The decision made on the East-West link a few months ago not to run a motorway through the suburbs of Mangere was a significant victory for the community. However it also made a lot of sense as the majority of the transport problems are on the northern side of the harbour. Subsequently AT have also effectively ruled out any options that involve creating a new bridge between Mt Wellington and Highbrook. My understanding is the current plan is a variation of option two and would see a new road created along the foreshore from roughly Captain Springs Rd through to Silvia Park Rd (which would be upgraded) and have direct south facing motorway links added. This is shown below with the new sections in blue and the upgraded section in red.

East-West Jan 14 option

Overall I think this is the right outcome for the project as it does enhance connectivity while making better use of existing infrastructure (the motorway and Highbrook Dr) while also likely costing significantly less than some of the other plans originally proposed. A case of probably getting 80% of the benefits for what may be 20% of the cost.

Immediately after the decision I heard there was quite a bit of anger from the road and business lobby groups who wanted a full motorway. The press release from the Auckland Chamber of Commerce (who I believe had been shown the plans along with other business/road lobby groups) contained a little bit of that anger calling the proposal only a partial solution. Their “other key requirements” would see the road turned into a full motorway between Onehunga and Highbrook. Also notice the use of the term RoNS to try and make the project sound more important.

“Auckland needs a full solution with an efficient and safe new road between SH1 and SH20 that eliminates traffic lights and intersections for trucks, avoids community severance and has a minimal impact on the industrial zoned land in the area,” said Auckland Business Forum chairman Michael Mr Barnett

“A partial solution is not acceptable. Given the national significance to the economy of the activity in the area, funding concerns should not restrict the design, consenting and construction by NZTA in an urban RONS basket.

“We need a complete solution presented covering freight as well as cars and buses and which can be consented and built by 2021 or earlier.”

This is in line with Prime Minister John Key’s confirmation last June that resolving the transport problems in this part of Auckland will be the Government’s next major focus for the Auckland transport network.

Other key requirements include:

  • At the western end – an upgraded Gloucester Park interchange with SH20 at Onehunga to eliminate heavy trucks having to enter the Onehunga retail area and local streets – Neilson, Onehunga Mall and nearby rail overbridge, Selwyn St, and Gloucester Rd;
  • At the eastern end – a full road interchange with SH1 adjacent to Mt Wellington that provides efficient, safe on-off south and north facing ramps;
  • Efficient connections to freight transport and distribution businesses located in the Southdown area, including along Great South Rd towards Penrose and Otahuhu;
  • Supports an east-west bus service and safe cycleway that is separate from heavy road traffic.
  • Protects the need to connect to AMETI and Highbrook, either as part of the project or in the future.

“To meet these requirements we suggest the best solution to date is a new road built along the northern shoreline of Manukau Harbour and which then cuts inland to link with the Southern motorway. This option avoids community severance and taking up valuable industrial land in a business growth area of Auckland that needs more land not less.”

It’s worth remembering some of the business community were also behind the suggestion of an 8-lane horror show which included over 4km of tunnels.

East-West Business Assciation proposal

So Auckland Transport made the correct decision and scaled the project down to what it should have been in the first case. Case closed right? Well it appears the business/road lobby aren’t going to give up that easy. This is an email sent to a number of people last week following on from an East-West Link discussion held by the Penrose Business Association. If you read the invite you will see they are also referring to pushing the option above.

Yesterday’s PBA’s “East West Link” meeting held at Turners Car Auction was very successful and well attended by an excellent cross section of business’s located between Onehunga and Highbrook including representatives from Road Transport, AA, EMA and the Auckland Chamber of Commerce.

As we move forward from this meeting the Penrose Business Association is keen to arrange a bus trip to explain at first hand to senior politicians and officers from both central and local government as well as business the range of roading opportunities that should be considered as we work towards finding the best solution to service one of the most important economic engine rooms in New Zealand.

It is only when you have the opportunity to visit these sites that you understand the scale of the transport operation that exists within our community which is largely out of site.

The transport companies shift some 15,000 cars from the Port of Auckland to Penrose each month, 4 container trains that depart MetroPort bound for Tauranga each day (currently down to two trains because of a locomotive shortage) and its only then that you realise how important a highly efficient transport system is and if done correctly brings significant savings for all of New Zealand.

To determine the interest level for the site visit please advise by return email if you wish to join the proposed bus trip which we propose to operate within the next 5 weeks.

I guess the point is that with this project in particular we’re going to continue to see a sustained push to make it larger and larger. Although in some ways this next suggestion might fall into that basket too.

A new Inland Port

You may recall this post where I looked at the East-West link and how it seemed to be primarily benefiting the Port of Tauranga through their Metroport operation. This suggestion looks at how the East-West Link could also help the Ports of Auckland.

When looking at the land around the area on Google Maps you may have noticed a large area covered in cars. This is shown in Green in the image below and the land happens to be owned by the Ports of Auckland Ltd (POAL). This is important because as you may know POAL currently run an inland port in Wiri however I understand that site is leased from Kiwirail and is smaller than what exists at Onehunga.

On the Northern side of the harbour much of the foreshore has already been reclaimed except for one section just to the east of the POAL land. With the East-West link going through this area along the foreshore and in a fairly straight line it would leave that section in yellow that hasn’t been reclaimed as a bit of an oddity. That raises the question of whether we could make use of it. Well there might just be a decent use for that area if it was reclaimed, most likely at the same time as the road was built. 

In addition to above, it would be quite useful for the rail network (in black) if we also grade separated the Westfield Junction, thus reducing one potential point of conflict on the network. At the same time as building the East-West link we could do that rail grade separation and perhaps more interestingly we could use that reclaimed section of land to provide a direct connection to POALs land (shown in Purple). That direction connection could allow POAL to shift their inland port operations to their own land, thereby reducing their operating costs and allowing them to compete better with the Port of Tauranga. Alternatively they could operate both. The new land could also provide a additional storage space in its own right.

East-West KR Siding option 1

The impact of such an idea could be quite large. With more capacity and a direct link it would allow POAL to shift a lot more freight by rail which helps reduce the number of trucks on our roads. Let me know what you think of the idea.

Share this

26 comments

  1. Now that would make for a real multimodal freight outcome, give more flexibility to use rail to and from Auckland’s port taking pressure off Grafton Gully and the very full central motorway spine. And add resilience and competition between freight systems. Clever.

    1. Except that this is Auckland, and the motorway would be built first, with the rail line “as demand requires later”. Sorry, but I am cynical of this with the current government pushing one thing only, and the Mayor not having the courage of his convictions.

      Plus, one more foreshore ruined by a motorway.

    2. If POAL need more land, then reclaiming the yellow section land here + grade separating the rail link makes a lot more sense than reclaiming prime CBD waterfront.

      If this went ahead, wouldn’t it also make sense to build the “missing” corner from the Eastern Line to the Southern Line northbound. In the context of the Panmure Interchange upgrade and the AMETI phase 2, this would create a one-change route from Eastern Auckland to Penrose-Ellerslie-Greenlane-Remuera.. even Newmarket would be quicker than via Britomart. Also useful local direct route GI-Panmure-Penrose-Ellerslie (and with one change Onehunga).

  2. I agree with the section from Sylvia Park Rd/Great South Rd to Hugo Johnston, but from there it should go inland. There is asbestos contaminated land and a polluted stream. They could put a road through there and parallel to the spur line to join onto Neilson St around 339, by Toll and the other freight companies. Many trucks would still use Church St even if this were built, as the quickestmost direct route to the depot is NOTvia this new road. Whatsmore it will completely destroy the Onehunga foreshore cycleway, which is well used by locals. Would that be replaced?

    1. Well I agree about the foreshore. But the cycleway could be relocated on the harbour side of the road I guess. Easy when you’re spending a billion or two. Pah!

      Longer term surely it makes sense though to continue the road to connect with SH20.. as it is today that junction into / out of Onehunga is a bit of a problem; with the new road that would become a real choke point. I don’t suppose such works could be coordinated with potential airport rail bridge works? Not obvious to me, but maybe there’s a dig-once / build-once opportunity?

  3. Destroys another waterfront in Onehunga, another cycleway destroyed and for what? The rail line won’t be built, KiwiRail doesn’t have the money or the interest. It’ll just be another clogged road that will then be expanded in a few years to a full motorway. Thin edge of the wedge.

  4. They already have multiple motorway links to both the Southern and the Western Motorways – if there was some better planning of when freight trucks left the area then they’d have more or less empty motorways for themselves 20hrs a day. Besides, what’s being produced in this area of any value? Certainly nothing time sensitive, if the area is too congested then PoA and PoT should considering moving their inland ports to another railway siding somewhere else in Auckland. This is a vast sum of money being wasted on yet more roading for the benefit of small group of business owners. This project’s BCR should be calculated and made to wait in line after all the other projects which are denies funding in Auckland and have massively better BCRs but because they don’t involve trucks or SOVs don’t get funded. Typical Auckland planning.

  5. I still struggle to fathom why there is desire to build anything here? Honestly the company I work for use a painter off of church st eest of Onehunga and I often use the Seart offramp to get there. It is always busy but never heavily congested except with sovs at knock off time

  6. The unfortunate thing in New Zealand is that the rampant cronyism can lead to the wrong decisions being made. Business owners have enormous power and many friends in influential positions particularly within the National Party. Judith Collins and her support of Oravida and Bruce Pulman are prime examples of this approach and how rampant it is within the New Zealand political system. Along with the general New Zealand obsession with the car it’s not surprising that the growth in PT has been pathetic until now and that the cities growth has been centered around business need rather that general quality of life. Fortunately over recent years in Auckland PT and quality of life seem to be being given more of a focus by the mayor, however it is clearly a constant struggle against a backward short-term thinking National Government and out for themselves business community.

  7. This looks like half a solution – what about the bad congestion to the west of Captain Springs Road? Personally I think they would be better off upgrading the existing roads.

    1. Homes that people don’t want to sell for sure.

      Ironicly, the Flockton Basin flood area is on or next to the former St Albans motorway designation and many home owners do want to have their homes taken under the public works act instead of being “volunteerally” redzoned. But you can bet NZTA won’t be suddenly jumping in to buy the land as part of the rebuild because the right investors aren’t whispering in Ministers ears.

  8. Interesting thinking, but it won’t work, mainly because the land in question is poor quality landfill.

    POAL already own most of the Wiri inland port site; we only lease the rail grid from Kiwirail. Wiri is well suited to our needs, has a good rail connection which we intend to get a lot more use out of (up 54% so far this year) and it’s about the same size as Pikes Point. Pikes Point is a woefully inadequate site for container operations. It’s old landfill, it’s not well structured or constructed and simply couldn’t take the weight of containers or container handling equipment. That is why the site is used for storing cars, a heliport and a recycling operation. Light stuff. In any case, it’s fully let to long term tenants.

    Given our existing site isn’t suitable for container ops, adding more through reclamation offers no benefit, and the same goes for installing a rail line and grade separating the junction. I’m sure KiwiRail would love Auckland ratepayers to fund a bit of grade separation at that location, and it may have real benefit for them, but it has no beneift for POAL

    Sorry to put a dampner on things.

    Matt Ball
    Ports of Auckland

    1. Thanks for commenting Matt, interesting that the land quality is so poor.

      The grade separation wasn’t so much for the port but primarily for passenger services which will only increase over time.

  9. Back to the drawing board with POAL putting a dampner on things for the area?

    So the question is Matt (POAL) how many “shuttles” via the rail system from the main port to Wiri (and vice versa) is the Port planning to run daily by say 2025. I ask for two reasons:
    1) Increased competition from the Metro Ports and Passenger Services
    2) As you know the Manukau South Link is still designated and a decision is about to be released from AT – most likely next month from AT then Council.

    1. Hi Ben, 2025’s a bit far out, but to give you an idea, we were running just four trains a week last year, which is now up to 8-9 a week, and the next target is 16 in the next year or so. Don’t forget our shuttles are shorter than the Metroport trains, so can accelerate faster and slot between passenger services most of the time.

      1. 16 a week next year is pretty good 🙂

        And yes your freight shuttles are much shorter than PoT’s Metro Ports which use to give me (the MP’s) more grief when they got in the road during my former life at Transdev than POAL’s shuttles ever did.

      2. Thanks heaps for your engagement by the way. Interesting to hear about your ops, and good to see you are getting some trucks out of Quay Street!

  10. The pro-road lobby was never going to accept the axing of the E-W link gracefully, and sure enough, they haven’t. Yes, Cam, you’re correct: the little dots (and big red lines) go over people’s houses but this appears not to be a concern to our captains of industry. Let’s face it: a motorway through the middle of Auckland would be SUCH a boon for all those road builders and contractors and their attendant lobbyists. When there’s this much public money to be divvied up, the needs of communities come a distant second.
    One big reason it is necessary to link Highbrook to anything is that it is a complete shambles. The roundabout is a mess, it has no public transport to speak of, and no one in their right mind would cycle there. Interestingly, the bit of vacant land Auckland Transport had drawn a bridge on is now being developed, presumably by Fisher and Paykell. The OBA Great Big Motorway does not go over this (it’s a bit hard to tell) but appears to instead plough through Otahuhu East. I hope the politicians and senior officials laugh them out of the room (in a caring way, of course).

    1. Yeah. Industry built Highbrook and set themselves up for no access. Sorry, I’m not paying for your errors gentlemen.

      1. Why not, you are already paying for a good chunk of their opex. Why not dig a bit deeper, and ensure it goes even lower?

  11. The east-west link right beside Metroport is the only option that has ever really been on the cards. It’s the original one, and is the only one that accesses the areas they want accessed. The other list of options, including in residential areas, was a false flag operation. If you add really unpopular options into the mix, you ensure community and public support for the original option.

    1. Except Geoff I know from a number of people involved that the unpopular options were more than just a distraction exercise but were actually being pushed seriously. It was only the community outrage that forced them to be dropped

  12. Be interesting to see where the road is actually supposed to go as the gas feed for the power station goes along there

Leave a Reply

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