Tag: new zealand herald

Coming up on Talking Auckland

·

The Local Government Elections Step Up

 

In the next 2013 – Local Elections post here at Talking Auckland, we take a look at the Right Wing (not Centre Right but, Right Wing) finally getting their A into G in the contesting of the Council Ward seats (so the race to become one of our 20 Councillors).

Does the Right Wing offer any serious alternatives or is it photo opportunities with the Prime Minister and which ever Minister trundled along, and angry press releases dumped into Scoop that sounds like a pile of Shrilling.

Also tomorrow in Talking Auckland; a special eye is being kept on the Herald on Sunday. Polling has been done (as alluded to on Facebook) and the numbers are apparently meant to be released (into the HoS) in regards to Brown vs Palino. Who fares what and how so? The Herald on Sunday should be telling us tomorrow with Talking Commentary to follow right behind it.

And finally why am I (naturally) more suspicious of the Right Wing than that of the Left Wing in our politics? I will reveal a bit more into my ideology and why despite being a Nat and a “Young Tory” (according to Russell Brown) I am often at wills against my own party. It will also reveal our political paradigm we actually have and how it is something else than rather Left vs Right.

All coming up as Talking Auckland continues commentary on the 2013 – Local Elections.

 

Auckland 2040 – So We Need to Talk

·

But Please – Lay Off the Main Stream Media

 

This is a message for the Auckland 2040 Lobby Group

I have received and noted feedback from you (2040) via a third-party on me. I have noted that you have seen my often scathing remarks against you in regards to the Unitary Plan but; I have also noted that you (2040) have read my 104 page submission which included the Special Character Zones, and Manukau and were “impressed” (words handed back this way).

Admittedly relations between myself and Auckland 2040 would be “frosty” and that can be owed to the heavy debunking spearheaded from this end in the last weeks of the Unitary Plan feedback process. Those relations as of current are still frosty.

However, if truce flags are willing to be raised the guns will fall silent for the duration. That is Auckland 2040 – if you were “impressed” at the submission I wrote and the introduction of the Special Character Zone then the next move is yours – you know where to find me or contact me.

 

In saying that I do have on request though for Auckland 2040. Lay of the Main Stream Media appearances please – for your sakes not mine nor the City’s.

Why do I ask this? I saw your interview on the NZ Herald yesterday (Friday) and heard your question at the Auckland Conversations on Population Trends. From those I can deduce that your fixation on three set issues are truly annoying the city to no-ends of the Earth and will not win you any allies in getting the Unitary Plan modified to something more palatable to the city as a whole. Oh and the wider city also does not care if one of your “heads” has 30-years of planning experience if the humility and “nous” is somewhat lacking (meaning get a PR guru and a face that can sell your message without annoying the city (Of particular note here: If I as an individual can sell off a successful message in the social media and MSM realms and get mentioned for it – without annoying the bulk of the wider city there might be some lessons here for you guys on “facilitating the debate”)).

As for the three issues annoying the city they are:

  1. Fixation on the North Shore with little regards for elsewhere in the city including the South and the West
  2. Fixation of trying to lower the population projection. The statistics are saying otherwise to your claims. So at least just pause until we get the latest Census results to see where things are going on a more up to date reflection. You did seriously annoy the audience with your fixation at that Conversation piece last week earning you no favours.
  3. And for heaven’s sake – drop the three storey issue in the Mixed Housing Zone. I and others have already debunked that piece (Guy Haddleton’s house in a Single Housing Zone) and will always have it as ammunition if need be against you. Three storey pieces can already happen under the existing plans and not much changes in the Unitary Plan. Constantly banging on about it especially in regards to the North Shore will definitely earn you no favours. If you want my advice on this; three storey pieces will happen, let’s get the quality right and in-line with our population growth. Do that and you would win more friends.

Now was that advice harsh? Maybe but, it is also valid. Valid in me laying out my concerns to you so we have a no surprises policy when reaching out and thawing relations as well as where I currently stand.

 

As mentioned earlier – your move next.

Ben Ross
Talking Auckland

 

Follow Up to The Block and The Unitary Plan Article

· 2 Comments ·

An Acknowledgement

 

Yesterday I wrote what could be deemed a very heavy broadside commentary piece against a North Shore Local Board member and her comments in the Herald on Sunday in regards to The Block.

The said commentary can be found here: The Block, The Unitary Plan And What?

I have acknowledged feedback that the commentary in the said post is the equivalent of taking a nuke to cracking a walnut open rather than being more “tactful” in response to the comments made in the particular Herald article yesterday. Using the nuke approach has caused upset on the North Shore and again I have acknowledged this as such.

I could write a whole spiel on errors from yesterday but that would be inconsiderate. Needless to say there were errors yesterday and errors I picked up on as well. But with the errors there are ways of handling them including using a nuke. That particular option was not the best option given

My indiscretion from yesterday has been noted and will follow-up with more appropriate responses next time such an article from the MSM comes to light.

In saying that our old buddy Orsman has written a piece on the Unitary Plan…

Time for a look 😀

 

The CRL and That Poll Ctd

·

Looking at the Debate that has Cropped Up Again on the City Rail Link

 

Yesterday in my “THE CRL AND THAT POLL” I had stated that:

Thanks to Bernard Orsman from the NZ Herald and Horizon Research (a polling company), debate has flared up again on the City Rail Link. Is there any thing new in this debate? Currently no so I wont bother going into it much unless you like to go around on a Merry-Go-Round with the emergency stop button absolutely stuffed beyond repair…

 

Well to prod the debate along some we would not all be stuck on the never-ending Merry-go-round I asked this question last night over Facebook and Twitter:

Ben Ross: In any case, is C & R releasing a unified policy statement on the CRL any time soon so votes can make a choice in 10 months time?

 

And wouldn’t you know it the debate has shifted has the spot light has been clearly shone onto Auckland’s centre-right local body political organisation “Communities and Residents” (C&R).

Let’s see what C&R members or officials have to say on the debate (for the sake of continuity I shall paste the entire thread):

Bernard forgive me if i read this wrong but since when is 1099 the majority of Aucklanders?

  • m.nzherald.co.nz

    A majority of Aucklanders want the Government to make a significant contribution to the $2.86 billion city rail link, a new poll shows.
    • Bernard Orsman A poll of 1099 people is the basis for a scientific poll…just ask Peter.
    • Donna Beattie They didn’t poll me
    • George Wood Were people told of the costs involved in the CRL project? It is interesting that depreciation and operating costs have not been revealed at this stage of the planning. Even B Ben Ross has not considered the operating costs. It certainly wouldn’t be taken up by the private sector and run like a business s happens in Hong Kong!
    • Bernard Orsman Would the private sector have built the Northern Busway George?
    • George Wood The Northern Busway is a completely different funding arrangement. It was built by Transit New Zealand who committed $200 million of funding from the Alternative to Roading (ATR) fund and funding from the Infrastructure Auckland funds ($40 Million). Around $60 million of additional ratepayers money got a state-of-the-art system of five bus stations but the operational funding required per passenger is a lot lower than rail. It currently would carry over 5 million passenger trips (Northern Express and North Star Expresses) each year which is half the rail systems current patronage at a fraction of the overall cost.
    • Ben Ross Is someone sitting on a report that I let alone the rest of Auckland has not seen George in regards to operating and depreciation costs in regards with the City Rail Link? I rather hope not this side of the Local Body Elections 2013…

      Operating Costs and Depreciation of the CRL has entered my mind and crossed my thoughts many times once the CRL opens around the 2025 mark. If I were to look at paying patronage, total patronage and trains per hour being thrown down that 3.5km tunnel, the private sector opportunities with the 3 CRL stations available (sky rights and retail/office rights anyone?); the allowing of the airport, Botany and North Shore Lines (and especially the North Shore Line which can carry 900% more passengers than the bus way ever could (as well as the fact the North Shore Line runs via the CRL system); AND account for the late Owen McShane Rail Fallacy then YES I have appreciated the operating and depreciation costs of the CRL mega project from beginning to the end.
    • George Wood Ben Ross, this is interesting commentary from Brisbane on the south east Queensland public transport. Bus is looked upon as being more favourable to passengers.

      http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/brisbanes-bus-growth-outstrips-rail-20110503-1e6mm.html

      www.brisbanetimes.com.au

      Southeast Queensland bus patronage has surged by 65 per cent over the past six years, more than triple the growth in rail usage.
    • George Wood Good South East Brisbane busway report and evaluation.
    • Ben Ross Hmm yes, although I remember buses playing second fiddle to heavy rail in Brisbane while I was there in 2003-2005. Heavy rail was mode of choice if one lived on the Sunshine or Gold Coasts and did not want get stuck in metro car traffic all day
    • Ben Ross But that is beside the point as this argument is flipping over to a bus verse rail competition argument which should have been buried in the 90s but has not <_<. Rail, bus and car complement each other on a comprehensive mixed transit system rather than compete against each other. It should be a requirement for all Councillors, Mayors and Ministers of Transport to do a four-year course in Sim City 4 building before standing for office… Just saying (after I have been known to build extremely comprehensive transit systems for sprawling cities over 3 million)
    • George Wood I was around in about 1999/2000 when the ARC decided to go with the rail system. It was never really evaluated to the Nth degree with the chairman of the ARC Philip Warren being hell-bent on buying the rail rights from Tranz Rail.
    • Ben Ross Sounds like a Councillor Lee there George
    • Ben Ross In any case, is C & R releasing a unified policy statement on the CRL any time soon so votes can make a choice in 10 months time?
    • Desley Simpson Ben my understanding is that C/R support continuing to buy land as part of preserving the option, but are not committing until Govt confirms funding.
    • Ben Ross Thanks Desley, much appreciated and understandable with that answer. To do otherwise would be near financial if not political suicide. 2018 rather than the Centre-Lefts 2015 would be the preferable construction start date all things considered. Call it a gut feeling on that one
    • Bernard Orsman Let’a be perfectly frank everyone. Len is not going to start building the CRL until the funding in place. That includes council funding, Government funding and alternative funding sources. Right now, the Government are not coming to the party with funding and won’t allow him to toll roads or introduce a regional fuel tax. In the meantime, he boxes only with property purchases and designation. The National Government clearly don’t support the project and it won’t happen until there is a change of Government in 2014 or 2017? Labour and the Greens have indicated they will pay the Government’s share by using money set aside for the holiday highway. Whether they will support alternative funding sources is unclear. As the saying goes, there is a lot of water to flow under the bridge. As for C&R, its position is all over the road. It will be interesting Ben Ross to see if they develop a clear, unequivocal policy next year or do what they have done the past two years and each have a separate view.
    • Mark Thomas Across Auckland, I think support for the CRL is more mixed than this suggests. 90% of submitters from the Orakei ward didn’t support it in the Long Term Plan. Not because improved public transport including rail isn’t part of Auckland’s future: it has to be. They don’t support it because there is no plan to fund it! (And, Horizon has been one of the least reliable surveyors of public opinion).
    • Bernard Orsman What are you saying Mark. Do you, or C&R, want the CRL removed the LTP – and nothing to happen until 2022 at the earliest???
    • Mark Thomas No. I support the continued designation and associated funding for now, but a much more effective conversation needs to happen with Aucklanders and other potential funders about cost, value and timing. I appreciate Len’s “Consensus Building Group” is partly designed to do this, but when I look at its composition: Child Poverty Action Group, Combined Trade Union, Environmental Defence, AA, EMA, Cycle Action, Walk Auckland, Business Forum etc it looks more like a United Nations. Except the Security Council veto holder is missing. So, we need an Auckland transport initiative that gets agreement on both the problem and the most cost effective solution. Stay tuned!

I will continue to prod Communities and Residents over the next few months to make sure a unified policy statement does get released by them to the Auckland voter – no matter which way they swing, so long as it is a clear stance before and in time for the Local Government Elections next September.

 

On another front and in another thread, the validity of the Horizon Research poll in the CRL has been brought into question. You can see the arguments crop up in the second half of the thread (the first half is about cost again):

Bet the people of South Auckland were not told of the true costs of the Central Rail Link? It will be far more than we have been told up to now especially when the depreciation and operating costs have not been assessed. The point I would raise with the people who are so enthusiastic that this project proceeds is: If it is so good why isn’t the private sector clamouring to run the Auckland Metro Rail system? Maybe Ben Ross can answer this question?
    • Millie Liang Good point George. I read a research paper a while back that showed long term maintenance of infrastructure in California hadn’t been costed in and over a 50yr period up keep costs were 4-5 times the actual construction cost. As you say if it made commercial sense the Council would be turning private enterprise away from the door every day… I would simply ask the Germans/Italians or even Mr. Branson come have a look (at their cost) and tell us if you interested..
    • Hone Willis If you are looking for “commercial sense”, then public transport is probably the wrong place to look.

      Did California do a costing on roading maintanence savings in that study Millie?

      The issue (for me) is Auckland’s current “unfinished” Rail network is a waste of space.

      If we are not going to close the loop, or increase coverage in any way… we might as well focus on wharf traffic, and forget about passenger rail.

      We needed the loop to be finished fifty years ago, when it would have cost so much less, now.. the cost is almost prohibitive.

      Or, perhaps we need to accept that Aucklanders are incapable of doing what every other major city in the world has done..

      An efficient means of moving your workforce around saves everyone time and money….
    • Ben Ross Correct, and heavy rail is the most efficient form of people movement in a large city (well subway is for the super dense cities but even they still have extensive heavy rail systems).

      I am finding it ironic Australia and NZ is behind the ball with heavy rail with the Republicans in the USA and the Tories in the UK having another crack at heavy rail programs again….
    • Ben Ross The law for starters does not allow private enterprise to run our metro rail system – or our freight rail system either.
    • Ben Ross And there is a difference between run and operate…
    • Millie Liang Hi Hone..I need to dig the paper out but I recall what opportunity/ cost benefits were envisaged were lost in something like 10-15yrs when traffic volumes were back to what they were previously and then an under budgeted maintenance program is causing ongoing problems.
    • Barnsley Bill George. The people of south Auckland will not be paying for it
      • Ben Ross The people of South Auckland like myself already pay well will be paying for the CRL: General Rates, Targeted Rates for those near the corridor, development levies on new houses near the corridor, general taxation and for those who use buses, trains or ferries – our fares
    • Ben Ross The ones who benefit from the CRL – pretty much every Aucklander that travels by train, bus, ferry, or car on a major arterial road or motorway no matter where their destination is inside the region
    • Scott Bovaird Grrrr you can’t compare the value of a public transport service on the basis of ’would commercial enterprise be interested’ its nearly annoys me as much as people who think John key will be a good pm cause he is a ’business man’….
    • Ben Ross Agreed Scott. I was going to trot out the Public Good speech but I just err did a major screw up at home and need to go fix it before I have hell on the home front
    • Millie Liang Hi Scott.. I doubt if there is many with a more Socialist ideology than me but it all needs to be paid for and I can’t see it being wise to kick the can down to our kids generation to pay down the debt. I definitely wouldn’t call someone who was a foreign exchange dealer a business man..The ones I know before they burnt themselves out were more like gamblers 🙂:)
    • Scott Bovaird Note I didn’t actually say I was in favour of the CRL just that I hate the above analogy. I also think john key is as far from being a proper business man as you can get.
    • Scott Bovaird Millie plenty of ways to pay for it… Regional fuel tax… Hotel bed tax( my preferred at the moment)… Just two off my head
    • Millie Liang Agree with your thoughts Scott, as long as it isn’t just property owners that have to pay for it through increased rates.
    • Dick Quax People support the cental rail loop because they just don’t know the real cost. A billion here and a billion there and soon you’re actually spending real money – even the rate payer may notice.
    • David Thornton This Hoizon survey carries no credibility in view of previous polls it has conducted being shown to be unscientific. This is one of those polls where the client [Auckland Council?] has indicated its position and hopes the survey will prove it. Use your imagination. And who is behind this AllaboutAuckland website?
    • Ben Ross Dodgy polling companies are unhelpful true. And yes who is this All About Auckland outfit?
    • George Wood All About Auckland is the former Franklin Live Ben Ross
    • David Thornton And who owns it and is there a financial arrangement between it and Auckland Council?
    • George Wood It is owned by Kane Glass who has been committed to recording the Auckland Council meetings from virtually the first day,.
    • Ben Ross 😀:-D all good then.
    • Jay Boreham I’m with David Thornton on this. This survey was done by the same company who did the sham survey against the NZ Police earlier this year. I would question the integrity of this survey and AC for using them if I was you. Also would an online poll really reflect the population in the South.http://www.police.govt.nz/news/release/33031.html

      www.police.govt.nz

      The findings of a recent survey claiming falling public trust in Police were del…See More
      • David Thornton Jay, i see that the Police survey story refers to the owners of Horizon, do you knoqw who they are?
      • Jay Boreham According to their website their “Prncipal” is Graeme Colman who is/was also a consultant for Morrison McDougall Public Relations who say: Graeme was Auckland City’s Media Manager for three years and he managed the New Zealand Business Council for Sustainable Development, involving policy advocacy at the highest levels. According to BACS “Graeme provides some results from the many surveys he has conducted with suggestions of how charities can improve their chances of business support.”
    • David Thornton George Wood getting back to Horizon – can you confirm that Ak Cl did in fact commission this survey, and did the council approve the survey questions. Also how much did it cost?

And now you can see where one particular part of the CRL debate is going.

 

Although me getting mentioned twice? What am I here – the unofficial Transport Mayor of Auckland or Mayoral Candidate for Auckland folks? Heck I am flattered 😛

 

So will see how this debate continues to pan out as we approach the Local Government Elections in September next year. In the mean time there will be plenty more to be said on the City Rail Link!

 

Wheels of Motion are Turning

·

Fighting for the South Manukau Link

 

Continuing to advocate and lobby hard for that South Link to be built – FOR YOU, the residents of South (and Counties) Auckland! As you deserve better!

 

Last month I had posted on someone deciding to place a nice big concrete pad in the middle of the path for the Manukau Rail Southern Link. You can see the post (SOUTH AUCKLAND GETS SHAFTED – YET AGAIN) by clicking on the link.

Well after some advocating and lobbying, Councillor George Wood who is a member of the Council Transport Committee got a Notice of Motion placed into November’s agenda about the South Link. The Notice of Motion is:

Requests Auckland Transport to give a high priority to the installation of a south facing rail link between the Manukau Spur Line and the North Island Main Trunk Line at Wiri so that this connection can be in place by the time
that electrification of the Auckland Metro rail systems occurs. 

You can see the Notice of Motion in the November Transport Committee Agenda at the bottom of this post.

 

Naturally I am supporting this motion after kicking up the initial fuss in the first place when I first spotted the concrete pad in the middle of the South Link’s path.

I had this to say in my material forwarded to Councillor Wood as well as my submission to the Regional Public Transport Plan:

The link to the original New Zealand Herald article: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10799107

 

As I said above, the Herald and I had commented on the missing link in April. Now some seven months later it seems apparent the link is a no-go or basically dead. Without the link; Manurewa, Papakura and Pukekohe are virtually isolated in easy access to Manukau by rail. This flies directly in the face of the idea around a Rapid Service that should allow very easy access with minimum fuss or transfers to a primary service centre for South Auckland.

The current proposal using trains which incur a transfer penalty at Puhinui or the bus trundling along the Great South Road (which takes more than double the time a train does) from Papakura to Manukau (and skipping Homai on the way) to me in my opinion is substandard for the people in these locales, and basically reinforces the isolation factor/feeling these residents have from a major service, employment and leisure centre!

Operational Proposal for Manukau to Papakura Link

With the Manukau to Papakura Link (The South Link) built for around $3.8m, the next question is what kind of services do you run. The answer is both straight forward for both the existing diesel passenger train fleet and the upcoming new electric passenger train fleet. The estimate length of journey from Papakura to Manukau Station via The South link is around 19 minutes (plus a seven minute walk from the Manukau Station to the Westfield Manukau Mall), compared to 30 mins using the Waka Pacific 471 and 472 bus according to the www.at.co.nz Journey Planner.

Thus allowing for turnaround at Manukau and Papakura Stations and knowing what rolling stock availability there is available pre-EMU’s; I recommend using one ADL-2 class DMU to run a single service backwards and forwards between Manukau and Papakura every one hour  in a single direction from 6:00am until around 10:19pm – seven days a week. That means for example your Papakura to Manukau via The South Link would start at Papakura at 6:30am and arrives in Manukau at 6:49am; then leave Manukau at 7:00am to make its return run to Papakura via the South Link.

An example of how a proposed Papakura-Manukau via The South Link Timetable would work (for brevity I have not included the afternoon services)

From Papakura Arrive at Manukau From Manukau Arrive at Papakura
    6:00am (first service) 6:19am
6:30am (first service) 6:49am 7:00am 7:19am
7:30am 7:49am 8:00am 8:19am
8:30am 8:49am 9:00am 9:19am
9:30am 09:49am 10:00am 10:19am
10:30am 10:49am 11:00am 11:19am
11:30am 11:49am 12:00pm 12:19pm
9:30pm (last service) 9:49pm 10:00pm (last service) 10:19pm

 

When the new electric trains are fully on-stream replacing the diesel fleet between Papakura and Swanson, the frequencies can be increased to every 30 minutes at the minimum, or 20 minutes for optimum service delivery until either the Botany or Airport Line (via Puhinui Station) is open and a new operating model would be in place (subject to EMU fleet availability).

In concluding this section of my RPTP; I highly recommend Auckland Transport remedy the situation and get that link for $3.8m built by 2016 at the absolute latest. Once the link is built, operating services would begin on an hourly timetable, stepping up to 20 minute frequencies once the new EMU fleet is fully online. To do otherwise is not an option unless you endorse isolating a major part of the community from its main service centre!

 

Now what I did not mention is the fact that we will have 10 ADL-class DMU’s available when all the EMU’s are online 2016. With ADL DMU’s already by then doing the Papakura – Pukekohe shuttle runs until the main line is electrified from Papakura to Pukekohe, those DMU’s can be extended to do a full Pukekohe – Papakura – Manukau via the Southern Link shuttle service until such a time Pukekohe is electrified and the EMU’s fully take over. So with upwards of 10 DMU’s, you can pretty much obtain 15-20 minute frequencies on Pukekohe – Manukau shuttles until those EMU’s can do the runs in place of the DMU’s (most likely 2020).

 

 

So here I am pitching for the residents and communities of: Homai, Manurewa, Takanini, Mahia, Papakura, Drury and (in-part) Pukekohe to get the missing link built for a frequent and rapid service to Manukau – the primary service and employment hub of South and Counties (former Franklin District) Auckland. Manukau has more connections to South Auckland residents than the CBD ever will, and as a result South Auckland should be able to access Manukau easily and efficiently which building The South Link will provide. To not provide the link and roll out the services utilising the link in my opinion as a Papakura resident and ratepayer, an insult to my fellow South Auckland neighbours and communities.

 

Thus I will continue to advocate and lobby hard for that South Link to be built – FOR YOU, the residents of South (and Counties) Auckland! As you deserve better!

 

BEN ROSS : AUCKLAND

Shining The Light – To a Better Papakura (OUR home)
AND
To a Better Auckland – (OUR City)

Auckland 2013: YOUR CITY – YOUR CALL

 

 

The Agenda