SkyPath is ready to go but NZTA isn't...
It’s been 17 years since the Government’s Transport and Infrastructure Select Committee asked Transit (predecessor to the NZ Transport Agency) to find a solution to walking and cycling across the Auckland Harbour Bridge.. Today NZTA are no closer to a solution. NZTA did support SkyPath through its design and consenting process but then claimed its Northern Pathway was a superior option. The Northern Pathway subsequently failed its wind tunnel testing, and NZTA’s recent proposal for a standalone walking & cycling bridge has been rejected by the Government (and general public) as too expensive.
SkyPath remains a feasible, cost-effective solution that has been rigorously tested and has resource consent. Given NZTA's failure to deliver we've called for an independent review
So why hasn’t NZTA delivered yet?
Unfortunately NZTA‘s approach has since ranged from reluctant cooperation to outright obstruction. As NZTA’s Chair Brian Roche describes, NZTA has had a culture of “prejudice against a proposal from an outside organisation”.
Here are examples in relation to SkyPath and the Auckland Harbour Bridge (AHB)...
Why have we seen this behaviour from NZTA?
NZTA is not comfortable with a low-cost solution for walking & cycling on the Auckland Harbour Bridge because this doesn’t fit their narrative that we regularly see in the media:… ‘the Bridge is at capacity and can’t be strengthened, hence a new crossing will soon be needed’.”
NZTA’’s approach is at odds with the Government’s Policy Statement on Transport (GPS 2021 – 2030) that requires reduced private vehicles and trucks in favour of the more sustainable modes.
Time for a review:
After 17 years, it’s time for an independent panel to review the situation, this should consider:
SkyPath remains a feasible, cost-effective solution that has been rigorously tested and has resource consent. Given NZTA's failure to deliver we've called for an independent review
So why hasn’t NZTA delivered yet?
Unfortunately NZTA‘s approach has since ranged from reluctant cooperation to outright obstruction. As NZTA’s Chair Brian Roche describes, NZTA has had a culture of “prejudice against a proposal from an outside organisation”.
Here are examples in relation to SkyPath and the Auckland Harbour Bridge (AHB)...
- In February 2021, NZTA senior management advised the Government’s Transport and Infrastructure Select Committee that the AHB can no longer be strengthened but failed to mention the Holmes Consulting strengthening solution prepared for NZTA.
- Despite NZTA’s advice to the contrary, we don’t believe the AHBis is at capacity.. The truss bridge (the centre 4 lanes) is not. For the clip-ons, NZTA assumes a significant capacity loss is due to the differential temperature effect (when the top and bottom plates of the clip-ons have different temperatures). NZTA uses the theoretical maximum loss of capacity, NZTA have refused to take the advice of their peer reviewers Hyder to carry out the actual testing to see whether such a large allowance is necessary.
- We have found instances of deceptive behaviour by NZTA, including the manipulating of information by requiring consultants Beca to backdate their advice to support a pre-determined position in NZTA’s Board papers.
- In May 2019, NZTA management declined the consented and funded SkyPath design by opting for a 'superior' design – the Northern Pathway. NZTA management said the Northern Pathway gave certainty to Aucklanders, it would cost approximately $120M and that construction could start in 2020. However NZTA failed to disclose they hadn’t designed the pylons (supporting legs) nor the landings at each end. One year later the cost had increased to $240M, and Northern Pathway failed its wind tunnel testing..
- NZTA has not produced any substantive reasons for choosing not to deliver SkyPath, a design which it helped design, supported through the resource consenting process, had NZTA Board sign-off as buildable (see pg 14) and assured the Minister of Transport in this letter from NZTA's Chair that "Assuming the detailed business case confirms the economic case, the Skypath project will be able to proceed to implementation."
- NZTA has rejected a short trial using the western-most lane for walking and cycling. Their traffic analysis assumed no-one would get out of their cars to walk, scooter or cycle. NZTA has rejected the international evidence that road capacity reductions results in less traffic.
- Transit advised in this letter dated 19 May 2008 that it had ensured structural elements would be incorporated into a strengthening project to “future-proof the clip-on lanes and allow for future walking and cycling options” on the bridge..
Why have we seen this behaviour from NZTA?
NZTA is not comfortable with a low-cost solution for walking & cycling on the Auckland Harbour Bridge because this doesn’t fit their narrative that we regularly see in the media:… ‘the Bridge is at capacity and can’t be strengthened, hence a new crossing will soon be needed’.”
NZTA’’s approach is at odds with the Government’s Policy Statement on Transport (GPS 2021 – 2030) that requires reduced private vehicles and trucks in favour of the more sustainable modes.
Time for a review:
After 17 years, it’s time for an independent panel to review the situation, this should consider:
- the options for walking & cycling across the bridge,
- determining the actual capacity of the AHB and the options for strengthening it,
- review the Beca/NZTA relationship to ensure best-practice management of the bridge, given its vital role,
- the merits of a short trial of one traffic lane for active transport.
SkyPath's history
The SkyPath Trust worked from 2010 to 2017 to create an innovative new solution - with a viable engineering design and approved business case. The SkyPath design challenged NZTA’s position that it couldn’t be done with an innovative private engineering solution - a composite structure (lightweight yet stronger than steel) attached to the eastern clip-ons. In 2010, NZTA agreed that this new design was structurally possible, and collaborated with the SkyPath Trust in extensive engineering works to check feasibility. A public launch of the new SkyPath design in 2011 was led by then Mayor Len Brown and welcomed by many supporters as an exciting new way to unlock an achievable pathway solution.
Funding remained a sticking point, with NZTA declining to provide funds, but agreeing that they would consider a licence for a private facility to operate. Their refusal to provide funding led to the development of the Trust’s proposal for a partnership with a private investor, which would have meant a small fee for users of SkyPath. Getacross wanted to see a facility that was free for all pedestrians and cyclists to use - but supporters agreed that this private investment seemed like the only viable method of funding the facility, given NZTA's refusal to do so, prior to the 2019 funding announcement.
SkyPath and their investor developed a design and business case which gained Auckland Council support following 2014. Auckland Council Resource Consent was granted in 2015, and confirmed in 2016 following appeals to the Environment Court.
NZTA acquired the design IP, naming and naming rights of SkyPath (and SeaPath) from us in 2019. Per this letter from NZTA Chair to Phil Twyford, SkyPath could have been delivered by NZTA for Aucklanders to start using in 2021 but unfortunately we now face years of delay and uncertainly..
Funding remained a sticking point, with NZTA declining to provide funds, but agreeing that they would consider a licence for a private facility to operate. Their refusal to provide funding led to the development of the Trust’s proposal for a partnership with a private investor, which would have meant a small fee for users of SkyPath. Getacross wanted to see a facility that was free for all pedestrians and cyclists to use - but supporters agreed that this private investment seemed like the only viable method of funding the facility, given NZTA's refusal to do so, prior to the 2019 funding announcement.
SkyPath and their investor developed a design and business case which gained Auckland Council support following 2014. Auckland Council Resource Consent was granted in 2015, and confirmed in 2016 following appeals to the Environment Court.
NZTA acquired the design IP, naming and naming rights of SkyPath (and SeaPath) from us in 2019. Per this letter from NZTA Chair to Phil Twyford, SkyPath could have been delivered by NZTA for Aucklanders to start using in 2021 but unfortunately we now face years of delay and uncertainly..
Here's a pictorial of the history since 2003! Bike Auckland have provided this excellent summary of 40 years campaigning.
