Bus 28
The 9 month struggle with the ARC, the Auckland City Council and Stagecoach to supply an additional 028 bus service from downtown Auckland to Richmond Road in Grey Lynn.
The 028 service is an excellent service home in the evening, as it avoids the congested K'Road route. However the last bus used to run at 5:08pm when a lot of people were still at work.
Finally in March 2000, an additional service was put on at 6:10pm. The preferred time of 5:40pm could not be met as Stagecoach were unable to supply a bus and the necessary driver at this time...
29 May 1999: Email to ACC and ARC
From: Cameron PitchesSent: Saturday, 29 May 1999 20:27
To: Darren Davis, Denis Mander
Subject: Cam's Tips
Hi there
As a loyal user of the bus service along Richmond Road, Grey Lynn to the city every weekday, I would like to make a few suggestions that would make it better... I know that every man and his dog has some suggestion or other to do with the buses and you probably get a lot of 'helpful hints', but I would appreciate a response to these. I have travelled extensively on the transport systems of many of the major cities in the world (if that is any qualification for giving advice!)
I travel daily to the centre of town (Victoria Street/ Queen Street) The bus routes I'm talking about here are 024, 027, 028.
A Better Evening Service
The 28 service offers the most direct and quickest trip in the morning. This is reasonably frequent in the mornings and works well, but in the evenings it only returns at 4:40 and 5:05. Like many people, I don't finish work until 5:30. Ideally the 28 bus should run additionally at 5:35 and 6:00. Alternative bus route 24 is a nightmare as it goes up K Road, where it is normally so congested that it is honestly quicker to walk home. This is a big deterrent from using the bus service. Getting home is just so difficult.
Travel Card
Recently I found myself without the correct change ($1.10) and handed over a $10 note. I got a surly response from the driver (understandable I guess as it must drive them nuts) and a handful of $1 coins. A zone travel card system is surely the answer here - just show the driver your monthly travelcard and find a seat - no fumbling for change and delays at every stop. If they could be available from the local dairy, they would be ideal. These work well in London and I'm surprised that Stagecoach haven't started using them here. A travel card would have the benefit of being usable on any public transport service and make catching a connecting bus (eg the Link service) financially viable for Joe Commuter.
The Link
It would be totally acceptable transfer to the Link at cnr Richmond and Ponsonby Roads (if I didn't have to pay twice). This would be especially attractive if the Link frequency was increased to every five minutes at peak times. The same could apply to all of the buses that travel on the same route as the Link.
I'm aware that the budgets for the buses are being allocated soon. Please consider the above suggestions.
Thanks for your time
Cam Pitches
31 May 1999: Response from Denis Mander, ACC
From: Mander, DenisTo: Cameron Pitches
Date: Monday, 31 May 1999 09:20
Subject: RE: Richmond Road buses etc.
Cameron
Thank you for your email. The points you raise appear sensible. I have asked the ARC and Stagecoach to provide me with responses that I can pass on to you.
Denis Mander - Transport Planning, Auckland City Council
2 June 1999: Response from Darren Davis, ARC
From: Darren Davis < Darren Davis>To: Cameron Pitches
Date: Wednesday, 2 June 1999 07:12
Subject: Re: Cam's Tips
Cameron,
Thanks for your email. As a bus user who lives in the same area, I can share your frustrations about the lack of afternoon 028 express bus service after 5pm.
Stagecoach does offer some fare products that might help out. They have the $7 Auckland Pass which is available for unlimited daily travel on all Stagecoach buses (incl. The Link) as well as inner harbour ferry services (Devonport, Stanley Bay, Bayswater and Birkenhead). They also have a $59 one zone monthly pass valid for unlimited travel within the Auckland Isthmus on Stagecoach and Link buses. The subject of integrated ticketing is the subject of a regional council project for the coming financial year.
My understanding is that Link frequencies are unlikely to increase in the near future (I may be wrong, Stagecoach may be able to better advise you on this). Running a 10-minute service required an initial capital outlay on their part of $3.4m. To double the frequency would cost a similar amount. What Stagecoach has done is to put more buses into service on The Link route during the peak. They are also investing in Automatic Vehicle Location technology for the service involving GPS. This will allow better control of vehicle utilisation and help address some of the reliability problems The Link suffers in the peak from being bogged down in traffic. Stagecoach and ARC are working with Auckland City on bus priority measures to ease Link travel times. If you're travelling from Ponsonby to Newmarket, there's also the 012/018 service which runs half- hourly in the peak on a more direct route with a better service reliability. It leaves Three Lamps at 5.50, 6.20, 6.50, 7.20, 7.50, and 8.20 returning from Newmarket at 4.15, 4.45, 5.15, 5.45 and 6.15pm.
I have also forwarded your email to the marketing manager at Stagecoach who will also respond to you directly.
Thanks,
Darren Davis
Marketing Advisor
Community Relations
Auckland Regional Council
8 June 1999: Response from Russell Turnbull, Stagecoach
From: Russell TurnbullTo: 'Cameron Pitches'
Date: Tuesday, 8 June 1999 16:53
Subject: RE: Cam's Tips
Thanks for this email which has been forwarded to me for reply.
A. I have asked our schedules people to look at your suggestion for a later (5.35pm) 028 service and they will work with the ARC on this. We'll see what happen but I support your idea.
B. Travel Card. I think we have the products already in place for this. Our monthly A Zone pass covers the isthmus and is $59 ($1.96 per day over 30 days). This gives unlimited travel on all Stagecoach and Link buses between New Lynn and Otahuhu through the Isthmus. Alternatively, is your trip is fixed every day (as it sounds it is) a 10 ride ticket could also suit you.
Either way call rideline on 366 6400 for details. The only thing we don't have, which you might be indicating towards, is a zone based day pass. We have a day pass for all zones at $7 which is very reasonable.
C. Link Bus. Good point about increasing frequency. We are working with the City Council on getting enough bus priorities to ensure our current Link is more reliable. Regional Council has indicated that only when we have this in order would they consider funding for additional services. We are currently trialing GPS as well to provide more accurate monitoring and 'manipulation' to keep the service more consistent. However, when we get a Friday night like last week, not even that will work. Only wings on buses or a continuous bus lane (not likely) well help then!
Thanks for your feedback, please take note of my email address for any further ideas.
Kind regards
Russell Turnbull
Marketing Manager
Stagecoach Auckland.
8 June 1999: Email to Stagecoach
From: Cameron PitchesTo: Russell Turnbull
Date: Tuesday, 8 June 1999 21:31
Subject: Re: Cam's Tips
Hi Russell
Blimey! Thanks for your reply - it's encouraging to know that some thought is going into the buses!!
A note on B, though. Since I use the buses only for weekday commuting, I'm financially better off paying the fare each time (1.10 x 2 x 22 = $48.40 per month). In London travel cards are priced so that this would be the maximum you would pay for a monthly card - "free" weekend travel is a bonus.
I'll have a look at the 10 ride ticket idea, though.
Thanks
Cam Pitches
18 August 1999: Email to Stagecoach
From: Cameron PitchesSent: Wednesday, 18 August 1999 18:52
To: Russell Turnbull
Cc: Mander, Denis; Darren Davis
Subject: Re: Cam's Tips
Hi Russell
How are things progressing with the new evening 028 bus service?
Yours Patiently,
Cam
19 August 1999: Response from Stagecoach
From: Russell Turnbull To: 'Cameron Pitches'Date: Thursday, 19 August 1999 10:16
Subject: RE: Cam's Tips
Sorry. no progress to date. We have a new City Depot Manager so I hope to take the opportunity up with her in the next two weeks.
Thanks
Russell
8 September 1999: Email to Stagecoach
From: Cameron PitchesTo: Russell Turnbull
Cc: Mander, Denis < Denis Mander>; Darren Davis
Date: Wednesday, 8 September 1999 09:04
Subject: Re: Cam's Tips
Hi Russell
Could you please keep me posted on the progress with this - even if you don't intend to add another service. Four months to add a single bus service to the time table seems excessive!
Thanks
Cam
26 September 1999: Email to Stagecoach
From: Cameron PitchesTo: Russell Turnbull
Cc: Mander, Denis ; Darren Davis
Date: Sunday, 26 September 1999 23:20
Subject: Still waiting for a bus to arrive!
Hi Russell
It's now five months since my original email suggesting, among other things, an extra 028 bus service after 5.00pm.
Could you phone me please (if I don't phone you first) on 025 288 9313. I'll call you straight back if necessary to save you the cost of the call.
Thanks
Cam Pitches
10 October 1999: Email to ARC
From: Cameron PitchesTo: Garth Stewart
Hi Garth
As discussed on the phone today, I am keen to get an extra 028 bus service from town to Richmond Road. The last service in the evenings is 5:08pm,which is too early for myself, Darren Davis, and most people. Russell Turnbull has suggested that a service around 5:30 may be possible.
I'm convinced that this service would be well patronised for the following reasons:
The alternative 024 bus along KRoad at this time takes forever - it's truely quicker to walk. I think that you could even consider scrapping this service in favour of an 028, as most people ride the 024 all the way to Richmond Road anyway. A new 028 service would be used by virtually all 024 users, if they know that it's available.
New town houses have been built on Richmond Road. Sommerville (at the old Sleepyhead site) is nearing completion now. This housing development alone has 93 apartments - given that most people moving in there are young upcoming professionals, that's at least a hundred extra people needing to get to town AND BACK each day.
Garth, I've been trying since May this year to get this going. I have attached the whole saga for your reference. Perhaps you could help? Please?
Thanks
Cam Pitches
025 288 9313
22 October 1999: Response from ARC
From: Garth StewartTo: Cameron Pitches
Date: Friday, 22 October 1999 11:58
Subject: Re: Fw: Still waiting for a bus to arrive!
Hello Cameron
I have passed your request on to Neville Jarvis, who was involved in the review of these services in 1997.
Neville will look at your request for consideration.
Regards
Garth Stewart
26 October 1999: Letter to all Auckland City Councillors
For over five months now I have been trying to get an extra 028 (Richmond Road) bus service put on in the evenings as, inexplicably, the last service leaves town at 5:08pm, when most people are still at work. I have contacted the following people in pursuit of this:Dennis Mander, Auckland City Council
Darren Davis, Auckland Regiional Council
Garth Stewart, Auckland Regional Council
Russell Turnbull, StageCoach
Neville Jarvis, Auckland Regional Council
All of the above have been courteous and helpful without exception. I can now conclude the following from my experience:
My efforts have been completely useless
No one has the authority to change bus timetables
Bus timetables are arbitrary and set in stone
There is no unified transport bus scheduling strategy
Communication between all three organisations and the public is poor and sporadic
When giving out building consents, Auckland City Council pays no attention bus schedules
My car looks like the best option
In a final act of bureaucratic defiance, I am now writing to every councillor, including yourself, in the hope that bus scheduling can be improved.
To further highlight my case and for your reading pleasure, I have enclosed my correspondence to date with StageCoach, the Auckland City Council and the ARC.
Thanks and regards
Cam Pitches
PS Congratulations on the informative website. Also, I think you should take seriously the recent suggestion in the Herald to buy Tranz Rail. $200 million would get you a controlling shareholder majority, and you could sell off the bits you don't want. You could sell your airport shares to do this. What do you want an airport for anyway?
30 October 1999 - 30 November: Responses from Councillors
From: The Yates'To: Cameron Pitches
Sent: Saturday, 30 October 1999 14:58
Subject: 028 bus service
Thank you for the letters. I am sorry that you have been unsuccessful so far. I quite agree that unless there are more buses at hours that people need them there is not an adequate bus system. I regret that I am not a member of the Roading and Transport Committee, and am not involved in negotiations with the ARC, so I cannot assist you now.I ask if you have been in touch with other Councillors? I thank you for having taken the time to send me the information.
Kind regards, Juliet Yates, Councillor, Auckland City.
During this period I also received supportive phonecalls and written responses from:
Mayor Chris Fletcher
Penny Sefuiva
Victoria Carter
Bill Christian
Phil Raffils
Maire Leadbeater
Doug Astley
Jon Olsen
9 November 1999: Email to ARC
From: Cameron PitchesTo:
Sent: Tuesday, 9 November 1999 21:24
Subject: Richmond road bus
Hi Neville
Following on from our phone conversation today, I have attached my correspondence to date with StageCoach, the ARC and Auckland City council. As I said, this dates from May this year.I appreciate your positive sentiments regarding an additional service, but it is frustrating that my efforts appear to have come full circle and amount to nothing. I would also suggest that the procedures you have in place for receiving anddealing with suggestions from long suffering bus commuters are inadequate. If everyone is in agreement that an additional service is a good idea, why does it take so long to get it going? I have no confidence what so ever that the ARC has the ability to solve Aucklands transport problems.
I am happy to be proved wrong of course.
Regards
Cam Pitches
10 December 1999: Email to ARC
From: Cameron PitchesTo: Neville Jarvis
Cc: Denis Mander ; Darren Davis ; Russell Turnbull >
Sent: Friday, 10 December 1999 07:45
Subject: Richmond Road 028 Service
Hello Neville
I am writing with regard to an additional evening 028 bus service from the city to Richmond Road. I have written to the ARC, Auckland City Council and StageCoach for some time now and have yet to get a positive response in writing if this is going to happen or not, and if so when. My most latest correspondence from Russell Turnbull reads:
"The 028 unfortunately isn't one of our most popular routes. Most recently we have been puttiing additional resources into corridors such as Mt Eden and Dominion Roads where demand is high... Thank you again for your letter. It will be used as a basis to discuss this extra service with the ARC shortly."
I take issue that the 028 is unpopular. I would point out that the two 028 services that I travel on in the morning (Richmond @7:52 and 8:05) are standing room only most of the time. I would contend that the return services (Customs St @ 4:40pm and 5:05) are not as popular because many people are still at work at this time - which is the thrust of my whole argument for a later bus service. The 028 service takes half the time (around 15 - 20 minutes) than the 24 or 27 services which go via traffic clogged K Road. It is well known that transport scheduling is supply led - you won't know the popularity of a service until you try it. The popularity of the Link bus is a case in point, exceeding it's projected usage by a large margin. I am willing to conduct an on-board survey of passengers to prove my point, but this, I feel, is the job of the ARC.
Neville, could you please tell me:
Is an additional 028 service for Richmond Road in the evening going to be implemented, and if so when?
I would appreciate a yes or no answer to this question, as it has been dragging on since last May.
Regards
Cam Pitches
10 December: Response from ARC
From: Neville JarvisTo: Cameron Pitches
Cc:
Sent: Friday, 10 December 1999 09:13
Subject: Richmond Rd 028 Service
Hello Cam
This matter has been discussed with a number of interested parties over the last week or so including the scheduling and operational people at Stagecoach.
I have not disputed that a need can be established for an additional trip however the cost may be of concern. The ARC will not be conducting a survey, we do not have the resources.
The current situation is that we have two main ways of achieving an additional 028 trip. These are by way of variation of an existing contract using variable cost rates which were set during the last tender round, or by tendering the trip and entering into a new contract with the succsesful tenderer who may or may not be Stagecoach Auckland.
My discussions with Stagecoach have revealed that the immediate implementation of an additional trip is unable to be done without providing an additional bus and driver resource. The cost of this is significantly greater than could be recovered through use of the contract variation method. Stagecoach are unable to accept this method as a way of achieving the outcome you desire.
The other way, through the establishment of a new contract, is both time consuming and costly and there is no guarantee that it would result in an additional service. This Council has established 'value for money' criteria which measure, for example, the contract cost per passenger carried, and I would suspect that the cost of a single trip contract divided by the potential patronage would fail our benchmark and a contract would be unlikely to be awarded.
Stagecoach have given me an assurance that they will review evening peak services early in the new year with a view to recovering a peak resource for use on an additional Route 028 trip. February has been suggested as loading patterns are more settled. The contract variation method could then be used.
With respect to the popularity of the 028 service your comparisons between morning and evening patronage indicate to an extent why the morning trips are currently operated commercially by Stagecoach while the evening trips are both funded through a contract.
The answer to your question is Yes provided that the additional service can be achieved at an acceptable cost.
regards
Neville Jarvis
14 December 1999: Email to ARC
From: Cameron PitchesTo: Neville Jarvis
Cc: Darren Davis ; Russell Turnbull ;
Sent: Tuesday, 14 December 1999 07:43
Subject: Re: Richmond Rd 028 Service
Hi Neville
Thanks for your prompt response. I appreciate the effort that's going into this and I look forward to some action in February. However, your response raises some more questions that I am interested in getting answers to.
1. How do you determine scheduling improvements if you don't conduct surveys or invite comment from existing commuters? This is especially relevant since the contract review for Richmond Road services is not due for renewal until 2003, by which time there will be an additional 400 homes built going by current building trends. Already the morning 028 services are crowded. My own experience and the fact that I have been waiting since May for an answer tends to indicate that there is no defined process for handling suggestions.
2. If a contract variation can't be used now, how come it can be done in February? If service scheduling is going to be shuffled around, why can't it be done now? Eg. Scrap the 5:40 024, in favour of the 028. Is StageCoach contractually obligated to be in a position to provide extra buses and drivers when requested by the ARC? If they can't provide them, then is the ARC free to seek services from other bus companies, outside of any StageCoach contract?
3. How do you determine if a service is not commercially viable before it is in place? If contracts between the ARC and StageCoach presume this then I imagine that there is an unnecessary period of negotiation where StageCoach will contend that a service isn't commercially viable, and the ARC on the other hand will say that it is. Without a trial service or, at the very least, a survey of some kind neither of these arguments can be proved.
Once again, Neville, I'm sure that there are valid reasons for all of the above, but I still can't help thinking that the bus scheduling process should be a lot more rational, more flexible and clearly defined.
Thanks and regards
Cam Pitches
14 Decemeber 1999: Response from ARC
From: Neville JarvisTo: Cameron Pitches
Sent: Tuesday, 14 December 1999 10:25
Subject: Re: Richmond Rd 028 Service
Cam
We do conduct surveys and invite comment, in fact we have just completed a review of contracts presently operating in the eastern suburbs prior to their expiry in June next year. This is normal practice and the eastern suburbs review included meetings with 3 community boards and a subsequent meeting of a working party representing one of these boards. In addition we liaised with officers of Auckland City Council and a submission was received from ACC. The public were invited to participate in the review through media advertisements in locally circulating newspapers, and posters on buses. In addition articles appeared in the Auckland City Council City Scene publication. The public were assisted in making submissions through the provision of an information sheet, a feedback form, and a stamped addressed envelope. These were available by phoning Rideline. Darren Davis looks after this process.
The public are able to make suggestions at any time and do so. In addition we receive feedback from our contractors. We are in daily contact with Stagecoach who proactively seek our financial support for service improvements. We are always prepared to support worthwhile improvements to the public transport network provided that they are cost effective and able to be funded within our budgets. Most of our Monday to Friday contracts are varied in some way throughout their life.
A contract variation can be used now. What I said was that this method does not cover the additional cost of providing the additional resources needed and Stagecoach are unable to accept it as a means of providing an additional trip. The alternative, if for any reason Stagecoach is unable to provide an additional service, is through a tender process. We are unable to just go out and negotiate with another operator. The price will determine whether we proceed or not with a contract. This is a long process which we hope to avoid. Stagecoach are looking at cancelling another trip in favour of an additional 028 and we will rely on their knowledge and expertise in this matter.
The commerciality of a service is a matter solely for the operator. It is not our business.
Whether rational or not public passenger transport was deregulated in 1991 and the process for the registration of commercial services is controlled by the Transport Services Licensing Act 1989. Our tendering and contracting processes are governed by the Transit New Zealand Act 1989, the Transit New Zealand Amendment Act 1995, and the Manual of Competitive Pricing Procedures issue by Transfund New Zealand. And of course our budgets.
regards
Neville
17 December 1999: Email to ARC
From: Cam PitchesTo: Neville Jarvis
Cc:
Sent: Friday, 17 December 1999 23:32
Subject: My 2 Cents...
Hi Neville
Thanks for your patient answers to my questions. I now have a much better understanding of the constraints that the ARC is placed under.
You're probably getting a bit sick of this, but I have to take issue with "The commerciality of a service is a matter solely for the operator. It is not our business."
The commerciality of the 028 service lies at the heart of my attempts for an additional service.
On one hand StageCoach says it's not commercially viable - I have a letter from Russell Turnbull stating this. I fail to see how they can come to this conclusion without having trialled this service or surveyed potential commuters. And so they are asking for rate and tax payer's money to support it. This is why the ARC should be concerned. StageCoach's stance also delays the implementation of the service as negotiations with the ARC take place.
On the other hand I'm convinced it would be commercially viable, provided the public was made sufficiently aware of the new service. Any bus company should be able to provide this service and potentially they could start tomorrow. If the costs of the tendering process are prohibitively high then I would suggest that the ARC should be investigating why this is so, as it is obviously a barrier to offering flexible bus scheduling. This may involve a change to the Acts that you mention - and, my, there does seem to be a lot of them!
Without supporting evidence from a trial service or a survey, neither viewpoint on commerciality can be proved or disproved.
On the issue of available resources, since StageCoach claim they don't have a bus available at this time, they shouldn't have any objection to another unsubsidised operator being used on this "non-commercial" route. Or is there a clause in their contract that prevents other operators from servicing the 028 route, even though StageCoach can't actually provide a bus?
I would appreciate it if you could circulate my views to those concerned with bus issues within the ARC. I believe that the effective scheduling of buses is critical to solving the rapidly developing transport crisis in Auckland, especially given the lack of other public transport options in and out of the city at this point in time.
Thanks for hearing me out Neville. In the meantime I'm happy to wait until February to see what eventuates.
Regards
Cam Pitches
20 December 1999: Letter to all Auckland City Councillors
Richmond Road Bus ServiceToward the end of October I wrote to all Auckland City councillors, seeking support for an additional 028 bus service in the evenings after 5:08pm. I'm writing again to thank the councillors that responded with letters, phone calls and emails of support and to bring you up to date with the whole saga.
I have been corresponding with Neville Jarvis at the ARC who has been supportive of an additional service, and has given a qualified "Yes" to it proceeding at some stage in the new year, probably around February. The qualification is that it can be achieved at an acceptable cost, which is not quite the definitive answer I was hoping for. I have attached copies of the emails to and from Neville for you interest.
To summarise, I maintain that an additional evening service would be commercially viable, given sufficient public awareness of the new service. I also think the large number of apartments and town houses that have been built along Richmond Road would yield even more commuters than there are at present.
The ARC, on the other hand, is willing to accept Stagecoach's contention that the 028 isn't likely to be commercially viable. This is despite the fact that both the 028 services that I travel on in the morning are more often than not standing room only, and that the return services aren't popular (they are around a third to a half full) probably because most people are still at work.
In addition, Stagecoach claim they do not have a bus and driver available for an additional 028 run right now. The ARC's position is that to tender an additional service would not meet it's cost effectiveness criteria. I'm also informed via Victoria Carter that the next round of contract reviews for the Richmond Road service will not come into effect until 2003.
The net result of this is that the additional 028 service is in the hands of Stagecoach and not the ARC as I think it should be. I believe that the ARC or the Auckland City Council should be dictating bus schedules, not Stagecoach.
This seemingly trivial, easily addressed issue is taking up far too much of my time and yours, so I am not seeking a response from you right now. I may, however, be calling on your support once again in February of next year.
Festive Regards
Cam Pitches
11 February 2000: Auckland City Council Transport and Roading Committee Public Forum
HelloMy name is Cam Pitches and I'm here today at the invitation of Maire Leadbeater to highlight the bureaucratic paralysis that grips bus scheduling in the city of Auckland.
Like a lot of people, I have travelled widely around the world and experienced first hand various forms of public transport. Based on my experience, I believe that Auckland can do a lot better than it currently does, starting with the most obvious public transport on offer - the bus.
Wishing to put this belief into practice, I suggested some improvements to the bus services for Richmond Road residents in May of last year. Among other things, I suggested to Darren Davis at the ARC and Dennis Mander at the Auckland City Council that a bus returning home later in the evening would encourage more people to commute by bus. Inexplicably, the last return 028 Express service departs town at 5:08pm, at a time when most people are still at work. Alternative services after this time go via Queen Street, K Road and Ponsonby, which are often so unpredictably busy that it is quicker to walk the 3 km to my place than travel by bus. The 028 Express travels a different route and consistently makes the journey in around 10 -- 15 minutes.
This suggestion was warmly received. However after much correspondence with representatives of the ARC, StageCoach and the Auckland City Council I find myself standing before you some eight months later, still waiting for a definitive response to my suggestion that is taking up far more of my time and yours than it should.
To summarise:
ACC: I understand that the Auckland City Council has no power what-so-ever to schedule bus services to and from Auckland City. At best they can only pass on suggestions to the ARC.
ARC: The ARC contracts with bus companies to provide scheduled services. These schedules seem arbitrary and appear to be set in stone. There is no continuous improvement process that accepts suggestions from the public and returns a response. The next scheduled contract review for Richmond Road bus services is apparently - do I hear any guesses anyone? - two thousand and three is the correct answer. This seems laughable considering the number of dwellings that are currently being built along Richmond Road - 97 in one development alone. By 2003 I estimate that there will likely be an additional 300 new homes, yet there is no provision in the ARC's contract with StageCoach to easily add any additional services.
Neville Jarvis at the ARC informs me that there are two ways that an additional 028 can be achieved - variation of a contract or tendering the trip and entering into a new contract.
1. Variation of a Contract
The major flaw with this is that StageCoach can say no! In the case of the 028 service, the ARC blindly accepts StageCoach's contention that the service will not be commercially viable. This despite the fact that no surveys have been done or that no trial service has ever been attempted. The fact that the morning 028 services are often standing room only makes me thing otherwise. StageCoach say that the additional trip is unable to be done without the ARC providing an additional bus and driver. I find this hard to believe, given the three or four buses that travel past the Victoria Street bus stop at around 5:30 with signs saying "NOT IN SERVICE".
2. A new contract
According to the ARC, the establishment of a new contract is "time consuming and costly" and - get this - there is no guarantee that it would result in an additional service!! The cost of creating a new contract per passenger could well fail the ARC's benchmark. Additionally, the ARC is not concerned whether or not a service is commercially viable - they leave this to the operator to determine. Subsidies for services are determined by a complex formula that involves, among other things, the number of stages a bus travels. I can't help thinking a better way of contracting services for the ARC would be to charter buses at a flat rate and collect the revenue from it.
Additionally the ARC is reluctant to create contracts with other bus companies, as this reduces the attractiveness of the proprietary electronic bus passes. Again I think that the ARC, or another body should be collecting all revenue from buses, as this would allow the use of a weekly or monthly travel card that could be shown to the driver for verification. There is nothing worse than waiting behind someone in the rain as they fumble around for the inconvenient stage one fare of $1.10.
Because neither of the two available methods available to the ARC can be applied, we are left with an unresponsive and ineffective bus service.
As part of my job as a software developer, one of the things that I find hardest is determining what it is that users want - reducing an issue down to a definitive problem that can be solved.
In the case of Auckland transport, I would suggest that an objective of solving Auckland's traffic crisis is too large and ultimately too hard for anyone to do in one fell swoop.
Auckland's looming transport crisis is a symptom of a number of underlying smaller problems. I would suggest that finding a way for commuters to get in and out of the city without using their cars would be one of these, and I urge the Auckland City Council to get directly involved with this.
Part of the role of Auckland City Council is to make the city a better place to work. By making commuting services available to people all over the greater Auckland area, Auckland City and the businesses within it will both benefit from the wider range of skills and the greater number of people available in a larger commuting zone. To ignore the commuting problem, or to leave it to any another local body would only serve to jeopardise Auckland City's growth and give people more reason to live elsewhere.
11 February 2000: Letter to Les Patterson, ARC
Mr Les PattersonTransport Committee Chairman
Auckland Regional Council
Private Bag 92012
Auckland
Hello Mr Patterson
Following on from our phone conversation today, please find enclosed copies of the email correspondence that I have had to date with the Auckland City Council, the ARC and StageCoach regarding the implementation of an additional 028 Richmond Road service in the evenings.
I have also enclosed a copy of the presentation that I made to the Auckland City Council transport public forum on Wednesday. This highlights the major concerns that I have regarding the current scheduling of buses in Auckland.
I have posted both of these on my website at www.essential.co.nz/bus28 if you need additional copies.
I look forward to hearing your response to this, and would hope that the ARC is aiming to improve it's handling and implementation of needed changes to bus scheduling.
Regards
Cam Pitches
02 March 2000: Letter from Les Patterson, ARC
Dear Mr PitchesThank you for your letter setting out the difficulties you are having in improving the bus service to Westmere.
I am both concerned and surprised that it is taking so long to finalise this matter. I will ask my officers to take this matter up with Stagecoach and ask them to expedite the provision of this service as a variation to their contract which I firmly believe is the best way of achieving an appropriate outcome.
I must however take issue with your contention that contracted services are "set in stone". This is certainly not the case, and both the ARC and the various contracted service providers regularly review the service specifications set out in contracts with a view to making justifiable and affordable improvements. Often, such a review is a result of public input. Stagecoach is very proactive in this regard.
Indeed 42 contract variations were processed during 1999, all resulting in improved bus services. The contract which includes the Route 028 service has been varied twice since its commencement resulting in service improvements which included the introduction of a peak period express service to Pt Chevalier.
Hence my surprise at a lack of action in resolving this matter, which I trust will reach a successful conclusion in the near future.
Yours sincerely
Les Patterson
Chairman, Transport Committee
5 March 2000: Letter to Les Patterson, ARC
Hello Mr PattersonThanks for your letter dated 2nd March. I look forward to seeing some action on this issue.
Please find enclose the names of 41 people who have signed my petition for an additional bus service in the evenings. I hope that the ARC can use this to their advantage when Stagecoach claim that such a service will not be commercially viable. I will also forward a copy of the petition to Russell Turnbull at Stagecoach, with whom I have been corresponding in relation to this issue.
Please be aware that the efficiency of the 028 service is largely due to the clearway lane on the right hand side of Hobson St. Keep in mind that this clearway finishes at 6:00pm, so the benefit of scheduling an 028 later than this time would be minimal without changing the time for the clearway also.
Also Ben Williams has made the suggestion of changing the route slightly to avoid congestion. He suggests turning left at Albert Street (as some drivers occasionally do already) to avoid the Victoria St West, Hobson St intersection. This route would be more closely aligned with the inbound service also. I would also suggest the bus make an additional stop on Wellesley St W to pick up passengers that work in this part of town.
Thanks once again Les for your attention to this matter. I hope that the responsiveness of the ARC will also improve as a result of this.
Regards
Cam Pitches
20 March 2000: Email to Denis Mander, ACC and Russell Turnbull, Stagecoach
From: Cam Pitches [mailto:Cameron Pitches]Sent: Monday, 20 March 2000 11:58
To:
Cc: Denis Mander
Subject: New 28 Service?
Hi Russell,
I heard from Kim Williams that you are looking at starting a new service after 6:00pm? Is this correct?
If so I would like to point out that the clearway that the 28 uses on the RHS of Hobson St ends at 6:00pm. I presume that the council will be extending this, so the bus isn't stuck in traffic?
Thanks
Cam Pitches
20 March 2000: Email from Denis Mander
CamI understand Russell is away for 3 weeks. We haven't heard about an additional service. I will wait to hear from Russell what he has in mind before we ask our operations people to investigate extension of clearways. Hope to hear from you and Russell shortly
Regards
Denis Mander
20 March 2000: Email from Denis Mander
From: Mander, DenisTo:
Sent: Monday, 20 March 2000 16:23
Subject: RE: New 28 Service?
Cam
Have just received advice from Neville Jarvis that an additional trip has been scheduled to depart Downtown at 6.10 p.m. via Route 028 to Westmere with effect from Monday 27 March 2000.
Denis
20 March 2000: Email to Denis Mander
Sent: Monday, 20 March 2000 17:04To: Mander, Denis
Subject: RE: New 28 Service?
Great news! Thanks for your help. Will you be extending the clear way till 6:30? Who advertises this new service to the commuters?
Regards
Cam
20 March 2000: Email from Denis Mander
CamAm seeking a response within Council re the clearway (am not sure how "easy" something like this is to do). Am not sure what arrangements Stagecoach are making re the marketing of the new service. Will raise it with City Scene.
Denis