Auckland Transport’s latest board meeting is board meeting is on as this post is published and here are the things I found interesting.

Closed Session

The closed session normally contains what appears to be the most interesting items at the meeting. My comments about the items in italics

Items for Approval/Decision

  • CPO/Britomart Group Agreement – I wonder if that relates to the suggestion to eventually build a permanent building behind the CPO.Cooper & Co Britomart Western Site visual 1
  • CRL Procurement update
  • Park and Ride – I’m not sure what this entails, new Park and Rides, changing how they’re managed?
  • Rail Procurement – I assume this relates to the procurement of services, if you recall they stopped the tender process last year.
  • AT Technology Strategy
  • Road Stoppings & Real Estate Inventory Optimisation
  • Newmarket Level Crossing – Confirmation of NoR
  • AMETI – Stage 2A Acquisition of land

Items for Noting

  • EMU Project update
  • Parking Future Platform update – I’m guessing this relates to the parking app we saw in the parking strategy video a few months back.
  • Insurance update
  • Unitary Plan verbal update – I’m not sure if any of the AT staff have been involved in the closed group reviewing the UP recommendations and if they were if they would be talking about this or just the UP process in general. 

Business Report

Moving on to the main Business Report and as usual I’ll just work through the report in the order highlighting the bits I find interesting.

RLTP Variation – AT have made a variation to the three-year Regional Land Transport Programme (RLTP) to include the Matakana Link Rd which suggests they’re planning on it being worked on within the next few years.

Strategic Initiatives

  • Work on the indicative business case for the NW Busway is expected to start in August.
  • AT say they’re working with the NZTA on integrating rapid transit options for the North Shore with the Additional Waitemata Harbour crossing route protection.
  • A preferred network for the greenfield growth areas has been decided and will now be presented to the council. I assume they’ll be fairly similar to the draft networks that were proposed. They’ll now have Indicative business cases created.

Lincoln Rd – AT have lodged a resource consent application for the large widening of Lincoln Rd. They expect it to be open for submissions in August.

Lincoln Rd Feb Design - Universal

Parnell Station – Kiwirail plan to move the old Newmarket station to the site in November and it will then undergo an external refurbishment till April 2017. AT will also be doing work at the station including adding footpath connections and ticket gates. It hadn’t been clear before that they would be gating the station but it makes sense that they should be doing. They haven’t said yet when services will start stopping there

Parnell pic June15

Otahuhu Bus/Train Interchange – AT say passengers will start using the new concourse from early October but the station will offically open on 29 October. They will also now be building a third platform, which is required for the CRL so means it can be done preventing disruption again in a few a year’s time.

New Network – AT are currently evaluating tenders for the West Auckland routes and will soon be launching tenders for Central, East and North Auckland which once awarded should allow the majority of the city’s new bus network to be implemented by the end of next year.

Bus performance and capacity – AT’s figures show bus reliability and punctuality are down on the same time last year and that a “A consolidated 12-month plan has been developed to address this and to manage capacity increases.” It’s interesting to see that Skybus which is a commercial service and outside of AT’s control performs considerably poorer than the other bus services. Conversely the Northern Express which has been gross contracted is the best performer, although the much better infrastructure helps here too (note: other services are generally net cost contracts until PTOM comes in)

2016-06 - Bus Performance

Fare evasion and Security – AT say “Strategy discussions are progressing with Police around an enhanced joint approach to Metro security and fare enforcement.


A few other things that I noticed that caught my attention.

Parking – the monthly indicators show parking occupancy in the city centre remains high both on and off street. On street parking prices in the city will be going up soon.

2016-06 - Parking Occupancy

Forward Programme – This gives an indication as to what is being discussed in future board committee meetings and at the next meeting. One interesting item to the next Customer Focus Committee is that AT are looking to change the T&Cs of AT HOP top-ups.

Is there anything else you’ve seen in the reports you’ve found interesting?

Share this


  1. Will car parking outside of the central city be reviewed?

    Car parking on carlton gore road in Newmarket is $1 per hour during the week. Compared to $8 early bird in the local parking building. Unsurprisingly there are never any spare parks on the street

    1. AT have said they are going to implement city wide policy of aiming for parking occupancy rates of ~85%. So that if it goes above that level, they will start to charge parking fees and if there are already fees, then they will increase until the supply/demand equilibriates to the 85% average occupancy again. So, should mean that you can always find a park, but the cost will depend on how busy the area is.

      1. Thanks for that Bevan. Do you know where I can read the source document? It will be interesting to see what happens as a result.
        Does anyone have any concrete evidence on what happens with the reduced traffic in the School Holidays?

  2. Interesting about Matakana Link Road. Even without the motorway being built this link road will certainly help congestion through Warkworth (especially during holiday periods). I imagine they will look at coning off parts of the old intersection during peak periods to improve flows.

  3. I find it interesting that AT only reports on bus punctuality at the start of the journey. I can only assume the stats for punctuality at the end is much worse than it is at the start so they prefer to report on the former rather than the latter. Good to see though they have developed a plan to address punctuality issues, though it’s a shame it took them a long time to get around to this. And it’s poor timing with the new network coming in over the next year which should hopefully come with much better schedules.

      1. Exactly, so why are they bothering with the business case now? I thought the way things worked under the current government is you fund and start work on things first, then the business case is something that gets done later. At least that’s how it seems to work with half the RoNS and harbour crossing etc.

  4. Good to see a mention of an investigation of bus lanes along Tamaki Drive from the port to Ngapipi Road. This stretch is exceptionally wide for a road built in the 1920s (I wonder if it was intended to take trams?).

    There is certainly space and a need for bus lanes along there, and hopefully separated bike lanes as well in, conjunction with the Glen Innes to city cycleway.

    I recently tried crossing the road near the mini golf place and gave up after waiting for a gap for at least 10 minutes. The traffic speed is way above 50 km/h, taking its cue from the design (I know myself it takes willpower to keep to the limit along there when driving).

    Bus and cycle lanes would make this premier waterfront route much safer for everyone by narrowing the space for cars and thereby slowing everything down.

    1. Ahem, you’re doing it wrong. You should be inside your car, not outside. Once you’re inside your car you will no longer have to wait 10 minutes.

      (I wish I could add a sarcasm tag, but unfortunately that’s how it works in many parts of Auckland.)

  5. There’s a nice public space at the back of Britomart. I think people like walking around there. Quick, let’s stick a building on it.

    One day the trains will stop at Parnell.

    1. Yes Harriet, I note that the cost to build 4.5km of rail, signals etc would be $96m… So how does HR to the airport from Otahuhu or Puhiniui cost over $1B according to consultants? Sounds like jacked up figures to make HR look bad compared to LR. I seriously think that the cost of either of these options would be entirely comparible to the cost of LR from Onehunga. For starters they are much shorter routes, they don’t need an expensive bridge over the harbour, LR wouldn’t even need to go from Dominion Rd to Onehunga if it isn’t continuing on to the airport so that’s another expense which isn’t included.
      This Mt Roskill spur could be routed Mt Roskill-CRL-Otahuhu-Airport for running pattern. They want 4TPH and up to 6TPH in peak. That will serve the airport nicely. Could start off with 3Car EMU.

      1. Rail and signals is the cheapest bit of building a railway, 90% of the cost is land, retaining walls, viaducts, tunnels, underpasses, stations, roadbed etc.

      2. Laying rails and installing signals on an existing, flat rail designation might be $20m per km. Dominion Road for example

      3. It has been suggested here before (Matt L, I think it was) that the Mt Roskill Spur idea only still exists as a foil to the LRT plans. Something to satisfy the need to make direct comparisons of alternatives. While it’s a very appealing idea to have, as well as the extra destinations, a Western line spur to do the same job as Onehunga does in boosting inner network frequency on the Southern line, does the strong likelihood of a third Henderson platform delivering peak express services through that same corridor soak up all the capacity that Mt Roskill would need? Does it impact on the plans for the main LRT depot to be based at Stoddard Rd, fed via that same corridor? Does it help or hinder potential freight use of the corridor?

        1. More thoughts – would a Mt Roskill Spur scupper the SW/Airport LRT proposal, by undermining or delaying the Dominion Rd LRT? Also, the LRT introduction is clearly pegged as post-CRL. I’d understood/expected that LRT as far as Kingsland was desired to soak up some of the capacity problems on the Western line during CRL works.

  6. While a Parnell station makes sense, the station that has been constructed isn’t really in Parnell, nor does it service Parnell particularly well. Will they be building a funicular in the near future? It is a hike and a half up the hill to Parnell Road. Perhaps it should be renamed the Domain station in the meantime?

Leave a Reply