Auckland Transport have sent me copies of the board papers presented at their first board meeting, on November 17th. There are five documents I have – which I’ve uploaded so everyone can have a good look through:
- Board Agenda: this just lists what the AT board considered at their November 17th meeting.
- Chief Executive’s Report: this is probably the most interesting document of the lot (it’s certainly the longest). More on this below.
- Eight Month Budget: this document highlights what Auckland Transport will be spending its money on between November 1 2010 and June 30 2011. There is over $300 million proposed for capital roading works (beyond road maintenance) during that time – which seems like a surprisingly huge amount.
- Rugby World Cup update: this document shows where things are at for Auckland Transport in terms of planning for the World Cup. Of interest is that during all the Super 15 rugby games next year there will be trials for operating both platforms at Kingsland station for citybound trains. That should help boarding times after the game enormously.
- Financial delegations: this is fairly uninteresting for those outside Auckland Transport, as it relates to who’s allowed to spend what money within the organisation.
As I noted above, the Chief Executive’s report is probably the most interesting. A lot of what it talks about is just organisational stuff – and a general update to the board on how the transition is going in putting Auckland Transport together as an organisation. But there are some interesting things said later in the paper, in terms of both public transport operations, but also future projects.
Looking first at operational matters, there are some quite interesting revelations about future operating models and future changes to bus routes:
Working our way down from the top, it’s good to see some progress is being made on the procurement of the EMU trains – although it seems we’re still quite a long way off from signing any contract for their construction (remembering that electrification was first funded in the 2007 budget). In terms of rail track access fees, in the second bullet point, unfortunately it seems as though I never received Appendix A – so I don’t know much more about that. The development of a new operating model for buses and ferries is also interesting news as it seems as though this is likely to be the alternative to the PTMA amendments that were originally proposed. I await further detail on this matter with much interest.
Shifting on to the “business as usual” stuff, the most interesting thing is that the Link Bus and City Circuit routes are proposed to be redesigned before the Rugby World Cup. While the Link Bus certainly has its flaws (bus bunching, the Victoria Park waits etc.) it’s generally considered to be hugely successful, so I hope it’s not messed around with too much.
Later in the document we get an update relating to the progress of various important infrastructure projects – including the following which relate to public transport matters:
It’s good to see that excellent progress is being made on the Manukau Rail Station. With regards to the other two projects listed above, it will certainly be very interesting to see what happens – as both are pretty controversial.
A bit later again in the document we find out some more about the Airport Rail study that should be getting underway soon. I’m glad that the word rail seems to be front and centre for once.
It’s excellent to see planning for this project moving ahead and a real commitment from Auckland Transport that the end goal is a rail link to Auckland Airport from both Onehunga and Manukau.
All up, it’s great to finally get an insight into what’s happening at Auckland Transport. Let’s hope they get into the habit of regularly posting board papers on their website, perhaps even before the meetings are due to take place so that members of the public can see whether anything particularly interesting is to be discussed – and then make an informed decision about whether they wish to go along to the meeting. This is certainly a big step in the right direction from the way in which ARTA used to be so secretive.
Processing...
with regards to the PTMA I’ve heard that the new PT operating model is to be ‘trialled’ in Auckland, Wgtn and Chch. However this ‘trial’ will involve 12 year contracts!
The story behind this is that Joyce was wined and dined by Infratil before the election, and then publicly came out saying the PTMA will go. However once a Minister he heard the other side of the story and realised the problems of the commercial system with rapidly declining value for money. Therefore he is trying to find a half-way house where the govt does not interfere, but will improve value for money.
I really worry about the 12 year contracts though, if not done right could leave very inflexible bus services that cant respond to demand, wider network changes etc. Don’t think this is the right way to go if we want to see major service and quality increases.
So we could cut spending on new roads/upgrades by $200mil a year still leaving $100mil a year for that, at the same time maintenance of existing roads won’t be impacted so that $200mil a year could go towards paying for the CBD tunnel. 5 years of that and we have $1bil to put towards it. Sounds like someone needs to start making some hard calls and prioritising some projects
I think you are right Matt, I think we’re going to have to start the thing with borrowing, and keep pushing at the national level. I think time is on our side, in the sense that things change both globally [Oil hit USD 90 last night] and nationally. Auckland can do everything up to digging the thing surely, then get some bonds/ loans sell the airport shares, cut the road building budget and sign some contracts. It will force a reaction from WGTN, who knows even reinstatement of a regional fuel tax…… They will come to the party later on because it makes so much sense and we will have different heads down there eventually…..
I think selling shares would be foolish if we’re going to have to take on debt. The share holdings return dividends, which can be used to pay down debt, and will do so into the future. Selling them to avoid having to get loans in the short term means their income stream isn’t available long-term when debt will doubtless again be required.
I would want more detail about where that $300m is going before I started on a slash-and-burn approach to clawing it back. How much of it is going into Flat Bush, for example? Or into some of the works on former-Waitakere’s back roads?
There’s scant information about what it’s being spent on, and even though it sounds very high we still don’t know enough to say the Council can just stop spending it. Is some of it going on shared spaces? That’s not maintenance, but I don’t think anyone here would disagree with the projects.
Yes more detail would be great, but on the face of it there is $300m to be spent on new roads (not including state highways) in the next 8 months. That’s a lot of cash.
Given the sum and the timeframe, I would say that the vast majority of that spending is stuff that’s already committed and has been inherited. There’s a lot of work going on out there, and eight months isn’t long to get $300m of capital works underway.
Public transport expenditure in the next 8 months is $205,894,000. Wouldn’t mind seeing a breakdown of that.
Also Integrated ticketing:
Wouldn’t mind seeing the Board update either for that. It worries me that they are talking about implementation works when no one has told us what the fare structure will be or how it will actually work from the customer’s perspective. Successful IT projects usually follow this path:
* Requirements definition
* Functional specification
* Technical Specification
* Coding
* Testing
* Training
* Implementation
We are missing step 1 at this point.
The joys of Auckland Transport being subject to LGOIMA may have to be explored on those matters Cam.
$300m excellent. These “NEW” roads should be created so as to enhance urban interconectivity. Wouldn’t a 2 lane
road/cycling/pedestrian bridge between Beach Haven and Hibsonville be just fantastic. Maybe a bridge continuing Onewa road to Bayswater make a massive difference to the urban environment. Roads can be great for bringing communities together.
@ patrick davis
Be careful what you wish for with these new connecting roads. They could very easily become rat-runs, and thus turn quiet local streets into congested nightmares.
Also the cost of these bridges is very high. Note the Kopu Bridge in the Coromandel is costing $48 million and that bridge is about 600m long. This is the same length as the proposed Hobsonville – Beach Haven. A Bayswater – Onewa bridge would be 1.5km, which would have a huge cost. Just can’t see how these can be justified.
Luke 🙂 SJ could.
It’s an idea that may be worth moving towards a cost benefit analysis. Or maybe not.
I would expect any new connection, if built in isolation, could used for “rat running” (though can’t visualize Beach Haven to Hobsonville). Remember this was everyones fear when Kaipataki Bridge was built finally providing inter connectivity between Beach Haven, Birkdale and Glenfield/Windy Ridge. After all these years, still no congestion, still no rat running.
The Bayswater bridge may not have motorway connections so as to nullify it as an arterial route, I don’t know. But we could start thinking about it.
The key component here, is to avoid building in “isolation”. The question I see, is what level of urban interconnectivity do we really want?
@Luke
New connectivity doesn’t necessarily mean congestion and rat runs on quiet suburban streets. A prime example was the Kaipataki Bridge connecting Beach Haven/Birkdale with Glenfield/Windy Ridge. And since 20 December 1999 when it opened, this has still not happened.
Maybe built in isolation these roads may have adverse effects, but we wont know until detailed research is undertaken.
PS what’s stopping Bayswater Bridge from having no connectivity to the motorway.
I’d always thought a bridge from Beach Haven Rd to the Upper Harbour Highway/Motorway interchange would be a good idea… especially if they ever built a busway or rail lone on the route.