Auckland Mayor Wayne Brown has made headlines by proposing an alternative to the government’s $56 billion Waitematā Harbour tunnel plan, which he has openly criticised as overly expensive and impractical. Instead of supporting the current tunnel project—which would involve two underwater passages for traffic and one for light rail—Brown has advocated for a second harbour bridge connecting Point Chevalier and North Shore.
Brown’s vision, shared during a council meeting, emphasises a more cost-effective solution to Auckland’s growing infrastructure needs. He believes that the tunnel proposal, which could take decades to complete, is not an immediate solution to the city’s transportation woes. His argument is that bridges, compared to tunnels, are significantly cheaper to build and more efficient in terms of delivering benefits in a shorter time frame.
The initial government plan, announced by the previous Labour administration, included a mix of tunnels for cars, trucks, and light rail, costing between $35 and $44.5 billion. It also sought to repurpose lanes on the existing Auckland Harbour Bridge for public transport, such as buses and cyclists.
However, Brown has dismissed this approach, stating that the focus should be on resolving more immediate traffic issues, like congestion on State Highway 1, rather than committing to a tunnel project that may not address these challenges effectively.
Brown’s proposal has resonated with parts of the business community, who are concerned that the tunnel project, despite its massive scale, may not deliver the promised benefits in reducing congestion.
Simon Bridges, CEO of the Auckland Business Chamber, expressed scepticism about the decongestion advantages claimed by the Labour Party. He noted that previous modelling has shown only modest improvements in traffic, a key concern given the enormous financial investment required.
While Brown’s bridge idea has garnered some support, it faces opposition from environmental and cycling advocates who argue that a tunnel could provide more opportunities for sustainable transport options, such as pedestrian pathways and cycle lanes. Critics of the new bridge option argue that long-term resilience may favour tunnels, particularly in relation to future-proofing against climate challenges.
For Kiwi business owners, this debate holds significant implications. Should Brown’s bridge proposal gain traction, it could lead to quicker and more affordable infrastructure improvements, potentially easing traffic congestion and improving logistics for businesses reliant on road transport.
On the other hand, abandoning the tunnel plan might delay Auckland’s ability to integrate more sustainable transport systems like light rail, which could affect sectors invested in green transport solutions.
In the short term, business owners may benefit from reduced costs if the bridge plan is approved, but they should stay informed on developments as the final decision on Auckland’s second harbour crossing will undoubtedly impact the city’s future infrastructure landscape.
