Lesson From Melbourne

·

Auckland Transport: Take Note

 

Saw this via my Twitter feed a few moments ago:

Fare evaders allowed to do a runner

Michelle Griffin

 

Yarra Trams has ordered its inspectors not to pursue fleeing or aggressive fare evaders after a spate of attacks.

In an internal Yarra Trams memo obtained by 3AW, dated March 2013, ticket inspectors are told they:

  • Must not block the path of, or attempt to physically detain a person who attempts to walk/run away.
  • Must always maintain a safe distance between themselves and a person being spoken to – if possible.
  • Must not surround or corner any person being spoken to regarding an offence under the Act.

The edict was issued after 10 assaults on ticket inspectors on trams between January and March this year. According to a Yarra Trams spokesman, this is “slightly higher” than the number of assaults at the same time last year, and resulted in 15 minor injuries, such as sprains and bruises.

The edict effectively ensures that those who refuse to give their name and address and instead flee cannot be detained or fined.

This comes just as Public Transport Victoria orders an increase in tram patrols by inspectors, in an attempt to cut fare evasion to 7 per cent across the public transport network.

There have been several aggressive confrontations between inspectors and passengers reported in recent years.

Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/fare-evaders-allowed-to-do-a-runner-20130426-2iid2.html#ixzz2RWdwDPO7

 

This is happening in Melbourne while we have this per Campbell Live: “SERIOUSLY AUCKLAND TRANSPORT?” that I covered recently. No wonder why Councillor Mike Lee is jumping up and down red and blue in the face. But in acknowledgement and balance: Dr Lester Levy of Auckland Transport is actively working on this situation – a man I can trust as a ratepayer to sort what is best for both AT/Rail and the city (AUCKLAND TRANSPORT TO RE-THINK STRATEGY).

 

But Auckland Transport – take note of Melbourne please SO WE CAN AVOID Melbourne’s situation…

 

 

Off to the Auckland Plan Committee

·

And Away I Go Giving a Presentation

 

May 2, I give a presentation to the Orakei Local Board on Special Character Zones and Centralised Master Community Plans as an alternative to some of our centres in the Unitary Plan (as we are a heterogeneous city). May 14 (as I have been granted Speaking Rights by the Deputy Mayor (to which I send my thanks 🙂 ) I give a largish presentation to the Auckland Plan Committee (the same committee overseeing The Unitary Plan) – on Manukau.

 

I have mentioned Manukau before at BR:AKL the most recent in my “THE CLUNKER AND ME (2) + A NOTE ON MANUKAU” post which deals with ‘Sense of Identity,’ and on the planning perspective; “QUESTION: AUCKLAND – METROPOLIS OR MEGALOPOLIS/MEGAPOLIS” post.

From “THE CLUNKER AND ME (2) + A NOTE ON MANUKAU:”

  • May 14 – Tuesday: Auckland Town Hall – Auckland Plan Committee (confirmed). I am asking for a speaking slot here while the Unitary Plan is still under the feedback process to provide clarification on the Manukau City Centre idea. After giving the idea at the Manukau Civic Forum and through my subsequent post: MANUKAU AS THE SECOND CBD OF AUCKLAND; the idea has been noted by Council (Councillors and planners) as well as growing some legs and going for a run. So to save the councillors getting befuddled around Manukau I thought I might go and clarify what I mean with Manukau as our Second CBD.

…

The post goes on with a note on Manukau and the City Centre Zones verse Metropolitan Zones per the Unitary Plan. My “MANUKAU AS THE SECOND CBD OF AUCKLAND” post linked above outlines what will be the foundation to my presentation to the committee.

 

The “QUESTION: AUCKLAND – METROPOLIS OR MEGALOPOLIS/MEGAPOLIS” looks at:

Something to think about

As I have been chatting away to various people on the concept of Manukau being a second CBD in Auckland; two interesting and thought-provoking questions popped up. They were:

  • Can Auckland be looking at THREE CBD’s by 2040: the existing CBD, Manukau and Albany (or Takapuna(something the North Shore can figure out itself))
  • Is Auckland an actual metropolis or in fact a megapolis/megalopolis

As for the tri-CBD question; another time and another debate. Right now it is the metropolis/megapolis/megalopolis question for Auckland

Now before some one pipes up about the world megapolises and megalopolises being massive areas with tens of millions of people, I want you to put that world relativity concept behind and think of a New Zealand and literal Greek concept of the terms.

The best way to convey the information is an information dump from Wikipedia…

…

 

So plenty to chew on and quite of bit for me to draw up for my presentation in three weeks time to the Auckland Plan Committee. And yes the matter will most like be a “hot button” issue and be somewhat contentious, but a matter needing to be raised and for the city to discuss 🙂

 

BEN ROSS : AUCKLAND

BR:AKL: Bring Well Managed Progress

The Unitary Plan: Bringing Change

Auckland: 2013 – OUR CITY, OUR CALL

 

 

This and That – AGAIN

·

Not Again…

 

Where is Progressive and REASON with The Clunker Debate

 

 

You know when something gets flagged on Facebook more than three times it is worth considering rather urgently. I had commented on the polarisation and slack Main Stream Media report on The Unitary Plan in my “This and That” post:

THIS AND THAT

From One Extreme To The Other

 

With The Clunker?

 

While most commentary and interaction with The Unitary Plan (The Clunker) continues as May 31 approaches at a more civilised level, unfortunately extremes can crop up that skewer the debate. This can either be extreme commentary from a particular group or individual (which I will comment on below), the media being particularly lazy as they are and only covering one side of the debate which they are doing with The Clunker for the most part (that will be bringing me to my second part).

…

 

After thinking that kind of situation was to be buried and we all move on with the Unitary Plan feedback and all keep our heads and maturity. Guess I spoke too soon when this was flagged to me:

Councillor backs ‘village idiots’ blog

A blog calling residents “delusional village idiots” for opposing apartment plans in Milford, Browns Bay and Orewa is backed by Albany councillor Michael Goudie. The councillor posted a Facebook link to the anonymous “I hate NIMBYS” blog that labels unitary plan opponents “soulless geriatric time bombs”. Mr Goudie, who prides himself as being the voice of youth on council, says the blog is “brilliant” and encourages people to share it. “I am glad people power is finally taking a stand against the loud minority.”

Hibiscus Bays Local Board member Gary Holmes says Mr Goudie holds passionate views but should step back from debate while the council is consulting on its draft unitary plan. Mr Holmes says it’s “unfair” to pit old versus young generations during discussions on Auckland‘s intensification. “It’s not generational. People have been through battles and understand what is at stake.” Browns Bay and Orewa residents have already fought hard to restrict heights, he says. “In 30 years they will thank us,” Mr Holmes says. If Auckland had listened to members of the older generation such as former mayor Sir Dove Myer Robinson the region would have a widespread rail network. Mr Holmes says there is support for some apartments, particularly around transport routes, but some of today’s character needs protection. “You can’t look at every area in the same way.”

Mr Goudie says on Facebook that the issue was about attitude not age.

…

 

It is about attitude and not age as I can attest to through my work on the Unitary Plan thus far. It is the reason why (and for my views of THAT blog see my “This and That” post) I can be scalding of St Heliers but in the same breath reach out to RIGHT ACROSS THE SPECTRUM age and demographic wise (except the NIMBY’s) with everything thus far with the Unitary Plan. And heck you need to reach out across that spectrum as the old adage states: united we stand for divided we fall (or more simply put divide and conquer).

While an age polarisation debate might have kicked off on The Shore and the Isthmus, down here in Southern Auckland I see: people young and old, workers and entrepreneurs, urban and rural folk alike somewhat if not united in concerns, voices, and ideas with the Unitary Plan. I could go a far as saying Southern Auckland knows growth is going to happen but, it needs to be done right with all negative consequences mitigated against. Then again we always want things done properly. This is what we are fighting for down here in the South with The Unitary Plan – making sure as Dene Andre said “Liveability from international best practice is executed.”

 

So again my conclusion:

 

CONCLUSION

 

All this brings me to the conclusion which seems inevitable in this Clunker debate. The two extremes facing off and firing broadsides against each other which will polarise the debate and entrench views. This action goes and buggers up the middle ground from both sides (those pro-sprawl, and those pro-intensification) who are actively working together and working a compromise in bringing this city forward for the next thirty years. The extremes are trying to force either change or no change, while the middle favours more progression. Progression and change are two very different things and have very different consequences to people and the city.

 

I just ran these words through a thesaurus to get the synonyms that we can more relate too:

  • Change: transformation, revolution (which then implies upheaval), conversion
  • Progress and Progression: development, evolution, growth, advancement, improvement

 

Now look at those words and think to yourself which basically scare the living daylights out of you. Those that are NIBMY-ists don’t bother answering as I am rather not interested in hermits or fossils (one which is a relic of a by-gone era) as nothing is static in this universe. For me I am more inclined towards Progress and Progression over “Change” even though I am a social liberal and can tolerate some “change” as defined above.

But look at the language of the Unitary Plan (and Auckland Plan) and you see the language I classed under the ‘Change’ department (especially transformational). I admittedly have parroted that same language although that has been scaled back in more recent submissions as I swing more to progression rather than transformational. Then again you often have to speak the language of the council (so transformational) to get them paying attention (oops there goes a secret of mine). The language Council is using in the Unitary and Auckland Plans through “change” is pretty much enough to go make most people (even those progressive) rather hesitant in what is being pushed forward. Probably won’t help matters is when Council goes and bollocks up the communications process and people really do start running around clueless through no fault of their own (although communications with the Unitary Plan has been “basic” but not flash).

 

SO WHERE TO NEXT?

Well I expect nothing from the MSM in reporting both sides of the coin in a more balanced manner so blogging continues and my main outlet. But moving the language from change to progression will be more the theme as I continue and sell my alternative to The Clunker. A story is being told, this is my story on our city

 

BR:AKL:  Bring Well Managed Progress

The Unitary Plan: Bringing Change 

Auckland: 2013 – OUR CITY, OUR CALL

North Shore Rail – Actively Being Considered

·

Wheels Turning (Slowly) for North Shore Rail

 

Came across this last night while reading up happenings across the city: “Shore rail considered”

From the article:

 

Rail to the North Shore is being investigated by Auckland Transport.

The public transport mode has been “identified by the Auckland Plan as an important extension to the rail network”, the council-controlled organisation’s annual report says. “A draft report on land use preconditions has been updated and finalised by Auckland Council following feedback received from stakeholders.” Auckland Transport goes on to say the NZ Transport Agency has reported on steps to restart work on an additional Waitemata Harbour Crossing. “Auckland Transport will need to consider the implications of this on planning for rapid transit on the North Shore.” The agency says it and “other stakeholders are considering the findings and possible next steps, including future proofing the rail connection”.

In November, Massey University vice-chancellor Steve Maharey said a section of its Albany campus was sold to Auckland Council. Mr Maharey claimed he was told it would become a public transport hub with light rail as an option

-ends-

 

I have commented on this before in my “NORTH SHORE RAIL FOR $2.5B?” post written in September:

…

Of all the options that were available, the one that caught my attention the most due to cost effectiveness while delivering the highest benefit was:

 

Meaning the Bus-way is extended, upgraded and fully optimised (so at maximum efficiency and/or capacity) before the Albany to CBD section of the Bus-way is flipped (converted) over to Heavy Rail which would connect to the Aotea Station of the City Rail Link. A reminder that the bus-way as it currently stands was designed to be flipped to rail in due time – so it should not be that difficult.

The conversion of the bus-way to heavy rail in Auckland Council’s and Auckland Transport‘s opinion would be around 2041. In my submission to the Auckland Plan, that conversion would be completed by 2040  (so third and final period of the current Auckland Plan):

…

 

Lets see where North Shore Rail goes. But by the looks of things it could be in position ahead on anticipated time. Remembering heavy rail can move upwards of 900% more people than the bus-way ever could. So a great decongestant for the North Shore 🙂

 

 

 

Question: Auckland – Metropolis or Megalopolis/Megapolis

·

So I ask again: “AUCKLAND – METROPOLIS OR MEGALOPOLIS/MEGAPOLIS?”

 

And it needs to be answered after the Herald bungled this piece: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10879448 <_<

Ben Ross - Talking Auckland's avatarTalking Southern Auckland

Something to think about

 

As I have been chatting away to various people on the concept of Manukau being a second CBD in Auckland; two interesting and thought-provoking questions popped up. They were:

  • Can Auckland be looking at THREE CBD’s by 2040: the existing CBD, Manukau and Albany (or Takapuna (something the North Shore can figure out itself))
  • Is Auckland an actual metropolis or in fact a megapolis/megalopolis

As for the tri-CBD question; another time and another debate. Right now it is the metropolis/megapolis/megalopolis question for Auckland

Now before some one pipes up about the world megapolises and megalopolises being massive areas with tens of millions of people, I want you to put that world relativity concept behind and think of a New Zealand and literal Greek concept of the terms.

 

The best way to convey the information is an information dump from Wikipedia

Metropolis 

A 

View original post 1,291 more words

Update with Karaka Collective Information

·

An Information Error

 

PLEASE NOTE

I have received an email from a person in regards to the Karaka Collective and information the Collective’s representative has sent me which I subsequently posted on BR:AKL.

The information I had received which was subsequently embedded in my “Karaka Collective Shares” post was incorrect in the fact a resident who is not part of the Collective –  was highlighted as being part of the collective. Subsequently the incorrect information has been spread further in the public domain (the original submissions were already in the public realm prior to BR:AKL posting them) of which is a concern.

I have been informed that the barrister for the Karaka Collective has been alerted to this incorrect information and should be making the proper adjustments to reflect the correct information.

As a result of this I have pulled down the Karaka Collective Shares post, as well pulling down the information links from Scribd. I will repost the information once I have the CORRECT information from the Collective at hand. Thus for now any other posts linking back to the Karaka Collective Shares post will not work for the duration of the suspension.

 

BR:AKL does send apologies to the person affected by the incorrect information embedded in the blog for any inconveniences caused.