Channel Magazine December 2016 / January 2017 by Benefitz

The third hurdle was getting resource consent. Auckland Council granted resource consent in July 2015, with Mayor Brown emphasising the benefits not only to cyclists but to locals and tourists who choose to walk across and take advantage of the views of the city and the harbour. The project throughout has been challenged by residents’ groups and others on both sides of the bridge, who argued against it on the grounds of the impacts of up to 13,000 people a day using the SkyPath, with increased traffic, parking congestion and disruption to their communities. (Estimates by SkyPath suggest an average of 2,100 people a day in Year One, climbing to around 6,000 in year 20. An average of 2,000-3,000 cyclists use the Sydney Harbour Bridge cycle way on a daily basis.) Opponents have heaped derision on the concept, and expressed outright scepticism that the project is viable. When it came to challenging the resource consent in the Environment Court, Herne Bay Residents’ Association withdrew its appeal stating that it did so because it did not think that the project would come to fruition. The Northcote Residents Association and Northcote Point Heritage Preservation Society, however, pursued the appeal, which was decided in early November, with Environment Court Chief Judge Laurie Newhook confirming the consent, but with conditions to be provided in a written decision yet to be handed down. Opposition from residents at both ends of the proposed SkyPath cited a number of deficiencies in the proposal, and is unlikely to have abated since the Court decision. What exactly is the thing going to be built of, say some, and why hasn’t NZTA come to (or made public) any conclusions about how the SkyPath might impact on the integrity of the bridge? And then there’s the big question of cost. Is the Council really prepared to cover the operating shortfall if fewer cyclists or pedestrians use the pathway than predicted? If the project is so worthwhile, challenges ex-Councillor and now Takapuna Devonport Local Board member George Wood, why isn’t Council or NZTA building it? They could borrow money to fund it at far better rates than the private funders, he says. “I still have major doubts as to whether SkyPath will ever happen, in the manner that is being advanced by the SkyPath Trust," he

says. "It’s interesting that the New Zealand Transport Agency, who own and operate the Auckland Harbour Bridge, have indicated that if SkyPath doesn’t happen then they will consider building purely an access across the harbour just for cyclists. “The whole project seems to have gone on forever and whilst this is happening the ratepayers are having more and more costs put on the Auckland Council account. Once this project went from being simply a cycleway to an across-harbour tourist walk things have changed. Some of the conditions that Auckland Council has included, like allowing dogs on-leash to have access and children under five years accompanied by a [paying adult] to have free access, the whole appearance of SkyPath has changed. “The Environment Court has yet to come down with the conditions for the operation of SkyPath and then we will await the deliberations of the New Zealand Transport Agency. The Agency will determine whether they can approve SkyPath being attached to the bridge and what loading restrictions they will impose. Auckland Council will then have to decide whether they are prepared to fund the shortfall in SkyPath’s revenue. This information will be set out in the Council’s annual plan for next year. “While we wait for any final SkyPath plans the costs are escalating considerably but at the same time it seems that the Continued on next page

Northern landing. All images: Reset Urban Design.

…NZTA is now on board as the developer of a related “Sea Path” linking the Northcote end of the SkyPath to Takapuna and beyond… Northern Landing Internal View.