While the Supercity is shaping up as a anti-democracy nightmare, one side effect is we may see the back of some of the transport dinosaurs who spread misinformation about Auckland’s transport system, such as Rodney Mayor Penny Webster who made the news earlier this week moaning about opposition to the “Holiday Highway”. So I dug back into Penny’s past and found her speech to the ACT conference in 2001 and want to deal with some of the, ahem, inaccuracies she clearly believes.
Whatever the reason for their ill-conceived crusade, each person in the anti-road movement has the same fear. They are scared of cars because automobiles allow individuals to make their own decisions. Car drivers can turn left or right, they can travel for miles or stay in the city, they can live out and commute in or live in and commute out. Planners and politicians can’t control them.
What crap. The point so easily lost on Penny and others of her ilk is this; 1 car per family: an economic miracle, 4 car per family: an economic disaster, give people no other option, or a far poorer option, and they are effectively forced to have a car and drive, which leads to my second point. How can consigning (by design) everyone to travel the same way, via automobile, be a position a so called “freedom loving” politican supports when it may not be the best option for them or their family (or affordable)? What about the elderly, those too young to drive, the disabled and those living in poverty, should they be consigned to transport irrelevance?
Auckland’s transport costs $3 billion every year. One billion of that is straight transport costs – fuel, wear and tear. Another one billion is caused by land escalation costs including servicing for densified housing, subsidised by ratepayers.
I almost went cross-eyed at this one, the infrastructure costs of low-density housing are much higher, the evidence for this is overwhelming, in fact Joshua (admin) did his thesis in part on this very phenomenon. Makes sense doesn’t? Lots of long thin water pipes are more expensive than shorter wider ones, ditto electrical grids, roads, footpaths, etc. And this person is a Mayor? I feel sorry for Rodney residents.
Forty-five years ago, the first plan for the completion of the Auckland road network was launched. We are no closer today to a satisfactory solution.
I actually agree with what she says here if not the sentiment, because guess what, an unsatisfactory plan leads to an unsatisfactory outcome. She might like to read the CBD rail tunnel based proposal of a year earlier which was less than 1/4 the price.
There is no evidence that the current growth strategy and transport planning for Auckland, with its heavy investment in public transport, with no effective policies to address the current congestion issues, will provide the transport infrastructure the city needs to achieve the well‑being of the community.
Oh dear, only an ACT politician could call less than 20% of monies going into the PT system “heavy investment”.
Auckland is a de‑centralised city with both residential and nonhome destinations widely dispersed. It’s a typical young, modern city that has developed in the car and transport age. As a result, it would be very hard to get up to 20% public transport use because of the limited number of people who work in the CBD. In Auckland, only 12% of employment is in the CBD. A further 22% work in ten other centres, but each area only contains about 2% of employment, while the remaining 66% of work trips are dispersed elsewhere in the region. So, it’s difficult to get a concentration of work trips along any of the corridors. You’ll very likely only get a high proportion of public transport where the public transport has a separate corridor and there is very heavy congestion on the roads. However, once you’ve got this heavy congestion, the adverse effects on the economy of the region make this an undesirable situation.
This I want to deal with as it is one of the big whoppers regularly told about Auckland’s transport. Auckland developed around the tram and the railway, not the car. The oldest and most desirable parts of the city today are those that developed close to train station or on both sides of a tram route. Saying we can’t even aim for 20% PT mode share is crazy considering that up until 1954 over 66% of trips in the Auckland region were taken by public transport, walking or cycling. The active destruction of the PT system after 1955 is the reason our CBD collapsed (surrounding it with the biggest motorway junction in Australasia didn’t hurt) and investment in the separate corridors of PT she talks about is the only way it will regenerate and become a fantastic place for people and businesses again. Remember Melbourne has been able to double its CBD job share in 10 years. Finally Penny needs to accept that unless you have a PT system that caters for the majority of trips, you are going to have congestion during peak times, cars are flexible, sure, but inefficient at moving large numbers of people in peak times. An effective public transport system is hard, it takes good political organisation and great planning, responsible budgeting and investment but when it works well it is worth it’s weight in gold.
It’s often implied that alternatives to road transport are benign with no adverse effects. In practice, the noise from rail can be as disruptive as that from motorways and accidents from public transport are not much different from road transport.
This is simply not true, the London tube and Auckland roads have a similiar number of trips taken on them per year (just over a billion), while the tube has approximately 4 deaths a year and Auckland’s road’s 80.
Public opinion reveals that while drivers approve of better public transport for others, the reality is that they themselves won’t be abandoning their cars in a hurry. Studies overseas have shown that enticing people out of their cars and onto public transport does not work. Recent New Zealand Automobile Association figures show that in 1986 fifteen percent of people travelling to work used public transport, and in 1996 this had dropped to seven percent.
The Northern Busway really proves her point here, doesn’t it? And talking about dropping figures in the 80s and 90s despite enticements? My word what enticements were these? Abandoning public ownership, fair fares, planning, integration, frequencies and investment?
I really could go on all day. As a right wing commentor said to me another blog, “It doesn’t seem to pass the common sense test”, I agree and hopefully one positive side effect of the Supercity reforms is we may see the back of leaders such as Penny who lack common sense. If she stands for the Rodney Council seat don’t vote for her if you ever want to see an effective transport system in Auckland.
Her full speech is here. I advise you to read it sitting down and it might make more sense if you drink heavily first.
Processing...
I reckon Owen McShane wrote that speech.
I’m not so sure, it doesn’t ramble on about road trains for a couple of pages as one he wrote inevitably would… 😉
While I don’t think she has gotten any better the speech was from 2001 which is some time ago, remember back then John Banks was trying to stop Britomart and now he is one of the louder voices calling for a CBD tunnel. In saying that I will be happy to see the back of her (hopefully).
It is still on the ACT website as a de-facto part of their policy and she is still loosely involved with the party, she could ask for it to be taken down if her attitudes had changed…
Her v Christine Rose for the Rodney seat will be an interesting battle. You probably couldn’t come across two more diametrically opposed people when it comes to their thoughts on transport (well, most things really).
Hmmm, i don’t think it’s the freedom hating “anitcar movement” that feels scared and threatened Penny.
Thankfully this kind of looney tunes far right thinking does not get much traction these days.
I find it staggering that such a person could be elected dog catcher, let alone a Mayor… I believe we do not need anyone with such a misguided belief system on the council holding up true progress…
She’s an argument for jettisoning Rodney from the SuperCity, with toll gates at the SuperCity boundaries for those Rodneyites that want to come profit economically from the SuperCity but unwilling to pay their dues to it.
The problem with taking Rodney out of the Super City is that it would probably become a complete mess of auto-dependent sprawl.
Just out of interest what is Auckland’s mode share for public transport at the moment?
7%ish I think. But 48% of people entering the CBD during peak hour.
I have a linked video coming up soon on the site Cam, that talks about how misleading the “PT modeshare percentage” can be…
She is effectively saying PT advocates are power hungry socialists. In fact the roading system in NZ has to be the most socialised service in the country outside of healthcare. Where is the clamouring for an economic return on our $20billion of roading assets?
People like her think they are ideologically pure classical liberals, but in fact they are just advocating for a sort of tyranny of the majority. And even then they mistake ‘private car use’ for ‘people in favour of roads and more roads’
IIRC Treasury values NZ’s roads at over $100 billion dollars, (rail at $11 billion if anyone’s interested), our single most valueable asset on the government books… The percentage return on this investment into the governments coffers..? Not a single dollar, in fact local roads require subsidises via our rates.
I’d have some respect for Penny if she called for privatisation of our roads but then absolutely no one would vote for her…
Let’s face it, the person elected from Rodney won’t be a PT advocate. The Rodney supercity ward is a lot different from the RDC as it does not include Whangaparoa or Orewa (they are in Albany ward). People living in Warkworth, Kumeu, Matakana, Wellsford aren’t likely to use much PT. Whilst the Holiday Highway will be abonus, I think what the people up there would really like would be for AT to spend some money on the local roads and farmtracks.
Should it also be of worry that Penny Webster is on the TAG group for the RMA amendment act? I guess its all apart of the Act agreement with National
Yes Brent that is a great worry indeed. The urban planning part of that group is likely to ban urban limits – say hello again to limitless sprawl.
We in Pukekohe are about to reap the benefits of the new SuperCity being forced on us – no buses.
I have ridden the bus from Pukekohe to Auckland for 25 years – work at the University. We have finally got a brochure from ARTA saying, amongst other things:
and:
For me this will mean major inconvenience, and considerable expense (about an extra $1500/year – I will take the train to Papakura, then the bus to Auckland – taking the train all the way in and walking or busing up to the University is impossible because of the time). For quite a few of poorer people it may mean loss of job. There are agricultural workers who take the bus from Pukekohe or Paerata and get off before Drury. There are workers who work at Wesley College, or in Drury, for whom the train is not on. There are workers who get off at the golf course petrol station and are met there. Most of these people are taking the bus because they either have no other transport, or cannot afford to drive. Most of them will never see either the ARTA brochure nor maxx web site – most of them have no Internet access and many don’t even know much English. The first they will know of this is getting on the bus one day and being told that there is no bus service starting Monday or whatever.
I really don’t know whom to go to about this. I have written email to ARTA, NZBus, MAXX, the expiring Franklin District Council, several newspapers, and Paul Hutchison, our MP. I have received polite responses. I have filled out a survey. I have no confidence any of this will make any difference.
Can anyone suggest any other action I should take? The absolute number of persons affected will be relatively small – but they will be mostly the ones with least power to do anything about it. For some it will be a disaster.
jj
Are you sure that catching the train is slower than the bus? I would be incredibly surprised if that was the case – and anyway surely the trains from Pukekohe to the city would be much nicer than such a long bus ride.
If hardly anyone uses the service because a much better service exists, then I think it’s reasonable for ARTA to eliminate duplication.
admin:
Did you read my comment? It isn’t duplication if there are some – quite a few, in fact – for whom there is no alternative. If you live in Pukekohe, work half way to Drury, and have no car – Oh, I guess you could walk 10 Km each way – sure!
Catching the train into the city is impossibly long for me. This is because of where I work, at the University. Currently I leave my house at 6AM, catch the 6:05AM bus in Pukekohe, get off the bus on Symonds Street at about 7:10AM, and am in my office by 7:15AM. My official hours are 7:30AM to 4:30PM.
In the evening I catch the bus on Symonds Street at about 4:38PM, get off the bus in Pukekohe at about 6PM, and am home by 6:05PM.
To get the train I have to leave my house at 5:45AM to catch the – is it 6:10AM train? – and after I walk up from Britomart (there are buses but it takes longer to get one than to walk) it is 7:45 by the time I get to the office. I have to leave the office at about 3:45 to walk down to the train. The evening train is much more often late. I have used the train when the buses have been on strike; I would not keep my job if I used the train regularly – and there is no way I could even afford to work in the city if I had to drive – pay for a second car, petrol, parking, insurance, and maintenance would come to something close to $200/week. The bus costs $50/week.
The bus is very comfortable and has plenty of seats; the train is uncomfortable to ride because of the swaying, and is very crowded – often have to stand.
The cost for the train is quite a lot higher even if I didn’t have to take two services.
But it is simply not true that ‘hardly anyone’ uses the service. It is true that nothing like so many use the service as use the in-town buses. This is the ‘last mile’ problem that is inherent in any rural service. The fact is that if the attitude is supposed to be, “stuff those people who want to live far out – especially the poor Maori, Indians, and so forth” – then it makes sense that ARTA’s attempt to do a survey is done in such a way that no one who will be disastrously affected will even know about the change. For me it will be a mess; for some it will be a disaster.
Perhaps I had misunderstood the idea that those not on $100K salaries should still be given the opportunity to live.
BTW we are also being done over in another way. I have seen an article on the web explaining that the rates in most areas would decrease – except those in Franklin and Rodney, which were already a bit under par. Theirs would increase.
Milk the rural areas to help reduce the burden on the core – good idea! Is it any wonder we fought tooth and nail (and were ignored – we didn’t just lose) not to be part of the SuperCity?
jj
@John, you are doing all the right things, may I suggest getting a petition of all the other people who rely on the service – they may not know it will be ending, encourage them to also write their councillor, MP, local rag, etc…
Try printing some flyers and hand them out while waiting for (and on) your bus service and other services on the route during the day…
You could also join the CBT and start a campaign…
Good luck…
@Jeremy Harris:
Thanks – I am, indeed, doing the flyer thing. I have printed a bunch of copies of the ARTA proposal, together with my e-mail to them, and handing it out. As I said, quite a few of the people are not in a position to do much about it. I think I might do a petition to get them to sign and post it to ARTA or something. We have until 24 September to get the message across.
I apologise to @admin for getting a bit hot 🙂 The reality is that it may seem straightforward from the point of view of people who live in the City proper just to ‘take the train.’ It was not a good idea to incorporate what are really rural areas and will always be rural. Pukekohe is a satellite of Auckland; there is no real sense in which it is a suburb, or ever will be (unless they bridge the Manukau Harbour :-)). We tried to make the point – but I suppose the momentum just took off and it was lost from the beginning.
But the fact is that loss of the bus will be a big deal for some of us.
Thanks for replying.
jj
I can see ARTA’s point of view, they have limited resources and a need to eliminate duplication of services…
You could also propose a Drury to Pukekohe service (in a smaller bus) and an earlier and later train service, which should eliminate some of your concerns…
Remember you can buy a monthly pass for the bus and train which should lower your costs… Otherwise you could look at seeing if you can amend your hours at work, or move into the city… (I’m guessing you’ve already thought about these)…
I could see potential value in a triangular service running Drury – Pukekohe – Waiuku – Drury and in the opposite direction using a fleet of smaller buses, say the smaller MAN’s from the mid 90’s if they’re equipped to run properly at open road speeds.
Do you know if there are plans for a Drury station, or am I just behind the 8-ball?
Drury station – don’t know. They did, indeed, run smaller busses for a year or so and they met our needs. But of course the costs are principally labour costs – and my drivers are concerned about losing their jobs.
Yes, of course I use a monthly pass – have always done.
jj
Yes repopening Drury station is on the list of things that are talked about a lot, a good idea, fairly easy to do but not actually funded yet. Perhaps that could be one project to push for.
What about combining the x47 bus routes into one route that goes Tuakau – Pukekohe – Drury then terminates at Papakura (or maybe even as far as Manukau city centre), and run that every half hour. People going to Auckland would still have to transfer to the train or another bus.
One thing I have suggested to ARTA (in e-mail) is keeping the commute buses. They could run Pukekohe-Papakura 6-8:30AM and 4:30-7PM or something like that. Those are probably the fullest buses – and during the middle of the day just have the loop bus in-town, which they are proposing.
jj