Comments on: $5m “Transparent” Bridge To Cross Harbour Bridge

By: Ron

Ron — Mon, 28 Dec 2009 23:13:34 +0000

Almost everybody seems to be missing the point. I walk down Jacob’s Ladder every weekday on my way to work from St Mary’s Bay to Fanshawe Street, and back again each evening. I’m saving petrol, saving carpark fees and helping myself keep healthy. This access is now being taken away for at least a year (so 0508 VIC PARK informs me.) That’s bad enough, but some of the comments above suggest there are cretins around who would like this pedestrian access removed permanently! Get real, use your legs and use your brain. What about the council providing some temporary access from St Mary’s Bay to Fanshawe Street?

By: Max

Max — Fri, 11 Dec 2009 03:57:44 +0000

Just to give a bit of context that is missing – Cycle Action was in on the discussions about upgrading Westhaven, and the local residents were dead set against ANY sort of bridge between St Mary’s Bay to the Westhaven side. Seems they felt that the dirty unwashed would travel by car to St Mary’s Bay, park in their nice streets, and then cross over to Westhaven to fish. Seriously!

Originally, ACC was (possibly with NZTA?) were planning TWO bridges (one at Jacobs Ladder, and one halfway to the Harbour Bridge). But that got canned, partly because of these local protests.

As for the bridge itself: Cool stuff (especially if it is at least reasonably possible to carry your bike up and down the stairs). I’m for it, though I can understand some people might feel it is a bit steep in price.

By: Joshua

Joshua — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 03:20:12 +0000

Also the fact that you are sheltered from the wind, It’s a huge wind tunnel through that section of the motorway not only because of the 8 (yes lanes of motorway, but it’s also just off the sea. Don’t think as many people would use the Cable stay bridge.

By: jarbury

jarbury — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 09:00:37 +0000

I quite like it actually. I am guessing that if this wasn’t included, NZTA would have found another way to spend the $5 million. Probably on even more pavement!

By: Jeremy Harris

Jeremy Harris — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 08:59:18 +0000

I take your point BA…

By: BA

BA — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 07:17:10 +0000

Well, I’d rather have an iconic bridge that forms a wonderful gateway into the CBD. It looks much better than anything that has ever been constructed in the city and I praise NZTA for having a vision. (Though we can all wish similar vision was applied to rail projects).

Count yourself lucky, you are not getting the usual shitty looking bridge with metal railings…Very common at our railway stations and motorways.

Then no one would be up in arms because it is status-quo, something that is oh so popular in Auckland.

High time we catch up with other “world class” cities.

By: Jeremy Harris

Jeremy Harris — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 01:59:23 +0000

Actually it does work like that, NZTA is responsible for Penlink and other roading programmes, local roads budgets are getting stripped back (I know hard to believe – roads underfunded) but if an adequate cable stay bridge could be built for $1 million I’d suggest the extra $4 million would be better spent on fixing potholes…

By: BA

BA — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 01:29:13 +0000

^^ It doesnt work like that. They are working with the resources that they have.

Almost sounds as ridiculous as some NIMBY suggesting Britomart developers that there are plenty other sites in the CBD where a 60m hotel can go up. Well, smartass, they dont own the rest of the CBD. GAAH

By: Jeremy Harris

Jeremy Harris — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 21:30:57 +0000

I see where you guys are coming from but a pleasant cable stay bridge can be built and free up the access then why not use the extra $4 million for something emminently more useful..?

A new train station, towards the CBD tunnel study or even *horror* Penlink…

By: Joshua

Joshua — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 19:16:38 +0000

Totally agree BA, everyone complains about being locked out of the waterfront, then when they try and make a easier connection to improve accessibility and make the quality of city living better, everyone complains.

A great step towards making our city more pedestrain freindly!

By: BA

BA — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 11:53:54 +0000

Guys, Guys, stop taking this all out of context. I know where you’re coming from, but look at it seriously. For once, we are building something that looks half decent. Who cares if they spend 5 mil on it? Atleast we are getting something, and thats a change.

Also, dont complain about no-one using that walkway. THEY WILL once it is built.

Don’t you get pissed off when Steven Joyce says 1% of Aucklanders use trains as an excuse for low funding? Thats exactly what all this moaning sounds like. Build and they will come…

By: Jeremy Harris

Jeremy Harris — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 09:39:38 +0000

Interestingly they didn’t do a rendering of what the glass will look like when covered in exhaust particulate…

I wonder why..?

By: Su Yin

Su Yin — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 09:11:01 +0000

I wish they would stop building infrastructure that promotes sustainable modes of transportation (walking, cycling) that takes you from nowhere to nowhere.

Later, the council will use this as an excuse to crush future proposals of walking and cycling infrastructure that people really want and need. “We built a nice, fancy and expensive pedestrian walkway but nobody used it! Therefore we don’t want to waste more money on another one!” the councilors will cry.

*Cries*

By: Joshua

Joshua — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 06:25:27 +0000

They are also building a cable stay bridge on the Manukau Harbour Crossing project, however I’m always for something different, but hopefully they have a better image than that. Also I think it will be great, it will create a good city walking link, which is very valuable for the city.

By: M P

M P — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 05:50:45 +0000

Better render here http://www.pbase.com/enigma35/image/116865782.jpg

I am all for the idea, it will be a stunning new gateway to the city. About time Auckland caught up with the rest of he world in design terms. IMO it is much better than a boring cable stay bridge which will not protect people from the wind and rain plus the new design has elevator access.

By: George Darroch

George Darroch — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 05:03:27 +0000

Something for which Auckland has been crying out, I’m sure?

By: Jeremy Harris

Jeremy Harris — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 04:19:14 +0000

I like the cable stay bridges they’ve built for the Mt Roskill Motorway extension and so my vote is for the top image…

I run around the Marina once or twice a week so I’ll use this bridge and active mode access should be provided as part of roading upgrades but I do agree with others points, what the hell is up with our transport priorities..?

By: Jon C

Jon C — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 22:05:07 +0000

Good point Stranded. They seem to have forgotten that people protested and walked the bridge to make the point we want to walk and cycle across the bridge not walk across it!
Commuter, sadly it seems so. I am sure we could find a way to spend another $5m on the train system.

By: Commuter

Commuter — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 21:34:59 +0000

Is this a transport agency joke? A way of emphasising that they can throw away as much money as they like on ridiculous schemes that will enable the wealthy residents of St Mary’s Bay to access their yachts more rapidly? Meanwhile public transport is starved of funds; Kiwi Rail can’t even find $100,000 to clear the rail embankments of weeds, etc, etc. I despair!

By: Stranded on the North Shore

Stranded on the North Shore — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 21:28:48 +0000

They should scrap the plans for this fancy bridge and put the part of the money forward for the Harbour Bridge pedestrian and bike crossing. Goodness me.