Auckland Transport are consulting on the widening a 900m section Neilson St in Onehunga as part of the East-West link.

The public are being given a chance to have their say on changes designed to improve travel times and congestion along Neilson Street in Onehunga.

The improvements which include changes to parking in the area are part of the local transport improvements of the East West Connections project and are designed to provide benefits for local road users including freight along Neilson Street.

The work involves creating four lanes (increasing from two) on Neilson Street between Alfred Street and Angle Street. A clearway and no stopping zone is proposed to be in place from 6am-7pm Monday to Friday. This doesn’t apply to parking at weekends and evenings.

Auckland Transport Principal Engineer Joe Schady says the improvements also include new walking and cycling facilities alongside Waikaraka Park.

“A new footpath and timber boardwalk linking to the existing walkway will make it easier and safer for the community to access the park particularly for sporting activities and the Speedway.”

The NZ Transport Agency’s Auckland Highway Manager, Brett Gliddon says creating extra lanes on this part of Neilson Street will help to deliver some early benefits to the Onehunga area, particularly for local business owners, truck operators and customers who are moving in and out of the Onehunga and Penrose area every day.

Community feedback will help to finalise the design for the work. Construction is planned to start later this year and be completed by December. The work is part of a wider package of improvements including removing the rail bridge at the end of Neilson Street and replacing it with a new, lowered road.

The Southwestern Motorway will also be widened to four lanes in each direction between Neilson Street and Queenstown road to further support traffic growth expected on State Highway 20.

Feedback from the public in mid-2015 showed that overall improvements on Neilson Street were supported to help relieve the significant congestion that is experienced on the road and on the approaches to SH1 and SH20.

A series of public information days will be held in August to encourage people to find out more about the project and have their say on the plans for Neilson Street.

Neilson St Widening Map

Given this doesn’t appear to even require moving kerbs, only adding some pedestrian amenity and changing how the road markings it’s crazy that it wasn’t done years ago. We’ve long supported the widening of Neilson St including the possibility of truck only lanes as a quick and much quicker and cheaper solution to transport issues in the area.

In fact the same approach should be taking all the way through to the intersection with Church St (along with a signalised intersection for the Metroport entrance). The biggest reason for not doing this is that it would probably show the foreshore expressway as not being needed, at least not anytime in the next few decades. That could save us having to spend up to $1.8 billion and I have no doubt we could find some other uses for that kind of money.

The consultation is open to Friday 26 August

Share this

23 comments

  1. You wouldn’t think from that graphic that Neilson St is 4 lanes to the west of the proposed works (mainly plus grassed median with turning breaks).
    Anyone know how much traffic will use the big new building opposite Angle St?

  2. It is surely reasonable to expect these multi-billion dollar motorway projects to go through as rigorous value engineering process as the CRL?

    And ones where it is not sufficient to start from an unexamined assumption that all road building is economically positive.

    Value for money is a key expectation for both NZTA and AT, now can we see that in practice regardless of mode?

    There is nothing a priori exceptional about road building as an economic class, although that is how it has been evaluated in practice, particularly since the invention of the RoNS idea. A uniquely circular conflation of significance with one kind of infrastructure, without any theoretical or technical basis.

  3. Is there any point submitting on this?

    Genuine question. NZTA seem to ignore anything and everything that people who are not senior management and the Minister have to say.

    1. Not quite correct. They are listening very closely to what the National Road Carriers and Business Forum are saying. Indeed, you could be forgiven for thinking this lot and their mates in the AA have driven this entire project.

      1. Better this than spending $1.8 billion on the East-West Link. And even better still if the Government listen a little further beyond the desires of the Truck lobby and the Business Forum because I detect, that the Auckland public is becoming more aware, that forever spending more money on roads is just not going to work.
        The successive Ministers of Transport and NZTA themselves, have been slow learners and it may be that if they don’t quickly change their game the Auckland electorate may give them a bit of a surprise in 15 months time.
        In my view, there is definitely a realization by more and more Aucklanders’ that the motor car only, is not a solution and a reform of transport modes and funding is now urgent.

        1. As a wise man once said, stop buying stuff and we could get away with less trucks. I have always been an advocate of marking all corridors two lanes each way, no parking. Usually only costs paint and the benefits are amazing.

  4. Clearways? They are already there just not enforced and that is part of the problem, traffic already forms two line in both directions at the Captain Springs lights as there is already the room for two lanes each way when the clearways are observed.

    1. The clearways don’t operate 13 hours a day, there are generally cars from the car yard parked west of Captain Springs during the day.

  5. Have peak hour clearway lanes available only to trade vans, trucks and busses ever been tried? – Might not be so relevant on Neilson St in Auckland, but its something we are thinking of pushing for in Nelson – any comments?

  6. If only they would do a new southern exit from the container terminal across Hugo Johnson Drive, through the old Southdown Freezing works to a widened Sylvia Park Rd they could save on what they intend to spend on the East-West Link.

    1. Unfortunately this doesn’t address the Church St bottleneck which seems to be the underlying cause of the neverending pro-roads lobbying. I would support a new four lane road between Sylvia Park Rd and Neilson St if it meant the East-West link was dumped and the possibility of a future pedestrian/cycling route around the inlet was preserved. Several commercial sites would have to give up their sites to make this happen. If they can’t be convinced of the collective good and get difficult then the trucking lobby boys can pay a visit to “persuade” them

      1. The east west link doesn’t only preserve the possibility of a future pedestrian/cycling route around the inlet, it builds a large section of it.

  7. My suggestion would take a lot of the trucks off Church St eliminating a large part of the bottleneck. Removing the rail bridge will greatly reduce the congestion at Neilson & Onehunga Mall.

    1. The Galway St option helps that but non of it fixes the real problem, removing the east west traffic to make the business of doing business in Onehunga easier.

    2. Rather than that, trench Neilson St under Onehunga Mall, removing the old railway over bridge and the current intersection. Trenching will make it easier for LR to go over the top of it and if cut and cover would provide a better cycle and pedestrian access to the port redevelopment and Mangere bridge. Install the Galway St feeder so east bound traffic coming off the SW isn’t getting dumped into the Neilson St Onehunga Mall intersection.

      1. Yes surely the original Option A of basically upgrading the existing roads & having Freight/transit lanes, plus the trench idea would do wonders. As time progresses perhaps toll light vehicle through traffic.

Leave a Reply