Serious Questions to NZTA and Auckland Transport Over Supporting Growth – Southern Auckland: Does Not Match ATAP or Auckland Plan

Documents incompatible


Finally NZTA and Auckland Transport released the documents and feedback form for the Supporting Growth – Southern Auckland plan (how transport might look in the South over the next 30 years). While we have had a change of Government, the Auckland Transport Alignment Project change, a new Government Policy Statement and the Auckland Plan 2050 go live it seems someone has not updated the Supporting Growth material at all. See: Southern Growth Areas (Transport Investment for Southern Auckland) Out For Consultation MK3


In fact it looks suspiciously the same as the MK2 version from 2017 when a very different Government was in power rather than reflecting what the current Government in power wants.

The 2017 version:

Transport Network proposals for Southern Auckland
To be ditched


And here is the current version out for consultation:






Not much has changed (if anything) and this presents problems I outline in a letter to the Supporting Growth – Southern Auckland sent yesterday:

To the Supporting Growth Team

I have been reading your Supporting Growth – South Auckland material and two particular documents have me concerned around how this lines up to the:
  • ATAP
  • GPS
  • Auckland Plan
  • and the NLTP
The two documents are:
  • (4):  A new Rapid Transit Network (RTN) could be provided connecting Drury to either Manukau or Puhinui train stations. The RTN could run alongside SH1, Mill Road, arterial roads, or a combination of these.
  • (2a) Providing additional lanes or reallocating the use of lanes, along part or all of State Highway 1 between Manukau and Drury. These lanes could be allocated to buses or higher occupancy vehicles and would be additional to the upgrades being provided in the short term
  • (2) Bus lanes on State Highway 1
  • (3) RTN (same as 4 above)
In regards to the bus lanes on State Highway 1
What is the methodology for providing bus lanes down State Highway 1 from Drury to Manukau when:
  1. No Auckland Transport commuter service would use this as AT works on the priority of feeding into rail stations and the 33 Great South Road service
  2. No AT commuter service would use SH1 in the future given the above
It seems it would duplicating and waste resource for little gain when a Rapid Transit Network already exists (the Southern (rail) Line), a Frequent Service Network already exists (the 33 which can be extended to Drury) and future RTN (running a service down the upgraded Mill Road is prudent to build resilience if the 33 bus and Southern Line are impaired).
What is the methodology of a RTN following the route suggest as (4) in the Strategic Connections PDF
Again like the bus lanes on State Highway 1 it would be duplicating existing RTN and FSN systems already in place (again the Southern Line and the 33 Great South Road Bus) and future systems (a service up Mill Road) thus and also again wasting limited resource.
Further more (4) is very convoluted in its route and would not deliver the desired outcomes one seeks in an RTN route (direct and express) to the point it would not even meet the desires of a FSN route like the 33 Bus (which sticks to one corridor). Your route suggested is more like a convoluted feeder into into the RTN and FSN that already exists otherwise the feeders known as the 365, the 362 and the 361 provided by Auckland Transport. 
If you are looking at a future RTN as it were may I suggest starting at Manurewa Interchange, head south down the Greath South Road to Mahia Road (and Te Mahia Station), down Mahia Road to the big Clendon roundabout, down Roscommon Road through to Cavendish Drive, and finally down Cavendish Drive to Lambie Drive and Manukau Station where the Eastern Line AND Airport to Botany Rapid Transit would link up.
This would allow a high socially deprived area a decent transit link to key transport interchanges and employment areas.
Speaking of which why is Airport to Botany Rapid Transit not mentioned at all in your Supporting Growth Southern Auckland documents when it is a key Rapid Transit Link in Southern Auckland that is:
  1. In the Auckland Plan 2050
  2. In the ATAP
  3. In the NLTP
  4. Is deemed absolute priority (Airport to Manukau section) by NZTA’s documents and by Transport Minister Twyford himself
  5. Actually supports growth in Southern Auckland by linking the Southern residential population to employment complexes such as: Airport, Manukau, East Tamaki and Botany via a transfer at Puhinui Station
Source: NZ Government and Auckland Council
Public transport RTN Proposal AP2050 final
Source: Auckland Council
Airport to Botany Rapid Transit
Source: Auckland Transport
Airport Access Study 2020
Source: Auckland Airport Access by Auckland Airport, NZTA and Auckland Transport
Why is this (4) RTN proposal in your documents when it is not in the Auckland Plan 2050 Strategic Public Transport, ATAP or the NLTP (which sits over the RLTP). Your very first TFUG version of the transport system in Southern Auckland better reflects the ATAP, GPS, NLTP, Auckland Plan 2050, the expectations of the Minister Twyford and the Urban Geographic layout (current and future) of Southern Auckland:
Potential Projects
Source: Auckland Transport and NZ Government
I look forward to your reply as these will form the basis of my submission to the Supporting Growth – Southern Auckland.



The NLTP from NZTA:

NZTA auckland-summary-map
Source: NZTA


Let’s see what the replies are and where it goes next.


2 thoughts on “Serious Questions to NZTA and Auckland Transport Over Supporting Growth – Southern Auckland: Does Not Match ATAP or Auckland Plan

  1. Good work Ben. Sadly NZTA and AT are still mired in the build more roads mentality, failing to understand they now report to people with more lateral thinking. Keep them on their toes mate.

Comments are closed.