Category: Hot Discussion

An issue causing hot discussion either here in the blog or in the wider community

Back From Hearing Panel

·

Returned from RPTP Panel

 

First of all: A thank you to Councillor Mike Lee and the other panel members for taking time in listening to my presentation

 

I have arrived back from my presentation to the Auckland Transport Regional Public Transport Plan hearings panel this afternoon. I am pleased to say that the full ten minutes plus two extra ( 😉 ) were productive and a dialogue entered on:

  • the relocation of Te Mahia and Takanini Stations to Spartan Road and Walters Road (Technically Glenora Road but for now Walters Road has stuck as the rallying name) 
  • The Family Pass not being easily accessible

 

The presentation was designed in such a way that hyperlinks (in blue) were placed into the paper copies that allow the panel members or their assistants to look up ‘extended information’ (which is stored in this blog) on points I was making (the idea of the presentation was to sum up the main points and entered into dialogue – mission accomplished).

The presentation can be seen here:

 

After the presentation (actual) dialogue was entered to on two main points (there was a third point but that was me reinforcing the Manukau South Rail Link which by the looks of it has “a-lot” of support in South and Counties Auckland (basically everyone south of Manukau through to Pukekohe):

  • the relocation of Te Mahia and Takanini Stations to Spartan Road and Walters Road (Technically Glenora Road but for now Walters Road has stuck as the rallying name) 
  • The Family Pass not being easily accessible

 

Walters Road and Spartan Road Stations

In my presentation I had emphasised the point on closing Takanini and Te Mahia Stations and relocating them to Spartan Road and Glenora Road (Walters Road is the rallying name). The two new stations would be equipped with facilities such as a bus interchange for feeder buses and Park ‘N’ Ride. The panel nodded away and picked up on the strong emphasis on the Park and Rides at all stations south of Manukau (basically). I was questioned on the Park and Rides and my belief of them being integral to a fully integrated transit system.

My answer was that I use the Park and Ride at Papakura and would do so at the Glenora (Walters) Road Station when built. I further went on and said the further away we get from the inner suburbs, the lower density housing we have, and we also have rural communities coming into effect as well.  As a result feeder buses will do well up to a range of a 2km radius from a station (if run at a high enough frequency) but due to the nature of suburbia and all things rural south of Manukau (I was focusing on South Auckland); Park and rides extend the range of the station literally to an unlimited range.

For example a Park and Ride at Glenora Road would allow those as far as Clevedon to come in by car, park, and catch a train to town, Manukau, or even out west. A fully fledged Park and Ride at Pukekohe would allow (even more) residents from Waikau to come in by car then piggy back by train from Pukekohe to town and back again as happens now. Park and Rides also give maximum flexibility to bus or rail users that allow patrons to rock up to the station in their own time then continue the trip by bus or train (which is why I use Park and Rides). But at the end of the day feeder-buses, and Park and Rides both have their places especially as you go further out away from the CBD into suburbia and even more rural communities. This is the point I was bringing across to Auckland Transport this afternoon.

More on the station relocations can be found in my THE RAIL EFFICIENCY PROGRAM #5A post

 

The Family Pass not being easily accessible

This point took up most of the allocated time session in regards to dialogue between myself at the AT panel members. Councillor Mike Lee – who is also an Auckland Transport Board “Director” led the questions on the consequences of the scaling back on the availability of the rail Family Pass. The basic sum up of my answers can be found in my “FAMILY PASS HARD TO GET” post but basically the following was observed:

  • Notice was given in a publicity drive before AT-HOP was rolled out in September 2012 about the scaling back the accessibility of the Family Pass
  • Family Passes were available on the trains at their designated times as well as ticket offices before AT-HOP
  • After AT-HOP Family Passes are now available only at the four (soon to be five) ticket offices but not on any of the 57 (approx) blue Rail Ticket Machines
  • Complaints rolled into Veolia about the scaling back of the accessibility of the Family Pass as soon as the publicity started one-month prior to AT-HOP
  • Veolia front line staff were at pains having to explain to passengers trying to explain the decision a logic behind Auckland Transport scaling back the accessibility of the Family Pass
  • It is believed verbal abuse claims rose initially after the removal of the Family Pass from the trains but not available from the ticket machines
  • Patronage in the weekend and off-peak slipped considerably especially on the Eastern Line (via Sylvia Park) due to removal of the Family Pass (and Day Rover)
  • I mentioned that in school holidays; Eastern Line trains were full when the Family Pass was readily available (everyone going to Sylvia Park), however now you would be lucky to get near 1/3 full currently with the Family Pass scaled back
  • I thus mentioned the HAS to be an option on the Rail Ticket Machines – with maximum publicity to get the Off-Peak and Weekend patronage back up again

 

So the questions were asked, the answers given to AT in person for all to hear and transcribe.

 

Now it is a case of we wait and see what happens.

 

To me personally and above all else right now – having the Family Pass option installed on the Rail Ticket Machines would make me the most happy 😀

 

As I said – we now wait and see – but I have done all I can folks!

 

Road Plan Concerns

· 2 Comments ·

South Eastern “Bypass” Causing Concern – In South Auckland

 

I had seen this particular article crop up yesterday in the Herald in regards to the Redoubt Road – Mill Road Corridor

Being that the said corridor is both close to home (being in Papakura and five minutes away from the southern end of the soon-mentioned corridor) and I often use to skip-pass a section of the Southern Motorway when it backs up (usually in the afternoons) BR:AKL will take a look at the situation, then later on post an alternative proposal to the scheme.

 

The Map on Page 331 of The Auckland Plan shows the corridor and area of land in question:

AP Transport Map

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Click for Full Resolution

 

From the Herald article from our resident Transport Reporter – Mathew Dearnaley, there is a bit of upset from residents in the corridor area.

From The NZ Herald

Bypass plan horrifies residents

By Mathew Dearnaley

Hundreds of homes are in the firing line of a new arterial road for South Auckland – of which the first section alone is costed at almost $250 million.

Auckland Transport says about 260 properties, many of them along Redoubt Rd above Manukau, are in the path of the first stage of what it ultimately envisages as a 32km eastern bypass of the Southern Motorway to Drury.

The council organisation revealed last night a cost estimate of $246 million for the 9.2km section from Manukau and Flat Bush to Alfriston east of Manurewa, parallel with Mill Rd – including $66 million for property purchases – although it has yet to hazard a price for the full project.

Only $82 million is allocated for the next 10 years, and the project could take twice that time to complete.

But it intends seeking a route designation for the first section from the council’s planners by the end of next month, and says it is powerless to stop landowners from building new homes until then.

The plan has horrified residents of the historic Redoubt Ridge, through which Auckland Transport intends carving a road corridor up to 30m wide, past a remodelled junction with a widened Murphys Rd running from Flat Bush.

Redoubt Rd resident Raewyn Roberts, spokeswoman for an action committee to fight the proposal, yesterday called on Auckland Transport to avoid destroying what remained of a valuable ecological corridor from Murphys Bush to Totara Park and beyond.

She said it should instead press the Government’s Transport Agency to widen the Southern Motorway and alleviate a serious bottleneck caused by what she called a poorly-designed new connection with the Southwestern Motorway.

Long delays on the motorway were prompting many drivers to turn off at Manukau and head up Redoubt Rd, causing safety concerns which she accused Auckland Transport of exploiting to strengthen its case for a bypass.

Meetings held by Auckland Transport had reduced some of her neighbours – including migrants who had recently moved on to the road – to tears.

“It’s appalling,” she said. “This is a mega, mega project – they have this massive dual carriageway which will come roaring up from the old Manukau City centre, wipe out the ridge, then sweep down Mill Rd.”

A distraught fellow committee member, Eve Osborne, said she and her husband were assured by officials before buying their large colonial-style home further up the ridge for “close to $1 million” in 2011 that the road would avoid the property.

They moved in after being built out by neighbours in Glendowie, but had to halt badly-needed renovations to the Redoubt Rd property in October after learning the road would be “going smack through this house” and those on either side.

Auckland Transport spokesman Mark Hannan said the road had been flagged as a strategic arterial route in the 30-year Auckland Plan, and was a priority project needed to cope with future growth from Flat Bush to Drury.

Although its preferred alignment “shows an impact” on about 260 properties, among more than 400 along the first stage of the road corridor, he said many may be affected in only minor ways.

The proposal

* Redoubt Rd-Mill Rd-Murphy Rd corridor:
* 32km long to Drury.
* $246 million for the first 9.2km stage, cost unknown south of Alfriston.
* About 260 properties affected in first stage.
* Likely to be built in several stages over 20 years

 

To be fair to Auckland Transport this corridor has been placed in The Auckland Plan as the picture above shows. To be even more “fair” this corridor has been floating around in plans for by the looks of it, the last decade or so; so plenty of notice and attention there. However to be fair to the home owners up at Redoubt Road and Redoubt Ridge, what AT has planned for the corridor is simply horrifying and I am sure we can think of some better alternatives here (given that aspects of the corridor are needed with mass urban development due out my way and along the corridor over the next 30-years).

 

Auckland Transport does have a website dedicated to the Redoubt Road-Mill Road Corridor in which you can find particular information on the project:

Redoubt Road – Mill Road corridor

Your questions on the Mill Road corridor answered

 Redoubt to Mill Road corridor > Old Mill Road consultation

Redoubt Road – Mill Road Corridor Study: Issues

Design and consultation (this one has graphics on the proposed works)

 

A reminder that the scope of the works is for the Redoubt Road – Mill Road Corridor FROM State Highway One (Manukau Interchange) to the Mill Road/Alfriston Road Intersection. Any thing further south of that particular intersection leading into Papakura and later Drury has not come up yet (not that I have seen), so  a case of wait-and-see with AT to see what comes up there (it is also the section that would have my attention more as I am only five minutes away from that section of the corridor).

 

I will write up a separate post on alternatives to the corridor works later to see if effects of the works and corridor could be better minimised.

 

But I do agree with this in the duration:

“Redoubt Rd resident Raewyn Roberts, spokeswoman for an action committee to fight the proposal, yesterday called on Auckland Transport to avoid destroying what remained of a valuable ecological corridor from Murphys Bush to Totara Park and beyond.

She said it should instead press the Government’s Transport Agency to widen the Southern Motorway and alleviate a serious bottleneck caused by what she called a poorly-designed new connection with the Southwestern Motorway. Long delays on the motorway were prompting many drivers to turn off at Manukau and head up Redoubt Rd, causing safety concerns which she accused Auckland Transport of exploiting to strengthen its case for a bypass.”

Yep NZTA stuffed that up alright when they built the State Highways 1/20 interchange. The bottleneck at Hill Road Off-ramp where the motorway south goes from three to two lanes has been there for the last 20 years or more. NZTA decide to build (the much-needed) State Highway 20 interchange but forget to widen the motorway to three lanes to at least Takanini Interchange or for better results Papakura Interchange (which is getting an upgrade anyhow) which means the bottleneck is a heck of lot worse (and yes I tried to avoid it countless times by using Redoubt Road and Mill Road, or the Great South Road in the afternoon rush hour). To the situation worse NZTA are upgrading the Papakura Interchange to allow easier traffic movement in that area but forget the Papakura to Hill Road section of the motorway including Takanini Interchange, making the bottlenecks worse. I wonder because Papakura is a National Party electorate (Justice Minister Judith Collins) and the Takanini Interchange falls into the Manurewa Electorate (Labour MP – Louisa Wall) that NZTA have got their priorities in interchange upgrades backwards (Takanini was due for its upgrade 2015, but now its off the books entirely)

 

However at the end of the day the Redoubt Road/Mill Road corridor will need to be built (regardless of State Highway One) but in a more tactful manner that is not as disturbing as the current proposal. I don’t quite think large-scale carriage-ways are needed now or ever even with the growth coming up in the area.

 

As I said I shall draw an alternative’s proposal up later and see what I get…

 

Rates Movement

·

Which Way Are Your Rates Due to Move

 

Yesterday buried at the bottom of my Annual Plan post I had a chart on rates movements for the 2013/2014 Council financial year per Local Board area. I thought I might repost it here along with the percentages of the movements on rates increases and decreased spread over the Auckland Area to see how many got an increase, and how many got a decrease – so lets take a look:

 

Rates Movement by Local Board – 2013/2014

 

By percentage

 

I’ll let you figure out if the majority are facing increases or decreases – and by how much 😉

 

 

Annual Plan Submissions Due

·

Have Your Say on the Auckland Council Draft 2013/2014 Annual Plan

 

Auckland Council have called for submissions to the Draft 2013/2014 Annual Plan – the main budgetary document for Auckland Council for the next 12 months. All revenue and expected expenses (including capital outlay for proposed capital projects) over this twelve month period are laid out in the Annual Plan documents which I shall link and embed below.

 

I am still working through the Draft Annual Plan at the moment before compiling a submission (submissions close 4pm – 25 February 2013) but will upload my submission to BR:AKL as soon as it is done.

 

Amendment to the 2012-2022 Long Term Plan

It is of note that Council has asked for our feedback via the submissions on the “Regional Facilities Auckland grant towards development of the TelstraClear Pacific Events Centre” – which is building this White Water Rafting Facility at a cost to the ratepayer of $32m as well as taking on some financial risk if the project fails. In order for this development to happen (and as stated in the Draft Annual Plan) there will have to be an amendment to the 2012-2022 Long Term Plan which is already in operation. This would be because this particular development is calling on for extra funds made outside what has been allocated already in the existing and current Long Term Plan.

As a result I will be submitting in strong opposition to this as it creates precedent for every other Tom, Dick and Harry project with dubious actual economic merit to come before Council and thus allowing an existing LTP to be butchered to cater for it – when if needed, it should be kicked over to the next Long Term Plan which is the 2015-2025 LTP.

This is not how we budget for things anywhere – and I expect Council to follow the same standard. Besides I can think of better used to go and sink $32m such as cleaning up Otara Creek which is a toxic site or to our struggling Local Boards to fund local community facilities or events.

 

However I will run further commentary on this as I draw up my submission

 

In the mean time some links and documents

 

Web Links to Council Annual Plan

Draft annual plan 2013/2014 – Home Page

Draft annual plan 2013/2014 – Documents

Draft annual plan 2013/2014 – Key topics and events

Draft annual plan 2013/2014 – Draft Annual Plan 2013/2014: Have your say

 

The Annual Plan Documents

VolumeOne of the Draft Annual Plan

Volume Two of the Draft Annual Plan

Volume Three of the Draft Annual Plan

 

And the movements in Rates per Local Board Areas:

(Yep another rates decrease coming my way)

 

Alcohol and Local Community

·

Auckland Council Begins Work on Alcohol Control Measures

 

Central Government last year passed the Sale and Supply Alcohol Act which gives Council and Local Board increased authority and delegation on how alcohol (a demerit good) is sold and supplied in local communities.

Councillor George Wood has been made chairman of a working party (as noted in his Facebook status below) of members Auckland Council and Local Board to begin the slow and long process in getting ready to set up a Local Alcohol Policy or LAP:

George Wood shared a link.
Auckland Council starts long process to prepare local alcohol policy. I’m chairman of the working party along w/ 7 Crs and 7 LB members.

 

George also Scribd‘ed a fact sheet on Part One in developing such a LAP:

 

So as alluded to Part One is developing a Draft Local Alcohol Policy before step two kicks off which is: consultation

 

BR:AKL will keep an eye on Councillor Wood’s working party as it begins drawing up a Draft LAP and see where this new direction in alcohol policy goes for Auckland and its Local Boards

 

 

 

An Auckland Housing Redux

·

Battle on Housing Goes On

 

BR:AKL Has Viable Alternative Urban Land Use “Policy” Already

 

 

And I bet we are all sick of the Housing Affordability Debate swinging from one extreme to the other and back again; both at central and local government levels, both by the centre-left (social authoritarian section) and centre-right (neo-conservatism). The conservatives from both sides of the political spectrum are basically bashing each over the heads trying to score “up-man” points on one another with housing, yet really don’t offer what WE really want in housing (it is what THEY want in housing and telling US how and where to live). Interestingly Social Liberals (from the left), Neo Liberals (centre right) and even the libertarians (down the bottom of the political compass) have gone extremely quiet on housing and urban land use policy.

 

This is rather a shame as the liberals could very well offer some viable alternatives that we (the residents and businesses) could be very well-looking for. You know “US” making our own choices and working in a collaborative  manner and shape OUR CITY, OUR WAY (not the Government (Local and Central’s) way). Now before I post the “redux” on a social liberal‘s view for “housing” just a quick differentiation between how a social liberal and neo liberal would achieve similar goals.

 

What Social and Neo Libs share the same in housing:

  • Planning: Liberalising the planning rules and requirements (like ditching minimum parking requirements, setbacks, landscaping, etc. – basically getting planners out of the road)
  • No monopolies on construction goods (Fletchers would be “broken”)
  • Zoning: basically zone and let the people and developers do the rest (apart from Master Plans)

 

What Social and Neo Libs do not share the same in housing:

  • Provision of social housing provided by The State (not councils). Social Libs would allow it, Neo Libs not
  • Community Master Plans. Social Libs would allow a strict prescription based plan and development to occur in some areas (Town Centres), Neo Libs would still do the zone and let the people and developer do the rest right across the board

 

As for the “Redux” here it is; my social liberal (and well read) Submission to the (then) Draft Auckland Plan where extensive mention of land use was made out:

 

Unfortunately though despite the hearings and constant lobbying, this extensive submission gathers (digital and actual) dust sitting in the draw. So while the conservatives bludgeon each other and boring us with no actual solutions, this liberal document waits for some brave political soul to bring it into the light and see it through in execution.

 

The CRL and North Shore Line Redux

·

A (re)Look at Two Particular Heavy Rail Projects

 

Over the last year advancements have been made on Auckland‘s heavy rail system (for both passengers and freight). BR:AKL has been following developments as Auckland’s rail continue to grow and evolve through the 21st Century. With the next step of the City Rail Link under way – that is the Notice of Requirements (protecting the land route for the CRL); BR:AKL takes a quick look back at some rail posts, in particular the operational model post CRL but pre North Shore Line, and The North Shore Line herself.

 

The Redux

Operational Models – An Alternative Proposal Post CRL, but pre North Shore Line (thus far)

CRL TIMETABLE AND OPERATION PLAN

THE PROPOSAL After seeing one or two particular proposals for CRL Timetable and/or Operations (that is how passenger trains would run along the Auckland Rail Metro Network) I thought to myself if I could come up with my own proposal.

 

CRL TIMETABLE AND OPERATION PLAN – PART TWO

THE CRL TIMETABLE/OPERATION FREQUENCY PLAN

 With the baseline operation plan laid out (so basically one train an hour on each of the three lines in each direction) it was time to ramp the frequencies up to acceptable standards

 

CRL TIMETABLE AND OPERATION PLAN – PART THREE

POTENTIAL PASSENGER CAPACITY ON POST CRL RAIL NETWORK So far in my City Rail Link Timetable and Operation Plan Proposal I have covered the foundation of my proposal on passenger train operations and frequencies once the $3.6b (Rail Fallacy applying of course)  CRL was opened and under way. You can get a full recap at my CRL TIMETABLE AND OPERATION PLAN – PART TWO post. In this post I build upon the proposed frequencies from Part Two and apply what potential capacity the Auckland Passenger Rail network could have post CRL. Now remember as of current in my proposals I have three lines of operation – they are: …

 

Parts Four and Five have been in the pipeline since Part Three and should be up for “publishing” sometime in February (Part Five as soon as the RPTP is finalised). Part Four would look at a Manukau to New Lynn “shuttle” via Glen Innes and Britomart as well as preparing for the Manukau (Rail) South Link) with Part Five looking at a dummy timetable post CRL but factoring in any changes with the Regional Public Transport Plan.   The CRL Timetable and Operational Plan series will be used in lobbying and advocacy once Auckland Transport starts drawing up proposed operation plans for the trains once the CRL is operational.

As for the North Shore Line two posts were dedicated to this crucial project as well as mentions in submissions to The Auckland Plan:

NORTH SHORE RAIL FOR $2.5B?

Could We See Rail on The North Shore?

 

A QUESTION FOR THE CRL – Is the CRL Future Proofed for The North Shore Line?

…one thing has struck me – well two actually:

  1. No mention of The North Shore Line (which crosses the City Rail Link at Aotea Station)
  2. No apparent future proofing of Aotea Station for The North Shore Line when it gets built (that is when not if folks)

…

 

Including aspects of The North Shore Line are crucial as part of connecting “all” of  (metro) Auckland to the rail system. Both North Shore Line posts spell out the importance of the CRL as well as The North Shore Line. As time goes on I will write-up a Timetable and Operation Plan – Post North Shore Line with all the lines built and what such a timetable could look like for Auckland.

So interesting and exciting times ahead as advancements in one aspect of Auckland’s Fully Integrated Transport System (or Suite) continue slowly but surely.

 

[All City Rail Link posts can be found by typing “City Rail Link Debate” into blog search box]