Are You Ready to AT-HOP? Are we ready to AT-HOP on Auckland’s Metro Rail Network? October 28 is when it goes live. The latest plus some more … Continue reading AT-HOP Updated CTD
Are You Ready to AT-HOP? Are we ready to AT-HOP on Auckland’s Metro Rail Network? October 28 is when it goes live. The latest plus some more … Continue reading AT-HOP Updated CTD
Auckland Transport ambassadors were sighted at Britomart this evening handing out the new rail timetables that become effective October 15.
That means October 15, all the Auckland metro rail lines will be operating under a new timetable Monday to Friday (weekend timetable remains unchanged).
Here is the fronts and back of the new timetables being handed out:
Online versions can be found at: http://www.maxx.co.nz/timetables.aspx
As mentioned in the ALL THINGS PUBLIC TRANSPORT, Auckland Transport has released the Regional Public Transport Plan for public submissions. I have read the 138 pages of the RPTP document and have begun writing my submission to the plan. My submission will be covering five main points on the RPTP which will be further reinforced in the subsequent hearings panel afterwards – the points being:
I will endeavour to keep a running commentary as I write my submission and get it in by the deadline of Monday 4th November 2012. But in the mean time I will again show my (counter) proposal for zone based fares including this time MAPS and Graphics on my counter proposed zones. Also note that this RPTP submission will form the continuation of my comprehensive policy proposal package for my election campaign next year to the Papakura Local Board (in the Local Government 2013 elections).
These zones are like a target with a cross in the middle extending through the zones. From the very south to the very north of the zoned areas would mean travelling through seven zones one way. Four zones to get half way the journey and another four zones as you move through the centre to the other end of the city.
I also propose a maximum fare cap of $15 per day for all travel on the integrated public transport system. However you would still be able to by a full day pass for unlimited travel on all modes across all zones from 9am Weekdays and all day weekends and public holidays for a discounted cap price of $13 if you know you are going to be travelling around all day.
The trusty Family Pass should also be made available at the same time as a full day pass for the flat fee of $25. Super Gold holders ride free per usual at their dedicated times.
Okay so we have the zones set (maps further down) and the fares organised for cash-single trips (no using an AT-HOP card), the day and family passes, Super Gold Holders and the maximum fare cap for any one day’s travel.
Those who would use an AT-HOP card would be our current more frequent travellers who use the exiting ten-trip passes (being phased out) or monthly passes. Using an AT-HOP card should mean you get a discount when paying your fare compared to feeding money down a ticket machine or to the ticket office. Thus I propose the AT-HOP cards have a flat 20% discount regardless of child, adult or tertiary student on the cash fare otherwise charged for your journey. As for Monthly passes there would be four sets of “monthlies” available with prices reflecting discounts accordingly. The same conditions on your 31 days of use from the first day “used” with the existing monthly paper monthlies will transfer over to the AT-HOP Card loaded with Monthly profiles.
The Four Monthly Passes and fares (child in brackets)
The discount rate for adults with Monthly Passes is at minimum 25% compared to single-cash fare with child passes higher (there are no Tertiary discounts).
As for bikes – free travel but as per usual to on-board staff discretion depending on train loadings.
Click for enlarged pictures
Balance, simplicity, fairness and minimisation of fare evasion was the methodology behind the zone fares, prices and boundaries stated above. Further refinement will be done as I continue the submission but constructive feedback in the comments department down below is welcome as always.
This submission is part of my “What Do I Stand For and Believe In – For a Better Auckland” fundamentals; the backbone in the formation of my comprehensive policy proposal package for my election campaign next year to the Papakura Local Board (in the Local Government 2013 elections). :
Part Three of the Better Auckland fundamentals: An Integrated Approach to Transport: None of this “all for one but not the other approach” we get from both roading and Green lobbyists. Road and Mass Transit both have their places here in Auckland – albeit more balanced like the Generation Zero 50:50 campaign. This integrated approach also applies to many other things out there – I call it The Best of Both Worlds.
Shining The Light –
To a Better Auckland
Auckland 2013: YOUR CITY – YOUR CALL
Not so sure what to think here but it would seem NZ Bus Drivers have rejected their latest pay offer from NZ Bus who run Auckland’s Metrolink, Waka Pacific, Go West, North Star and Link (City, Inner and Outer) bus fleet.
This is from my inbox this morning (Saturday):
Results of Auckland bus drivers ballot
Bus drivers have voted against a revised proposal from NZ Bus for their collective employment agreement.
The vote was 51% against ratifying the proposed settlement, and 49% in favour.
Drivers voted by secret ballot at their different bus depots over the past week and a Company lawyer was present to supervise the counting of the vote.
Spokesperson for the bus unions, Karl Andersen, said that the voter turnout was very good. There were very few union members that didn’t vote.
“After careful consideration of the offer, drivers are still of the view that they don’t earn enough to provide for themselves and their families,” he said.
Karl Andersen said despite some movement from NZ Bus, both the amount offered by the company, and a delayed implementation of pay increases, was still a core issue for drivers.
The unions are considering their options at the moment and will make some decisions about next steps early next week, he said.
On Monday we will probably hear what is next in store for NZ Bus, its union workers, and bus commuters. Hopefully no more strikes…
Some good news after the Bums Rush Auckland Council gave yesterday with its continuing crap handling of our finances. Auckland Transport had released the much vaunted Regional Public Transport Plan (RPTP) for viewing AND submissions. You can check the RPTP at the AT website HERE (which includes links to the submission form) or read the embed at the bottom of this post.
I am busy reading through the 138 page document but from what I have seen so far I can personally say that if we follow through with this, then Auckland as another blogger said is on the cusp of a (Public) Transport Revolution. Yes I will be forming an extensive submission on this RPTP, especially around the “zones,” fares and most likely feeder bus set ups. And yes I will trundle along to a hearing in front of Auckland Transport if the CCO gives enough heads up for me to get a period of time off work.
As I said earlier, I am busy reading through the document, so no extensive commentary just yet. But from glances at the website and summary documents I can safely say (for now) that the RPTP will meet the number three fundamental in my “What I Stand For – For Auckland” page:
- An Integrated Approach to Transport: None of this “all for one but not the other approach” we get from both roading and Green lobbyists. Road and Mass Transit both have their places here in Auckland – albeit more balanced like the Generation Zero 50:50 campaign This integrated approach also applies to many other things out there – I call it The Best of Both Worlds.
While I begin writing the submission to the RPTP, I’ll show an example of what will be in my submission – in this case Zonal Fare:
From my ZONAL FARES post written last month:
Ben’s Proposals for Zone Based Fares
Four Zones (I will draw a map later) with the Central Post Office (so Britomart Transport Centre) as the central focus point in which the zones are calculated:
- City Zone (Orakei, Newmarket and Grafton Trains Stations, plus the city side of the Harbour Bridge andPonsonby Road form that boundary)
- Inner Zone (Basically marked by the traditional Otahuhu and New Lynn fare boundaries, and Smales Farm on the North Shore)
- Outer Zone (Manurewa to the south, Westgate and Swanson to the West and Albany to the north)
- Regional Zone (all areas beyond the outer zone)
These zones are like a target with a cross in the middle extending through the zones. From the very south to the very north of the zoned areas would mean travelling through eight zones one way. Four zones to get half way the journey and another four zones as you move through the centre to the other end of the city.
The fares for moving within or between the four zones (single trip – cash fare one way – flat fee regardless or adult or child)
- Within a single Zone: $2
- Between two Zones: $3
- Between three Zones:$5
- Between four Zones: $7
- Five or more Zones: four zone fare plus the price of the “extra zones” travelled to the daily fare cap of $15 (so travelling six zones would equal $7 + $3 = $10 one way)
I also propose a maximum fare cap of $15 per day for all travel on the integrated public transport system. However you would still be able to by a full day pass for unlimited travel on all modes across all zones from 9am Weekdays and all day weekends and public holidays for a discounted cap price of $13 if you know you are going to be travelling around all day.
The trusty Family Pass should also be made available at the same time as a full day pass for the flat fee of $25. Super Gold holders ride free per usual at their dedicated times.
Okay so we have the zones set (map coming later in an update) and the fares organised for cash-single trips (no using an AT-HOP card), the day and family passes, Super Gold Holders and the maximum fare cap for any one day’s travel.
Now to using an AT-HOP card in place of cash.
Those who would use an AT-HOP card would be our current more frequent travellers who use the exiting ten-trip passes (being phased out) or monthly passes. Using an AT-HOP card should mean you get a discount when paying your fare compared to feeding money down a ticket machine or to the ticket office. Thus I propose the AT-HOP cards have a flat 20% discount regardless of child, adult or tertiary student on the cash fare otherwise charged for your journey. As for Monthly passes there would be four sets of “monthlies” available with prices reflecting discounts accordingly. The same conditions on your 31 days of use from the first day “used” with the existing monthly paper monthlies will transfer over to the AT-HOP Card loaded with Monthly profiles.
The Four Monthly Passes and fares (child in brackets)
- 1-Z – For travelling within one zone: $60 ($50)
- 2-Z – For travelling between two zones: $90 ($75)
- 3-Z – For travelling between three zones: $ $150 ($110)
- A-Z – Ultimate pass – travelling between four or more zones: $210 ($150)
The discount rate for adults with Monthly Passes is at minimum 25% compared to single-cash fare with child passes higher (there are no Tertiary discounts).
As for bikes – free travel but as per usual to on-board staff discretion depending on train loadings.
I still have a lot of work to do on these but it is a start and would be a good time to get the initial dialogue going to refine this idea ready for a submission to Auckland Transport in due time.
Well that due time is here and it is time to write that submission.
The submission will also become another piece of my “policy platform” when I contend for Papakura Local Board in next year’s Local Government Elections.
Shining The Light –
To a Better Auckland
Auckland 2013: YOUR CITY – YOUR CALL
So it seems we (the ratepayer) got the absolute Bums Rush for due process and all things fiscal responsibility when it came to this White Water Rafting proposal for Manukau.
From The NZH:
Water facility clears first rapid
5:30 AM Friday Oct 5, 2012
Rafting and kayaking venue approved, but the vote leaves some councillors fuming
A controversial $30 million white-water-rafting and kayaking facility in Manukau is back on the drawing board after coming through the political rapids at Auckland Council.
After a lengthy and testy debate yesterday, the council voted 11-9 to allow the Counties Manukau Pacific Trust to build the facility at the TelstraClear Pacific Events Centre, subject to public consultation.
The trust will receive $20 million from the sale of a piece of adjacent council-owned land and promised to raise the remaining $10 million.
Trust chairman and business leader Sir Noel Robinson gave a guarantee to councillors that the project would not require any ongoing funding from ratepayers.
Sir Noel said the trust was proud of what it had achieved for the community and the youth of South Auckland with the Pacific Events Centre and wanted to complete the next stage, the white-water facility.
The commercial venture, with an entry fee of $35 for kayaking and $55 for rafting, is budgeted to run profitably, which will enable the trust to subsidise 15,000 local schoolchildren annually.
You can read the rest of the article over at the NZH site.
The feeling that I am seeing coming through right across the spectrum from main stream media to social media outlets is one of pure and utter condemnation and disgust against the 11 idiots who voted for this proposal behind the Telstra Pacific Events Centre in Manukau.
This remark from Manurewa Local Board Chair Angela Dalton surmises the current feeling out there in Auckland:
Angela Dalton shared a link.
This morning I spoke alongside colleagues from 6 other Boards at the Auckland Council Strategy and Finance meeting. We told the Councillors we are struggling with the money we have been given in our budgets. To find another 3% savings they
must first look to the regional budgets and projects such as the Waterfront and CDB. They should also look to the CCO’s before coming to the nickel and dime budgets that the Local Boards have to operate on. Following that I stayed to listen to a four hour debate on why we should or shouldn’t sell ratepayers land in my ward to fund the construction of a White Water Rafting Project that is touted to deliver many of the outcomes of the Southern Initiative. In a deja vu vote of 11-9 the Manurewa Local Boards wishes were once again discarded, 11 votes that included the 2 Maori Statutory Board is the same scenario that saw us have 1.75 million dollars stripped from our budgets a few months ago. I can tell you most assuredly that a trip down a white water rafting shute is not going to turnaround the lives of young people in Manurewa. I thank the Councillors who supported Manurewa in the debate, Cameron Brewer, Calum Penrose, Dick Quax,Christine Fletcher, George Wood, Sharon Stewart. I hearBernard Orsman who was at the debate today will have a piece in the Herald tomorrow about the Trust who are leading this project. Today was jacked up politics once again marginalsing Local Boards advocacy on behalf of their communities.
And this from Orakei Ward Councillor Cameron Brewer:
The most outrageous decision in the two years of this council’s existence was made today. Nine councillors agreed to sell council land and for the proceeds (worth $20 – $30m) to go towards a whitewater rafting facility in the paddock between Telstra Clear Pacific Events Centre in Manukau and the southern motorway, subject to public consultation. Another nine of us councillors were against this controversial project which was rejected by the Manukau City Council 10 votes to 3 back in 2010. However this time the proponents secured the support of two non-elected Independent Maori Statutory Board members so it just got through 11/9. This is a project that’s been 10 years in the making but leaped frogged the exhaustive Long Term Plan consultation and budget processes, which was only signed off on 28 June! Disgusting when you also consider the growing debt mountain, the core council service and local board cuts, and the rates increases. This money needed to be spent much much more wisely
With this final remark from me personally:
Ben Ross I suppose I raise this challenge here as well for those who do care genuinely for Auckland:
Okay so Council led by our now wayward Mayor has failed beyond doubt with this White Watering Rafting project. So where is our Alternative Mayor and Council (candidates) willing and ready to stand now against this failure and say to Auckland,”We stand for Shining the Light for a Better Auckland” come 2013. 2013 Shining the Light for a Better Auckland.
I said Council failed as the motion got passed 11-9, meaning that motion now constitutes going into Council policy for which all of Auckland feels the effects of.
I looked at my What Do I Stand For and Believe In – For a Better Auckland page which is located one over here at BR:AKL and looked at which of the eight fundamentals which have been “breached” by yesterdays decision at Council. Apart from numbers two and eight (as urban planning and transport were not in effect here per-se) the Council basically breached the rest of the fundamentals ESPECIALLY numbers six and seven:
So because six of the fundamentals were breached and especially two of the “heavies” that I believe in were totally disregarded by nine Councillors and those two useless Independent Maori Statutory Board Members who voted for the proposal, I am in total opposition to them with me showing no confidence in them what so ever!
The question is then ‘now what?’
Well I am running for Local Board in Papakura next year in hoping to do my part in restoring sense and responsibility back into our civic institutions (for a better Papakura and Auckland), but for the rest it is a case of what I said above: “So where is our Alternative Mayor and Council (candidates) willing and ready to stand now against this failure and say to Auckland,”We stand for Shining the Light for a Better Auckland” come 2013. 2013 Shining the Light for a Better Auckland.”
As what I stand for – in Shining the Light for a Better Auckland; you can check my fundamental principles below:
More Literature on AT-HOP I saw this being distributed around rail stations this morning on my trip into the city – the latest on AT-HOP and impending ticket regime … Continue reading AT-HOP Update
I have noticed one heck of flare up over the Hauraki Gulf, The Hauraki Gulf Forum and the attempt to set up a bureaucratic nightmare in regards to implementation of The Hauraki Gulf Marine Spatial Plan.
This flare up is what is inspiring me to compose my technical first speech of my campaign in the Local Government Elections next year as I contest for a seat on the Papakura Local Board.
I will continue to keep an eye on the Hauraki Gulf developments and possibly follow-up with some commentary this weekend.
But it seems Auckland ratepayers are being taken for a ride by those who voted AGAINST Councillor Mike Lee’s amendment yesterday…
I finally managed to squeeze some time in my hectic work schedule to trundle along to a Auckland Council committee meeting today. And today it was the Transport Committee chaired by Councillor Mike Lee that I was able to rock up to and sit quietly down the back and observe around about two-thirds of the proceedings before I wanted lunch and carry on with other things.
I also saw for the first time although I did not introduce myself (bit shameful on me) to them were; MP Julie-Ann Genter and Principle Transport Planner Joshua Arbury. Both were due to give their respective reports or presentations in front of the Transport Committee today.
You can see the agenda (the hard copy was thicker than a piece of 4 by 2) in the embeds below. But from observations today out of that Transport Committee; the bulk of the resolutions were: “To Hold another meeting to discuss what was in this meeting which was about the previous three meetings WHICH was about the meeting last year.”
I say we are getting progress somewhere if today’s resolutions were anything to go by…
One thing that I will single out though was the immature behaviour of Councillors Quax and Morrison against Julie-Ann Genter and her first class presentation (which reminds me to email her to get a copy of that presentation). Councillor Quax raised a point of order as Ms Genter was explaining a finer point in her section of the presentation about abolishing ‘minimum parking requirements for a development’ due to “time.” While the Chair might of not been keeping time I certainly was and 10 mins was not up to the point anyone that passed a motion for extension of time (which Cllr Dr Cathy Casey did raise in the end) I would have been grateful so I could hear Ms Genter finish her presentation fully. What Councillor Quax was doing was trying to “stomp” on Ms Genter’s presentation as it would have been a direct affront to his flawed and dead ideology which Auckland is trying to shake the legacy from off.
I for one Councillor Quax do not support Minimum Parking Requirements and made that extremely clear in my submission to the Auckland Plan, and will make it even more extremely clear in my submission to the Unitary Plan.
As for Councillor Morrison and asking Ms Genter had she read the Auckland Plan. That to me was implying that the MP had no idea what she was talking about in her presentation when speaking on land and transport planning. Most likely also Councillor Morrison was also implying that he supported the extremely flawed ideology on having Minimum Parking Requirements. I’ll tell you want Councillor, I would be falling head over heels to get Ms Genter into a working party on the unitary plan as some of her ideas were pretty damn solid and much better than what I am seeing coming out of Unitary Plan discussions at the moment.
So to both Councillors – SHAME ON YOU! Then again both of you I would oppose and are in opposition to what you represent any how…
And on that note, I wonder if I rock up to the Governing Body meeting coming up – should be a lively debate in that meeting.
Oh and good to see my local Councillor Calum Penrose also participating in the Transport Committee today 😀
[update from Admin: Embeds now working]
After yesterday’s initial post on Quay Street Nuts, I had a few discussions with others as well as a general head scratching session last night on the Quay Street issue. Basically I came to the same conclusion as I did yesterday in which I said:
So from what I can gather unless my English and interpreting documents some what out of whack, these incoming changes have been signalled well in advanced in three sets of plans (The Auckland Plank, The City Centre Master Plan, and The Long Term Plan 2012-2022). Whether I agree with the changes or not is a different story although it can be seen above in my comments to the Facebook thread.
In short I have no issue with the Quay Street works, but as I said:
“I think the problem is that this part of Quay Street flipping over to a boulevard is somewhat too soon without actual alternative in place. Stanley Street and State Highway 16 is not somewhat of an alternative heading from the east seeming our engineers can not phase traffic lights for peanuts”
Outside of that issue, I am not having major issues here with Quay Street (west) although I am looking at alternatives here (not whole scale Quay Street west – just some minor tinkering to smooth the works transition). As for Quay Street east, I already drew up a plan for that and submitted on it. However works in that sector are not due to after the CRL I believe, so still time to keep the dialogue going there.
Oh if you are wondering what I meant about sticking the boot in at that particular Hearings Panel; it means I strongly disagreed with Parnell and do not want that station built, was not overtly fond of Quay Street work so soon in the game, and as for the CRL – well you all know how I advocate for that mega project on a delayed timetable. But as I said, there was both constructive criticism and as I said singing the praises too. So I am not always a grumpy old fart
Due credit is give when it is due – such as Councillor Wood is about to find out.
George will still get his due credit tomorrow when he goes into bat for the 380 Airport buses at tomorrow’s Transport Committee meeting.
Just to provide clarification here on Quay Street-west and Quay Street-east as they are treated as two distinct entities by both Auckland Council and the CCO’s as well as myself. Quay Street-west is Quay Street from the Viaduct Harbour through to the Tangihua Street/Tinley Street/Quay Street Intersection (where the Z petrol station and port entrance is); while Quay Street-east is from that same intersection through to the Stanley Street/Tamaki Drive/Quay Street intersection.
Further explaining: with Quay Street-east; that is being “dealt with” in my Auckland Water-Frontier work as I create a boulevard and an expressway in that section of Quay Street. This run of commentary on Quay Street-west is where this post (and the current “angst” from Orakei) is focusing on (again mentioned above).
I also had a read of a few letters to the Editor in the Herald this morning which were somewhat scathing of basically Orakei (mainly the Councillor, Local Board Chair and the Tamaki MP), while one was supportive of light rail along Tamaki Drive. And again after a ponder I would also tend to be in agreement with Mr Sheehan of Milford and his letter to the editor as well as Mr Broome’s letter to the editor on Light Rail – although I would look into the timetable of that. I would look at the light rail timetabling plan (for roll out) due to the fact I had mentioned something similar in the Wynyard Quarter section of my submissions where a light rail line would run from Wynyard Quarter to (as of now after some progression post-submission) east end of The Auckland Water-Frontier project zone.
And where does all this bring me too? It brings me to politely disagree with Orakei and their assertions around Quay Street and offer support behind Ludo Campbell-Reid and the works soon to start on Quay Street-west (although I can withdraw that support too).
A respected former centre-right councillor did raise with me: “I think its more the lack of communication than the vision.” My reply to that was: “The question though is where (the lack of communication). I found it in three sections of the City Centre Master Plan, a section of the Long Term Plan and sections in the main Auckland Plan. Heck even I was aware of Quay Street west (although I paid little attention to it as I was focused on Wynyard Quarter and Quay Street east) when writing submissions and having frank discussions with Ludo, Cathy Casey, and George Wood in the hearings panel. I am of the current opinion Quay Street might have snuck up on some more quickly than first anticipated”
So the issue in my eyes with Quay Street-west is basically done and dusted with works soon about to begin – of which I have as said many times above and before, no problems with. I might email Ludo Campbell Reid around some minor “transitional” concerns with Quay Street-west to endure traffic movements are smooth and not heavily disrupted pre CRL however to seek some reassurances.
References
Letters to The Editor
Reference to City Centre Master Plan