Roading's triple bypass needs care

By GREG McKEOWN*

Giving excessive priority to cars cutting through neighbourhoods, at the expense of creating great communities, should be a mistake of the past. There are encouraging tinges of change in the latest reports on the eastern corridor which point to a more positive outcome.

The first is a mind shift away from motorway lanes for cars and trucks to a multi-modal corridor incorporating rapid transit. The second is some recognition of well-planned land use and community development. We need more of that. The goal of improved transport should be improved communities.

The Auckland City Council transport committee is proceeding to phase two of the development of the eastern corridor. After listening to as many people and representative groups as possible, I conditionally support that decision.

There is little doubt that the case to develop transport infrastructure in the eastern corridor has been established. Reports in March recommended that "doing nothing was not an option".

Transport planners at Auckland City then suggested a careful approach and a peer review. They also recommended an up-to-date analysis of the transport requirements of eastern Auckland. Key inputs were forecast land use and population growth, with careful consideration given to increased uptake of transit.

And, based on those results, we should be crystal clear about two things.

First, that an adequate tract of land should be preserved in the eastern corridor for the development of transport. Provision could be made for a balance of cars, trucks, buses, trains and other alternatives, including rapid transit.

Secondly, we should determine a specific range of alternatives for the corridor, both in terms of alignment and modal mix.

With up to $13 million voted behind the project conditionally, we are at an absolutely critical stage. The problem with reports and the large amounts of public money supporting them is that sometimes the wrong idea can get promoted. At this point we should be careful not to champion any cause to an extreme that potentially excludes viable alternatives.

To make sure that we invest our time and public money in sound ideas, the brief for the next phase of the work must be developed carefully. We are asking key questions now to ensure that we are all on the same path. Here are a few.

Is the recommendation for a six-lane multi-modal expressway the only option that will be developed in phase two? No. Planners and engineers will be directed to keep other options on the table, including rapid transit, dedicated freight and high-occupancy vehicle lanes, increased use of rail, different alignments and tunnel options.

What are the potential changes to Tamaki Drive, and are they acceptable to the public at large? The city end of Tamaki Drive (from Ngapipi Rd to Mechanics Bay) could be expanded to six lanes. But Tamaki Drive has been described as one of Auckland's premier parks; its essential character must be preserved.

To the same extent that making progress with Auckland's transport solutions requires leadership, looking after assets such as Tamaki Drive requires trusteeship.

What is going to happen across Hobson Bay? For the past year, the public has been told that we will be enhancing the bay and have engaged with the process on that basis. The idea of half-bridges attached to the causeway, while possibly open to consent, does not seem to support the promising vision of superb mitigation and enhanced community facilities. The plan must lock these aspects into the project.

Will cultural, social, environmental and economic issues be addressed properly? Yes, properly and professionally. To date we have sought feedback from the public and special interest groups.

Phase two will include the greater level of consultation that people have been seeking. Building a solution for the eastern corridor will require a balanced and considered approach, with co-operation and concessions required from all parties.

Are tolls the only answer for funding the eastern corridor? No. They may be part of the solution. But let's be clear - funding should not force form and function. We must design and develop a solution according to transport and community needs and then fund it, not vice-versa.

The "triple bypass" analogy creates a clear visual image of the proposed eastern and western corridors flanking State Highway 1, and serves some purpose in that regard.

But a triple bypass alone is not the solution. The patient also needs a change of diet.

Auckland must give greater priority to land use, community development and equipping itself with a first-rate passenger transport network.

* Greg McKeown is chairman of the Auckland City Council transport committee.

Further reading
Feature: Getting Auckland moving

Related links