This is a cross post from our friends at Bike Auckland. You can see the original post here.

An Auckland for Everybody

It’s 2024, and the Auckland Harbour Bridge is finally open and available to all modes of everyday transport. 

Using a dedicated lane protected from traffic, people walk, scoot, and cycle across the Waitematā Harbour, saving time and money, and breathing in the stunning view of the city across the water.

Tourists stop and take photos, commuters in suits cycle by, and families are out walking, their kids riding scooters, going on a joyful adventure together. Bus passengers wave at them as they pass.

Everyone can travel between the City Centre and the North Shore in the way that they want to, and (of course) some people are still driving across in the free flowing traffic.

This is the Tāmaki Makaurau Auckland we dream of.

We can get there by reallocating one lane on the Auckland Harbour Bridge for people powered transport.

This can be done quickly and affordably, with little to no impact on traffic flows.

  • It will empower people to choose climate-friendly travel
  • It will give more transport choice to people who don’t drive
  • It will reduce the cost of travel for many
  • It will create a more resilient transport system
  • It will make more efficient use of our existing transport system

And, most importantly, it will be safe.

So, what’s the hold up? 

Waka Kotahi (NZTA) has the power to create a safe, equitable, climate friendly connection for people to walk and wheel across the Harbour Bridge now.

We call on Waka Kotahi to free up one lane on the Auckland Harbour Bridge for walking and cycling, for a more resilient and connected transport network for people in Tāmaki Makaurau.

What exactly are we asking for?

We’re calling for one lane on the Auckland Harbour Bridge to be permanently motor traffic-free, enabling people to walk and wheel across Te Waitematā between the North Shore and the CBD.


At the moment the only way to walk, scooter, or cycle from the North Shore to the CBD (and vice versa) is over 40 km travelling all the way around the harbour via Hobsonville Point! This takes roughly three hours on a bike, and at least eight hours on foot. It’s not a serious option for everyday transport. Especially when the Harbour Bridge is right there.

But to cross the Auckland Harbour Bridge we currently must be in a car, bus, truck or on a motorbike. A child can see it, and visitors to our city remark on it: this is a glaring gap in the heart of our transport system and a huge barrier to access and equity (especially for the more than 28% of Aucklanders* who don’t drive).

Tāmaki Makaurau may well be the last city in the world built around the water where people who want to walk, ride or roll from one shore to the other are told: You shall not pass! 

Dedicating one lane to walking and cycling (and skating, and scootering…) on the Harbour Bridge will fix this injustice – and provide a golden opportunity to tackle a bunch of other urgent problems we face, from congestion to pollution, from accessibility to resilience.

Why the Auckland Harbour Bridge? 

Because it’s there! It already exists, and it’s the shortest route from A to B. No wonder the question we’re most often asked in our advocacy for a more bikeable city is: ‘When can we bike over the bridge?’

From Westhaven on the city side, you can see Northcote a few tantalising minutes away on the North Shore. It’s just over one kilometre. That’s a ten-to-fifteen minute walk, and even less on a bike or scooter!

Converting one lane for walking and cycling is the fastest, fairest, most affordable way to bridge this gap between the North Shore and the rest of the city. It’s also the smartest way to get full value out of this vital link in our national transport system.

Why now?

It’s time. It’s beyond time.

For decades, Aucklanders have watched, waited, and despaired as plan after plan for walking and cycling across Te Waitematā has been proposed, picked apart, and then cancelled. It’s already been over half a century of debates and delays. Generations of wasted potential for easy, healthy journeys, and lost opportunity to get Aucklanders out of traffic and reduce our emissions.

There’s growing urgency for climate action – and 45% of Auckland’s emissions are from transport, with 79.9% of that from cars! We have a great opportunity to reduce emissions by empowering people to choose climate friendly transport like walking and cycling. Because of this, the Climate Commission’s draft advice includes completing cycle networks in main cities by 2030; and the Harbour Bridge is a big missing gap in our network!

Public demand continues to grow – as consistently shown by consultations carried out by Waka Kotahi.

“Most of the feedback affirms public calls to ‘just get on with building it’”

Waka Kotahi, 2020

  • 1959: Harbour Bridge built without the promised walkways and cycleways
  • 1979: Students took a protest ride over the bridge and the Northcote Resident’s Association wrote to the Times in support of walking and cycling access
  • 2004: A petition to parliament for walking and cycling access across the Harbour Bridge gained 6,700 signatures
  • 2009: The Get Across campaign gathered 12,000 supporters, and a rally across the bridge attracted 5000 protestors
  • 2020: 78% found to be in favour of a walking and cycling connection across the harbour (Waka Kotahi 2020)
  • 2021: Bike Auckland leads a Liberate the Lane rally with approximately 2500 people in attendance
  • 2023: Release of new crossing designs, which would take 10 – 20 years to be completed. Meanwhile, surveys show that 66% would walk or bike across the harbour* (Waka Kotahi 2023)

“There was also strong support for cycling infrastructure sooner, rather than later, with comments suggesting a cycle lane on the current bridge”

Waka Kotahi, 2023

Read the full timeline here.

Freeing up a lane for walking and cycling is the smartest, simplest and speediest way to give Tāmaki Makaurau what it needs.

Let’s Liberate the Lane, NOW and make an accessible city the main event!

If you would like to see the explainer infographics in their entirety, see the image below! The image here links to an A4 PDF if you want to print out some flyers for your local area.

For answers to the following frequently asked questions, see the original post here.

  • Who would use a shared path on the bridge?
  • Will the bridge wobble when people walk, scoot or cycle on it?
  • How would people access the liberated lane?
  • What about safety?
  • What about traffic fumes?
  • What about motor traffic?
  • Is it flat enough?
  • What about the weather?
  • Is there a better alternative?
  • A whole new crossing?

GA Update: for those who prefer photographic renders over illustrative ones, here’s one we’ve seen doing the rounds.

Share this


  1. And for those who say it’ll create congestion – the motorway this morning was bumper to bumper all the way from Greville Road to Onewa Road, but the bridge itself was free-flowing.

    1. The dream: hundreds of people will walk across to and from their jobs every day. In the weekend there’ll be families with children strolling into the city. The reality: it’s a long walk from either end of the bridge to anywhere in the city or anywhere but a few homes in Birkenhead. Most people will only do it once and after the steep climb many will turn around once they’re at the top. Very few will do it regularly and almost nobody in winter. Idyllic pictures of happy families strolling show how unrealistic this idea is. There are better ways to spend tax dollars – e.g. regular ferry crossings from Birkenhead would be more useable for more people

      1. Winter in Auckland isn’t as bad as you make it out to be.
        I cycled to work all year round when living in Auckland. Only a few light frosts each winter are not a barrier to people who are used to using transport other than private vehicles for some if not most of their trips.

      2. I totally agree. Of course it’s a nice idea but I once lived in one of the closest streets in Northcote. I walked over the bridge and back during a bus strike. NEVER again – to the bridge, over the bridge, and then into the city took well over an hour. It was a normal Auckland day – just breezy that added up to windy and cold at the top. And not pleasant at all due to traffic noise and the road surface shaking due to passing trucks. For bikes – not much different – where exactly do the bike riders live who will commute to work this way. But a dedicated bus lane to reduce car numbers? Absolutely!

        1. A bike or e-bike or e-scooter could make the trip from one end of the bridge to the other in about 10 minutes. Significantly faster than a car at peak times.

        1. They hardly exist any more .. if they ever did. The Colin Meads legend applied to 10% of rhe population 50 years ago.. its now under 1%.

      3. I really have to laugh at someone complaining about no-one cycling in an “Auckland winter”. This week my partner (who only moved down recently from Auckland) and I both cycled to work in Christchurch on a minus-1 degree morning; it was plus-1 degree the following day. And even in Christchurch the data tells us that winter cycling numbers are only 20% less than summer numbers.

        As for a “steep” 5% gradient to climb up and over the bridge? Please… other parts of Auckland have far worse grades and somehow people manage – throw in some e-bikes and it’s a non-issue…

  2. Even old Wayne can’t say its a bad idea given he said he wants to do more with the current infrastructure we have. It just makes sense. Not that he has control over it being Waka Kohati’s responsibility. Its a legit joke that even the Transport Minister can ask for it to happen but then the organisation he’s responsible for just says no.

  3. Yes yes yes!

    Pedestrian access was part of the original plan. Let’s make it happen.

    Single occupied vehicles are the least efficient use of our roading space.

    This is the quickest and easiest option to finally allow people to walk and cycle across the harbour. Which also means that after a pattern of use has been developed, at least one or two years, it can be removed just as quickly. On the other hand if people are making use of it there will be strong evidence as to why more infrastructure encouraging people to abandon their private cars more often needs to be built

    People are adaptable but they can’t make use of an option that doesn’t exist.

    1. Correct. Instead of long-winded reports searching for reasons not to. Engineers, planners etc are great in telling you about issues you should consider. Not so much in making the actual decisions that are needed.

      “Always listen to experts. They’ll tell you what can’t be done, and why. Then do it.” – Heinlein.

  4. The cartoon is a little optimistic, IMO. There’ll need to be some degree of wind protection up there, and the low-rise ARMCO wouldn’t get approved for use at a street race, let alone as the only pedestrian protection.

    Sucks to have to say it too, but something more in line with what we have at Grafton may be required for reasons that are sadly obvious.

    But let’s have that conversation, ideally it is just a matter of time until this can actually happen and these things need to be talked about so people’s expectations are realistic. It’s still worth doing.

    1. “and the low-rise ARMCO wouldn’t get approved for use at a street race, let alone as the only pedestrian protection.”

      Funny thing – most of our pedestrian network (including some directly adjacent to 100kph speed limit roads) has much LESS protection (none) than that barrier in the drawing. Seems then that we do better in street races than for our everyday protection for pedestrians? Also, a straight lane on a bridge is not a street race circuit 🙂

      Yes, there will be some technical issues in how best to protect people in a retrofit situation. The issues is: Do our agencies approach that problem in a “How do we solve it?” or in a “How do we use this issue to rubbish the whole idea?”

      1. AT literally just built an eastern busway section with 60km/hr buses running alongside a cycle path and footpath with no armco, just a meter of unplanted verge buffer. This is brand new, they had plenty of room to put in a barrier if they felt like. If they don’t feel the need there on a project that appears to have a bottomless money pit assigned to it… then it would be extremely hard to justify saying an engineered steel barrier isn’t enough. 80km/hr might be too fast, but (on the uphill at least) buses rarely go that fast on the bridge anyway. Make it 60 limit, congestion free it will still be an upgrade.

    2. Wind is such a non-issue. What’s going to happen? people are going to mary poppins off the bridge? Come on. Worst you’d take a slide off your e scooter because you were overconfident and going a bit fast. If the goal is to completely engineer out people falling off bikes and scooters then we’ve lost, pack all up and never leave the house.

      Even at the overzealous safety focused clipboard manager level, do what they do now, close it for a couple hours during major storms. Think they would quite quickly get found out about the fakeness of the issue however, and people would go slow or walk their bikes.

    3. Actually, some renders do include the light high tensile steel anti-climb mesh barriers, as installed on the Storey Bridge in Brisbane.
      And anyway WK seem happy to close the bridge to vehicles when it is windy. I have cycled in very high winds in Wellington, but hey that’s Wellington…

  5. In our dystopian future,issues like this and bus lanes, will be viewed with bewilderment,either as amusement or outrage,but the inability to overcome perceived obstacles,will reflect badly on those in charge.

  6. “terrorism” lol.

    And how wonderful a trail in the Waitakeres would be for a commuter from Northcote to the CBD….

  7. It make sense. Let’s do some maths! The daily traffic count in 2019 was about 170,000 vehicles per day. Divide that into eight lanes at present, that is 21,250 vehicles per day per lane. Divide that number by two and we get 10,625, each doing two trips per day, there and back. If we can get that number of people per day to walk or cycle, the remaining seven lanes will not become any more congested with vehicles than they are now. Multiply 21,250 by say 300 working days per year and we get 6.37 million car trips per year saved. That makes for cleaner air for everybody, and less parking congestion in the CBD. And we can start now. All we need is a traffic barrier, and entry ramps for the pedestrians and cyclists. Lets do it !

    1. I really like the idea of liberating the lane but getting 10000 people to walk or cycle the bridge per day is unrealistic. Very few people will take their bike from farther away then Glenfield or Takapuna and the feeder network towards the bridge is not that great, either, if you just look at Onewa Road as an example. That will make a lot of people who live closish rather take the bus or car. And then there are many people who need to go farther than the CBD so that biking becomes harder again.

      1. Liberating a lane is likely to show up the inadequacies of surrounding infrastructure, which provides the list of the next projects to be tackled.

        A bit like the road network but with an outcome more people can be proud of.

  8. Reassigning one lane to active modes is a no brainer. It leads to an immediate reduction in emissions, encourages a shift to cycling or walking with the associated health benefits, allows more people to use the bridge, but with a lower weight penalty. Lowers the need for a second bridge or tunnel.

  9. We’ve deleted Roger Hawkins’s comments for breaking just about every guideline. Keep it civil y’all.

  10. In a parallel universe, one traffic lane on the Auckland Harbour Bridge was reassigned to walking and cycling as a “temporary measure in late 1973 as a fuel-saving measure in response to the soaring cost of petrol. Despite initial scepticism, this proved successful, shifting the Overton window around transport in New Zealand and capitalising on the bicycling boom of the mid-1970s. The rest is history.

    Back in the real world, the second-best time to do this is now.

    1. If it worked once, it will work again. 10,000 people per day walking or cycling per day might be unrealistic at first, but if successful for a few, many more will be encouraged to give it a go. We could reach 10,000 per day in quite a short time. Are there any numbers for 1973?

      1. Sorry Alan, I made this up. It didn’t really happen here.

        Something similar DID happen in the Netherlands; the Car Free Sundays movement of 1973.

        “Not only did they show once again what cities looked like without cars, they also made it possible that other forms of transportation, less oil dependent and in particular cycling, were seen as a viable option for everyday transportation.”

  11. Our population and the number of people employed, who need to cross the bridge for work, dictates that there will never be 10,000 walking or cycling across the bridge daily. Where will they come from and going to where?
    Do not assign a lane – it is not warranted.

    1. Your comment reminds me of what people used to say before there was a harbour bridge.

      Our population and the number of people employed, who need to cross the harbour for work, dictates that there will never be 10,000 crossing the bridge daily. Where will they come from and going to where?
      Do not build a bridge – it is not warranted.

      The North Shore is what it is today because of the harbour bridge.

  12. Cost – Benefit wise there is ZERO argument possible against this: Walking and biking are beneficial activities for personal health; the bridge is effectively a maunga and therefore should receive a similar protection as our other maunga that have survived centuries of quarrying; driving a car is the laziest way to move on the planet; and we are in a climate change emergency with a council more interested in protecting the silver tsunami baby boomers assets than actually positive outcomes for people of all ages. The ex prime minister promised us that climate change would be our “nuclear free” moment; but we continue to import fossil fuels, mine fossil fuels; whilst our NUCLEAR FREE policy has stood up to three and a half decades of outside pressure. Two lanes of the Auckland Harbour Bridge is very little to sacrifice for the greater good. He Kotahi Waka Kotahi, please just do a little something for my six and three year old boys!!!

  13. Odd that there’s no research published that show’s what modes of transport these bridge cyclists are currently using. I’ll hypothesise that most will already be using the bus or ferry and not a car.

    Commuters look for the fastest travel times, so taking a few cars off the road will simply encourage someone using the bus to drive again.

    Our focus needs to be on reducing travel times, that will then dictate what mode or modes are required, and to what extent.

    We’ve jumped straight into a cyclist first solution without fully understanding a complex problem.

    1. You can look at for some of this information – lots of people who live close to the harbour bridge currently drive to close locations on the other side. Many could easily walk or ride if the option was available.

      1. Thanks for the link – will have a read.

        Could and Would are two different things though. We’re lazy creatures and bar a few, take the easy path.

        Just remember those same people Could also buy a motorcycle and lane split, but haven’t.

        1. A motorbike requires a separate driver license class so that is a barrier to entry, plus it is even more dangerous than bicycling.

          The lighter variants called scooters (like Vespas) are not allowed on the Harbour Bridge.

      2. Just look at the NW cycleway as a comparison, I think the most successful in NZ. People cycle many km every day, sun, wind rain…
        They would too over the harbour bridge, given the opportunity. I will

    2. There will be one or two lanes less so all would even out. The buses carry far more than cars do in the peak times from memory.

  14. The timeline should also mention 1974.

    I had not seen the pictures before they features in the GA post below, but in winter of 1974 they just opened up one clipon to people walking and cycling for a few days. Nobody died, and it ‘just worked’.

    Amazing it can’t be done now. I know H&S standards are much better now, but a lot of people claiming it can’t be done is astounding. I personally have ran across the bridge a couple of times during Auckland marathon day; the view is awesome and not that hard an incline to run over.

  15. What planet do you all live on the majority of people would never support this aren’t there far more important issues to be focusing on.

    1. this is a very important issue. Health, both mental and physical benefits if someone brings up the need more hospitals arguement.

      “But to cross the Auckland Harbour Bridge we currently must be in a car, bus, truck or on a motorbike. A child can see it, and visitors to our city remark on it: this is a glaring gap in the heart of our transport system and a huge barrier to access and equity (especially for the more than 28% of Aucklanders* who don’t drive).”

    2. We have to get away from the idea that just because most don’t support something, it is a bad idea. It is really holding us back.

      I know our two main parties just create policy purely based on focus groups, but we need to have principles we adhere to regardles.

  16. Are there map images showing potential connections at the ends of the bridge?

    I like the idea of getting over the bridge, but it would be good to see how directly it could reasonably connect to the destinations at each end.

  17. An opinion piece, parading as fact based – shameful.
    Picking apart the article we can go straight to capacity. There is not enough spare capacity on the bridge to repurpose a lane that active modes. If there was, there would never be traffic chaos when a vehicle breaks down.
    Next up is the fact that experts have repeatedly said that one lane is not safe. I think we can all remember that the wind was strong enough to blow a truck into the center spa, causing significant damage. If the bus hits the Armco (and it will) it can be easily crush a cyclist in the other lane. It’s not just me saying this, experts are pointing it out.
    The weakest case is the emissions. If NZ wants to reduce road transport CO2 emissions, they can introduce a carbon intensity reduction mandate in the fuel. 10% reduction can be had by simply changing the fuel specifications to be the same as Europe.
    Lastly the 3 hours needed to cycle around the Harbour is pure BS. According to Strava, it’s 43km from the Northcote tavern to britomart. Only the most unfit could not do that on n 2 hours. Someone In Lycra will do it in not much more than an hour. Of course, how many journeys start on Northcote point and end in the CBD? If you live in Hobsonville and work in Albany, you will never cycle across the bridge.
    This project has been doomed since day one. Far too much money has been spent on it, including over 1m for intellectual property that was never used. The government has spent a fortune buying houses on the point that are not needed and lay vacant in a housing crisis.
    Labour might build a new bridge, but they are more likely to kick the can down the road, a Nat/ACT government will never spend a cent on this.
    Just accept that while it would be nice on a wish list, it’s a no go.

    1. I can’t be assed going through all your points. But right off the bat:
      There is not enough spare capacity on the bridge to repurpose a lane that active modes. If there was, there would never be traffic chaos when a vehicle breaks down.

      This is simply not true. Breakdowns blocking a lane cause far more congestion than if the lane was gone or closed from the start. Merging into the other lanes, breaking / slowing as a result, people (correctly) minimise the speed differential between adjacent lanes because doing 80 while the adjacent lane does 10km/hr, and is trying to merge into your lane is extremely unsafe and uneasy. This could be easily be managed in the case of the harbour bridge as there are 3 southbound SH1 lanes before the Onewa interchange, and one lane of onramp at Onewa. 3+1 doesn’t add up to 5. It simply doesn’t need 5 southbound on the bridge in the Am.

    2. Just so I fully understand your leap of logic: “the wind was strong enough to blow a truck into the center spa, causing significant damage”

      So your answer is not to ban high sided vehicles like light trucks on the very rare windy day; but to not allow active modes ever?

      Is it too much of a grasp to understand that in extremely high winds – maybe once a year, they also recommend that people don’t walk/run/cycle/scooter etc? And that whatever barrier (running parallel to direction of traffic) that actual engineers install, might be better suited to guiding vehicles away from people than bridge girders. Being built for the job.

      I could go on, but you are just wrong. Like Northcote to Britomart can be stuck into Google maps and you see it is ~2:40 hr of work on a bike. If you disagree, take it up with Google as I suspect they build travel time estimates with a lot more real world data than you. Even then; that is a healthy adult person on a eBike or reasonable road bike.

      What about kids, scooters, wheelchairs, walkers, runners or just people like me (a MAMiL) that would do a 30 minute ride into town, but not a 5-6 hour round trip lightly.

      The bridge is exclusory; like your thinking

      1. I do the loop all the time. Google maps – lol.
        So you think we should create traffic chaos, releasing more CO2 and Nox emissions, just so a few people that live in the Northcote/Birkenhead catchment don’t have to catch a ferry – REALLY??
        The fact is, plenty of experts have already worked on this project and the conclusion is always the same – that it can’t be done.
        Of course, if you don’t care about adding misery, emissions and loss of productivity – yeah – then it’s a great idea.

        1. I also ride the loop. Might be an hour for a Stravaracer but for a normal person it could easy take that long considering all the extremely treacherous places that you have to negotiate which would slow down someone who isn’t that confident mixing it up with fast flowing traffic no matter how fit or unfit they are. Also that is a pretty big ride for most normal people considering you aren’t just doing kne loop but you have to get home again, compared to say a 10km commute over the bridge and back.

          It won’t make more emissions because car driving needs to be made more difficult and more modes and options need to be made available and easier to the point where taking the car is a less preferred option. Might seem like a chicken and egg argument but after doing pro car options for 70 years with the resulting failed system we have now it should be pretty obvious that we need to do the other things instead. This would be a massive psychological step towards convincing people that reducing car dependency is going to be taken seriously.

          Oh and europe doesn’t just have a different fuel standard, they do a lot of things that make driving less attractive like high fuel taxes, expensive compulsory insurance, promoting rail travel and providing alternative mode options, congestion charging, restricted town entry and parking, the list goes on so if you want to compare us to Europe I think you need to take all the other stuff into account too.

        2. Stravaracer, I am guessing you’re young. Let’s see if you are still managing that ride when you are in your 60’s! You might need an e-bike.
          Hopefully a lane on the bridge will have been liberated long before then, so you should still be able to get to the North Shore on leg power.

        3. Actually, the fact is that all the work was easy to strip to pieces.

          The claim that road reallocation creates traffic chaos, releasing more CO2 and Nox emissions is nonsense and has been debunked soundly by experts all over the world. Traffic evaporation, trip reduction and mode shift occur. WK and AT alike continue to use a model that’s inappropriate, and fully debunked, to try to understand what the network will do.

          There’s not one jot of a technical reason not to liberate a lane. The reason WK refuse to allow trials is because they know this will make the truth clear to everyone.

  18. There are enough other great places to cycle and walk in Aucklannd. We can’t continue to cause disruptions to the economy for a handful of individuals.

    1. Not true.

      Cycling is transport, it’s not a “nice-to-have”, nor just “…for a handful of individuals.” A higher percentage of people can cycle than can drive.

      If the transport system does not enable everyday cycling, then it is failing and needs to be changed.

      This is more true for the Auckland Harbour Bridge than any other transport link in New Zealand

    2. “There are enough other great places to cycle and walk in Aucklannd.” – try thinking of cycling as a means of transport and not recreation. Then you will see why you are wrong.

  19. I did the maths, which showed we need to get 10,000 return journeys by cyclists or pedestrians per day over the bridge to justify closing one lane for motor vehicles. But the Powers that Be will not be interested, because, for example, they are determined to build the Penlink, and another 50,000 houses around Stillwater, which will add another 10,000 return car journeys on to the bridge, defeating the 10,000 car journeys replaced by cyclists. The only solution to Auckland’s transport problem is “heavy” rail to North Shore, serving Albany, Silverdale, Orewa, and all the way to Warkworth and on to join up with the existing line at Wellesford. I have said this since 1986 when cracks were discovered on the clipons. Light rail to Birkenhead and Takapuna will not solve the transport problems for all the continuing population growth from Albany to Warkworth. It is time this is begun to be recognized. Start now to build rail for 160km/hr trains around the harbour via Massey, Hobsonville, and on to Albany, with provision for connection to a new rail tunnel under the harbour. A road tunnel will never be safe. because sooner or later there will be a truck fire, as in the tunnel under the Alps which killed 100 people. Any tunnel under Auckland Harbour has to be a rail tunnel, connecting to the CRL, so that it can serve all the housing north to Warkworh and Wellesford. And Penlink should be heavy rail to connect to the rest of the rail network.

    1. If you think getting a cycle lane across the bridge is hard, try a HR option from the CBD to Orewa, through a tunnel in the harbour…

  20. What a bunch of dreamers alright. Look at all the other cycle ways and walkways that have been created throughout the CBD that no one is using – including old motorway lanes that were repurposed! Now a bonanza for taggers!
    If your serious I’m sure a small clip on walkway could be easily engineered onto the outside of the bridge without the need to spend tens of millions

    1. We’ve been down that path (pardon the pun) before. ps The Light Path/Pink Path averaged about 400-1,200 bike counts per day in March. Imagine if the bridge could be biked as well, it’s all about the network affect. Think of roads that are not joined together, how well would they be used?

    1. Considering that your “share 1/8th capacity off the bridge” is a total red herring, in fact a lie if you have any grasp of basic arithmetic, doesnt make it true. It’s not “Sharing” anything.. it’s usurping. AKA Denying, if you will. The bridge runs at 110-130% capacity 4-5 hours per day. But wait , there’s more; that’s givent that 5 lanes are open to the overloaded direction. Reduce that to 4 and there’s an exponential effect on the overload. So purrrrlllleeeeze, think before you blither. I totally get it that there’s an ideological reason to run a bike lane but there is no rationally/evidence supportable reason. Just sling lightweight dedicated 4m wide aeropath under the centre of the bridge, and we’ll find out how many people will really use it. Nie shade in summer, out of the rain on winter. Everyone wears buds with depressing NickCave droning on anyways, so the thrum will be complimentary. Cheers’

      1. I totally get it that there’s an ideological reason to oppose a bike lane but there is no rationally/evidence supportable reason.

        Hint: Mike Hosking is not always right – in fact he is usually wrong

        Fixed it for you

      2. lol, their proposal costs a lot less than what you propose. where did you get 110-130% capacity from?? It’s not the bridge that is the problem. There aren’t enough lanes on either side of the bridge. The bridge is hardly ever congested. Google Maps Typical Traffic confirms this easily and that is a large, accurate data source. So you are the one who has no idea what you are talking about. It’s mostly the barrier shifting that causes problems on the bridge. So the bridge can spare a lane.

        The idea of continuing to build a city just for cars is stupid. A city should be built for people. Freedom of movement is a human right. People should be able to walk and cycle across the bridge on a human rights basis. It shouldn’t be restricted to basically only people who can drive and can afford a car. It is the right thing to do.

  21. 110-130% capacity?

    The bridge flows fine at all hours, its the approaches that are the issue. And WK’s own analysis showed that traffic will flow better with one lane allocated to active modes.

    “Usurping”? “IT’S MY ROAD, MY ROAD.I WON”T SHARE!”


    1. (with arms crossed, a frown and claims of dastardly ideology, while unwittingly insisting on maintaining my preferred ideology…)

  22. All fun and games until a little kid throws their toy onto the lanes, causes a huge car crash and multiple casualities 🙂

    1. Golly. At the moment this could happen on any of the lanes, as kids can just as easily throw their toys from a car window. So we’d better quickly get those cars off the bridge to avoid that huge car crash and multiple casualities.

      1. Exactly my thought as well; some of us had kids who discovered that they could press a button and lower a window to stick hands and soft toys out into the slipstream.

        Interesting isn’t it that some people are grasping at straws trying to find any reason not allow people onto the bridge.

        I mean the possibility of a child’s toy causing a crash on the bridge if we allow active modes is getting ludicrous .

        Personally have seen insecure loads on car roof racks, utes and trucks, so they should be banned from the bridge. Only significant damage done to the bridge in recent years was a high sided light truck being blown into the structure. So they should be banned in all weather just in case.

        In fact just ban everything but buses, active modes, cars with less than 3 occupants or those paying a steep toll/congestion charge. Everybody else can use the upper harbour as apparently it is quick and easy; you just need to be an elite level cyclist and have no consideration for anybody who can’t cycle at 40km/h

        Being facetious of course, but some of the responses cannot seriously be arguments made in good faith

    2. What all of these “concerns” around implementing cycling infrastructure expose, be it the harbour bridge or Hobsonville Rd, etc, is just how bad Auckland drivers are.

      We must protect them from themselves, apparently. I am surprised they can get out of their driveway each morning without having an accident.

    3. It’s kind of weird isn’t it. We are so set on having car lanes running smoothly without any interruption yet it is the PT (bus lanes) and active modes (bike lanes) which always get disrupted – either just through poor design (eg the bus lane along Fanshawe past Fonterra makes all northern city bound buses wait for even a single car to turn left at those light – madness!) or when there are road works and the lanes get blocked.

      This whole mindset needs to change because doesn’t this just prove how inefficient single car travel is when there are busy times?

    1. That was blocking the counter peak direction, taking it down to two lanes.
      Not sure it’s any different, the counterpeak already backs up to Takapuna every day.

  23. I understand that the pedestrian/cycle “clip on” was shelved because the northern support structure has a failing or sub optimum pile system.
    That pile system should have limited the increased load of the move to the 53 ton vehicle max, but didn’t.
    I do not recall any investigation of the costs of in creasing the piling to overcome the problem and I’m sure problems in design etc could be overcome with the new techniques that are available to the engineers of today.

Leave a Reply

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