Price tag on Britomart jumps to $261 million

By BERNARD ORSMAN

The Britomart budget keeps blowing out, with the latest estimate $261 million.

And the Auckland City Council has no idea how many passengers will use the transport centre.

The latest increase comes after Audit New Zealand ordered the council to include $12 million of interest charges hidden in the debt servicing budget onto the Britomart books.

Just last month, the council voted to increase the budget for Britomart from $174 million to $249.5 million to pay for cost overruns on a new design.

When $20 million written off from the previous scheme is included, the total cost of Britomart will be $281 million.

The inability of the council to come up with patronage figures for Britomart has already prompted Infrastructure Auckland to freeze an application for $95 million towards the project until it has firm figures.

Transfund has frozen an application for $25 million for the same reason.

Auckland City councillor David Hay told a working party on Britomart that it would be wrong to approve spending of $261 million without knowing how many passengers were going to use the transport centre.

A 168-page report on the costs and benefits of Britomart, prepared by Beca Carter Hollings & Ferner, says the downtown project will have a minor impact for people using buses. But it is quiet on the benefits from trains, which will gobble up most of the $261 million cost of the large public scheme.

A Beca associate, Graeme Roberts, and consultant Grant Kirby said they were waiting on patronage figures being prepared by the Auckland Regional Council.

Mr Roberts and Mr Kirby said the figures were subject to a confidentiality agreement that would prevent the public seeing them but allow Infrastructure Auckland and Transfund a glimpse to evaluate their funding applications.

Last month, the regional council told the Herald about another study which projects a 15 per cent rise in the number of rail users as a result of moving the railway station in the Strand to Queen St.

Based on this study, the number of rail commuters who use the railway station each workday would increase by just 405 passengers, from 2700 to 3105.

The cost-benefit analysis is upbeat about the Queen St station being able to handle up to 10,500 passengers per hour with 24 trains coming and going but it does not say how busy, or quiet, the station would be.

Public transport accounts for only 7 per cent of trips into central Auckland and an Automobile Association survey, quoted in the report, says 2 per cent of commuters get around Auckland by train.

Auckland ratepayers would have to subsidise rail commuters using the station. Buses would pay their way.

The report has come up with "best estimate" benefits worth $103.5 million for Britomart.

They include benefits to commuters from faster services, more coordinated bus, rail and ferry services and reduced waiting times worth $60 million; a 1 per cent saving in peak-hour car trips from people switching from private to public transport worth $26 million, and a flow-on in reduced car crashes worth $13.5 million. The report said the cost of not proceeding with Britomart and upgrading rail and bus services at their present locations was $20.9 million.

This option would do little to support regional plans to develop public transport, would not improve links between trains, buses and ferries and not assist with the rejuvenation of downtown Auckland, the report said.