First Critique of a Candidate

·

It Pays to do One’s Homework when “One” is Paying Attention

 

And yes I (and others as Twitter lights up) am paying attention at the moment thanks to Orsman’s Tweet yesterday on Palino and Transport.

And so Orsman has written his piece about mayoral candidate John Palino and his transport “ambitions” for Auckland. The back part was good as anyone with half a brain attached would know that the current Integrated Transport Program Mayor Len Brown pigeon holed Auckland and Auckland Transport into is an utter joke. How can someone spend $65 billion with a $12 billion funding gap on transport solutions that make congestion worse in 20-30 years? Not very intelligent stuff here – especially as Car Capital City Detroit just went bankrupt this morning.

As for the rest of the article? Well it might either show bad advice or plain laziness to go suss the situation out proper before dropping a comment in the NZ Herald.

The Herald article is somewhat a scatter gun here so I will try to make top and tail of it best I can.

From the NZ Herald

Candidate favours park-and-ride

By Bernard Orsman @BernardOrsman

John Palino wants to take pressure off transport network and make it easier for commuters to leave cars

Building park-and-ride facilities is the first transport priority for Auckland mayoral candidate John Palino, whose long-term solution is to build satellite centres where people can live, work and play.

 

Speaking ahead of his campaign launch tomorrow, Mr Palino told the Heraldthat Auckland must make the most out of rail electrification, saying park-and-ride facilities are the quickest, cheapest and most practical way to relieve pressure on the city’s transport network.

…

 

As I am debating with ATB’s resident socialist Patrick Reynolds, Park and Rides do have their uses. Typically in the outlying stations such as Papakura and Pukekohe where the stations serve a dispersed rural and urban population. While feeder buses and active transport can serve up to a 1.6km radius from the said station, the Park and Ride can serve a catchment 10x the distance which is what rural based commuters would do. So Park and Rides can have their uses.

As for cheapest method mentioned by Palino – err okay?

From the article again

“Let’s stop trying to get people out of their cars completely when it doesn’t suit them, and just make it easier for them to take public transport.

 

“I will subsidise parking where cost-benefit analysis shows park-and-rides provide a positive impact on the transport network.”

 

He said park-and-ride facilities might have to be multi-storey and cost between $20,000 and $40,000 per space.

…

That is some expensive parking. I would be inclined to charge Park and Ride users $2-$4 a day and have an option where you could use your AT-HOP card to “tag in and out” of the PnR.

As for making easier to get to the train station; AT is already ahead in that game as they prepare for the first time feeder buses into major stations and bus interchanges. Some new interchanges like Otahuhu are on the cards as well. So it will be easier to get public transport once the new interchanges and feeders are fully working.

 

“If we are ever to have the city rail project, we’re going to have to get the patronage required to justify spending ratepayer money,” he said.

 

That line suggests someone has not either done their homework or is in fact being lazy in obtaining the required information. How hard is it to send and email, make a phone call and have a coffee with people in the actual know behind the CRL and growth targets – the people being AT themselves. Oh and not reading the Prime Minister’s speech properly does not help either as he did lay down the challenge.

FFS doing my own reading and coffee sessions with those in the know I discovered that to bring the CRL forward all AT really need to do is show strong growth above a set percentage year in year out towards 2020. If Auckland Transport can do this then we might just see the first dirt sod turned around the 2017-18 mark.

And yes AT are putting in some strong initiatives from 2014 to make that growth happen to the point I can display confidence in them doing it.

 

And for this from Palino:

• Long term, build new satellite centres.

That is already on its way via the Unitary Plan through the Metropolitan Centres and twin Satellite Towns of Pukekohe and Warkworth. Although in saying that some polishing needs to occur first there before the Unitary Plan becomes operative.

As for Manukau, advances continued to be made there quietly behind the scenes as Auckland’s first Super Metropolitan Centre is drafted then brought into existence.

 

Coverage of the Local Government Elections 2013 will continue as development happen.

 

Related articles

 

Close Election?

·

Rudman Says No, Orsman Says “Could”

 

NOW the commentary starts ramping up on the Auckland Council Elections in the main stream media. This after I believe I started it quietly back in 2011 and ramping it up more recently.

We have heard some commentating writing off the elections already especially in the Auckland mayoral race with myself at this point in time giving Len an 85% chance of getting his re-election. As for Council Ward seats (those wanting to become a Councillor) this is proving to be more interesting (not that I don’t mind even with our shills).

Resident Unitary Plan writer Bernard Orsman thinks different to his counterpart Rudman and offered this insightful piece on the upcoming elections.

 

From the NZ Herald

Split vote could lead to close mayoral contest

By Bernard Orsman @BernardOrsman

As the race for the Auckland mayoralty begins, Bernard Orsman looks at the big issues for candidates and voters

…

And even if the mayor gets re-elected, he might find a different hue around the council table, one less friendly to the “inclusive” team he has come to rely upon.

The failure of the centre-right to unite around the Communities & Residents brand (with subsequent desertions from C&R this month) and the mixed bag of left-leaning councillors have worked in Mr Brown’s favour in his first term.

It would take only a handful of new, right-leaning faces to tip the balance and make life difficult for the mayor. Pro-Brown councillors Michael Goudie and Des Morrison are stepping down in the respective conservative wards of Albany and Franklin. The centre-right is also targeting Cathy Casey (Albert-Eden-Roskill), Ann Hartley (North Shore) and Richard Northey (Maungakiekie-Tamaki).

Deputy Mayor Penny Hulse has taken umbrage at a call from Herald columnist Brian Rudman for candidates to embrace the labels of National, Labour and the like.

She says this would see a return to the bad old days of the former Auckland City Council with secret caucus meetings, one-term councils and three-year planning horizons.

She has coined the term “Auckland Party” for people who want to focus on the city and building for the future.

But even minus the C&R tag, there are enough issues uniting centre-right candidates – such as a low uniform charge that leads to bigger rates for high-value home owners and debt levels – to potentially scupper the “Auckland Party”.

The looming election is already seeing changes made to the Unitary Plan, with word leaking out that height limits are being reduced in many town centres and “small-scale” apartment buildings banished from many residential areas.

Modifications to the draft Unitary Plan for formal notification in September is a political test for Mr Brown and his inner circle of Ms Hulse, Ms Hartley, Penny Webster and Mr Northey. Get it wrong and the Unitary Plan – the new planning rulebook that affects every Aucklander and every property – will become a big election issue.

…

I did leave the first half out as it was covering the mayoral stuff.

 

Orsman does have a legitimate point (if not a slight slant due to perceived bias against the Unitary Plan and Deputy Mayor (Bernard have you asked me yet for those secret papers – I do have all 7,000 pages of them sitting here)) though that Council could change its make up (regardless of who is Mayor).

Right now to get a true Centre-Right “dominance” around the Council table you would need a swing of 6 to 7 seats from the Centre Left or pro-Brown supporters in the election. That is one heck of an ask and would need pretty much a city-wide revolt for that to happen. I do not see such a revolt towards the Councillors let alone the mayor at the moment.

But, what makes this more uncertain is what kind of Centre-Right person could land a spot at the table and what they might actually do.

I’ll give an example using me in contrast to a shill. While I have no intention of running for a Local Board or Council seat until 2016 if I did decide to run this could happen.

I am a Social Liberal which naturally puts me Centre-Left on the Political Compass tests. However, I am perceived to be a “young Tory” that would hark back to Golden Era of National from 1936 to 1972. This means I would be cast as a Centre-Right candidate. In saying that unlike the Right Wing shills out there (just look at their stance on the Unitary Plan), I would be more inclined to work with the Deputy Mayor and push through the concessions for my area and the wider city. This is already occurring and I am not even a Councillor nor running this round.

Effectively rather than sit, their arms crossed and looking like a permanent sour-puss grumpy going “No, no, no” and not put any non NIMBY alternative forward (enter the Shill), I would work with the hand I got dealt with and make something useful out of it. So far working with that I have has worked as an advocate and consultant in gaining concessions for a Better Auckland through a better Unitary Plan – all while I am Centre Right.

So in Orsman’s case being Centre Right might not upset the cart per-se in Council business. Sure the sharper edges of the Mayor’s policy might be sanded back but no whole scale change that having a bunch of Right Wingers would foster (and damage the city due to instability – yes I am pointing to you C&R)!

Speaking of C&R – what on earth happened? Never mind!

 

Now what about this Auckland Party concept the Deputy Mayor brought up? Orsman said the concept would not work if the Council make up swung to the Centre-Right. I would correct him and say the Auckland Party would not work if the Council got dominated by Right Wingers for which in any case the City would be royally buggered.

I would say that the Auckland Party would be made up of both Centre Left and Centre Right Councillors who can work in a Grand Coalition sort of manner and advance the interests of the Auckland region. Rather than have factional politics and a divisive Council that marred the Isthmus for the last 50-60 years.

Lets see how this pans out as we draw closer to October 12 – Election Day

 

Related articles

 

Pre-Election Reports from the Council

·

The State of Council before the Elections

 

Auckland Council as per the Local Government Act has released its very first Pre-Election report for your consumption.

From Council

First pre-election report released
 

Auckland Council has today issued its very first pre-election report.

A new requirement of all councils under the Local Government Act from this year, the pre-election report is prepared by the local authority’s chief executive and must be politically independent.

“The purpose of a pre-election report under the Act is for councils to provide information to promote public discussion about the issues a council faces ahead of the local body elections, so voters can make more informed choices,” says Doug McKay, Auckland Council Chief Executive.

The Auckland Council Pre-Election Report 2013, prepared to meet the requirements of the Act, includes financial results for the three financial years immediately preceding the date of the election and latest projections for the three years immediately after.

The report includes a forecasted result for 2012/2013 year; given the final audited financial results for this period will not be reported to council until September 2013.

The report is prepared on a group basis, including council-controlled organisations, and covers operating expenditure, major projects and capital expenditure, debt projections and rates projections for 2014-2017.

—-ends—-

 

You can read the Report HERE (opens in new tab)

 

Election coverage will continue here on Talking Auckland as it happens.

 

Happens When you Pigeon Hole a Debate

·

Why the CBG Failed at a cost of $1.5m of your money

 

[Note: CBG figure moved from $1.1m to $1.5m]

I already posted today on my consensus of No Confidence against the Consensus Building Group’s Final report based on a failed Integrated Transport Program. You can see that commentary here: No Consensus in Funding the Integrated Transport Program

In that commentary I did mention how the Mayor through the Auckland Plan and his brief to the CBG pigeon holed the debate into looking at basically one option: TAX! Whether that be an increase in rates (which is a property tax), petrol tax or road pricing (crude congestion charging). Left out were asset sell downs, a lottery, departure and bed taxes, and a regional sales tax.

Problem? The Government as widely expected blasted down what the Consensus Building Group “came to” with the opposition effectively doing the same although for different reasons (Julie Ann Genter’s piece for example).

In saying that the Government rather than looking at a regional fuel tax as part of suite of options, it has decided on a nation-wide petrol tax increase as a sole option which besides many other things will rightfully annoy the rest of the country!

 

By the looks of things as well the Government could “hint” at Council moving on its existing asset base to help pay for some the transport projects. But, again we have a problem. We have no idea on how the city truly feels towards the asset question nor the to lotteries (and other options) because the Mayor denied our democratic right to have an effective say via a submission – if the CBG were allowed to look at such a scope.

The Mayor’s ideology is to me irrelevant and can be kept at home. What I want is vision dosed with pragmatism and all options on the table for OUR consideration free of the mayor’s ideology.

One thing would have been for certain; if via the submissions to the CBG we overwhelmingly rejected the assets question then it could have been further ammo against Brownlee. However, we will never know that answer thanks again to the piegon holing by the Mayor.

And so we are stuck with really no options at all to the point it is the Worst of All worlds. Effective taxed out of existence…

Vancouver looks mighty fine at the moment…

Note: Answering a question from another article; The Consensus Building Group was stacked with effective lobbyists rather than professional consultants, civil engineers and Geographers (who look at the Physical and Human environments and consequences of our actions)

 

TALKING AUCKLAND

Talking Auckland: Blog of TotaRim Consultancy Limited

TotaRim Consultancy
Bringing Well Managed Progress to Auckland and in support of a #movingauckland

Auckland: 2013 – YOUR CITY, YOUR CALL

Related articles

 

It’s About the Jobs – Again

·

Strong Economic Growth – Just not where it is needed

 

A release from Auckland Council‘s Chief Economist today on how the Auckland economy continues to do rather well:

Auckland’s housing market boosting wider economy
 
 
Strong house price growth across the Auckland region is boosting other parts of the economy including construction, finance and real estate industries, according to latest economic figures for the region in the first three months of this year.
 
Economic activity is now more sustained and broad based, with 17 out of 20 sectors recording gains in the quarter. Auckland grew at a rate of 3.2 per cent in the year to March; along with Christchurch, these two cities are underpinning growth across the country, said Geoff Cooper, Auckland Council’s chief economist. Mr Cooper said activity in Auckland’s construction, finance and property sectors will likely spill over into other parts of the region’s economy, and with time, other areas of New Zealand.
 
“Auckland house prices continue their upward march, which is buoying consumer confidence and further stimulating demand,” Mr Cooper wrote in the latest Auckland Economic Quarterly, released today.
 
“We’re already seeing a pick-up in activity across the finance, property and real estate and construction services sectors. As building work gathers pace, it will act as a catalyst for growth in various downstream sectors, particularly domestic manufacturing and retail.”
 
The median Auckland house price was $562,000 in March 2013, up 12.5 per cent from March last year. Signs that migration is rebounding, amid the slowing Australian economy, are likely to support house prices in the medium term.
 
Some 4,764 residential building consents were lodged with Auckland Council in the 12 months ended March 31 this year. While that’s down from the 10-year average of 6,631, it is up from the year-earlier figure of 3,976. This represents the early stages of a construction upswing in Auckland, which will need to continue before house prices ease.
 
Auckland’s consumers are among the most optimistic in New Zealand, spurred on by activity in the housing market. Westpac McDermott Miller reports a consumer confidence score of 119.0 for Auckland, well ahead of the national average of 110.8, and up 13.7 per cent from Q1 of last year. Retail sales rose 1.1 per cent from the final three months of 2012, and new car registrations increased again to just shy of the 10-year average.
 
Still, lack of job growth continues to weigh on Auckland’s recovery as unemployment remains high at 7.3 per cent. With business employment intentions in positive territory and economic activity looking more sustained, job seekers have more reason for optimism in the year ahead.

—–ends—–

 

Okay some renewed strength in the house building sector is good as that will get the supply up. Although still not fast enough for sustained Unitary Plan levels if the population growth remains to be high.

The issue though is emphasised in red although the rest in black could be good news if job growth increases..

However, this shows the crucial nature to which the Unitary Plan needs to get right on employment centres. Those main centres being our City Centre, (Super and) Metropolitan Centres, heavy and light industry, and supported by good Town Centres.

 

Forget focusing on you house and everything within 25 metres around it like our NIMBY‘s and shills are. Attention needs to focus on our higher end commercial and industrial centres to make sure the land and infrastructure is in position so that entrepreneurs like me can create jobs.

With the failure that was the Consensus Building Group just announcing their report on transport funding over the life of the current Integrated Transport Program; I believe emphasis will be placed on a more decentralised front with employment centres. Decentralised like running two CBD’s and multiple industrial centres so that people have the option live local and work local rather than cross city commute or funnel into one point as the mayor wants.

i will work up the plan and subsequent language around Manukau, Wiri and Southern Auckland and its potential development front through the life of the Unitary Plan as part of ongoing work in this area.

If we need jobs and our transport boffins are rather inept on getting Auckland moving (and no, Auckland Transport are absolved of this. They are the ones who need to carry this all out) the we better look for some alternatives quick

 

The CBG Final Report

Related articles

 

So Which Form of Mediocrity Would You Like Today?

· 9 Comments ·

Not Really Options for Transport as Purported by The Mayor

 

So with Mayor incumbent Len Brown kicking off his campaign the issue of transport got dragged up straight away. In other words how to pay for the 2012 Integrated Transport Plan that has caused a lot of teeth gnashing from all sides of the coin.

From The NZ Herald

Auckland drivers face off-ramp toll

By Mathew Dearnaley

 

Drivers may be tolled at Auckland motorway exit ramps to ease pressure on ratepayers over a $12 billion transport funding gap, according to a high-level report due out today.

 

The report, from a 17-member think-tank appointed by Mayor Len Brown, will give Auckland Council and the Government a clear timetable for when new revenue sources will be needed to raise an extra $400 million for each of 30 years.

 

The money will be for projects such as the City Rail Link and new roads, including another Waitemata Harbour crossing.

 

The plan is expected to include increases to fuel taxes and rates and possible charges for motorists to use existing roads from 2020, rather than just tolls now allowed on new government highways.

…

Well as already noted those going right through the city won’t be pinged so long as they stay on the motorway. As for the rest of us? The Great South Road and Mill Road sound better alternatives from Papakura to Manukau or Otahuhu that using State Highway one.

My point? This proposing on slugging the off ramps rather than certain points along the motorway and having an effective mass transit alternative is a case of the cart before the horse syndrome.

To make matters worse in Len pigeon holing the transport funding debate some options were eliminated from the scope in the feedback session by the Consensus Building Group (yeah an Oxymoron right there):

From the Herald again

That paper ruled out about 20 options such as assets sales, a regional sales tax and a lottery before leaving Aucklanders with a stark choice between hefty rates rises combined with fuel tax rises in one corner, and a combination of enhanced traditional funding sources and road charges in the other.

 

Although the Government is opposed to charging drivers to use existing motorways, it is understood the report will suggest tolls at the off-ramps to local roads, given that those are half-funded by ratepayers.

 

Long-distance travellers would be free to drive through the city without being charged, as long as they stayed on the motorways.

…

 

What was wrong having a good debate about those options in red? Probably not compatible with the Mayor’s ideology so he shuts them out of the debate entirely and pigeon hole’s into the more unsustainable options I could think of.

 

Least our transport workhorse (one of two) Councillor Mike Lee hits the nail on the head:

Council transport chairman Mike Lee said he believed Aucklanders were “more than paying their way” and he didn’t think trying to find more cash from them “is on right now”.

 

So a rejig of the transport priorities and funding allocations might be needed here first folks. Not much of chance that happening while the Local Government Elections now formally under way…

 

Related articles

 

Time for Some Sim Unitary Plan

·

1.4 million people in a 16.7km2 Area?

Can I do it?

Yes I can

 

Cold crap winter’s Sunday mean lots of hot chocolate, the heater and time to crack out some Sim City 4.

The Mission: Develop this 16.7km2 piece of real estate:

The hole where I will design and build the new mega city centre
The hole where I will design and build the new mega city centre

The area is planned to be the main core for the region or rather MEGA city. So that mean maximum densities and a very efficient transit system to boot to move those Sims around.

 

The existing transit map (note it does not show subways)

And the transport networks
And the transport networks. Note the Black and Light Blue are both highways (motorways)

Going to be fun connecting the transit system from the surrounds up to the new area. Of note this is what I have to connect up:

  • 2 lane roads
  • 4 lane avenues
  • 6 lane raised and ground level motorways
  • heavy rail
  • subways
  • Elevated High Speed Rail
  • Ferries and a port in the north west end

Infrastructure wise

  • Fresh water pumps
  • Treatment plants
  • Pipes
  • Some high tension power lines at the beginning
  • Nuclear FUSION reactors
  • Waste Depots so the trash is sent “off map” meaning some deals with it next door if I don’t incinerate it at a Nuclear Fission plant else where on the fringes of the mega city

Of note when I last had a “city” in that piece of real estate it took 4 fusion reactors to power it 😛

 

And to show were I will be starting:

Blank canvas for my new CORE city
Blank canvas for my new CORE city

Last time I developed a walking city with 75% of the 1.4m sims either walking or taking mass transit. Impressive? Yep despite the also impressive rapid roading system that matched it.

 

So time to fire up and get going. If one is wondering I do have a A4 colour copy of the above pic’s where I do pencil in preferences to what goes where in the planning phases. So essentially I am do a Sim Unitary Plan first then let the developers and sims let rip.

Fun times ahead