KEY POINTS:
When they hear the word "infrastructure" most people think of the road network. When they hear references to infrastructural projects they think, in Auckland anyway, of the harbour bridge. In the absence of specific project proposals from the new Government as yet, many seem to assume Auckland is about to get another harbour crossing.
When the possibility was put to Transport Minister Stephen Joyce, he pointed out that another bridge or tunnel was not urgent. Doubtless, he too assumed it was an obvious need until he met his officials in the Transport Agency, formerly Transit New Zealand. Another Auckland harbour crossing has not been high on Transit's priorities when assessed against other roading needs in the region and over the whole country.
Regular users of the 50-year-old harbour bridge would have to agree with the officials, reluctantly perhaps, because a big bridge or an undersea tunnel is a more interesting proposition than most of the mundane priorities. Aucklanders enjoy periodic debates on the relative merits of a bridge and a tunnel, and various alignments of each, and will continue to do so no matter how far in the future the project might be.
It seemed the life of the bridge might be suddenly foreshortened when a 2007 engineer's report warned of "catastrophic failure" unless the clip-on additions were strengthened. Transit hastened to assure the public that engineers did not use that phrase in its ordinary meaning. Nevertheless, heavy vehicles were barred from the outer lanes and the strengthening work began.
Then, just before Christmas, the same officials made the sensible decision not to provide walking and cycling tracks on the bridge. Less sensibly, they claimed the deadweight involved would reduce the life of the clip-on by 10 years. This, after the $45 million strengthening has added 769 tonnes of steel to the structure.
The agency has since said that part of that shorter life estimate was attributable to heavy vehicles and it would decide when the strengthening is finished whether to let trucks back on the outer lanes. With walking and cycling out of the picture, says regional director Wayne McDonald, the clip-ons would last another 25 to 40 years.
Long before it needs replacing, of course, the bridge may need a companion. But that is likely to still be many years away. Traffic on the bridge flows a good deal more freely than on many other parts of the Auckland motorways and their feeder roads. One of the worst congestion points occurs just south of the bridge, at the Victoria Park flyover. Widening the flyover, long a Transit priority, has been delayed by pressure for an extravagant tunnel under the park.
If Auckland is to benefit from the Government's stimulation programme it ought to nominate projects it genuinely needs. Rail electrification is an obvious one. Completion of the western ring road, for which the upper harbour crossing has been widened, is another. Whether or not that ring road becomes the preferred route to Auckland Airport, as intended, the city also needs a rail spur to the air terminals.
Beyond that, it is hard to see projects with pressing need. It is a myth that infrastructure has been neglected in recent decades. In the Auckland region alone we have acquired new central motorway connections, the northern busway, the motorway extension to Orewa and soon to Puhoi. The Newmarket viaduct replacement is next.
If money is to be spent more freely to counter recession this year, let it be for infrastructure the country needs and which can generate economic value. Leave the next harbour crossing for a while yet.
