However, the Government isn’t saying what the alternative is. Auckland’s population is predicted to increase by a million people over the next four decades – seventy percent of New Zealand’s population growth overall.

Without the CBD rail tunnel, growth in public transport patronage will reach a capacity limit a few years from now.

No other transport option will be able to support the expected growth in CBD travel demand. We know this because the $5m business case in support of the CBD rail tunnel established that alternative scenarios of increased use of private vehicles or buses won’t be able to cope with this demand.

Even the New Zealand Transport Agency, in a recent board paper, acknowledges that “there is confidence by NZTA that the project offers a potential option for further transport investment in the Auckland CBD, that supports the stated aims of Auckland.”

The CBD rail tunnel will connect Mt Eden directly to downtown Auckland, with stations at Symonds St, K’Rd, and Midtown. It will not be operated as a loop or circular service, but as a more direct connection from Western line stations to the CBD. A trip from Morningside to Midtown will take just 8 minutes. Fast journey times such as this will be possible for trips from all stations on the Western line.

For the other lines on the network, the major benefit of the tunnel is that Britomart will become a through station, rather than a dead end. This will at least triple the capacity of the entire rail network during the morning peak.

Even with all this in mind, though, the financial constraints on the Government are very real, and a lot of money will need to be directed into rebuilding Christchurch’s infrastructure, particularly within the next five years.

It is clear that, as part of that, transport infrastructure projects will need to be reprioritised.

But, in the face of spiralling petrol prices and the pressure this will place on public transport, it would be a huge mistake to cancel CBD rail tunnel outright.

The CBD rail tunnel has a projected completion date of 2021, with construction not starting until 2015. The next four years are set aside for securing the project’s designation, acquiring the necessary resource consents and undertaking detailed design.

This preparatory work is relatively inexpensive compared to the construction work itself, and the Auckland Council needs to lead this work if it really wants the rail tunnel to progress.

Of course, by 2015, the Auckland Council will need to make a decision about whether to progress with the actual construction of the tunnel.

By then we are likely to have a far better understanding of Christchurch’s remaining infrastructure requirements compared with the rest of the country. And by then central Government will have realised that transport projects which reduce our reliance on fossil fuels should be a priority for the economy.

In opening a fourth motorway lane between Newmarket and Greenlane, the New Zealand Transport Agency claims benefits of over a million dollars week to the Auckland economy, brought about by peak hour journey time savings of up to five minutes.

It is difficult to understand how this claimed economic benefit is calculated. No commuter using this section of motorway at peak times is likely to arrive at work any earlier or leave work any later – workers travel on their own time, not their employers. For a while they may enjoy an extra five minutes in bed or an extra bowl of cornflakes, but this is unlikely to add up to a million a week for Auckland’s economy.

Courier and freight companies that utilise this section of road more frequently at peak times may enjoy some cost savings, but these would hardly add up to $1m a week either.

The NZTA’s reasoning appears seriously flawed, which is a concern given the billions currently being allocated by central Government to motorway projects, while petrol prices soar to record levels.

On the otherhand, if NZTA want to use this type of economic evaluation, then the CBD rail tunnel must be worth tens of millions a week, since a single railway line can carry 10x more than a single motorway lane in an hour at peak. The CBD rail tunnel will also save more than 5 minutes at peak for Western Line passengers, who can also be productive on their mobile phones at the same time, checking emails and texts.

Householders face being transported to and from their homes in a shuttle vehicle as contractors widen North Shore’s busy Onewa Rd during a nine-month project starting today.

Why not catch a bus?

The NZTA will take responsibility for the system, which could then be rolled out nationally. NZTA are interested in taking over integrated ticketing because a nationally integrated system could also be applied to toll roads, parking meters and car parking buildings, vastly simplifying the systems used for charging motorists as well.

The NZTA has been working on a draft farebox recovery policy for public transport services which sets out the NZTA’s proposed requirements relating to farebox recovery policy in the regions.  Once the policy is finalised it is to be implemented by regional councils and the Auckland Regional Transport Authority.

The farebox recovery policies that regional councils include in their regional public transport plans set out the contribution public transport users are expected to make to the cost of providing public transport services in their region.

A farebox recovery ratio, the proportion of the total costs of the services recovered from the users, measures the contribution fares make to the cost of providing public transport services, and is typically expressed as a percentage.

The NZTA believes the farebox recovery ratio is one way to measure the effectiveness and efficiency of public transport networks.  The NZTA is keen for regional councils to set and achieve a farebox recovery ratio target for public transport services in their region which sets a fair distribution of the costs between the users, the regional authority and the NZTA.  Farebox recovery ratios have been in decline in New Zealand for quite some time, and the NZTA is keen to arrest this decline.

It should be noted that changing fare structures or raising fares is not the only way to improve farebox recovery ratios, other measures include improving service and information quality, integrating fares and simplifying ticketing systems to encourage increased patronage together with  reducing costs by optimising schedules, frequencies and service times, increasing priority measures and so on.

Further rationale on why we are doing this work and the rationale for the NZTA’s draft farebox recovery policy can be found in the consultation document and associated Questions and Answers attached.  This information is also available via the NZTA’s website http://www.nzta.govt.nz/consultation/farebox-recovery-policy/index.html

We welcome any submission you would like to make.  Details on how to make a submission can be found in the consultation document.  I have also attached a word file with all of the consultation questions raised in the consultation document, which can be used to make a submission.  The closing date for submissions/feedback is 5pm Monday 30 November 2009.

Figures for the first five months of operation of the Northern Gateway Toll Road, to June 30, reveal that, on average, it cost $1.29 in transaction costs to collect each $2 car toll.

For those paying by phone, it would have been cheaper to have waved them through for free. Each $2 phone payment cost $2.70 to administer.

I wonder if Steven Joyce will now move to close down the toll operation, as clearly it isn’t making much of a profit, let alone a contribution to the Northern Gateway road.

As well they might, because under the legislation establishing the system, the Government agreed that $1.13 of the $2 collected was to go towards paying for the motorway, 65c was for transaction charges and 22c would go in GST.

In its operating report, the Transport Agency says: “This means we can claim only up $0.65 from each toll to cover our operational costs.”

To make up the difference between the 65c permitted transaction costs and the actual figure of $1.29, the agency has had to dig into its own pocket.

This must also mean the death knell for the ridiculous Puhoi to Wellsford road widening project.

Former North Shore mayor George Wood has attacked what he calls a “veil of secrecy” over a future Waitemata Harbour Crossing project.

People who would be affected by the new crossing deserved to be treated far better, said Mr Wood, who was mayor from 1998 to 2007.

“NZ Transport Agency thinks it can push through this harbour crossing project on the basis it knows best and we will have to suffer what it offers,” Mr Wood told the North Shore City Council’s infrastructure and environment committee yesterday.

“The community must be told the impact of the crossing on North Shore’s arterial roads and potential adverse environmental, visual and ecological impacts.”

Consultants in a study last year for the former Transit NZ and Auckland councils recommended four tunnels – two for motorway traffic and two for trains – at a cost of $3.7 billion to $4.1 billion.

They recommended three-lane tunnels running 3.9km under the harbour for road traffic between Esmonde Rd in Takapuna and Spaghetti Junction in Newton, and single-track tubes for electric trains linking either Britomart or a proposed underground inner-city rail loop beneath Albert St.

Mr Wood said he had not seen one brochure setting out the broad outline of what the agency proposed.

“Public involvement should happen up front right at the start.”

Mr Wood said people of the North Shore had to lead the fight for progress on an alternative to the Auckland Harbour Bridge after a decade of doubt about the durability of the clip-ons.

A more vigorous approach would be to bring together key agencies in a project team, with a full-time project director and a funding stream from the government for initial planning and development.

Transport Agency regional director Wayne McDonald said North Shore City Council had been in a partnership of five agencies in the project to find a route. Information and plans were on the agency’s website.

No detailed design was done because the crossing could be several decades away.

Transport Minister Steven Joyce said he was seeking advice from the Transport Agency on whether the next harbour crossing should be added to the Government’s proposed 20-year national infrastructure plan.

This would be known by the end of this year.

It was revealed today that the Government’s “Roads of National Significance”, which includes the latest Waterview motorway option along with six other motorway plans around the country, have yet to pass any economic assessment.

In March of this year the Government announced the seven roading projects were “essential routes that required priority treatment” and would “support economic growth”, however the Campaign for Better Transport has received confirmation from the New Zealand Transport Agency that “corridor benefit cost ratios” for each route will take “several months to complete for all seven of the Roads of National Significance.”

Campaign For Better Transport spokesperson Cameron Pitches said this raises serious questions about the decision last week by Minister of Transport Steven Joyce to commit an additional $1bn to state highway projects over the next three years, bringing total funding to around $3bn.

The funding boost has been achieved by deep cuts to public transport, walking and cycling, demand management, local roading and project monitoring budgets.

“On the one hand the Minister of Transport is on record saying that he ‘supports transport infrastructure projects that make at least some sort of economic sense’, and on the other he has advanced billions of dollars to new state highway projects without knowing any of the costs or benefits. He can’t have it both ways,” said Mr Pitches.

With the Budget imminent, Mr Pitches is calling on the Government to explain the rationale for increased investment in state highways, given the uncertainty of the economic benefits and rising oil prices.

Meanwhile, the Campaign for Better Transport reports that the response to its “Action Stations” postcard campaign has been overwhelming. Almost 2,500 postcards in support of promised public transport projects, such as integrated ticketing and new railway stations, have been sent to central Government transport decision makers in the last week. The projects are now threatened with delays or funding cuts.

“It’s a great demonstration of the huge level of support there is for public transport here in Auckland. And public transport projects with the capability of moving thousands of people without the need for cars also make the most economic sense,” concludes Mr Pitches.

Postcards can also be downloaded from the bettertransport.org.nz website.

[ends]

Notes

The seven “Roads Of National Significance” are:
• Puhoi to Wellsford – SH1
• Completion of the Auckland Western Ring Route – SH20/16/18
• Auckland Victoria Park – SH1
• Waikato Expressway – SH1
• Tauranga Eastern Corridor – SH2
• Wellington Northern Corridor (Levin to Wellington) – SH1
• Christchurch motorway projects

Government Press Release on “Roads of National Significance”:
http://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/first+roads+national+significance+identified

CBT’s Official Information Act Request:
http://www.bettertransport.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/oia-request.pdf

NZTA’s Response:
http://www.bettertransport.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/nzta-response.pdf

Action Stations Campaign Website:
http://www.bettertransport.org.nz/campaigns/action-stations

What a fantastic day for Auckland! After 50 years of having the Auckland Harbour Bridge locked off to all those not in cars, today Aucklanders took back Our Bridge. I was right there at the front of the rally – impressed by the speeches (particularly that of Christine Rose) and heckling abuse at Wayne McDonald of NZTA. There were certainly a LOT of people there, perhaps more than the 2000 quoted by most newspapers.

For a while I thought we weren’t going to get across, as Wayne said “no” as we asked him nicely. But then we shifted down to the Curran Street onramp, found our way through the trees and onto the onramp itself. The police were there but didn’t really try to stop us – the crowd was just too great. First NZTA blocked off the clip-on lanes and then, perhaps because they were afraid of having so many people on the clip-ons, they blocked traffic off from the centre lanes too. So we had the entire northbound side of the bridge to ourselves. Everyone was jumping and yelling, absolutely exhilirated in what we’d achieved. It was a huge egg on Mr McDonald’s face in the end, as I’m sure traffic was absolutely screwed throughout the city. If NZTA had avoided being such idiots they could have easily managed it, but in the end it was their stupidity that led to the entire northbound side of the bridge having to be closed.

Leila and I walked across and back, seeing heaps of people of all ages, with kid, dogs and push-chairs. It was a day when we all celebrated being Aucklanders and celebrated the bridge as linking the city, not dividing it. This is just the start of things to come I hope – a day when the tide turned against our automobile-centric thinking.

As Christine Rose from the ARC said: “Let’s burn fat, not oil!”

What a fantastic day weather-wise for us, and also thanks to all the Aucklanders who turned up to celebrate Our Bridge. And to NZTA, shame on you for being such narrow-minded fools, it is your fault that the whole motorway got shut off, you could have organised this to run smoothly. Shame on you.

Photos here: http://transportblog.co.nz/2009/05/24/our-bridge/

It’s not just about the cycleway. I’ve been campaigning for walking and cycling access on the Auckland Harbour Bridge for more than 10 years. During that time the NZ Transport Agency (and its predecessor, Transit) has strongly opposed the idea.

It has come up with all kinds of excuses, ranging from, “It’s not a priority for the region”, to “It’s too steep and windy”.

Campaigners have responded to each excuse and the Transport Agency has come back with ever grander reasons why a walkway and cycleway could not be provided. Its latest excuse is that it would significantly shorten the service life of the clip-ons, but this excuse doesn’t stack up with the facts.

The honest reason why the Transport Agency doesn’t want to provide walking and cycling access is because, fundamentally, it is a road-building organisation which thinks Auckland’s traffic problems can be solved with more and bigger roads. The Transport Agency sees pedestrians and cyclists as a hassle they could do without.

Read the rest here.