'Complete waste of time': Councillors slam $1m Meola Reef study

Auckland councillors have blasted a proposed $1 million study into Mayor Wayne Brown’s favoured Meola Reef harbour crossing as “absolutely ludicrous” and a “complete waste of time”.

Brown remains an advocate for the route but has baulked at the study’s $1m price tag, calling it “ridiculous” and insisting he has not committed any ratepayer money.

The Government has invited Auckland Council to split the cost of investigating the option, despite more than $100m already being spent examining a second harbour crossing.

On Monday, Transport Minister Chris Bishop and Prime Minister Christopher Luxon announced the next steps for a second harbour crossing.

Bishop said Cabinet had agreed an independent detailed business case was needed, despite NZTA completing an investment case in May that identified a tunnel as its preferred option.

He said more work and information was required before Cabinet could choose a preferred option.

Brown said he had not committed any council funding to the Meola Reef study and stressed it was the Government’s proposal, not his.

His understanding was the Government had invited the council to contribute, but had provided no further information.

Brown said he had long considered the current approach to a second harbour crossing “silly and expensive”, and had pushed for other options to be considered.

Transport and Infrastructure Minister Chris Bishop said a decision on the preferred route and method of Auckland's proposed second harbour crossing will be made by mid-year. Composite / Brett Phibbs, Jason Dorday

However, spending $1m on another study was “ridiculous” given the amount of information already available, he said.

“The Government has already spent $100m on multiple studies with nothing to show for it, including $5m on architects. Why do you need an architect for a tunnel?” Brown said, in reference to the investigation into a tunnel next to the Auckland Harbour Bridge.

He expected any funding request that eventuated would be considered through the Regional Deal political group.

In a social media post this week, Auckland councillor John Gillon said the Meola Reef to Birkenhead option was “absolutely ludicrous” and should have already been ruled out.

He would not support any ratepayer money being spent investigating the route.

Gillon said options through the area could threaten Kendall Bay, Kauri Point Centennial Park, Chelsea Estate Heritage Park or Little Shoal Bay Reserve.

“None of these are acceptable,” he said.

He also questioned where traffic would go once it reached Birkenhead.

Gillon said the proposal was only being considered because Brown had lobbied for it, despite the council itself having no position supporting a Meola Reef-Birkenhead crossing.

“The Auckland Deal is with council as a whole, not the mayor as an individual,” he wrote.

“Just rule it out, Minister Bishop.”

Auckland Mayor Wayne Brown. Photo / Alyse Wright

​Waitematā and Gulf Ward councillor Mike Lee said the Meola Reef proposal was Brown’s “latest fad” and was “not well thought out”.

Lee said extensive work on a new harbour crossing had already been carried out in the early 2000s, when he chaired the Auckland Regional Council.

That work, involving central government, NZTA and Auckland councils, concluded a combined road and potential rail tunnel was the preferred option.

Lee said the decision was reviewed after National came to power in 2008, but ultimately remained in place.

He said Brown did not understand the geology of the Meola Reef area or the disruption major motorway connections would cause on both sides of the harbour.

“I think it’s just a complete waste of time.”

Lee was particularly critical of ratepayer money being spent revisiting the issue.

He said Aucklanders would effectively be paying twice, through both taxes and rates, for work he believed had already been done.

“To have all that work that was paid for completely wasted because the mayor thinks he’s an expert in bridges is just nonsense.”

North Shore councillor Richard Hills, while not supportive of the Meola option, welcomed a “thorough and potentially more open process”.

“It’s a process that could cost tens of billions of dollars, so it must be done right.

“A new crossing will bring network resilience to supplement the ageing bridge but future plans need to have a strong public transport priority, to build on the runaway success of northern busway which has already extended the life of the bridge, reduced congestion and emissions.”

Hills said walking and cycling should also be investigated, which were popular features on other famous harbour crossings around the world.

“Crossing from the Shore each day, the bridge is often the least congested part of the network so it’s also crucial to know how any future crossing lands in and around our communities and show the positive or negative impacts that may have.”

Transport and Infrastructure Delivery Committee chair Andy Baker said the proposal had never been brought before his committee, or any other council committee, so he had “nothing to say” at this stage.

“A bit of water to go under the bridge before we need to start worrying about this,” Baker said.