understanding is that the council are already looking at what can be done with the left over land parcels after Auckland Transport have finished their work and that it is likely there will actually end up with more dwellings along the route than there are currently.

Panmure Bridge and Pakuranga Rd

But it is at Pakuranga where things get interesting. Buses will have to cross Pakuranga Rd to access a new major bus station being planned for the town centre. On Campbell Live the other night we saw a design for the bus station that hadn’t been seen before. Since then Auckland Transport have uploaded the video which is below.

The station seems a fairly bit step up from what was previously suggested and one of the reasons for that is it is intended to that all buses in the area would use it whereas previously buses heading to Howick would still use stops on Pakuranga Rd forcing people transferring to cross the road. Based on the current road layout a single bus station would introduce a detour for buses heading up Pakuranga Rd towards Howick so to address that, a new bus-only link road is planned through what is currently the Pakuranga Mall carpark. In addition to the bus-only link road, a public plaza is also proposed and to compensate the owners for the lost surface parking, AT are planning on building a multi storey parking building. I’m guessing that is primarily aimed at stopping the mall owners from fighting the changes otherwise the arguments would likely drag on for years. In addition to all of this, Pakuranga Rd will be narrowed down to four lanes where it passes the town centre. Here are some maps and artists impressions of what is planned.

Pakuranga Current Layout

Pakuranga Proposed Layout

Pakuranga artist Bus Station

Pakuranga artist Bus link

Of course no discussion of Pakuranga can be complete without the major piece of roading being planned in the form of the Reeves Rd Flyover. The intention is to get through traffic from the North East off Pakuranga Rd and whisked straight onto the Pakuranga Highway also avoiding the Pakruanga Highway/Reeves Rd/Ti Rakau intersection. I have also heard AT say that the grade separation is needed to get enough cars off the previously mentioned intersection to enable the busway not be substantially held up on its way south towards Botany. While the intent is understandable this flyover is going to have a massive impact the areas of the town centre surrounding it. Auckland Transport say the design could:

  • potentially be a visual landmark and gateway to Pakuranga
  • be an expression of art or architecture that reflects the area

However as we have seen in Wellington with the Basin Reserve Flyover, that is pretty much impossible to do (also the Basin Reserve Flyover is only two lanes whereas the Reeves Rd Flyover would be four)

Reeves Rd Flyover

Reeves Rd Flyover - Pakuranga Rd end

All up this section is quite a mixed bag. There are some really really good aspects like the busway, much improved walking and cycling connections as well as even some reductions in the number of road lanes in places but then much of it is being used to justify the need of the flyover.

Share this


  1. This is going to be a massive change for Pakuranga, I’m impressed. All these changes are going to make it into a proper urban centre, especially the changes to the road width/pedestrian amenity. Especially good to see the bus lanes on Pakuranga Road, even if they’re just at the intersection.

    The changes to the local roads should enable some of the Unitary plan up scaling to occur; the council should look at keeping some of the land parcels to make as pocket parks for the new higher density dwellings.

    The flyover isn’t the best, but could be worse. As long as they have some good lighting on the underside, it shouldn’t have too much of a negative impact, hopefully.

  2. Does it have to go over? Could Reeves Road not just as easily go under in similar fashion to the Victoria Park tunnel?

        1. As Tamaki says below, the flyover through Sylvia Park works really well. Actually adds to the mall through some clever architecture underneath to make an effective wide covered walkway.

          There are 1000s of flyovers in places like Japan that work really well too.. and they have excellent environmental screening (tall inwardly curving glass sides) whenever they’re anywhere close to residential areas or office blocks.

          My vote says build a flyover, add some decent screening, spend the money saved by not building a tunnel on a decent chunk of the cycling network.

  3. I wonder if they could turn the space underneath the flyover behind the mall into a retail strip. This could mitigate the blight a bit. But it does seem OTT. Why would the intersections hold up the busway? The busway would have its own signals and right of way. So it might get a longer wait through a single cycle but that hardly seems to justify a flyover.

    1. Choice pun man, ‘OTT’.

      I like the idea of actually building under the flyover, but they have decided to put a road there instead. While I can see the justification for their decision, I think that there are several better options.

  4. I guess the flyover allows the narrowing of the Ti Rakau/Pakuranga Road intersection too. But really it is not part of the busway project at all, it is a road congestion project, designed to make it easier to get from Pakuranga Hwy towards Howick.
    Result will be miserable for those living on William Roberts Road. The Western side will be demolished, and the eastern side will have a flyover dominating their view.
    Will need to work very hard to ensure effects of flyover reduced. Making it a retail strip could be a really good idea.

  5. There is a flyover over the middle of slyvia park, and most of the land underneath is used for retail or public space. You don’t really notice the cars above.

  6. I represented Cycle Action Auckland at a workshop discussing the cycle facilities through this section, and its great to see that they seem to be as high-quality as hoped for, especially east of Panmure Bridge, where cyclists will get their own right of way! And of course the busway is awesome too.

    Regarding the use of the land near Pakuranga Road that had to be acquired, yes, Council seemed very much onto that, in working with the AMETI team to get more intensified town houses and apartment areas into the consolidated left-over land.

      1. A shared path (3-4m, not exactly sure) will be provided all the way from the bridge to Panmure – faster cyclists can stay on-road on Lagoon Drive or Church Street.

        While not perfect, the walk from Pakuranga to Panmure will be quite long, and the existing narrower path along the Lagoon will also be retained for recreational walkers. So pedestrian numbers on the shared path should be relatively low – and with the shared located between the busway and the hill face for most part, there will be relatively little pedestrian “side friction” either.

        1. Maybe you can ask them to replace the footbridge from lagoon drive to the panmure basin walkway. The current one is only single lane and the wooden beams are quite low. It’s also in pretty bad condition. It would be a small price int the context of the whole budget.

          1. Forgot to say, the panmure basin walkway is super busy and so bikes often have to wait for the people to cross the bridge cause it’s too narrow to pass on the bridge.

          2. Seconded.. that bridge really needs to be wider, and made suitable for cycling, it’s just about the only acceptable route from south to north on the Auckland side of the Tamaki river.

            There are so many relatively small changes that could make such a massive difference for cycling..

            I think it might help if all transport planners and roading engineers were to have a compulsory year commuting by bike. Even better their workplace would first be moved to somewhere like Penrose or Highbrook so they can get a bit of real world experience of what their peers and elders have bestowed on us.

        2. We used to walk that path quite often back when we lived in Panmure, 5 years ago, and the paths along there can get busy. A better path connection to Pakuranga will increase traffic. We’ll wait and see.

  7. Good post. Definitely a mixed bag. The bus way and cycle provisions should make for massive improvements. I still think some of the road projects are somewhat excessive though.

  8. I think no-one is going to argue about the need for the cycle lanes and bus lanes around here. No cycle prov at the moment on the busiest road around. Actually a safety issue at the moment my daughter used to cycle for her school team past here to get to Dunkirk Rd in Panmure for practice ..crikey.. .Saint Kentigern College directly by the road and other schools in the general vicinity plus the town centre. On the amount of roading provision it is about implementing a priority public transport network asap not progressively as these ones get rolled out over time I think and starting to see that more clearly now.

  9. Looks like a pretty cool development, though it would be nice to have some sort of bus lane/bus priority through to Howick along Pakuranga Road. works or not?

  10. If everything was just implemented citywide in one go with 4 months planning /open involvenent say on this website would work and probably less disruptive than people think. Especially if fares were cheap and families could see the benefits and even workers for speed benefits.

    1. Pretty difficult if we can only ever get road space for Transit priority by building grade separate bypasses for drivers in order to do it. That’s what was built at New Lynn, and that’s what is being built here and in Panmure. That’s also why these are billion dollar plus projects.

      Is this the only way it can be done?

        1. Nope; they just built the road first. And this is where I agree with Steve Civil above.

          My point is this: The ITP is completely unaffordable because while it recognises the need to build the missing Transit mode in Auckland it also assumes that we have to keep overbuilding for auto-dependency along with it. Our argument with the CFN is that we should invest in the necessary Transit infrastructure next, and then take stock of what is required rather than keep building yet more car space as well. Because, especially post Waterview and SH16, the motorway network is complete and lavish as it is all that we been building for the last 60 years. But also to build both at once makes each part equally sub-optimal. Building for Transit while also spending even more promoting driving is suggestive of a plan without any real aim.

          Note: the Transit part of AMETI is around 300million; the rest is all driving promotion.

          1. I completely agree regaring the DFN and the ITP.

            What is the road that was built fr the Northern busway?

      1. The render of Pakuranga road shows double deckers. It would work well on these routes as they are all oversize vehicle routes so have the big clearances already.

      2. The design of this busway is too a very high standard, almost gold-plated. I think this should mean that articulated buses can be used without any limitations. I believe articulated buses are better as they provide better circulation and faster boarding. You will be hard pressed to find any high quality bus facilities around the world that use double-deckers – although I would accept them for the services not stopping at panmure and going all the way to the city.

          1. Just thought today, we are going to run into issues having seceral articulated buses at our stops. Especially given that bunching is going to be very likely.

  11. This is the reprioritisation right here and now. On motorways left lane is dedicated for buses and trucks. If 3 lanes available maybe 2nd lane is is T3. Same on arterials and on Pak Highway etc where many lanes -2 lanes with width prioritise for cycle lane and bus/truck. This way freight is fastracked as well. All done overnight in a major emergency operation-all roadmarking crews and bus routes the next day ready to go!!!
    Capex over next 17 years is 10B Congestion Free Network 0.5B on walking and Cycling and $1.5B on strategic multi modal arterials to growth areas or ones which are stuffed up. This way freight isn’t held up in fact on our side. Problem fixed.

  12. This way we actually promoting the mode that everyone is starting to see as the missing link and not penalising it in the process. It will get patronage up super fast and focus clearly on what is required to make that mode even better.Call it a re-balance in the Auckland Network fast and swift no painful wait for lane by lane on 1% of the network and being held up even more in traffic with roading footprints being designed a further 12 years out . The Mayor, The Auckland Transport Chairman and maybe David Tua to put a punch behind it and get the mandate. I think doing it with everyone focussed on a good result and a short period would compound cost savings on planning/prof services/consultation also and Auckland as a whole seeing the benefits in front of them not on a map and dreaming. Marketed with cheap easy fares at the same time get everyone buying off-peak passes at 50% (students too with peak time) and the workers with on-peak/off-peak passes. Just my view but think an operation and big mode shift like this needs a big right hand upper cut literally no little pats.

  13. If we have the leadership/mandate to re-priorities the network all-round in one foul swoop say in 4 months time and get the swing with exponential PT growth do we need to widen Pakuranga Road at all in fact all the 4 lane or more arterials in Auckland. It needs the mayor to address the issues presented on Campbell live with direct action and indicating a change of focus will happen now!!! and for the public and to get involved with this massive change in mode prioritisation. Ie give the mandate for repriortising the network now and spending accordingly or we are in a forever ending spiral trying to catch up with car growth and spending money widening roads then we still need to put the main network in. Auckland just can’t afford it from here on lets be honest with ourselves. Get the whole network up now within what we do have and focus on the key major improvement links in the meantime ie what the guys have come up with. There is actually nothing wrong with it and it is a direct fix to keep us moving in the long term and sustainable. Not to mention better on the environment and no waiting around go nowhere. Fast Class A priority for bus and trucks do the maths we don’t need the $12b if we go down this track..actually no. Time to turn it or we are all screwed.

    1. Yeah, i still can’t figure out why more people haven’t realised that we can’t just endlessly widen the roads because 1) it costs a fortune, 2) they’ll be no city left worth living in, just endless noisy arterials to live beside.

      Fitting more people into the existing road-space should be allot cheaper, and make the urban environment far more pleasant.

      1. Like imagine living here https://www.google.com/maps?q=16+William+Roberts+Road,+Auckland,+New+Zealand&sll=-36.9126801,174.87412899999998&sspn=0.0017450899219311918,0.004156038069199714&t=h&dg=opt&hnear=16+William+Roberts+Rd,+Pakuranga,+Auckland+2010,+New+Zealand&z=18

        And now having to put up with the cars accelerating up the flyover all day long.

        I hope they are going to purchase all the residential houses surrounding the flyover and turn them into shops or warehouses. Or maybe a park. But certainly not apartments. There seems to be a rule in auckland that if you want to live in an apartment, you have to live on a busy road and put up with endless traffic noise so that you never want to sit on your balcony.

        Why can’t apartments be in quiet residential areas in this city?

  14. This now turned into a civil defence/emergency matter sorry to say.It is time to operate under emergency works. Im dead serious.Argue against this? look at the facts..car growth no growth in PT come on!!!!! we need it to rise straight up and cars number to drive downwards so we can make it work within existing corridors. Can’t wait for the trains time to take one exclusive lane for bus and truck all round.

  15. I think we are just going to have to B-Phase the exclusive bus/truck lanes and prioritise as much as possible for the best run until hit either the rail station or the motorway in most cases,or linking with the other buses that do. It worries me that nobody has said I’m completely crazy yet does it mean we need to do it to turn the titanic?

    1. That is because most of us think that it is pretty hopeless at the moment, there are no serious mayoral candidates other than Len, who is acceptant of PT at best. We have a central government that despite all its shortfallings, particularly in Auckland is unlikely to lose the next election due to there again being no credible opposition. It is extremely unlikely that any serious change to transport is going to happen unitl at least 2017, which means we won’t see the effects until at least 2021, is it any wonder we are despondent?

  16. Actually timing now probably the best. Think we can discuss with Len that this is the best way to go and maximise the efforts later on when the CRL is actually up and demonstrate that he doesn’t need to worry about the $12b, think it would help his personal cause also if it is seen he is doing something direct and bold about the auckland traffic problem that assists PT and freight before the election like a widespread transformation what I am personally recommending with roadmarking and b phase signals. Then carrying on with the congestion free network proposal while something in PT is breathing and moving upwards fast in the right direction-changes the whole culture/focus plus patrons get onboard fast and enjoy the faster ride. As above my concern with the current roll-out ,expenditure off the main network and complicated fares based on their own internal agreements /zones etc is not going to do it in my view. Think we have hit a critical point can but try I guess.

  17. What do the congestion free network guys think? Should we add a Dec 14 2013 map with roadmarking reprioritisation for bus and truck on left lane of motorways and arterials and put in cycle lanes on arterials where possible at the same time. Hit it with $5 off-peak fares or $70 off peak anywhere per month on the PT system get the shift with a smash. Double that for peak/off-peak. Market it big time with David Tua , (actually get the Mega Mitre 10 guy too) Len Brown, and Dr Lester Levy , Auckland Transport PT guys, Trucking Association Smashing through CONGESTION!!! stay tuned Auckland this time is now and get everyone behind it..Get all the network professionals on it on a live website. Give the traffic operations/road maintenance guys a mandate to help with roadmarking and signal modifications. Supercharge with the high frequency loops etc that AT is starting to do as well-fire it up come up with the best we can in 4 months time.

  18. Personally think the shift above would be absolutely extraordinary ie facing the problem head on if we did like Im suggesting and getting everone on board if done correctly and bang for buck would be phenomenal with roadmarking and signals only. Phasing in later is just making the task out of our reach financially and not really helping our city as a whole. I think everyone in this city knows we have a problem and is getting wiser with the true fix. Time just to push the launch button and reprioritise accordingly and make the smart/efficient network with what we have right now.

  19. Actually if we did this we would get level of service to a C at least for probably both PT and Freight. Plus adding extra cycleways on the arterials if they aren’t there. And giving the majority of Auckland another option don’t really see a lot of negatives for some gumption , af few paintlines/symbols and following through even faster with objectives of making Auckland a liveable City.

  20. Current scenario in order of priority
    Mode Car -Level of Service F-with delays growing
    Freight Level of Service F-with delays growing .
    Pubilc Transport-Level of Service F with delays growing. Only hope is trains in medium term and southern area routes only in 2 years time being consulted on.
    Cycle-On all key arterials No.

    After Network Wide Marked Reprioritisation in December.
    Cycle on Key Arterials-Yes
    Public Transport-Level of Service C and will only keep improving with benefits from the Congestion Free Network even with more patronage.
    Freight-Level of Service C sharing exclusive lane on motorway and key arterials. Bound to be a big increase in financial benefits and less congestion.
    Car-Still level of service F but probably 12 months D and 24 months a C as more shift mode. Heading in right direction.

    Seems better than a 3 for 1 deal as the 1 is actually changing for the better as well. But preaching to the converted.

    1. Whilst I love the idea Steve, and think reallocating road space appears to be the logical thing to do, I think it may be a bit politically unfeasible. If we could get past that barrier, we’d save billions of dollars.

      1. Absolutely we would save billions of dollars. $12 Billion with what the guys have come up with and probably the same figure for actually putting the network up early y reprioritising what we already have and congestion/emission savings and changing the whole ball game. Actually making Auckland a better place to live and visit.

  21. NZTA do the BCR on this one. And in terms of emissions a giant step down and all modes going as planned. Similar to an ice age/mother nature global change/ or a change in the north atlantic current which doesn’t do good things having seen the day after tomorrow.

  22. Thanks Bryce. Having watched the congestion free network and sometimes my brain goes into high gear sometimes (wish it did all the time)being wired differently. Now that I sit back and look at it makes perfect sense and accelerates the good smart/works the guys did and probably swings things probably even more in this direction. The fact is we already have the road corridor we know what the mode priority should be and the imbalance. Fix it on the ground for probably peanuts without moving one kerb block. Get Auckland behind and David Tua and the Mega Mitre 10 guy who is going to say no to something that is actually quite logical and those guys are quite big? I think given a mandate and a short 4 month timeframe telling Auckland we are going to fix it once and for all would be positive for the whole city and visitors for that matter. Make it an easy fare and even myself who works from home would at least buy an off-peak one to move around a bit.

    1. Forget about PT for a second but we could have freight routes through the city with a splash of paint. 2 lanes of the Southern dedicated to freight. Hell, make it a toll lane for everything but freight and make it a changing fee based on congestion. Just enough to keep the trucks and couriers moving but allow space for those who would pay to use it. Also leaves the other lanes free of charge. If you want to drive, fine, drive. Just be prepared for a wait.

  23. If the Auckland Transport Chairman is concerned about PT numbers not going up last 1.5 years and wandering why he should read the above and make some changes and give PT a fighting chance to plummet. Auckland wants it and in fact needs it to be sustainable and head in a less polluted and congested direction. Sure these Capex projects some good in them but they don’t need the same footprint if they spike the patronage now with a global network repriorisation that would probably cost peanuts with paint and the odd B phase signal..Its time to be procative not reactive and PC phasing in. And Len if you want to get patronage up ready for the CRL this is it and make it clear to everybody the benefits of it. Get people on PT not just whinging about the costs of it. Make it fast and easy with a dedicated lane shared with trucks.

  24. “concerned about PT numbers not going up last 1.5 years”

    Lets keep some perspective – PT numbers have flatlined/dropped a bit for the last, what? 3-4 months? Not 1.5 years. In the last 1.5 years we had a big increase.

  25. Ok maybe my figure not correct but thought saw that somewhere will check sorry if wrong. But what is the % of the pie by mode is it 50%? and should it be that or more?and spiking for 1 million people to come and still a bad service and not prioritised even within the existing network. Look at these roading footprints still massive and we can easily give a dedicated lane for bus/truck..right now ..why not? Giving the patrons on the bus the worst ride in history. We as a city can save probably $10 billion (forgetting the obvious savings of the congestion free network) and no cues for trucks , busese and probably within 3 years I reckon even for the cars just with some paint on the roads and some B phase signals. Sure some rail to come but too late we can’t catch up we need to focus on what is important right now as a city and just put it in.

  26. Actually here it is following up to the Campbell live show.
    Mayor is the priority of cars at the top or the bottom. To fix this problem shouldn’t it be at the bottom and the existing road network remarked to that effect. And future capital spending prioritised that way as well so public transport can gain some service and fast patronage gains to take up the strain as it is already noted as the missing mode.
    Can 1 lane now on the motorway and arterial be dedicated only to buses and trucks. And when remarking on arterials can we add in cycleways at the same time? For the sake of some paint? and maybe the odd signal light.
    This is it in a nutshell. We are feeding the problem not directing our resources and intellect towards the solution!!!!

  27. The government needs to change focus on the solution, Auckland Transport needs to stand firm and support this , we don’t need the $12B shortfall. And for some paint on the whole network we can hyper-accelerate both public transport and freight and add cycle lanes within 4 months. Needs to be hit with low easy fares so we are not disadvantaging anyone and promoting a significant gain getting almost everyone on it that can and making this alternative attractive, easy and fast. Getting the whole industry focussing on a solution then implementing overnight-all roadmarking crews in Auckland. Signals in the meantime being setup for B phase. We need the pie proportion to swing big time. Needs a big campaign “smashing congestion”. The rebalance is now or we will always be chasing a shortfall of expenditure. and making the problem worse not to mention congestion and emissions. Suggest after the mandate given we focus north, east, west, south on maximising routes/service gains and ideally also heading towards the congestion free network as the strategy fix. From experience once things gain momentum it is amazing what can happen.

  28. Fix all of Auckland for probably $1M-say $300,000 roadmarking operation, $700,000 signals. Changing the mode balance overnight. Supercharging the PT and freight overnight and adding cyclelanes. Congestion smashed. If we keep going down this track and I have to pay tolls, get stuck in even more cues while we are widening I am going to go balistic.

  29. I organised the APEC repairs in 97-7 millers-and all of Bitumix asphalt crews filling holes on Queen St and all of the City in one fowl swoop. Scary Operations like this need a big focus and everyone on your side once they see the benefits or the dire need for it, It is amazing what you can do you just have to dive in there. Big operations don’t phase me too much.

  30. If Auckland Transport isn’t going to do this, perhaps some assistance from Mainfreight and the truckies and roll them!!!!!!

  31. Actually if we don’t have the balls to change the prioritisation over the network now for probably $1M will we have these balls in 4 years time?

  32. Im just going to keep punching all over until I get a mandate!!!!!!Once I know what is right there is no turning back!!! Fair warning.

  33. Motorway left lane-Buses and Trucks (maybe split later truck exclusive second lane when cars go down but shared for now).

    Arterial-Cycle Lane, Bus/Truck lane ,left over space car.

    Specific Freights routes -prioritised for that purpose only.

    Is there a problem with this model? If there isn’t why don’t we just do it. Can someone of authority provide a reason why not?. What is the opportunity cost of not implementing this right now in terms of emissions, extra wide roading footprints, inconsistent and unsafe cycle network, and just a bad environment pure an simple.

  34. Do we want a liveable city with just some roadmarking and a couple of traffic lanterns to prioritise trucks/buses and probably cyclist too. Think completely do-able for peanuts and a 1 night operation if campaigned correctly and get all the brains on the end-game (which is fasttracking PT, freight and cycle routes) with a deadline like 14th December. Give the final endorsed citywide plan to a roadmarking team on the 13th Dec. Get the traffic operation guys on it to maximise speed and work with the PT guys and bus company for maximum patronage. With cheap easy fares at the same time could be a great success and get everyone going in the right direction before it is too late.

  35. Roadmarking and signals as part of existing maintenance contracts. Public Relations organised by Auckland Transport actually do recommend David Tua and the Mega Mitre 10 guy-smashing congestion. Mayor and AT Chairman talking about the easy/cheap fare system. We collectively as part of this website do the planning etc for free and work with the key Auckland Transport guys. This is how we roll and get a significant mode shift!!!

  36. Are we on the same page ?. If on the same page suggest a few of us meet with Auckland Transport-David Warburton (CEO) and Dr Lester Levy (Transport Board Chairman) , AT PT, AT Cycling, probably Len Brown also and see if we can launch this city wide campaign as an appetiser/2013 phase of the congestion free network.

  37. The framed illustration titled “Proposed Improvements” looks good – and looks like it has the Reeves Road connection/extension as a cut-and-cover and/or top-down/thrust box-section covered roadway, with the opportunity for a linear park above it (on the ‘lid’). This would be much better than an elevated flyover. Why is an elevated roadway seemingly being proposed instead of a buried roadway?

    If it’s an argument based on cost, I don’t think there would be very much cost difference in it (taking in the context of the whole project), and the value of the surrounding sites would be much more with the buried roadway option – and thus the council could collect more revenue from those sites. Who (if anyone) is doing the whole-of-life B/C analysis for this project?

  38. Why do the bus lanes go into the middle of the road at Ti Rakau Drive? It seems to me that it would be better to keep on the same side as the interchange. Firstly because there are less intersections crossing this side further up the road and also pedestrians wouldn’t have to cross a road on both sides to get to a bus stop. They have it on this side all the way from Panmure, why the change?

  39. we live on william roberts rd and have done so for the last 20 odd years now they want to pull our rented house down next year so they can build their flyover…we are pensioners so where will we go …this is not a good idea

  40. It is my understanding that that council/AT have still not decided whether they in fact will be even going ahead with the proposed Reeves Road Flyover. Anyone know something I don’t?

Leave a Reply