The Waikato District Council has released a design for the replacement Kopua Footbridge. The design shows the height over the central span increased at the highest pier from the current bridge’s 3.31 metres to 5.18. In the jumping zone, where children jump from the bridge, the height has been increased from 1.42 metres to 4.46 metres. The design was prepared by Aurecon for the Waikato District Council. (NOTE added 4/1/10. WDC Councillor Baddeley and Raglan Comm Board Chair Storey have advised that the preceding height information is incorrect. See WDC press release below. This release made on 24.12.09 announces that the design for the bridge has been approved and that the underside of the new bridge will be 800mm higher than the present one. The plan provided by Council to the Footbridge Exhibition at the Show Off Gallery, is now described as a concept plan by Raglan Comm Board Chair Storey. It is this plan that is shown below and which has the height values stated above. The plan shows the bridge landing on the Raglan side at a similar level to the current footpath. Councillor Baddeley advises that the WDC press release is the only official statement on the proposed bridge. )
Waikato District Council accepted a $347,000 tender from Aurecon for the design of a replacement Kopua footbridge in Raglan. Aurecon (formerly Connell Wagner) won the contract from five tenders, with its price about 19 per cent of the expected total cost of the bridge. Within its price, Aurecon is budgeting about $60,000 for the cost of consents and a further $22,000 for certification. Recent research by the Raglan Museum has discovered that the eastern access at 1 Wi Neera St for the planned high level bridge was the site of Raglan’s Government Reserve. A house on the site was built about 1880. As the house is pre 1900 any activity on the site will need approval from the NZ Historic Places Trust. They have advised the Raglan Museum Society that they will advocate that the house is not moved. There is also a Waitangi Treaty claim on the bridge site. Wi Neera had a house adjacent to the bridge site and it appears that the land in the area was promised to him.
Raglan residents opposed to the new design are seeking wider support in conjunction with an art exhibition at Show Off Gallery in Bow St, Raglan. The exhibition features paintings and photographs celebrating the spirit of the existing bridge.
Press Release: Waikato District Council 23 December 2009
Kopua Bridge Design decision made
The preferred option for the Kopua footbridge in Raglan was decided yesterday.
Waikato District Councillor, Clint Baddeley said the design reflected the wishes of the people of Raglan.
“We had an overwhelming response from people who wanted the replacement bridge to remain in keeping with Raglan’s natural landscape. What we have arrived at, we believe, does just that,” he said.
Cr Baddeley worked with members of the community board, the Mayor and fellow Councillor Tait to come up with the preferred option.
The replacement bridge will follow the profile of the current one and will be placed about 10m north of the existing bridge to allow the bridge to remain open during construction. The bridge will be 800mm higher on the underside than the current bridge.
The project is expected to cost $2.8m with $200,000 allocated to the removal of the existing bridge. Detailed design work could now begin.
“We have worked with local people to look at ways in which the history and heritage of the area can be reflected in the design and this work is ongoing.
I am also keen to work closely with the community to look at ways to develop the area near where the bridge lands including Wi Nerra Street to the walkway and the reserve behind the police station.
Each piece adds to the richness of our town and recognises what it is we value in living here,” he said.
In regard to Michael’s comment about the original footbridge being much higher, below is a photo of it from my personal collection.
I don’t know where you people get your information…. The Bridge sub committee agreed to the following:
The new design is in fact 0.8m (ie 800mm) higher than the current bridge in the centre span, not the 3m+ you state in your article …. (underside of bridge to water level at mhwl) This is necessary to enable the bridge to be designed with a curve – given that it needs to be longer and is still landing on the current walkway. (as currently the case and as per the feedback from the 4 open days we had)
To spread this stuff that it is 3m higher is, frankly, crap!!! We question the motive of the people who persist in spreading this mis-information.
The information comes from the Aurecon plan released by Waikato District Council. It shows the height over the central span increased at the highest pier from the current bridge’s 3.31 metres to 5.18. This is a height increase of 1.87 metres. The increase in the jumping zone is greater. If the Bridge subcommittee set an increase of 0.8 metres in the centre span then Council’s plan does not comply with this requirement and no doubt the Bridge subcommittee will reject the Aurecon design.
The plan displayed at Show off is a concept plan (not one released by WDC as a final design) … this was given to them to show what it would look like and not a final design. The 0.8m height was only agreed to two days prior to the chrismas break and no plans have yet been done!
This was made clear to those at show off !
Details of the sub committees requirements were given to Aurecon just before the xmas break and they are yet to work on a plan showing these requirements.
Does the administrator or Mr Storey have information reminding us on cost comparisons between construction of a new bridge and repairing the existing bridge?
From what I recall, repairing the bridge is estimated to cost about one million dollars. And a new bridge is expected to come in at $2.8 million.
The PATH LEVEL on the Walk Bridge needs to be the same hight as the existing Bridge. This is what the people want.
The designers need to work with that FACT then offer us the various options of how that can be achieve it.
Hi, I have just read all of the above. It leaves me thinking….if it is the height of the bridge at which people jump off that is the main discussion point, then why talk of the height at the underside of the the bridge……what will the actual height of the new bridge be at rail or jumping height ….or what is the difference in height at footpath height between the two bridges?
Hi John
Yes I am still around but have spent most of the last years in Africa. I am writing from Ethiopia.
The foot bridge issue interests me, not because I have any real concerns about a new design but rather that relative new-comers to Raglan may not be fully appreciative of the fact that the existing bridge is reasonably modern and is , in my view , an ugly structure. Compare it with photos of the bridge that preceded it. This was significantly higher than the existing structure and it was a real daredevil stunt top jump off it. The people of Raglan loved it. If you want to catch the true soul of Raglan it can help to look back in its’ history.
Best regards
Michael
In regard to Michael’s comment I have now added a photo of the original Kopua footbridge to the article so people can see how high it was.
It would be nice to see the new design profiled against the current bridge. The detail in the small plan above isn’t sufficient.
The three issues for me are:
1) will the current walkway on the town side maintain its character;
2) will the aesthetic impact of the new bridge be as quaint as the current one;
3) is the bridge to be raised using our taxes for the benefit of a handful of fat cats who want to use larger boats from the Coast Guard jetty.
Saying that rising sea-levels require a higher bridge sounds intellectually cheap and lazy, in the absence of a plan to show how such a rise would affect the Kopua Domain.
The bridge design best meets the wants of the Raglan community as indicated in the feedback given to Staff at the four open days.
The designers brief was to impact as little as possible on the townside walkway, to design a bridge that looks as close as possible to the current bridge (replicating the curve, but having less impact on the seabed… less piles). The bridge has been lengthened so it lands on the grass at the Kopua side which will avoid having to close it when the footpath approach floods during spring tides etc.
Given the exta length, the bridge had to be raised so as to retain the curve.
Is it cheaper to build a longer bridge, or is that why the cost has risen from the original $1.2m to $2.8m? Surely it must be cheaper to add height to the present causeway and keep the bridge at the same length and height (at present the walkway goes down from the bridge and it is that that occasionally floods, not the bridge). Why should ratepayers pay more for a bridge most don’t want?
I’ve not found a photo of the original bridge at high tide, so the photos make it look high, but the present bridge looks high at low tide too. Has anyone got a photo of the old bridge at high tide, or know what the profile was?
Most swimmers don’t jump from the centre, but from the Te Kopua end. How much higher will that be?
Why can’t Council just be open and make all the plans and instructions to the designers available? That way there’d be much less speculation, or do they have something to hide?