AC Transport Committee Agenda Items 1to10 2013 02 13

I hereby give notice that an ordinary meeting of the Transport Committee will be held on:
Date: Wednesday, 13 February 2013

Time: 2.00 pm
Meeting Room: Reception Lounge
Venue: Auckland Town Hall
301-305 Queen Street
Auckland
Transport Committee
OPEN AGENDA
MEMBERSHIP
Chairperson Cr Mike Lee

Deputy Chairperson Cr Hon Chris Fletcher, QSO
Mr James Brown
Cr Dr Cathy Casey
Cr Sandra Coney, QSO
Cr Des Morrison
Cr Richard Northey, ONZM
Cr Dick Quax
Cr Sharon Stewart, QSM
Cr Wayne Walker
Cr Penny Webster
Mr Glenn Wilcox
Cr George Wood, CNZM
Ex-Officio His Worship the Mayor, Len Brown, JP

Deputy Mayor, Penny Hulse
Independent Maori Chairperson, Independent Maori Statutory
Statutory Board Alternate Board, Mr David Taipari
(Quorum 7 members)
Desiree Tukutama
Democracy Advisor
8 February 2013
Contact Telephone: (09) 307 7576

Email: desiree.tukutama@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz
Website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz
Note: The reports contained within this agenda are for consideration and should not be construed as Council policy
unless and until adopted. Should Members require further information relating to any reports, please contact
the relevant manager, Chairperson or Deputy Chairperson.
TERMS OF REFERENCE
The Transport Committee will have responsibility for:
Input into the Auckland Plan in relation to transport issues and aspirations;
Advocating on behalf of Auckland to develop and enhance transport and connectivity for
the region; and
Prepare and recommend Regional Land Transport Strategy to the Governing Body and
provide input on behalf of the Governing Body to the Auckland Regional Transport
Programme.
Relevant legislation includes but is not limited to:
Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009;

Resource Management Act 1991;
Land Transport Act 1998; and
Land Transport Management Act 2003.
Transport Committee
13 February 2013
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ITEM PAGE
1 Apologies 5
2 Declaration of Interest 5
3 Confirmation of Minutes 5
4 Petitions 5
5 Public Input 5
5.1 Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway 5
5.2 Heart of the City - Wider Liveability Benefits the Pathway Steering
Group Project Delivers 6
6 Local Board Input 6
7 Extraordinary Business 6
8 Notices of Motion 7
9 Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway Project Update 9
10 Transport Update 87
11 Resolutions from 4th October 2012 Orakei Local Board: Auckland
Transport Update Orakei Local Board: October 2012 175
12 Correspondence 185
13 Consideration of Extraordinary Items
Page 3
Transport Committee
13 February 2013
1 Apologies
At the close of the agenda no apologies had been received.
2 Declaration of Interest
Members are reminded of the need to be vigilant to stand aside from decision making
when a conflict arises between their role as a member and any private or other external
interest they might have.
3 Confirmation of Minutes
That the minutes of the Transport Committee held on Wednesday, 5 December 2012, be
confirmed as a true and correct record.
4 Petitions
At the close of the agenda no requests for petitions had been received.
5 Public Input
Standing Order 3.21 provides for Public Input. Applications to speak must be made to the
Committee Secretary, in writing, no later than two (2) working days prior to the meeting
and must include the subject matter. The meeting Chairperson has the discretion to
decline any application that does not meet the requirements of Standing Orders. A
maximum of thirty (30) minutes is allocated to the period for public input with five (5)
minutes speaking time for each speaker.
5.1 Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway
Purpose
1. The purpose of the report is to give an update to the Transport Committee on
the Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway project.
Executive Summary
2. Mr Bevan Woodward, Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway Trust, will give a
presentation to the Transport Committee on the Auckland Harbour Bridge
Pathway project.
Recommendations
That the Transport Committee:
a) Receives the Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway presentation.
b) Thanks Mr Bevan Woodward, Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway Trust for his
presentation.
Page 5
Transport Committee
13 February 2013
5.2 Heart of the City - Wider Liveability Benefits the Pathway Steering Group
Project Delivers
Purpose
1. The purpose of the report is to present to the Transport Committee, the wider
liveability benefits that the Pathway Steering Group project delivers.
Executive Summary
2. Mr Alex Swney, Heart of the City, will speak to the Transport Committee on
the wider liveability benefits that the Pathway Steering Group project
delivers.
Recommendations
a) Receives the Heart of the City Wider Liveability Benefits the Pathway
Steering Group Project Delivers, deputation.
b) Thanks Mr Alex Swney, Heart of the City, for his deputation.
6 Local Board Input
Standing Order 3.22 provides for Local Board Input. The Chairperson (or nominee of that
Chairperson) is entitled to speak for up to five (5) minutes during this time. The
Chairperson of the Local Board (or nominee of that Chairperson) shall wherever practical,
give two (2) days notice of their wish to speak. The meeting Chairperson has the
discretion to decline any application that does not meet the requirements of Standing
Orders.
This right is in addition to the right under Standing Order 3.9.14 to speak to matters on the
agenda.
At the close of the agenda no requests for local board input had been received.
7 Extraordinary Business
Section 46A(7) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (as
amended) states:
An item that is not on the agenda for a meeting may be dealt with at that meeting if -
(a) The local authority by resolution so decides; and
(b) The presiding member explains at the meeting, at a time when it is open to the
public, -
(i) The reason why the item is not on the agenda; and
(ii) The reason why the discussion of the item cannot be delayed until a
subsequent meeting.
Page 6
Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Section 46A(7A) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (as
amended) states:
Where an item is not on the agenda for a meeting, -
(a) That item may be discussed at that meeting if -
(i) That item is a minor matter relating to the general business of the local
authority; and
(ii) the presiding member explains at the beginning of the meeting, at a time
when it is open to the public, that the item will be discussed at the meeting;
but
(b) no resolution, decision or recommendation may be made in respect of that item

except to refer that item to a subsequent meeting of the local authority for further
discussion.
8 Notices of Motion
At the close of the agenda no requests for notices of motion had been received.
Page 7
Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway Project Update
Item 9
File No.: CP2012/24488
Purpose
1. The purpose of this report is to update the Transport Committee on the Auckland Harbour
Bridge Pathway project (SkyPath) and provide guidance for consideration by the Strategy
and Finance Committee.
Executive Summary
2. The SkyPath has been previously reported to the Transport Committee. The following
progress has been made on the project since the last update in August 2011:
The AHB Pathway Trust (the Trust) has developed a lighter structure by using aluminium
in the central span;
Auckland Transport (AT) has undertaken a review of the SkyPaths business case and
referred it back to the Council to consider funding sources;
A range of capital costs for the project has been identified between $28 and $41 million.
There is still uncertainty about the capital costs, however for the purpose of the financial
analysis in this report a cost of $31 million has been assumed (as outlined in paragraph
k) in Attachment A);
Update of information in the Trusts business case and public private partnership (PPP)
proposal;
Comparison of the SkyPath to the rest of the transport and cycling and walking
programme;
Quantification of the Councils contribution to the SkyPath; and
Initial identification of project risks (outlined below in paragraph 20).
3. This report is seeking the Transport Committees consideration of the following items:
Support for provision of a walk and cycle way across the Auckland Harbour Bridge (AHB)
in the short term or wait for provision once an Additional Waitemat Harbour Crossing
(AWHC) is in place;
Referral for consideration by the Strategy and Finance Committee of Councils
contribution (in the form of part underwrite and assuming obligations at the end of the
PPP period) to the proposed PPP arrangement;
Recognition of the relative priority of a Council contribution to this project, compared to
the rest of the transport programme; and
Recognition of the relative priority of this project, in terms of timing and sequencing of
other walking and cycling projects.
4. This report proposes that the Transport Committee refers the SkyPath to the Strategy and
Finance Committee for consideration of the financial and procurement aspects of the project.
Recommendations
a) Receives this report on the Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway Project Update.
b) Supports in principle the provision of a shared walk and cycle way across the Harbour
Bridge rather than wait for provision once an Additional Waitemat Harbour Crossing is in
place subject to financial feasibility analysis.
Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway Project Update Page 9

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
c) Acknowledges the significant transport benefits (as well as recreational and tourism
benefits) the SkyPath would bring to the Auckland region in terms of completing a missing
Item 9
link in the Auckland Cycle Network and walking network, which would be further enhanced
by the completion of the Northern Linkage/Shoal Bay.
d) Acknowledges the timing of the SkyPath, in the short term, would take advantage of
Waterfront Aucklands planned waterfront cycleway and walkway from Westhaven Marina
to Daldy Street, and planned improvements by Auckland Transport to the local streets in
Northcote as part of its Safe Schools Programme.
e) Requests the New Zealand Transport Agency and Auckland Transport to consider the
Shoal Bay proposal as part of the investigation of the Northern Link between Northcote and
Akoranga to provide improved walking and cycling connections to the northern end of the
proposed SkyPath.
f) Recommends that a report should be prepared with further information for the Strategy and
Finance Committee to consider funding sources and the Councils contributions (in the form
of part underwrite and assumption of obligations at the end of the public private partnership
period) to the SkyPath. This further information would include:
- Procurement arrangements: fully contested or the proposed negotiated public private
partnership;
- Detailed risk assessment;
- Comparison of a public private partnership arrangement with traditional procurement
process to determine best value for money; and
- Assessment of the project against the Councils Significance and Public Private
Partnership Policies.
g) Recognises that while the benefits of the SkyPath are significant, any Council contribution
to the project should come from the Councils transport funding allocation to Auckland
Transport, rather than disrupt Auckland Transports ability to deliver the walking and cycling
programme which obtains New Zealand Transport Agency subsidies.
Discussion
Background
5. The Auckland Harbour Bridge (AHB) does not currently have any walking and cycling
access over it. This missing connection is a critical gap in Aucklands Cycling Network
(ACN). Past investigations have considered how to provide walking and cycling access over
the AHB but no plans have been progressed.
6. The AHB clip-on lanes were strengthened by the New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA)
in 2010. This work has considerably extended the life span of the clip-on lanes and
consequently the NZTA expects the AHB and clip-on lanes to have an indefinite service life
(e.g. the next 100 years) providing heavy freight movements are transferred to a new
crossing at a certain load trigger point. However, not all of the strengthening necessary for a
pathway to be attached to the AHB occurred at this time.
7. For a number of years, the Trust (a team of private individuals with professional skills) has
been championing for a pathway across the AHB. The Trust has developed the SkyPath
to complete the missing link for walking and cycling access across the AHB which is
proposed through a private funding scenario.
8. The Trust has previously made deputations to the Transport Committee on this project on
3 May 2011 and 15 August 2011. At the 15 August 2011 meeting, the Transport Committee
resolved:

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
b) That the Transport Committee recognises that providing walking and cycling on
the Auckland Harbour Bridge as a strategically important project.
Item 9
d) That the Transport Committee requests Auckland Transport to:
i. identify appropriate resourcing and budget for a financial contribution for
further investigation to an Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway project, for
consideration in the half-yearly review and the next Long Term Plan;
ii. conduct more detailed investigations with New Zealand Transport Agency into
design, procurement and financial arrangements, including an assessment of
risks, in relation to the proposed Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway;
iii. write to the Board of New Zealand Transport Agency to consider funding
support to continue investigations into an Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway;
iv. write to the Board of New Zealand Transport Agency to consider funding
support for an Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway project from the state
highway fund, to reflect New Zealand Transport Agencys responsibilities to
provide for walking and cycling alongside state highways; and
v. ensure costings are subject to a competitive price process.
e) That Auckland Transports further investigations into the Auckland Harbour
Bridge Pathway be reported back to the appropriate Council Committee for
consideration as part of the draft Long Term Plan process.
f) That the Transport Committee support Councils ongoing role in coordinating the
Auckland Harbour Bridge Technical Steering Group, as well as involvement in
investigating financing aspects of the AHB Pathway.
The Project
9. Such a connection over the AHB could provide significant benefits, including opportunities
for active travel and recreation, as well as being a draw-card for tourists. However, this
project has faced a number of challenges, including funding and structural engineering.
Under conventional funding arrangements, using public money, it is unlikely that this project
could be achieved within the next 20 years or until an Additional Waitemat Harbour
Crossing (AWHC) frees up space on the existing AHB.
10. The NZTA is custodian of the AHB. Uncertainties around timing and funding of an AWHC
have led NZTA to put plans for an alternative walking and cycling facility as part of the next
harbour crossing on hold in favour of SkyPath. Through the evaluation of the Trusts
concept design, the NZTA has found that the SkyPath is considered to be a feasible
engineering solution. However, NZTA has advised that it is not in a position to fund the
SkyPath due to budget constraints and its cycling and walking forward programme already
being in place. NZTAs internal processes require a fully contested public private
partnership (PPP), joint Ministerial approval and compliance with the Better Business Case
process. The NZTA have advised that the costs involved with this would likely be prohibitive
for a project of this small scale.
11. If the Council were funding all or part of this project in a conventional way, it would affect
existing budgets (potentially the AT walking and cycling budget which attracts a NZTA
subsidy) and existing programmes which have strong community expectation that they will
proceed. Therefore, the use of an alternative funding option is being considered and this is
consistent with the Auckland Plan requirement to investigate alternative funding options for
transport projects. The PPP proposal depends on a toll being paid directly by cycling and
walking users.

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Walk and Cycle Connections

Item 9
12. The SkyPath would easily connect into the existing cycling and walking network and future
proposals. At the southern end, the SkyPath would connect into Waterfront Aucklands
waterfront cycleway and walkway from Westhaven to Daldy Street. The initial phase of this
cycleway and walkway will be constructed in later 2013. The SkyPath may also connect
with Platform 2 of the Westhaven Marina Village at a later date. Waterfront Auckland has
indicated that it is willing to work together to achieve a seamless integration. At the northern
end, the SkyPath would connect onto the local street network in Northcote which is
considered safe for cyclists. The Auckland Cycle Network (ACN) identifies these routes as
cycle connectors (blue) or cycle feeders (green) as shown the map below. In addition,
AT plans to undertake improvements to some of these roads in the near future as part of its
Safe Schools Programme. The two most direct routes to central Takapuna from the
SkyPath entrance are 6 to 6.8km away.
Costs, Revenue and Funding

13. Attachment A provides detailed information about costs and revenue.
14. AT contracted Ernst & Young to undertake a review of the SkyPaths business case. This
has clarified capital costs and likely revenue. This report (dated 2 November 2012) and the
associated AT Board Paper are in Attachment B. The AT Board resolved to refer the project
back to the Council to consider funding sources.

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
15. The Ernst & Young report included a Northern Linkage within their estimate of the projects
capital costs. This refers to the development of a cycleway and walkway alongside the
Item 9
Northern Motorway between Northcote and Akoranga. Council staff advise that the Northern
Linkage is a separate project which should not be included in the costings for the SkyPath.
The Northern Link is included in the NZTAs National Land Transport Programme 2012-2015
as probable and shown as a Cycle Highway in the ACN. However, based on current
budgets, it is unlikely to be funded in that period. While it is not necessary for the Northern
Link to proceed in order for the SkyPath to be constructed, it would increase patronage
numbers and provide a more direct connection to Akoranga (and consequently Takapuna).
The NZTA has indicated that if the SkyPath were to go ahead, then there is a stronger
likelihood that the Northern Link project would proceed. The recent proposal from the
Kaipatiki and Devonport-Takapuna Local Boards and Reset Urban Design for Retrieving
Shoal Bay Waterfront would also influence the location/design of any link in this area. Were
the SkyPath to go ahead, the NZTA and AT would investigate a preferred alignment for an
improved walking and cycling connection between the northern end of the SkyPath and
Akoranga.
16. There is a range of capital costs for the project (between $28 and $41 million) depending on
the inclusion of various items (as detailed under paragraph k) in Attachment A), and how the
project proceeds as a PPP. The analysis undertaken by Council staff, in discussion with AT
and stakeholders, has determined that some of the additional costs identified in the Ernst &
Young report may drop away based on the updated PPP proposal. Council staff advise that
that the capital costs will be somewhere in between these figures and have assumed a cost
of $31 million subject to further financial analysis.
17. The Trust has obtained an initial proposal to fund the construction of the SkyPath from the
PIP Fund as equity partner to the Trust. This proposal is detailed below and in Attachment
C. In summary, under this proposal, the PIP Fund would cover the construction cost, the
operating and maintenance costs, and underwrite the most risky 25% of the revenue. The
less risky 75% of revenue would be underwritten by the Council (and others, e.g. community
trusts), who in return would share in the revenue upside and the Council would own the
SkyPath after the PPP period ends. The proposed revenue sharing diagram is included as
Figure 5 in Attachment A. It is important to note, that the Council underwrite is only triggered
when the expected revenue does not meet the breakeven point.
18. It is considered that a traditional PPP (i.e. fully contested, such as used for Wiri Mens Prison
or for Hobsonville Schools) is not appropriate for a project of this small scale. The fees set
out in Figure 4 in Attachment A reflect a negotiated PPP, particularly given the expression of
interest by the PIP Fund. A negotiated PPP is expected to significantly reduce the
transaction costs for both parties by reducing the contestability element, which is where the
large transaction costs lie. One risk with a negotiated PPP is that the process can become
non-transparent. However, this could be managed by using an independent third party to
assist in making the process transparent (KPMG have offered their assistance in this
capacity), and running contestable tender processes to secure contractors to build the
SkyPath and complete service elements (i.e. maintenance or cleaning). The difference
between a fully contested PPP and a negotiated PPP is discussed in more detail under
paragraph q) in Attachment A, however it important to note that the Transport Committee is
being asked for a recommendation to refer this project onto the Strategy and Finance
Committee and is not being asked to make a decision on the preferred method of
procurement. As part of the further work for the Strategy and Finance Committee, Council
staff will investigate the different procurement models, as well as alternative funding options.
Risks
19. There are a number of potential risks associated with the project. A number of these are
discussed above and/or in Attachment A, such as the use of a transparent negotiated PPP
arrangement and the Council underwriting some of the risk. Due diligence and professional
advice would be required to evaluate and negotiate a PPP arrangement. The PIP Fund
believes the project is worthy of its investment and is of moderate risk.

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
20. The Councils Risk Assurance team have undertaken an initial review of the project and a
risk register is being developed. A risk assessment workshop with key stakeholders is
Item 9
scheduled to refine the draft risk register and develop contingency planning in order to
manage potential effects. Key risks include:
Funding for operation costs;
Funding for construction costs;
Additional costs (note: contingency has been included in the business case to cover
unexpected costs);
Structural;
Not obtaining, or delays in obtaining, resource consent for the SkyPath;
Not all parties agreeing to the MoU or terms of agreement (including withdrawal of equity
partner);
Withdrawal of the equity partner during the PPP period;
Operational costs when ownership of SkyPath reverts to the Council;
Procurement arrangements delivery value for money;
Political risk;
Legal authority for Council entering into a PPP arrangement; and
Public acceptability of the toll.
21. When determining the relatively of this project in terms of the transport programme, the
Transport Committee should also recognise that the SkyPath would have important
recreation and tourism benefits. The benefits of completing the missing cycling and walking
link across the Waitemat Harbour are significant and would offer wide ranging benefits to
Aucklanders and tourists alike, which is a key differential of this project when compared with
other projects included within the cycling and walking programme. Recreation and tourist
users could amount to just over half of the expected total patronage. In considering sources
of Council funding, consideration could be given to the extent funds are allocated from the
transport budget or other budgets.
22. In conclusion, this agenda report seeks support from the Transport Committee to proceed
with a report to the Strategy and Finance Committee to consider funding sources and the
Councils contributions to this project for the following reasons:
The SkyPath would complete a critical gap in the ACN and the walking network;
The SkyPath is the only realistic solution available to provide walking and cycling over
the AHB and if this opportunity is not taken now, a walk and cycle connection across the
Waitemat Harbour may not happen for a number of decades. Given the current funding
difficulties, it is uncertain whether the AWHC will be built within the next 20 years. If the
proposed PPP is in place by 2015, the business case indicates there would be sufficient
time to enable the tolls to pay off the capital investment over 20 years;
The SkyPath would be well supported by the Waterfront Auckland waterfront cycleway
and walkway to the south, and by safe routes using the local street network to the north;
The SkyPath would provide for commuter travel, as well as recreational and tourism use;
and
There is an expression of interest from the PIP Fund to provide a capital investment
upfront, which would mean no Council contribution to the capital costs of the project.
This is significant because a public facility of this nature would normally require a 47%
capital contribution from the Council. The contributions sought from Council relates to
underwriting part of the revenue risk, assumption of operational costs at the end of the
PPP, and staff time and professional advice to undertake further evaluation and
negotiation of a PPP arrangement.

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Consideration
Item 9
Local Board Views
23. The Trust has presented to or met with the relevant Local Boards including Waitemat,
Kaipatiki, and Devonport-Takapuna Local Boards, which are supportive of this project.
24. Representatives from the Trust presented to the Waitemat Local Board meeting in April
2011. The Local Board passed the following resolutions (number WTM/2011/49):
a) That Kirsten Shouler, Alex Swney and Barry Copeland, Auckland Harbour
Bridge Pathway members be thanked for their presentation to the Board
regarding the Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway project.
b) That the Waitemata Local Board strongly supports the Governing Bodys
directive to Auckland Transport for investigation on how best to progress
work on a walking and cycling link across the Auckland Harbour Bridge.
c) That the Waitemata Local Board seek from the Governing Body to commit
budget to formally play a role in a partnership with the pathways steering
group to promote the project to the NZTA.
d) That the Transport West Portfolio holders report back to the earliest
practical Board meeting how the Board can best progress the Auckland
Harbour Bridge Pathways project proposals.
Additionally, this Local Board included the AHB Pathway in its Local Board Plan 2012.
25. Representatives from the Trust briefed the Kaipatiki Local Board members at a workshop in
August 2011, as well as the Local Board passing the following resolutions (number
KT/2011/117) in May 2011:
a) That the report and resolutions from the Transport Committee, regarding
Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway Technical Steering Group Report, be
received.
b) That the Kaipatiki Local Board strongly endorses and supports the concept
of enabling walking and cycling access between the city and the North Shore
via the Harbour Bridge.
c) That the Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway Technical Steering Group
consults with the Kaipatiki Local Board for input during the preparation of
the proposal.
26. Representatives from the Trust presented to the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board in August
2011 and passed resolution DT/2011/262 in support. This Local Board included the AHB
Pathway in its Local Board Plan 2012 by stating we believe developing a pathway across
the harbour bridge is an essential piece of infrastructure and will advocate on the
communitys behalf to create a harbour bridge walkway and cycleway".
27. These three Local Boards were updated on the project by staff via email on 17 January 2013
and the Trust has updated interested Local Board members on 22 January 2013.
Maori Impact Statement

28. The impact of the SkyPath on significant sites to iwi is still to be understood. The Trust
contacted (via letter) each known iwi organisation with ties to the area outlining the proposal
in 2011 and asked them to contact the Trust if they had any concerns. No response was
received. The Trust plans to undertake consultation with iwi as part of the resource consent
phase of the project. In particular, it is understood there are sites of significance to Ngati
Whatua o Orkei within Stokes Point Reserve near the Northcote exit. Further investigation
and liaison with Ngati Whatua o Orkei will occur regarding this as part of the resource
consent phase.

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
29. The SkyPath would be of benefit to Maori and provide for greater active transport use within
the Auckland region, however it is noted that there is a low proportion of Maori living in the
Item 9
North Shore. The toll for commuters and local users would be small and equates to a similar
fee if using public transport to cross the AHB.
General
30. The project has been discussed with the relevant Council (including the Mayors Office), AT,
Waterfront Auckland, Auckland Tourism, Events and Economic Development and NZTA
staff members, along with representatives from key stakeholder groups such as Heart of the
City, Cycle Action Auckland and Walk Auckland. This most recently occurred at a multi-
agency meeting on 18 December 2012. This report, and its recommendations, has been
prepared in response to the agreement reached at this meeting. These parties have
provided input or been given the opportunity to review this report prior to it being finalised.
AT staff have commented that the $31 million cost assumption may be understated and
there are some elements still to be resolved, and that care should be taken when making
decisions based on costs that may change during the process.
31. The SkyPath would be of benefit to all Aucklanders, however under conventional funding
arrangements it is unlikely this project could be funded in the next 20 years or before an
AWHC was in place. Therefore, the use of an alternative funding option needs to be
considered, in line with the Auckland Plan requirement to investigate alternative funding
options for transport projects.
32. The SkyPath is considered to be consistent with Section 10(2) of the Local Government Act
2002, in relation to this stage of the investigation of the project.
Implementation Issues
33. Establishment of a PPP requires a commitment of resources to undertake negotiation and
finalisation of a Memorandum of Understanding and legal agreements to form a joint venture
arrangement (or similar) with the relevant parties, and on-going monitoring of the agreement.
The timeframe for getting these agreements in place could run in parallel with work by the
Trust to obtain the required approvals. The transfer of the SkyPath to the Council at the end
of the PPP period would be subject to conditions about payment or condition of the asset,
and this would form part of the legal agreement.
34. The financial and resourcing implications of the SkyPath are:
Due diligence and evaluation of the project;
Staff time to coordinate the Memorandum of Understanding and legal arrangements, and
legal authority to enter into a PPP;
Underwrite of part of the toll revenue (refer to paragraph n) in Appendix A for the financial
implications to Council); and
Assuming responsibility for the SkyPath at the end of the PPP period (refer to paragraph
p) in Appendix A for the financial implications to Council).
35. The project needs to comply with the Councils Significance and PPP Policies. The purpose
of these policies is to set out the Councils approach to determining the significance of
matters on which they are making decisions (i.e. where a decision meets certain criteria, it
will automatically trigger a requirement to undertaken public consultation) and to set out the
general criteria the Council would use when determining if a PPP is an appropriate
procurement tool. The application of these policies to the SkyPath would be provided in a
report to the Strategy and Finance Committee.
36. Were the SkyPath to proceed, facilitation of progress of the project (until the project is
formally established or given go ahead) could be undertaken by the Harbour Edge
Development Steering Group. However, any governance or management decisions are yet
to be made.

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Attachments
Item 9
No. Title Page
A Detail About The Project 19
B Auckland Transport Board Paper and Ernst & Young Report 25
C PIP Fund Proposal Letter 85
Signatories
Authors Marguerite Pearson - Transport Planner
Kevin Wright - Manager: Transport Strategy
Authorisers Ree Anderson - Manager: Regional Strategy, Community & Cultural Policy
Roger Blakeley - Chief Planning Officer

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 9
Attachment A

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 9
Attachment A

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 9
Attachment A

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 9
Attachment A

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 9
Attachment A

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 9
Attachment A

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 9
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 9
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 9
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 9
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 9
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 9
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 9
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 9
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 9
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 9
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 9
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 9
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 9
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 9
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 9
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 9
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 9
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 9
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 9
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 9
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 9
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 9
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 9
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 9
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 9
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 9
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 9
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 9
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 9
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 9
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 9
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 9
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 9
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 9
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 9
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 9
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 9
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 9
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 9
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 9
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 9
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 9
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 9
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 9
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 9
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 9
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 9
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 9
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 9
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 9
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 9
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 9
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 9
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 9
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 9
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 9
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 9
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 9
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 9
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 9
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 9
Attachment C

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 9
Attachment C

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Transport Update
Item 10
File No.: CP2012/24703
Purpose
1. The purpose of this report is to update the Committee with key matters considered at the
18 December 2012 Auckland Transport Board meeting.
Executive Summary
2. At its meeting on 18 December 2012, the Auckland Transport Board considered in its open
agenda on a range of reports including:
Business report on the activities for December;
A report on public transport and cycling statistics for November 2012;
A report by KiwiRail on the National Train Control Centre;
A request for funding of double-tracking the north-facing connection to the Manukau rail
spur;
Proposed bylaws about election signs and public safety and nuisance; and
The Independent Technical Ports Study (this was presented to the 6 December 2012
meeting of the Councils Regional Development and Operations Committee)
3. In addition, the Auckland Transport Board considered the following items in its closed
agenda:
Property reports on compulsory land acquisitions and accommodation seismic
assessment;
Capital development reports on City Rail Link, Parnell Station and AMETI land use
integration; and
Operations reports about Auckland Integrated Fare System (AIFS), Rail Fare Evasion
and Aotea Road seal extension (review of funding process).
4. All open board papers are available on the Auckland Transport website at:
http://www.aucklandtransport.govt.nz/about-us/board-members/Board-Meetings-
Minutes/Pages/default.aspx
Recommendation
a) Requests that Auckland Transport respond to any feedback provided by the Committee in
relation to the December 2012 Board reports.
Discussion
Business Report on activities
5. Key highlights from the report on Operations include:
The AT HOP card was launched on ferries on November 30. There are now
approximately 43,000 AT HOP cards that have been sold, with 60% of those cards being
used at least once (as at November 30, 2012);
Managing the transport impact of the installation of ducting for Transpowers North
Auckland and Northland project, including the requirement to close westbound lanes of
the Pakuranga Highway bridge between Waipuna Road and Ti Rakau Drive over the
holiday period;
A series of initiatives are being investigated to boost public transport patronage growth
and redress the patronage tracking beneath Statement of Intent targets;
Transport Update Page 87

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
A reconfiguration of the downtown ferry terminal has commenced to create an improved

customer environment and to open up a larger area to non-ferry users; and
Item 10
The new City Centre Parking Zone scheme has not been implemented and accompanied
by a marketing campaign. All signs and new restrictions were implemented prior to
Christmas.
6. Key highlights from the report on Infrastructure include:

Monthly expenditure for November 2012 was $18.3 million, slightly below forecast. The
current forecast year end spend it $253 million, around $10 million above the fiscal
envelope. However Auckland Transport expects the capital portfolio will be managed to
the fiscal envelope;
Construction of works associated with Panmure Station, Ellerslie Panmure Highway
bridges and excavation to enable construction of the AMETI Link road have continued as
parts of the AMETI project. Consent applications for the next stages of AMETI have been
processed and issues are being addressed to minimise the risk of appeals;
The preferred scheme for Dominion Road was discussed at well attended public open
days in November. Funding applications for detailed design will be submitted to NZTA in
early 2013;
Papakura Station reconfiguration works are advancing and completion of the station is
programmed for April 2013. The contract for the upgrade of Mt Albert station has been
awarded and works were carried out over the holiday rail shutdown period;
Public consultation on the Federal Street shared space proposal noted that there is a
significant majority of respondents who support the proposals;
Open days on the Mill Road upgrade project have been completed and feedback is now
being analysed;
Construction of an upgrade to the Glenbrook-Kingseat intersection was planned to begin
in January 2013; and
Stage three of the Fort Street upgrade is underway, with sub-surface works complete and
paving having commenced.
7. Key highlights from the report on Strategy and Planning include:

Submissions on the draft Regional Public Transport Plan have now closed with 696
submissions received and 146 submitters noting a desire to present to the Hearing Panel.
The Plan is scheduled to be adopted at the March 2013 Board meeting and will permit
implementing of the proposed public transport network; and
Funding approval from NZTA for the first year financing payments for the EMU trains and
depot (approximately $19 million).
8. Key highlights from the report on Special Projects include:

Final design of the Electric Multiple Unit trains (EMUs) is progressing well with
approximately 90% of the design documents now submitted;
Production of the first EMU vehicles is proceeding steadily with underframes and vehicle
body sides under construction and on programme. Assembly of the first unit was
programmed to begin in January 2013;
The City Centre Future Access Study (CCFAS) was released on December 14. The
findings of the CCFAS were presented to the Governing Body by Auckland Transport in
December 2012; and
City Rail Link project optimisation, value engineering and work responding to Council
requests for further information (as part of the route protection process) all continued
throughout November and the notice of requirement was notified on January 25, 2013.

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
9. Extracts from the December business report are included as Attachment A to this report.
Item 10
Statistics Report for November 2012
10. The Statistics Report focuses on public transport patronage, service performance and
initiatives throughout November 2012 as well as cycling monitoring. Key highlights include:
Annual public transport boardings for the 12 months to November 2012 were 69,873,178.
This is 1.1% higher than the 12 months to November 2011 but tracking below the
2012/13 Statement of Intent target of 74,580,000 for the 12 months to June 2013. As
noted in the business report, a series of initiatives are being investigated to boost public
transport patronage growth;
Patronage during November 2012 was 5.2% lower than November 2011, with much of
the decrease due to a 17.2% reduction in rail patronage. Northern Express bus patronage
grew by 1.2% but other bus patronage fell by 3.4% and ferry patronage fell by 1.3%.
Auckland Transport considers that the introduction of the HOP Card on the rail system
has contributed to the decline in rail patronage as trips are now recorded at the time they
are made rather than at the time tickets are sold. This effect will disappear from January
2013 onwards;
Train performance was measured at 84.1% punctuality and 97.9% service delivery.
Trains are measured as punctual if they arrive at their destination within 5 minutes of
their scheduled time. The Onehunga Line was the best performing line, with 95.1% of
services being punctual, while the Southern Line performed the poorest, with 78.9% of
services being punctual;
Bus and ferry service performance are measured differently, with punctuality measured at
the beginning rather than the end of the trip. Performance statistics are also self-reported.
All bus operators and most ferry operators reported extremely high punctuality (for
example Birkenhead Transport reported 99.95%) and reliability (whether the service
operated or not) results; and
Cycling monitoring showed a 5.1% growth in cyclist movements in November 2012 when
compared to November 2011. Morning peak movements increased by 33.1% when
compared to November 2011.
11. The Auckland Transport Statistics Report for October 2012 is included as Attachment B to
this report.
KiwiRail report on National Train Control Centre
12. This report is a response to an Auckland Transport request to identify and practical and
affordable path to give confidence that if the National Train Control Centre (NTCC)
experiences a disruption, there is sufficient infrastructure in place to enable continued
operation of the rail network. This issue was highlighted by a power outage in April 2012 at
the Wellington-based NTCC which caused significant disruption to the Auckland rail network.
13. The report highlights the advantages of a centralised control model (particularly the depth of
staff expertise) but notes that additional back-up facilities should be provided at another
location in Wellington to ensure ongoing operations in the event of a site-specific event as
well as an unstaffed facility in the Auckland area that can be used for national control
services in the event of a catastrophic event in Wellington.
14. Optimal sites and funding arrangements will be explored by KiwiRail, Auckland Transport
and other interested parties throughout 2013.
15. The KiwiRail report on National Train Control Centre is included as Attachment C to this
report.
Manukau Rail Spur Connection Funding
16. This report is a request to the Auckland Transport Board for $3.6 million in funding to enable
the double-tracking of the connection between the Manukau Rail Line (which itself is double-
tracked) and the North Island Main Trunk line. $2.6 million is available from the EMU depot
contingency budget while the remaining $1.0 million will need to be included in the 2013/14
capital works budget.

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
17. Network modelling has shown that that the double track connection from the Manukau Rail
Line to the mainline at Wiri is essential for the delivery of reliable 10 minute peak services.
Item 10
KiwiRail is currently undertaking track works in the Manukau Rail Line and Wiri Junction
area to provide access from the main line to the new EMU depot. While double tracking the
connection is not needed until August 2014, significant cost savings can be achieved
through alignment to KiwiRails existing construction programme with construction
commencing in March 2013.
18. Auckland Transport will seek a subsidy from NZTA for the connection, as a project
necessary for delivery of a rail network capable of delivering robust and reliable 10 minute
peak services. The report states that Council approval will be required required to reallocate
funding within the 2012/13 capital programme and for inclusion in the 2013/14 programme.
19. The report relates to the north-facing connections of the Manukau Rail Line.
20. The report on Manukau Rail Spur Connection Funding is included as Attachment D to this
report.
Election Signs Bylaw
21. This report seeks the Auckland Transport Boards approval to undertake public consultation
on a proposed bylaw to regulate the display of election signs across Auckland. The bylaw
proposes to provide a consistent set of controls for elections signs and an integrated system
of determining appropriate locations for election signs for parliamentary and local authority
elections.
22. The controls in the proposed bylaw are largely similar to what is in the variety of legacy
bylaws. Initial consultation was undertaken with Local Board cluster workshops and a
working party of the Regulatory and Bylaws Committee of Council during October 2012.
Members of the Councils Policies and Bylaws team have also assisted with the
development of the proposed bylaw.
23. The report on the Proposed Auckland Transport Election Signs Bylaw 2013 Consultation is
available on the Auckland Transport website.
Public Safety and Nuisance Bylaw
24. This report seeks the Auckland Transport Boards approval to undertake public consultation
on a proposed bylaw for public safety and nuisance. The proposed bylaw will regulate
activities which can be carried out on roads and in other public places in an endeavour to
reduce risks to public safety and to avoid nuisance. The proposed bylaw is complementary
to a similar bylaw being prepared by Auckland Council for areas outside the transport
system.
25. Drafting of the proposed bylaw has been led by Council staff with input from Auckland
Transport in areas with particular transport impact. Council and Auckland Transport have
undertaken initial consultation with political, internal and major stakeholders including the
Regulatory and Bylaws Committee Working Party, all Local Boards, the Disability Strategic
Advisory Group, Council departments and a wide range of industry stakeholders.
26. The report on the Proposed Auckland Transport Public Safety and Nuisance Bylaw 2013 is
available on the Auckland Transport website.
Consideration
Local Board Views
27. Local Boards are involved in Auckland Transports consultation on major transport projects
and planning processes.
28. Local Boards were consulted in the preparation of the two proposed bylaws.

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Maori Impact Statement
Item 10
29. Active iwi engagement is taking place in relation to infrastructure projects such as the
Southwest Multi-Modal Airport Rapid Transit (SMART) study and AMETI. The updated
capital works programme on Auckland Transports website provides indicative timings when
consultation is occurring which enables the public and Maori to plan for upcoming
consultations.
30. The Key Relationships Unit section of the Business Report outlines in more detail Auckland
Transports Maori Engagement programme.
General
31. As this is an information item, no consultation has been done in the preparation of this
report. This update refers to communications with stakeholders on major projects.
32. Auckland Transport is responsible for taking legal advice in relation to its operations.
Implementation Issues
33. Auckland Transport is responsible for implementation of transport and the information in this
report provides highlights of how Auckland Transport is dealing with current issues.
Attachments
No. Title Page
A Extracts from December 2012 Business Report 93
B November 2012 Statistics Report 133
C KiwiRail report on National Train Control Centre 157
D Manukau Rail Line Connection Report 171
Signatories
Authors Joshua Arbury - Principal Transport Planner
Authorisers Ree Anderson - Manager Regional Strategy, Community & Cultural Policy
Roger Blakeley - Chief Planning Officer

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment A

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment A

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment A

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment A

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment A

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment A

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment A

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment A

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment A

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment A

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment A

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment A

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment A

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment A

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment A

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment A

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment A

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment A

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment A

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment A

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment A

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment A

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment A

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment A

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment A

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment A

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment A

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment A

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment A

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment A

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment A

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment A

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment A

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment A

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment A

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment A

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment A

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment A

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment A

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment A

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment B

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment C

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment C

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment C

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment C

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment C

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment C

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment C

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment C

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment C

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment C

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment C

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment C

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment C

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment D

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment D

Transport Committee
13 February 2013
Item 10
Attachment D

AC Transport Committee Agenda Items 1to10 2013 02 13

Transféré par

Informations du document

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

AC Transport Committee Agenda Items 1to10 2013 02 13

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

I hereby give notice that an ordinary meeting of the Transport Committee will be held on:

Date: Wednesday, 13 February 2013

Chairperson Cr Mike Lee

Ex-Officio His Worship the Mayor, Len Brown, JP

Contact Telephone: (09) 307 7576

The Transport Committee will have responsibility for:

Relevant legislation includes but is not limited to:

Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009;

At the close of the agenda no apologies had been received.

5.1 Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway

6 Local Board Input

(a) The local authority by resolution so decides; and

Where an item is not on the agenda for a meeting, -

(a) That item may be discussed at that meeting if -

(b) no resolution, decision or recommendation may be made in respect of that item

Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway Project Update

Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway Project Update Page 9

Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway Project Update Page 10

Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway Project Update Page 11

Walk and Cycle Connections

Costs, Revenue and Funding

Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway Project Update Page 12

Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway Project Update Page 13

Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway Project Update Page 14

Maori Impact Statement

Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway Project Update Page 15

Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway Project Update Page 16

Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway Project Update Page 17

Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway Project Update Page 19

Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway Project Update Page 20

Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway Project Update Page 21

Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway Project Update Page 22

Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway Project Update Page 23

Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway Project Update Page 24

Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway Project Update Page 25

Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway Project Update Page 26

Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway Project Update Page 27

Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway Project Update Page 28

Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway Project Update Page 29

Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway Project Update Page 30

Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway Project Update Page 31

Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway Project Update Page 32

Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway Project Update Page 33

Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway Project Update Page 34

Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway Project Update Page 35

Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway Project Update Page 36

Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway Project Update Page 37

Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway Project Update Page 38

Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway Project Update Page 39

Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway Project Update Page 40

Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway Project Update Page 41

Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway Project Update Page 42

Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway Project Update Page 43

Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway Project Update Page 44

Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway Project Update Page 45

Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway Project Update Page 46

Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway Project Update Page 47

Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway Project Update Page 48

Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway Project Update Page 49

Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway Project Update Page 50

Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway Project Update Page 51

Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway Project Update Page 52

Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway Project Update Page 53

Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway Project Update Page 54