Tag: Auckland Transport

AUCKLAND HARBOUR BRIDGE – SKY PATH – (Part Two)

· 9 Comments ·

To Fund and Build a Sky Path – Or Not

 

That is the (Multi) Million Dollar Question

 

And The Debate Continues

 

I have been running commentary of recent on the Auckland Harbour Bridge Sky-Path Project. You can find the commentary thus far as well as supporting links in my “AUCKLAND HARBOUR BRIDGE – SKY PATH” and “TRANSPORT COMMITTEE PROCEEDINGS” post here at BR:AKL.

 

Since those two posts a nice long debate has cropped up on Facebook amongst those that would be in opposition to the Sky-Path proposal as it currently stands. As in my previous commentary the Sky-Path proposal passed through the Council Transport Committee and is now before the Strategy and Finance Committee either next month or in April. From there; Councillors and Council Financial Officers can and will go over this proposal with a very fine tooth comb before the Councillors either “support” Sky-Path or “reject-it” on any one of numerous grounds including deferment (which I my current position).

 

The following paste dump from Facebook will illustrate the oppositional hurdles Sky-Path have to face if they do not want a Rejection-Dead Ducking from the Strategy and Finance Committee:

From Councillor Sharon Stewart (Howick Ward) – oh and heads up it is a long one:

  • Auckland Harbour Bridge cycle pathway design launched – Auckland – AKT

    http://www.aktnz.co.nz

    The Auckland Harbour Bridge cycle pathway design was unveiled this afternoon.
    • Sharon Stewart How are they going to keep the structure clean from sea spray? How often will they need to clean it? (THE GLASS) How much will this cost? How are they going to keep the structure clean from exhaust emissions as the structure will no doubt get very dirty from the bridge being used daily with cars/trucks etc…. ??? These are all questions that need to be asked.
    • Sharon Stewart Who will be responsible for the on-going maintenance and cleaning of the structure inside and out? Will all this come out of RATES? How many CCTV cameras will they need to cover the length of the bridge – in case a problem occurs in the middle – accident or even gang fight?
    • Sharon Stewart IS THIS A Fairytale?
    • Sharon Stewart How much will the CCTV cost including staff? How many staff will have to be on duty? Looking forward to the business plan.
    • Sharon Stewart Just thought of another question – air conditioning – has this been factored in. Cost etc… Remember all the bad air up above exhaust fumes.
    • Ken Shock Here is a question – why do motorists have to pay for roading with fuel taxes and rego fees – but bicycles get a ‘free ride’ ?? Why no rego ## on bicycles so that they can be busted when they break traffic laws – I see them do it frequently. I say user fees are the answer to maint. of bike facilities !
    • Millie Liang Hi Ken and Sharon. Totally agree with everything you both say…To me the Councillors are being played for fools.
      The promoters of this scheme are quoting this expert and that consultant says it viable…”cause it’s commercially viable on paper other wise these experts won’t be consultants for the council for very long. 
      I have evaluated hundreds of business plans, marketing plans, property development forecasts over the years and not one of them have ever stated the project isn’t going to make a fortune..

      People that say just “trust the experts” are simply away with the fairies and need to have a brain scan….

      Question. how are they going to keep walkers and bike riders separated or from being distracted by the view and killing each other ?…… Are under 10yr old kids meant to be kept on a leash ?. Where’s the Councils Q & A link on their web site or are ratepayers meant to be compliant stupid fools also. 

      And like Ken says and I’ve asked elsewhere before..How come motorists have to pay for rego’s warrants and cyclists don’t have to…both use the roads…
    • Sharon Stewart Exactly Millie – Do you not think Cyclists going up and down in two different directions along with walkers is a recipe or accidents? Apparently its 4 m wide for both cyclists and walkers in two directions.
    • Sharon Stewart Have they thought about the cyclists coming off the bridge a peak traffic times – morning/afternoon peak traffic and mignling with the traffic on or at the bridge approaches etc? How will this be managed?
    • Sharon Stewart Parking of cars that want to do the bridge crossing will also be a problem. Will the council have to purchase land for carparks next to the bridge for all these potential users? Would this cause issues with peak traffic all these potential bike users of the bridge at peak times? Anything as Millie Liang has commented on looks good on paper.
    • Sharon Stewart Pleased to see that George Wood has similar concerns along with Nigel Turnbull
      • Sharon Stewart Yes on the Skypath – he seems to be supporting so far the Eden Park recommendations. That surprised a few of us.
      • Millie Liang but I thought George voted it to go to the next stage.. If he’s got concerns why didn’t he simply vote against it until everything was in order… He’s been in this game long enough to know that once an idea gets momentum the promoters get confident and crank up the pr machine and then it’s hard to kill…. Someone needs to check Georges medication.. maybe all the get fit exercise is playing tricks on him and he fancy’s himself riding around town looking like some Tour de France 25yr or thinking he’s Buck Shelford running round Eden Park…or maybe eyeing some seat on some board/committee.
    • Sharon Stewart QUOTE FROM AN EARLIER POST – The proposal for the Auckland Harbour Bridge pathway Project Update —- Its going to Strategy and Finance committee. Lots of questions have been asked to be reported back to the Strategy and Finance committee. The proposal should cover all costings and contingencies before it is given approval from the Auckland Council. Ratepayers should not be exposed to risk. This is such a big issue and should be debated by the full council. The ratepayers have to decide is this a high priorty. I have had calls from Ratepayers from all over Auckland – most have suggested the 2nd crossing could have a walkway and cycleway incorporated. We now have only just a quorum. JUST.
    • Sharon Stewart QUOTE FROM AN EARLIER POST —Sharon Stewart Councillors Quax, Morrison, Wood and Stewart had lots of concerns. As I said before its not all done and dusted.
      Wednesday at 10:01pm Remember the Transport committee is not a committee of all Councillors – going to see what other councillors think about this. Now is the time to discuss and question before – the rubber stamp.
    • Sharon Stewart Question is will this become a huge burden on the Auckland Ratepayers????
      • Millie Liang cause it going to be another white elephant just like that Manukau Central car park building nearly empty all the time with 100’s of lights burning up ratepayers money 24/7, even on weekends when the building is all locked up…. If no body in the council has the common sense to ensure a simple thing like a motion senor in the lighting system,,, then how much collective brain power and common sense do the Councillors have… Councillors need to remember they were elected to run the city and it’d their necks on the chopping block not some highly paid cco exec or manager.
    • Sharon Stewart In the perfect world it would be nice to have everything – unfortunately its not the perfect world.
    • Millie Liang The first thing that Councillors should do is all in their own quite time and alone is sit down with all the information/plans/costings/reports(and none of this commercially sensitive rubbish so information is withheld from them) and write down all the questions they want answered… Then they are all correlated and the promoters/AT (or whoever they are) answer the questions in a Q & A… If Councillors don’t have any idea themselves, I sure consultants/engineers/architects construction companies who never get on the councils preferred contractors/consultants list will gladly pull it apart for free I would guess…. There is no way the consultants/designers/promoters will ever admit to anything but it being a success, therefore go outside the inner circle and get independent assessment.. Like any development proposal it’s all flashy and slick and 1+1 =2 and fools most people, hopefully the Councillors aren’t made to look like idiots…. And I hope once the construction drawings/specifications/contract docs are ready, international fixed price tenders are called…..Then and only then once the tenders come back should the council decide if it’s commercially viable…..

      Better still…why doesn’t all the Councillors just sit on their hands, call international tenders for design/build/operate the skypath….The councils preferred Consultants/AT etc won’t like it but but aren’t the Councillors Inc in the drivers seat and not just mere passengers as to what happens in Auck….. Remember we were told Eden Park wouldn’t cost ratepayers a cent, now look what the councillors have signed us up to…the govt must have thought,,is that how stupid the council and people of Auckland really are
    • Sharon Stewart QUOTE ABOUT — SkyPath’ vote going ahead Wednesday
      By: Laura Heathcote | Latest Auckland News | Monday February 11 2013 12:21
      Complicated politics are expected to characterise the vote on a plan to allow pedestrians and cyclists to cross the Auckland Harbour Bridge.
      An Auckland Council transport committee will decide on Wednesday whether to support SkyPath, a tolled walking and cycling route which would be slung below the bridge.
      Heart of the City’s Alex Swney says his support is shared by cycling and walking advocates as well as the Council’s business faction – which supports the public-private partnership.
      But he acknowledges Auckland Council is trying very hard to keep rates down.
      “Then there’s the complication. There are some that think that walking and cycling should be free so you want to try and second guess these things, you just don’t want to.”
      Cycle Action Network chair Barbara Cuthbert says the council’s being asked to be a minor guarantor, putting forward $3 million towards the project.
      She says a further $29 million is being put up by the NZ Super Fund.
      “This is a gift to the people of Auckland that we know that well over 65 percent of Aucklanders want this facility and this allows them to get it for virtually no investment from the council.”
      Ms Cuthbert says if the vote goes through, it’s hoped SkyPath would be operational by the end of next year.
      Cuthbert says New Zealand Transport Agency is also backing the project, provided it proceeds on the basis of being a tolled facility.
      “This is the final step. The transport agency have been very helpful in helping it get through to here in terms of giving advice and access to the bridge.”
      Photo: Edward Swift
      • Millie Liang HOLD IT A MINUTE..Barbara says “we know that well over 65 percent of Aucklanders want this facility”. 20-30% of auckland are meant to be asian and another 10% maori ….. now tell me how many asians or maori do you see riding round auckland…what’s her 65% based on and how was the survey structured, where/time/day ..was it leading questions….I studied probabilities & statistics at uni and you can get the results you are after quite easy….. How many councillors own a bike and are regular cyclists….then how many will regularly ride over the bridge
    • Sharon Stewart QUOTE FROM THE ABOVE ARTICLE SkyPath vote going ahead Wednesday -Cycle Action Network chair Barbara Cuthbert says the council’s being asked to be a minor guarantor, putting forward $3 million towards the project.
      She says a further $29 million is being put up by the NZ Super Fund.
      • Millie Liang Hold it…. some where I read it was commercially viable and why should ratepayers be landed with having to provide any guarantee…… So it’s $3 million….. those that want it should fund raise or can’t they even do that..go get sponsorship off all the consultants/contractors/bike retailers, travel companies etc etc etc, sell naming rights…how hopeless are they…. everyone got dreams but who’s paying…. To me it’s only going to be of benefit or interest to very few people, trouble is I believe they know how to lobby and work the system and get their demands pandered to, and the majority of Councillors are to scared to stop it in case they loose votes and are booted out in a few months time.
      • Sharon Stewart INTERESTING COMMENT – MILLIE
      • Millie Liang hahaha. just thought,re (Barbara Cuthbert says) I often hear in conversations/negotiations words along the lines of; she says / he says are all waffle words and simply verbal diarrhea…We get every everything in writing then we look at it and if it doesn’t stack up we move on…… Just ask Barbara to produce the MOU/Heads of Agreement or whatever doc she got from NZ Super Fund and if she got nothing in writing I would presume it just verbal diarrhea……
        Remember in this game it is more smoke and mirrors to get anything off the ground and reality is never the same… If the promoters/consultants etc etc don’t hype it and float the kite high it won’t have the Wow factor and people tire and move on….Councillors need to realize they were elected to collectively run the city in prudent manner and not like some division of WINZ.
      • Sharon Stewart Millie – make sure you read the Bernad Orsman and Brian Rudman articles in the New Zealand Herald today. On the Eden Park issue.
      • Millie Liang Ok will do… I hope I’m wrong but if they both thinking straight they will say the Councillors were conned and played big time by McCully or whoever the minister is.
    • Sharon Stewart I wouldn’t have thought that the NZ Super Fund would be supporting something like this?? Like your comments. NZ Superannuation Fund????
    • Sharon Stewart Lots of SPINNING – going on with the bikes
    • Millie Liang Another way to look at it….. The Councillors Inc need to imagine they are the financiers for this development and it is their own money they putting on the line… They need to act like astute and prudent professionals and ask the hard questions/seek independent expert opinion…

      Has the Council sought opinions from independent experts around the world as to the cost/commercial viability of it and if so where’s the reports. ?…. Where’s the report form the clip-on builders as to the pro’s-cons of doing it…. what’s the warranty on the existing structure, because if they going to bolt / weld onto the existing clip on that causes more problems that any of the maintenance workers will tell you…… actually what should happen is councils should go work as a maintenance worker and see just how bad it is…like the tv program where switched on bosses get hired as the new guy on the ground so they can see what is really going on in his company..
    • Sharon Stewart Did you read the above information quote from Barbara Cuthbert who said Council is being asked to be a minor guarantor putting forward $3 million towards the project. She said a further $29 million is being put in by the NZ Super Fund. I wonder what all the TAXPAYERS and the baby boomers will think about this. From my experience on being on council – projects like this always blow out and guess who picks up the mess. That’s right the RATEPAYER OR THE TAXPAYERS. Central Government keeps passing the baby over to the Local Government and its just getting out of control. That’s my opinion anyway.
    • Sharon Stewart Wonder what people like Stan Blanche and David Thornton thinks about all this?
    • Millie Liang You spot on Sharon. I commented re Barbara under your “INTERESTING COMMENT – MILLIE”
    • Millie Liang  I couldn’t believe the councillors took the hook line sinker over Mt Eden…what were they thinking… To me it wasn’t about the collective good for auckland but about getting themselves onto these paying bds and playing you scratch my back and I will scratch yours. Just my thoughts got no proof but I know how the game is played. Wonder what the voting would have been if no councillors were allowed to be appointed to any bd /committee.
    • Millie Liang One last thing before I need to concentrate on work.George, Cameron,Sharon,Dick, Ben, Lesley has any one calculated the wind and current movement on the bridge and how that will affect useage and what happens if people panic.
      • Lesley Opie Wind – that is something that will affect this structure. We live in direct line of the harbour bridge and when the strong south westerly winds come – it is awful – you can’t go outside. Imagine it is far worse actually on the harbour bridge. Think this walkway/cycleway is going to be a bit of a white elephant. With all the public transport proposed for the future how many will actually use it?
      • Sharon Stewart Lesley the public – need to understand that if we don’t get all the answers to the questions councillors may support this and this could end up being a huge anchor around us for ever. Hope you read all the post between Millie and I – probably best to copy and past – make sure you read all the See mores – this is just CRAZY. Imagine 5000 bike all 2 m long going one way across the bridge. Imagine the problem it will cause at the end of the bridge especially in peak traffic. Imagine even over the weekend people from the North Shore side wanting to ride across hundreds or thousands or maybe not many at all. If we got the numbers the SKYPATH are talking about the problems it will cause around Mission Bay – the bay’s etc… I don’t really think anyone has really thought this through. Imagine the window cleaning from inside and outside from all the sea spray. Imagine what would happen if 50 tourist end up on the bridge walking and site seeing and cyclist coming from both directions – FAST – It’s only 4 m wide for both cyclists and walkers in both directions. They are even suggesting having a cafe. What about air conditioning. They will need that because they can’t use the air from above because of he exhaust emissions unless they want to stop cars/trucks/buses etc… using the Auckland Harbour bridge the life line for those that live on the Shore to get to the other side. Cost of the CCTV cameras the length of the bridge in case of emergency. Accident or a gang fight. Once again no business plan. JUST A LOT OF SPIN.
      • Lesley Opie Where I live a wide cycle/walk bridge is being built to replace the narrow Northboro Pipe bridge (costing well over a million dollars – building passing bays on the bridge would have been much cheaper and adequate). When this bridge is wide the serious cyclists are going to speed over the bridge – they do it now when no one else is on the bridge. Health and safety issues have already arisen with the Northboro cycleway/pathway with pedestrians and cyclists – even though there are signs that say “Share with Care”. Cyclists seem to think they have the right of way over pedestrians (children, old people, mothers walking babies in buggys, people walking their dogs). Those who are proposing this Skypath don’t care about the effect on the surrounding environment so long as they can get their cycle fix. The bottom line is speeding cyclists and pedestrians sharing the same exit and entrance path and shared cycle/pedestrians paths, is not a good mix. Imagine a child walking with mum and dad suddenly decides to run ahead or sideways – could be quite nasty. Seems that those in charge of building the shared cycle/path ways don’t see the health and safety issue at all. They just think that everyone will share with care.
    • Sharon Stewart If you look at the plans Millie it will be glassed in. If it was open aired people would be blown off the bridge. Lot’s of Glass that would need to be constantly kept clean at I would suggest a huge cost. The maintenance of this under – grip on as they call it will be a constant drain on eventually the Ratepayers when the baby is passed on – as it happens all the time. RATEPAYERS ARE JUST AN EASY TOUCH. JUST KEEP PUTTING THE RATES UP FOR ALL THESE COSTLY DREAMS.
    • Sharon Stewart Read the 25 comments – above and take it all in. Looking forward to your comments. Some of those that are involved in promoting this SKYPATH are keeping to themselves today. SO FAR.
    • Millie Liang That’s why the mayor wants to ram another 1-1.5 million into the city…..It’s got nothing to do with the quality of life everyone enjoys..its all about the money… The average hard working people in the wider Auckland community think they can’t make a difference and that’s why there is such a poor voter turnout for elections… And when they go broke or simply sell up and move out they keep quite as they think they are failures…Like rats on a wheel, never mind how fast and clever you are you will get thrown off eventually… look at what they tell old people who have lived in their homes for 40-50yrs and can’t afford the continual increases in rates and cost of living…”well maybe you should consider selling up and moving somewhere where you can afford”..
      If this madness isn’t stopped, properties will be sold up, developers build 30-80sqm high rise apartments and the quality of life goes out the window and we book 6mths in advance to go to Long bay beach.
    • Sharon Stewart I hope the local Howick and Pakuranga times my local community paper picks up on this. As its a problem for all communities not just the Northshore and the CBD. Unless the public are aware of what is truly really going on – THINGS HAPPEN. Its called missing the boat.
      • Sharon Stewart Reay Neben, Nick Neben make sure you read all of these posts on the Skypath.
    • Millie Liang Re you comment Sharon ” Some of those that are involved in promoting this SKYPATH are keeping to themselves today. SO FAR.”…. old trick  they will keep quite pretending they aren’t aware, but if they any good they will be planning and plotting their next move…. Most probably studying up on how Sun Tsux would play his next card… If the councillors stand united, use common sense for once they will be able to withstand the next move of the promoters, but if councillors are picked of one by one, then it’s game all over.
    • Sharon Stewart Correct Millie its like a game.
    • Ben Ross Well we know what you must do Sharon when it hits Strat and Finance either next month or in April. Reject the proposal outright or defer it to the 2015-2025 Long Term Plan giving Skypath two more years in getting their figures together
    • Millie Liang Ben… To me it should have never got this far in the first place if astute people likeGeorge are still waiting for answers and he’s going to go and raise his concerns with the ceo . It’s like the Councillors were sleeping on the job… Imagine you going to the council for a resource consent with half of it missing or going to the bank for a loan with half your application not filled out ?
    • George Wood You are so right about the half baked application Millie.
    • Ben Ross Well then if that is the case Millie, the Skypath people are going to find a fast rejection from Strat and Finance just as AT did rather quickly with trying to get a half baked application for money reallocation in regards to the Manukau North Link duplication – although AT are going to be stupid enough to try again next month (insert Tui Ad here if I get a speaking slot) 

      It belongs in Strat and Finance no matter where they are with the progress for two reasons:
      1) To get the financial officers to run over this with a red pen and ruler
      2) So Strat and Finance can pass the rejecting resolution which is binding and tell Skypath one of several things: it will be deferred in any solid decision until your T’s are crossed and I’s are dotted, it will be rejected outright regardless until we get a new council at the end of the year, it will be rejected and sent back to AT (please don’t do that one) for more reports

      That proposal got stuck in the Transport Committee for over two hours leaving me fuming on the time wasting exercise that was when Skypath did not belong there at that point in time.

      Least it is now in Strat and Finance where the answer is simple: Half bake it like AT did last week with Manukau and it is rejected – pure and simple. Just don’t take two and a half hours to reach that conclusion please
    • Stephen Maire Ben, you continue to impress me. Keep it up.
      • Ben Ross Thanks for that  – incoming post in a few hours on this

 

Phew that took a moment to get it into the blog and format it back out – although I am not going back over the Facebook comments to correct spelling or gramma either 😛

But you can see where the debate amongst the opposition to Sky-Path is. Again my current line is this:

Well then if that is the case Millie, the Skypath people are going to find a fast rejection from Strat and Finance just as AT did rather quickly with trying to get a half baked application for money reallocation in regards to the Manukau North Link duplication – although AT are going to be stupid enough to try again next month (insert Tui Ad here if I get a speaking slot) 

It belongs in Strat and Finance no matter where they are with the progress for two reasons:
1) To get the financial officers to run over this with a red pen and ruler
2) So Strat and Finance can pass the rejecting resolution which is binding and tell Skypath one of several things: it will be deferred in any solid decision until your T’s are crossed and I’s are dotted, it will be rejected outright regardless until we get a new council at the end of the year, it will be rejected and sent back to AT (please don’t do that one) for more reports

That proposal got stuck in the Transport Committee for over two hours leaving me fuming on the time wasting exercise that was when Skypath did not belong there at that point in time.

Least it is now in Strat and Finance where the answer is simple: Half bake it like AT did last week with Manukau and it is rejected – pure and simple. Just don’t take two and a half hours to reach that conclusion please
With my official line being: REJECT THE SKY-PATH PROPOSAL AT THE STRATEGY AND FINANCE COMMITTEE ON THE PROVISION THAT IT (THE PROJECT) IS BEING DEFERRED TWO YEARS UNTIL THE 2015-2025 LONG TERM PLAN IS OPERATIONAL. IN THAT DEFERMENT, THE SKY-PATH PROJECT SPONSORS HAVE THOSE TWO YEARS TO MAKE SURE THAT ALL THEIR I’S ARE DOTTED AND T’S ARE CROSSED IN THE FULL BUSINESS AND ENGINEERING CASES BY THE TIME THE PROJECT COMES UP AGAIN ON THE 2015-2025 LONG TERM PLAN (CONSIDERATIONS).

No doubt this debate will continue – hopefully with the Sky-Path proponents having something to say in reply to the questions that were asked by those above – sooner rather than later.

 

BR:AKL will keep tabs on the Sky-Path development as it reaches the Strategy and Finance Committee  and whether the project will pass or rejected by Council as a whole!

 

Transport Committee Proceedings

·

Resolutions and Drawn Out Debate

 

Only to Send Two Matters To:

 

Another Committee

 

From 2pm until around just after 5pm I was at and observing the Auckland Council Transport Committee which met today. The public gallery was full for the most part for about two-thirds of the meeting – which is ironic as two-thirds of the meeting were tied up solely on the Auckland Sky Path project which I mentioned in my “AUCKLAND HARBOUR BRIDGE – SKY PATH” post this morning.

 

For two and a half hours presentations by the public, Local Boards and various associations; as well as constant debate on the merits and demerits of the AHB Sky-Path between Committee members occurred which meant two things to me:

  1. A numb-bloody backside for listening to all of this
  2. The fact I had a numb backside was made worse by Committee members being extremely inefficient in their debate today on the Sky Path as pretty much 99% of their questions and concerns belonged to the Strategy and Finance Committee (which the Sky Path proposal and recommendations finally got kicked to after that 2:30 hours) rather than the Transport Committee

 

Again you can get the details and information thus far on and from Page Nine of the February 2013 Transport Committee Agenda by clicking on the respective blue link.

However the resolutions in the Transport Committee passed and the matter is now finally off to the Strategy and Finance Committee where the entire AHB Sky-Path Proposal can be fleshed out and either one of these results will happen with the :

  • Rejected outright – project basically dead in the water until after the Local Government Elections in September/October this year
  • Rejected and sent back to Auckland Transport and the project people for more information
  • Rejected but deferred until the 2015-2025 Long Term Plan is operational (this is owing to that there is no budget line for the Sky Path project in the current 2012-2022 LTP)
  • Accepted as is and away we go subject most likely to Annual Plan considerations

 

From the resolutions passed on to me this evening I am going to take a punt that one or both of these is going to happen with the AHB Sky-Path:

  • Rejected and sent back to Auckland Transport and the project people for more information
  • Rejected but deferred until the 2015-2025 Long Term Plan is operational (this is owing to that there is no budget line for the Sky Path project in the current 2012-2022 LTP)

 

These were the resolutions passed this afternoon – please note the following first:

The reports contained within this agenda are for consideration and should not be constructed as Council Policy unless and until adopted

 

The resolutions

Secretarial Note: The motion was taken part by part. 

Resolution number TRAN/2013/9 
MOVED by Cr M Lee, seconded Cr CE Fletcher:

That the Transport Committee:

  1. a) Receives this report on the Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway (‘SkyPath’)Project Update. CARRIED
  2. That the Transport Committee notes the project sits within the LTP as an unfunded item. CARRIED
  3. Supports in principle the provision of a shared walk and cycle way across the Harbour Bridge rather than wait for provision once an Additional Waitemata Harbour crossing is in place subject to financial feasibility analysis. CARRIED
  4. d) Acknowledges the significant transport benefits (as well as recreational and tourism benefits) the Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway would bring to the Auckland region in terms of completing a missing link in the Auckland Cycle Network and walking network, which would be further enhanced by the completion of the Northern Linkage/Shoal Bay. CARRIED
  5. e) Acknowledges the timing of the Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway, in the short term, would take advantage of Waterfront Auckland’s planned waterfront cycleway and walkway from Westhaven Marina to Daldy Street, and planned improvements by Auckland Transport to the local streets in Northcote as part of its Safe Schools Programme. CARRIED
  6. f) Requests the New Zealand Transport Agency and Auckland Transport to consider the Shoal Bay proposal as part of the investigation of the Northern Link between Northcote and Akoranga to provide improved walking and cycling connections to the northern end of the proposed Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway. CARRIED
  7. g) Recommends that any construction and operation of the Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway facility should be subject to an open and competitive price process. CARRIED
  8. h) Recommends that a report should be prepared with further information for the Strategy and Finance Committee to consider funding sources and the Council’s contributions (in the form of part underwrite and assumption of obligations at the end of the public private partnership period) to the Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway. This further information would include:
    • – Procurement arrangements: fully contested or the proposed negotiated public private partnership;
    • – Detailed risk assessment;
    • – Comparison of a public private partnership arrangement with traditional procurement process or other processes to determine best value for money; and
    • – Assessment of the project against the Council’s Significance and Public Private Partnership Policies;

CARRIED
Cr Hartley left the meeting at 3.30pm. 


Resolution number TRAN/2013/10

MOVED by Cr C Casey, seconded Cr W Walker:

  1. i) continue to investigate how some or all users can have free access. CARRIED

Resolution number TRAN/2013/11 
MOVED by Cr GS Wood, seconded Cr W Walker: 
That the Health and Safety aspect of the project be reported upon. CARRIED

 

Not all points passed with a unanimous vote

 

So off to the Strategy and Finance Committee the Auckland Harbour Bridge Sky Path goes – just a bugger and a numb backside later it took 2:30 hours to get it to that committee.

Oh and One News were covering the beginning of the proceedings today with an article on the Sky-Path on their website.

 

Next post: Developments on the Manukau Duplicate North Link :-\

I Love Committees

·

Off to the Transport Committee

 

(Again)

 

I must be a sucker for punishment rocking up to Committees regularly – especially Government ones. However need to keep the networks going, keep an eye on proceedings, and undertake some of that “dreaded” lobbying to advance projects for the benefit of others (Manukau South Link, or AT-HOP fares anyone?).

 

Next Wednesday (13 February) at 2pm (heck that is a late one) is the first Auckland Council Transport Committee meeting which is chaired by Councillor Mike Lee. You can see the agenda (part one and two) by clicking on the links in blue below:

 

 

I am heading to the Transport Committee meeting on Wednesday for various reasons – they include:

  • Observing proceedings on the following:
    • The latest public transport patronage statistics for November 2012 where rail patronage slipped again for the fourth straight month (since August 2012) with levels now at the equivalent to August 2011 levels. Rail has slipped on by 17.2% for in comparison to November 2011 or 3.1% for the Year To Date that started in July 2012.
    • Comment on AT-HOP and its progression thus far
    • Reaction to Auckland Transport‘s rejection by the powerful Strategy and Finance Committee for funding reallocation to build the duplicate Manukau North Link. At the same time with me making enough noise as it is I might keep an ear to the ground for any noised on the South Link too
    • Any developments on the City Rail Link
    • Any developments on Pukekohe Electrification
  • Continued Lobbying of the Manukau South Link and possibly start lobbying for the Glenora Road Station down in Takanini (hey I am being honest and transparent on my actions in lobbying here folks – part of What I Believe In for a Better Auckland)
  • Reaction on the Mainzeal collapse that has stalled work on the MIT building over the Manukau Station. As the MIT works also included a bus interchange and ticket office, that work has stalled as well and could do for a while putting a nasty spanner in things. What I want to know does Council have a back-up plan to get things moving quickly!

 

Any reaction to the Mainzeal collapse would be interesting as Council has gone more dead silent than a Soviet Missile Submarine off the American Atlantic Coast… This is especially as a public transport project that the Regional Public Transport Plan depends on (wrongly as it stands (another post – another day)) – the Manukau Interchange has stalled entirely.

 

 

Will keep you posted from the events of the Transport Committee meeting next Wednesday.

 

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!