Every week we read more than we can write about on the blog. To avoid letting good commentary and research fall by the wayside, we’re going to publish weekly excerpts from what we’ve been reading.

Lloyd Alter, “The whole city of Florence can fit in one Atlanta cloverleaf“, Treehugger. This picture is worth a thousand words – Florence is a city of around 380,000 people:

florence vs atlanta

I have thought that Jim Kunstler was being his usual over-the-top self when he called the American suburban experiment “the greatest misallocation of resources in the history of the world.” But when you compare that photo of Atlanta to Florence, you can see that he was right.

Andrew Geddis, “How high can you go?“, Pundit

David Farrar, unsurprisingly, welcomed Nick Smith’s announcement of proposed changes, albeit with a caveat:

The question will be whether they will do enough. The greater weight to property rights and prioritisation of housing affordability look the most promising.

Right – people should be able to use their land as they see fit and loosing the market will create new housing supply to meet demand and thus make houses “more affordable” (more on what that might mean in a moment). Bog-standard orthodox, small-l liberal reasoning.

So, for example, if you look at the MOTU Consulting report that Nick Smith released as evidence of the need to change the RMA (more on this report in a moment), you’ll see that it estimates that “Building Height Limits” add some $18,000 – $32,000 to the cost of new apartments. So, remove the restrictions on how high developers can build on their land (as well as other constraints on building design) and you’ll get more and cheaper apartments, which is what John Key says first home buyers should now be considering instead of “proper” houses. Hooray!

But this is where things start to get a bit weird. Because under the proposed Unitary Plan for Auckland first released back in 2013, a document that was created under the auspices of the dreaded RMA, restrictions on building heights were going to be (marginally) relaxed in various parts of Auckland to allow more high-density housing to be built. What a good thing to have happen, right?

Jarrett Walker, “Basics: should I vote for a transit tax?“, Human Transit:

.  In growing urban areas, transit needs grow faster than tax revenues.

This problem is mathematically inevitable.

As cities grow, and especially as they grow denser, the need for transit generally rises faster than population, at least in the range of densities that is common in North America.  This is completely obvious if you think about it, and I stepped through it in more detail in Chapter 10 of Human Transit.  In brief: Suppose a particular square mile of the city doubles in population.  Transit demand would double because there are twice as many people for whom transit is competing.  But independently of that, if density is higher, each person is likely to find transit more useful, because (a) density creates more disincentives to driving and car ownership while (b) density makes it easier for transit agencies to provide abundant and useful service.   Those two separate impacts of density on transit, multiplied together, mean that transit demand is rising faster than population. […]

So if the city is growing denser, transit needs are growing faster than transit revenues.  This is nobody’s fault.  It’s a mathematical fact about the geometry of transit and density.

Alan Davies, “Future transport: What can we learn from New Zealand?“, Crikey

There are a number of things Australian urban policy makers and managers could learn from the New Zealand Ministry of Transport’s Future Demand project, which addresses the question of how the nation’s transport system should evolve to support mobility in the future.

Importantly, Future Transport recognises that the decline in travel in developed countries over the last ten years, particularly by car, is extraordinarily important and puts it front and centre as the key issue; it’s supported by a number of specialist technical reports.

Stacey Kirk, “Cycleway plan drops into a lower gear“, Stuff:

The Government is ignoring official advice and opting to spend less than half what was recommended to improve urban cycleways.

Ministerial briefings and a draft Cabinet paper, prepared for former transport minister Gerry Brownlee, show the Ministry of Transport advised spending $450 million to develop urban cycleways to a level that would be safe and convenient for commuters and children riding to school.

Of the $450m, $260m spread over five years would have been funded by the Government, with local councils picking up a $70m tab, and the remainder coming from the Land Transport Fund. […]

Green Party transport spokeswoman Julie Anne Genter said the Government was missing a prime opportunity.

“It’s a little bit difficult to understand why they aren’t taking the advice that they are being given because, in the context of the entire transport budget, it’s actually a very small amount of money and it has enormous benefits.”

This article also has some great stats on Wellington’s current cycling boom:

The census showed commuter cyclists had increased by 16 per cent since 2006. In Wellington, between 2007 and 2012, the number of cyclists counted during peak hours grew by 40 per cent.

New Bay of Plenty MP Todd Muller is pushing the idea of a road tunnel under the Kaimai’s.

A vehicle tunnel under the Kaimai Range needs to be considered with the same weight as a second harbour crossing in Auckland was given, Bay of Plenty MP Todd Muller says.

Mr Muller revealed his plan to about 35 people at yesterday’s Welcome Bay community breakfast. He later told the Bay of Plenty Times Weekend it was a top priority during his first term in parliament and promised to work with the NZ Transport Agency to investigate the feasibility of the idea.

“I’ve always had a strong belief that Tauranga and the Western Bay of Plenty will form part of the economic horsepower part of the country, which is Auckland, Waikato and the Bay of Plenty.”

Mr Muller said the tunnel would be a huge driver of economic growth in the area and hoped he would see it come to fruition in his lifetime.

We’ve talked about this idea before as it’s something the trucking lobby bring up from time to time. About the only comparison that can be made between the project and an additional Waitemata Harbour Crossing is that it would make the AWHC’s BCR of 0.3 look fantastic. NZTA data shows that on average only around 9300 people use SH29 over the Kaimai’s and is likely just one of the reasons the NZTA say it doesn’t make sense.

Eric Jaffe: The Remarkable Turnaround of Atlanta Public Transit, CityLab

So Parker, who’d overseen transit agencies in San Antonio and Charlotte, drew up a rescue plan. MARTA would cut unfilled positions but retain existing staff and launch a transit-oriented development program. He brought more work in-house: the agency developed a real-time transit information system itself for $50,000, he says, while outside firms wanted more than $1 million. And he convinced Wall Street to upgrade the agency’s credit rating.

Then he reinvested the savings. MARTA increased service and high-frequency hours, upgraded its bus fleet to natural gas, and—most importantly in Parker’s eyes—kept fares flat. As of October 2014 ridership was up for the year. In November, Clayton County voters overwhelmingly approved a penny sales tax to join the MARTA network, the first expansion since the agency formed in 1971.

Charles V. Bagli: Times Square’s Crushing Success Raises Questions About Its Future, New York Times

The Crossroads of the World has never been more popular. And that is becoming a problem.

More people than ever are packing into Times Square — from across the world, the country and the rest of New York City.

Eager to dip into such a bounty of wallets, international retailers are jostling for space, paying rents that are second only to Fifth Avenue. Pulsing, color-splashed digital billboards have grown from the size of basketball courts to football-field proportions. Attendance at Broadway shows topped 13 million last year for the first time.

Share this

21 comments

  1. Its great the Aussies like our Future Demand Project reports, as it seems that they’re the only ones actually listening to what the project says about how Government should actually decide the future not just let it happen or accept that the status quo now is how it will always be.

    The very next story about cycleway funding being scaled back is the exact opposite of what the Future Demand report says we should do with transport and demand planning.

    And it also, reiterates in essence Patrick’s, oft made comment “What you feed, grows”.

    1. If you feed it, it grows. With bus and cycle it is actually giving it actual garden space so it grows and in separate space. The data from Copenhagen for the protected cycling and the data from.our own North Shore busway is compelling and undisputable and if there is still a lane for car/truck what is the problem when these modes can reduce the car mode share by 37% even with using 50% Copenhagen morning peak and 50% our own current bus CBD share. Free flow safe cycle, bus and car within our current roadways. A lot of Roads like Great North Rd, ( yes this one for you Pohutakawas )can have a two way cycleway and a separated two way busway with 400mm wide x 250mm high terracotta pots stuck down with Selleys Liquid Nails and hedge planting done at $60 per m. So why not now, needs to be the question. All traffic models are now deemed unusable and void, and potentially fraudulent. Parking needs to be zoned off all arterial roads only. So now let’s look at proven mode shares and proven congestion relieving approaches.

      1. I would say that Auckland has an air tight case of negligence against the entire transport industry, and probably Wellington needs to look closely at those RONs if rail can acheive better outcomes of sustainability and future generations I would say you could make NZTA put in an electrified rail line in for free and demolish the motorway. Also Waterview I suggest you stop work, you are going to need the money.

        1. Anyone can make a complaint to IPENZ refer their website usually it is against an individual but no reason why anyone can’t state the organization involved and IPENZ can investigate from there. The ethics of professional engineers include sustainability, welfare of communities etc. I think it must be impossible for any motorway to stack up with what we know now as opposed to electric trains in the first instance. I fear NZTA is in full breach of ethics persisting with this approach. I am putting in a complaint myself about this and a few things about restricting proven congestion reducing methods, electric trains being no1, light rail, busways and protected cycle lanes.

  2. While this may not make the Kaimai tunnel economic the at attached article on the Japanese maglev project has the interesting information on how tunnel drilling is getting more efficient.

    “Obayashi, a big construction company, and Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Mechatronics Systems have jointly developed a tunnel-boring machine that is capable of drilling 25% faster than conventional bores. The two companies intend to come up with a shield-tunneler that can go 500 meters in a month, a 100% increase from 20 years ago.”

    This drill rate would complete each tunnel of the CRL in 4 months. (8mths for an out and back)

    http://www.worldindustrialreporter.com/jr-tokai-begins-constructing-first-commercial-superconducting-maglev-train-line/

    1. Great news on the tunnelling tech, I hope it’s cost competitive too, and appropriate to NZ conditions. There’s apparently a great deal of variation on the CRL route in terms of geo… I hope the CRL team are all over developments in this sector….?

  3. I’m surprised we haven’t heard anything about the Rugby League 9’s on this blog.

    Last weekend we heard all about the “great” events happening in Auckland that the Council no doubt contributes big bucks to.

    Here we have a great event, providing stunning vision of Auckland to an international audience and not a peep?

    1. Here’s how it works Matthew, this is an open forum; you have something of interest to say about the Nines, go ahead. Whinging that others haven’t said something, what?, is a pretty miserable addition to the conversation.

    2. I got the Eastern line train to Britomart this morning, the train was full of supporters “all dressed up for the Nines”, having a great time and hadn’t got the the game yet, and of course with free travel with their game tickets.
      Britomart was busy but coping like a normal weekday.

      Chap next to me on train was saying how fantastic the buses were at the end of the day before to get home.

      So yes, AT and ATEED working together nicely like a big city should.

      Another chap commented how the 7’s in Wellington are seeming to suffer (not sold out this year or last) now the Nines are here – he reckoned the cost of flights and accommodation in Wellington so close to the Nines means its one or the other, and 7’s are missing out on Auckland’s visitor $ as the Aucklanders are now staying home, and why wouldn’t they?

      So, yes thumbs up to ATEED for planning the event to occur 1 week before the 7s, now all we have to do is keep it here for a few more years.

      And made me wonder if we didn’t need something similar (a 2 or even 3 day event) for the Cricket too to make the domestic competion really come alive.
      Imagine if you could see 3 or 4 T20 length matches in one day – that would be quite something for fans,
      I’m sure the domestic teams could cope, or even an international triangular tournament like the Aussies do with the 1 dayers, except for T20’s and over a weekend or long weekend.

      Enough about the Nines Matthew?

      1. Good summary, though I’d like to know how much the ratepayer contributes so we can assess the cost/benefit. That information may be available but I’m unable to locate it.

        Our domestic cricket competition is beyond help and it doesn’t matter how it is packaged, people aren’t going to attend.

        Perhaps a 7 a-side competition with say 7 overs per team might work. I think they do something similar in Hong Kong with the stars of yesteryear. Problem is the international cricket schedule is already so congested you’d be struggling to get any current stars to attend which poses a problem in marketing the event. Domestic players aren’t going to get the general public along to an event.

      2. The cricket was a mess. Travel was free on the NEX but I didn’t see anyone else in Auckland getting a free bus ride as part of their ticket prices. This is not an infrequent occurrence and it would be nice of AT to explain why the NEX services keep getting free rides when many others don’t.

    1. I agree with almost all the comments in that article.

      Uber here (and the western world outside the US I think) is basically going to end up as a re-run of the NZ Bus Snapper/Hop debacle, over who owns the data it uses and generates.

      As you recall NZ Bus was very reluctant to allow its valuable boarding data to become “the property” of AT when HOP went in and is no doubt why it dragged it heels for so long to put HOP on its buses.
      And even now they claim commercial sensitivity on the HOP boarding data. Even though when PTOM comes in AT will again own the routes and the customers using them.

      NZ Bus did all it could, including special pleading to Ministers of the Government to allow them to try and keep their status quo.
      Uber has already shown it takes the same approach as NZ Bus having lobbied Ministers here for law changes which the Minister has ordered a review of.

      And Uber will no doubt do the same to their data – wanting to guard it and share it out as stingily as they can get away with, and only in return for special favours in return.

      How long before we see them wanting all bus lanes to become Bus+Uber lanes so that Uber users are privileged over PT and other Taxi/ride share users?
      And even if it allowed Taxi and Uber users the right to use such lanes, would that be acceptable to Auckland PT users.

      While I think Uber has a place, I think that AT and other local authorities themselves should actually consider owning and operating such a service like the KutsuPlus service in Scandinavia.
      So that PT and “last mile” services can seamlessly combine together to get people where they need to go.

      Its not in Uber or any other Taxi/ride sharing services interest to encourage users to use PT for any part or all of their journeys as they don’t want to share the revenue, they want it entirely for them,
      So there is no way any ride sharing app will propose using PT for all or part of its journey.

      So why would we be encouraging them to become part of the PT solution, when they are intent that the only sharing they permit is “ride sharing”.

  4. The Florence vs Atlanta picture is fundamentally dishonest and misleading, because it only covers the medieval walled city, not the modern municipality where the vast bulk of the 380,000 people live. As an example the main Santa Maria Railway station on the top left hand side of the photo is cut in half.

    What’s presented here is basically a cropped picture of the CBD, i have no idea what the population of the CBD of florence is, but this photo shows only around 10% of the city

    It’s basically a lie

    1. Actually it’s quite right, and it’s you who is either ‘fundamentally dishonest’, or more likely too lazy to spend five minutes googling!

      The cropped picture is the old town of Florence with 380k residents. The modern municipality of Florence has about 1.5m residents and yes, spreads out quite a bit more. Not quite 10% though, actually it’s about 25% of the metropolis shown I. The picture above.

      So yeah, third of a million people living in the space of one freeway interchange.

  5. I don’t have to spend 5 minutes googling, unlike you i suspect, I’ve spent a bit of time in Florence. The province of Florence (http://www.provincia.fi.it/) has a population of a bit over 1m, the city of of Florence (http://en.comune.fi.it/) which is a subset of it, has a population of 380k.

    The city with a population of 380k, isn’t remotely like the picture posted. It doesn’t stop halfway along the platform at the railway station. The entire inner north eastern suburbs which are part of the City area going past the football stadium are outside the old city walls and are cropped from the picture. It also runs a lot further west , past the Cascine, in fact all the way to the motorway bridge. in the south it goes as far as Certosa.

    The province with 1m+ people goes all the way to Empoli 35kms away

    1. My apologies, I stand corrected. Five minutes googling reveals the old city of the 1 quartiere pictured above has a mere 67k residents, in the same area as a single motorway interchange.

      Peter, perhaps you’d like to change the wording?

    2. Now let’s think about the other picture. If you were to fit something within an interchange presumably that would mean within the area of the actual interchange- the bit bounded by the ramps rather than expanding the picture to some arbitrary size that you can fit a subset of Florence into. My guess from the picture is that area would be around 1.5km each way. I would guess that is about the same as from the Florence station to the Ponte Vecchio. Kind of like saying I can fit Rome into a rat if Rome was small and the rat big.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *