Welcome to Friday. Here’s our roundup of some of the articles that caught our eye recently. Note we’re saving a few stories for posts next week, so if there’s something you think is missing today, stay tuned…

Today’s header image: the rad double rainbow from the weekend, courtesy of Scott Caldwell. 

Recently in Greater Auckland

And, because we skipped a roundup last Friday, here are last week’s posts if you’re in a catch-up sort of mood:

In other media, Matt spoke to RNZ about the “farcical” proposal for the harbour crossing, and the ongoing uncertainties about the proposed light rail routes.

If you enjoy our steady stream of urbanism content, a reminder that Greater Auckland is an independent, volunteer-run, analysis and advocacy platform. We appreciate your support and we welcome guest posts, including reposts of relevant content. Check out the “Contribute” link at the top right of every page.

Housing Housing Everywhere

There’s been a bunch of interesting housing stories lately, so we’re leading with that.

Regenerating Tamaki

Newsroom looks at the work of building housing around Glen Innes that’s been going on for many years now via the government-funded Tamaki Regeneration Company.

The organisation is 10 years into rolling out a unique housing programme in East Auckland, where paving the way for people to move from public housing to rental and home ownership is the priority.

The company will replace 2500 old state homes across the suburbs of Glen Innes, Point England and Panmure with 3500 new state homes and 7000 affordable and market homes, while partnering with council and central government to build commensurate infrastructure and revitalise town centres.

Work began in earnest in 2016, when Housing New Zealand handed over ownership and tenancy responsibilities for state homes in the area to TRC.

All it takes is a drive around these suburbs on the banks of the Tāmaki estuary to quickly see the changing face of this part of Auckland.

Medium-density new builds have doubled or tripled the number of homes lining streets formerly the domain of state houses built following World War II.

Auckland becoming a Housing Poster Child?

We’re starting to see a number of reports and articles, especially from the US, looking to Auckland as a case study of how to encourage housing, like this recent one from Business Insider:

In the face of this growing problem, the city decided to act. A law passed in 2016 allowed for “gentle density” — making it legal to build duplexes, triplexes, and townhomes on single-home lots. The policy tripled the city’s housing capacity. Between 2015 and 2022, new housing units permitted in the city grew from 9,200 to 21,301. Auckland went from mostly single-family homes to a much denser mix of multi-unit homes and attached single-unit buildings. In a 2021 research paper, Ryan Greenaway-McGrevy, the director of the Economic Policy Center at the University of Auckland, found that Auckland’s policy succeeded in its twin goals of boosting supply and increasing density.


The changes not only led to a lot of new housing, it also slowed the pace of rising housing costs. Maltman found a “significant reversal of the trend” of skyrocketing costs in Auckland.

“There’s been a significant slowing of rental price growth since the policy was implemented,” Maltman told me, referring to the 2016 reforms. “Both incomes and inflation have grown faster than the price of rental housing.”

Housing Consents

Speaking of housing consents, it’s been a while since we last updated things. The data to the end of June shows there’s been a change, with consents dropping off quite substantially recently, though they’re still high in historical terms.

In total, the number of consents issued in a 12-month period has dropped from a peak of just under 22,000 in September last year, to just over 19,000 in June. The numbers are currently tracking at around 20-25% lower than a year ago. If the trend continues, we might end up at around 17,000 per annum – which is still a very good outcome.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Note that there is a lag between a consent being issued and a dwelling being completed. That’s currently tracking at around 30-36 months, which means there’s still plenty more housing in the pipeline to be built. Which brings us to…

Stop the boom-bust cycle

Another article from Newsroom highlights that builders want an end to the boom-bust cycle:

Solving the boom-bust cycle of the construction sector can and should be done by whomever forms the next government, the Master Builders Association says

After enduring decades of volatility, the head of Master Builders says it’s time the government became involved by committing to its own long-term pipeline of projects, as well as looking to underwrite some private work.

“Take state housing for example, what we’ve had with successive governments is really inconsistent approaches to continuing to build state housing,” David Kelly said on the release of the association’s election manifesto.

He said following the Global Financial Crisis there was a significant slowdown in building, which then tried to catch up when the market got hot.

“And they’ve overheated the market, including through their own land acquisition programme … so that’s a really good example of where the government [should] say, look we will continue to have a long and consistent programme of building state housing. I think they could make a statement on that.”

He also said the bounce-back after the GFC could have been quicker, as it was in Australia where “policymakers have been more active in providing counter-cyclical incentives to boost demand during downcycles”.

“Following the GFC, house building in New Zealand dropped 50 percent and the residential construction sector lost 25 percent of its workforce. It took seven years for the workforce to recover to pre-GFC levels. By contrast in Australia it only took two years to return.”

How to talk about density

This video by the leader of Canada’s Conservative Party seems to push a policy similar to our National Policy Statement on Urban Development (NPS-UD). It’s a great way for politicians to talk about the benefits of allowing more density, especially around rapid transit stations.

Nice re-use of a handsome existing facade here, next to the Central Library.

Two Wheels Good

You might have missed this story from last week, about the Mobility Consumer Index survey from consultants EY. The big takeaway: two-wheeled trips are up by 63% in the past year.

Money said the survey found the two-wheeler option was particularly strong for shorter journeys where public transport might previously have been the choice.

“Say within 5km of a CBD where a trip might have been a walk, then a bus – a lot of those are replaced by scooters and Ubers which are cost competitive,” he said.

Here’s a great read from New Plymouth about families and their two-wheeled family vehicles, as the city looks to add protected bike lanes and other walking and cycling safety treatments downtown with support from the Transport Choices programme.

We can never read enough stories about school bike trains, and this one by Tommy de Silva for The Spinoff is a corker. Featuring the groundbreaking Pt Chev Bike Train, and a new one chugging through the well-connected paths of Puketāpapa – which in one term has seen the number of kids biking to Wesley Primary School go from zero to 10% of the school roll.

Low-traffic neighbourhoods

In Amsterdam, Paris, Oslo, Barcelona, Edinburgh, London, neighbourhoods that de-prioritise driving to allow other options to flourish are proving to be great places to live. They also save lives:

But as jargon and acronyms dominate the headlines, I wish political point scoring could be replaced with a real conversation about what a “healthier city” could look like: better public transport, safer streets for women, less traffic, accessible walking and cycling, and replacing some car journeys with other options.

Waltham Forest was one of the first low-traffic neighbourhoods in London (as covered here previously by George Weeks), and continues to deliver the goods:

Perhaps the most striking figure that has emerged from long-term studies is that the number of households exposed to dangerous levels of nitrogen dioxide is reduced dramatically. In Waltham Forest it fell from 58,000 in 2007 to 6,300 in 2017. People born in the borough can now expect to enjoy an extra six weeks of life expectancy, according to an independent study by King’s College London published in 2018.

It also turns out that having good friends within a fifteen-minute reach is good for you. Who’d have thought?

A study, using the Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Index to understand whether emotions are indeed contagious, showed that a happy friend living within a mile of you is enough to increase your chances of being happy by 25%. If your neighbor is happy, that ups your chances by 34%. An article on the findings in the Harvard Gazette sums it up well: “Happiness appears to love company more so than misery.”

And we’ve shared this before, but we do like this sweet chocolate-chip-cookie-themed take by Grady Connell on why Auckland needs more neighbourhood shops.

Regions love buses

Good news from Nelson/ Tasman, where electric buses have led to a huge spike in ridership including “a 195 per cent increase in weekend journeys, due to the more frequent services”.

Meanwhile, in Whanganui, the new service Te Nguru The Tide is leading an overall surge in bus ridership, with The Tide alone busier this June than the whole city network last June! Anthonie Tonnon talks to RNZ’s Jesse Mulligan here.

Good Reads

A great piece by Verity Johnson about what politicians don’t understand about Auckland:

… Auckland has shifted recently. In the past five years, a strange bonding-through-transportation-trauma has taken place. It brought both the True Blue Businessman and the Mung Bean Hipster together in a way that previously only Tom Cruise movies could. I know, because I’m part of this daily crossing of the divides. Every day I, representing Team Alternative Milks, take a bus with True-Blue-Through-And-Through Stew. And we chat the whole time about how much better this is than driving.

It’s not that we’ve suddenly found a shared love of the climate. It’s just neither of us can do 3 hours of daily deadlock. And so frustration has given birth to a new, purely practical Auckland voter, who wants public transport because they just can’t spend another minute in a car.

A meditation by Anna Rawhiti-Connell in the Spinoff, about the “car sit”:

Somehow, sitting in the thing I hate, not going anywhere, provides respite from the reality of having to actually drive it places in order to successfully exist as a functional adult in Auckland. In my head, converting this necessary evil into my own private isolation tank feels subversive.

In Newsroom, Dr Kirsty Wild writes about the need to get ourselves out of this “quick-fix” doom loop which is paving the way to poorer lives:

We need to talk more about the stress of driving, and its impact on our lives and families. Not only because it’s making our lives worse, but also because it’s keeping us stuck in a cycle of expensive ‘temporary fix’ roading projects that relieve congestion for a short period, but are making it worse in the longer run. Election promises of new roads are the petrol station chocolate bar for the exhausted commuter: a temporary ‘pick me up’ that quickly leaves us more tired than before.

Also in Newsroom, Marc Daalder pinpoints the political addiction to bitumen in defiance of everything we know about climate change:

It’s election season, which means it’s also big roading project announcement season.

The New Zealand electorate loves nothing more than a promise to see most of the country paved in asphalt in an unrealistically short amount of time for an unrealistically small amount of money.

The climate’s best hope is that these plans all fall over when the true, sheer cost of them becomes apparent. Hopefully, before someone at Waka Kotahi puts in an Everest-sized order for bitumen, parties of all stripes will have come around to the demands of the climate response and redirect that funding to e-bikes instead.

Lastly, in a week in which several ferry routes in Auckland were abruptly canned due to staff shortages, all eyes are on options for those who need to cross the harbour.

Our friends at Bike Auckland point out in a media release how this underscores the urgency for walking and cycling access via the existing bridge, aka Liberating a Lane.

Meanwhile in Sydney:

Related: please enjoy this iconic people’s bridge, in Kazakhstan:


Share this


  1. With ferry unreliability, and nice plans for waterfronts a long way from reality, still no liberated lane on the bridge… is there healing in the water of the Waitemata?

    Eke Panuku is supersizing the berths at Westhaven to profit from the uberwealthy… would it take much to enable ordinary Aucklanders to get out on the harbour? Office dwellers could paddle a kayak to work if there was a rack to store them on. Apartment-dwellers could rent a small 2-person sailing dinghy for an afternoon or a bigger boat for a weekend, if owners were incentivised and enabled to make them available.

    A low-carbon future includes recreation, and the harbour should be a focus for that.

    1. Not quite sure what you’re trying to say there Heidi?

      Are you suggesting that boat owners should be forced to make their boats available to random punters wanting a day on the harbour?

      On the supersizing berth part – what happened is that they took out a set of heavily underutilised section of ‘pole moorings’ within the Westhaven enclosure. These are a lot cheaper to rent as you can’t walk out to your boat, you need a dinghy on the pier which you then row out to your boat.
      Somewhat more inconvenient that walking down the pier and stepping aboard.

      The ‘western entrance’ which was a gap in the sea wall was closed off, the seawall was fortified, and have now replaced the pole moorings with a series of 18 & 20m berths as that’s where the money is.

      They’ve done this because that is where the demand for berths is. 40ft used to be a big boat, now it is 50-60ft. And 90% of the boats in those new berths are all huge launches. Very few yachts.

      You can find the pricing for the berths in the Westhaven website, but to give you an idea, it’s most certainy a rich mans sport!

      18m (59’1″) $68.00 $2,108.00/month
      20m (65’7″) $78.00 $2,418.00/month

      As you can see, it’s a cash cow.

      1. They’re steadily increasing the length of the berths, ma, to house larger boats, putting the rents up and “forcing” – since you use the word – smaller boat owners out. I am more thinking of coordinating a service that boat owners could be part of to lower their costs. Yes, I understand the insurance implications, but with proper training and skipper assistance, it could be worked out.

        But even just kayak and small dinghy storage on the land close to offices would be something.

        I was struck by the demographic skew on the ferries to Rotoroa last summer; getting out on the harbour is a rich man’s sport altogether. And that’s what I’d like to change.

        Do you reckon Eke Panuku have worked out the carbon cost of pandering to these fly-in, fly-out billionnaires and their fuel-guzzling, resource-wasteful toys – and whether taking their money to allow them to keep ruining the future is really a good idea?

        1. I agree that kayak storage would be very popular Heidi.

          But to be honest if I had the choice I wouldn’t go kayaking in the harbour from the bridge to north head, it’s a terrible piece of water to be on. I always say to my kids when we’re going down the harbour to hang on tight as there is so much wake from all the stink pots charging out at max speed (12 knots), so really they’re doing 15 knots (just shy of 30km/h).

          Kayaking from the shore, or kohi would be a much much nicer experience than the harbour east of the bridge to north head. (rightly or wrongly for the reasons you mention.)

          But those big butt ugly launches aren’t going away, they’re only becoming more and more popular. People don’t want to sail somewhere at 5 knots, they want to walk onboard, turn a key and drive somewhere at 15-25 knots. Then put 1500 litres of diesel in upon returning…

          The issue with renting your boat out is you then have to have a charter license to operate, there a a lot of hoops to jump through to get that, (they’re expensive and rigourous hoops) and if you’re on the boat you need a skippers ticket, also a very hard test to pass.

          Not to mention that nearly every boat owner on the planet has zero interest in letting one of their most trusted friends use thier boat, let alone some stranger.

          I guess owning a boat could be defined as a rich mans sport, but there are a lot of boaties that most certainly aren’t rich and I’d certainly include myself in that. The $20K leaf we just bought is worth more than our boat. If you keep your boat on a mooring you can probably own one for $2-3/k year. That’s a lot of money for some people but also quite affordable for many, should one be inclined to buy a boat in the first place.

          There are a lot of times I’d not recommend it… 😉

        2. The olden days of Auckland had many people making their own trailer sailers etc so was not a rich mans sport back then.

    2. I’m guessing you used to be a primary school teacher, before switching to a life on welfare, as you seem to have a very strange notion of the workplace.
      People don’t want to turn up to work wet from Kayaking the harbour anymore than they want to turn up sweaty from riding their bike to the office.
      There are lots of opportunities for Aucklanders to get on the harbour, including kayak rentals in Mission Bay.
      Auckland is often called the ‘City of Sails’, that is a big low carbon statement, even if the yachts are made from petchems.
      You should just keep your stupid ideas to yourself, socialism doesn’t work dear.

      1. Nice features in all human skin are its waterproofing and ease of care.

        Speak for yourself, like a good rational agent of the free market.

        The rest of us might enjoy a bike buzz on the way to work, and we know how to operate a shower.

        1. Dr Hu seems to know what everyone wants. Or insists on forcing it on them.

          The dig at Socialism is ironic.

    3. I would like to see a huge spend-up on the ferries and some new stops. The Australians do this brilliantly, it’s about time we starting writing some cheques to make the most of our harbour.

      I still like my idea of a huge wooden boardwalk along parts of Tamaki Drive to create some public space (and to free up some space on the road corridor for permanent bus lanes) and hooking a ferry up to it in parts would be an incredible addition to the city. I’m just not sure how to do it and preserve some of the incredible lava features on the eastern shorelines, although some very smart people could probably find a way to showcase them with clever design.

      1. Ummmm…..! Re “I still like my idea of a huge wooden boardwalk along parts of Tamaki Drive to create some public space (and to free up some space on the road corridor for permanent bus lanes) ”
        Just a minor detail but a major one if you cycle. Have you ever tried riding a bike on a “boardwalk”? They pop up sometimes on existing shared pathways. Many have some really bad design features such as antislip strips that also rip the bejesus out of your cycle’s tyres, and require regular upkeep, as these surfaces are prone to wear in ways which create ‘trip hazards’ for pedestrians. Their surface, which is “boards” also creates a nasty jittering sensation for anyone attempting to traverse using a wheeled transport device – eg- A walker, wheelchair, pram, and of course a bicycle.
        The designers of any boardwalk need to keep this in mind – or is the intention built into these to limit users to those fit and able to walk and reduce cyclists to pushing their devices unless they want ripped tyres and a very uncomfortable ride… if so what about those people who have no option but to suffer the discomfort of a jittery ride eg people living with limited options for locomotion like using a wheeled mobility device and babies in prams?
        This concept sure smacks on ‘ableism’ if the designers fail to figure this out.

        1. Before you get too incensed, I agree it would be a bit pointless to suggest creating extra space that large chunks of the public couldn’t access 🙂

          Whether a boardwalk is the best way to do this or not, I’m not sure; All I know is that we are drastically selling ourselves short on public space on Tamaki Drive and other cities around the world do a far better job with their harbours. Reallocation of road-space should be the start, but if we can change the way we use the harbour by extending beyond the sea wall, then I think it should be on the table for discussion.

  2. Interesting Titbit in the 2024 GPS, –
    The heavily publicised 20% reduction in VKT by 2035 has fineprint,

    “Reduce total vehicle kilometres travelled (VKT) by the light fleet by 20 percent (relative to projected growth)”

    If you go hunting for other references to “relative to projected growth” you find a cabinet paper that states this,

    “Target 1 is based on what we expect baseline VKT to be in 2035, taking into account expected VKT growth of 24 percent by 2035, largely resulting from population growth. It is important to note that this target, while challenging, is equivalent to only a 1 percent absolute VKT reduction compared to 2019 levels. ”


    So presumably if the projected population growth increases, (its back to 2% in 2023 with migration) the 20% reduction in VKT in 2035 could still actually result in an increase in VKT from today…

    1. Also interesting to see an Avondale to Onehunga rail link in the GPS. I wonder if this is tied to the Marsden spur or general rejuvenation of northland rail freight, or if passenger services are being considered?

    2. Yeah; and worse – that myth of 20% VKT reduction has already been carried through into all sorts of plans and strategies. WK touts their practices as climate-conscious but the fallback is that they’re still planning for VKT growth and achieving this reduction relative to the baseline (ie no reduction at all) is treated as aspirational.

      You’d think the Ministry would prepare a GPS that responds to the High Court finding that the emissions budgets don’t actually deliver on our international commitments, knowing that fixing this will absolutely require us to revise things like this bogus VKT reduction…

  3. That bridge is Kazakhstan is the kind of thing we should build in Auckland, for active and PT modes. Save the billions on ridiculous tunnels and put that money towards other infrastructure.

  4. On listening to the RNZ reporting on “revenge passing” where motorists drive dangerously close to cyclists as an act of intimidation, several questions arise.
    Part of the problem could be that Motorists who do this face no consequences, and even ‘sympathy’, and cyclists who complain often face social ridicule, or ‘blame’ focused critique from the non-cycling public sector. It is not ok, for example, for a business owner to use ‘revenge passing’ to take out their anger about ‘reduced business’ because of a cycle – lane construction, any more as there is justification for domestic violence or child abuse. What makes them so entitled that they can assume approval to use violence without expecting to face consequences like any other violent offender?
    How is this motorist behavior different to other forms of dangerous driving and threatening behavior such as ‘road rage’?
    There is also another variety of this ‘toxic’ motorist called ‘the willfully blind’ motorist- or the “sorry I did not see you” excuse motorist while backing or turning into a driveway/ parking space etc; without looking or indicating.
    So far there are only legal consequences if a motorist hits someone on a pedestrian crossing. Despite the legal consequence, this still happens enough to prompt the necessity for expensive extra barriers to be constructed around crossings as well as enhanced law enforcement. As a consequence, motorists have become more cautious around pedestrian crossings.
    Cycle lanes need a similar level of legal protection to match any physical protection being installed. Bus lanes have more legal and social protection than cycle spaces. Eg Cameras are set up on pavements at rush hour to catch motorists illegally using bus lanes and parking wardens turn up with tow trucks to tow vehicles parked on them outside of permitted legal parking times.
    There is also a ‘shame’ factor if a motorist hits someone on a pedestrian crossing, even if the pedestrian jumps out suddenly into the path of a moving vehicle. Motorists have a legal responsibility to be cautious around this space.
    Cycle-ways need similar protection, both ‘legal’ and otherwise, because motorists also misbehave for psychological reasons.
    Many public spaces are still primarily designed for the convenience of the motorist, and are unsafe cycling spaces, where there is lowered levels of responsibility expected of motorists.
    The legal consequences for crashes involving this type of motorist behavior really need a skillful reset. Most public car parks are monitored by cameras. “Near misses’ should at least prompt justification for a legal recourse for victims to report and allow for ‘warning’ similar to driving over the speed limit to be issued.
    Being a motorist, no matter how ‘essential’ this has become to individuals wellbeing, is still a privilege leveraged on responsible conduct. That is why older people have to pass a strict physical competency test, to retain the right to drive when they reach a specified age. Why is ‘revenge passing’ and similar motorist behavior not considered as an element of ‘road rage’, which happens as a result of anger toxicity affecting a driver’s behavior, and ability to drive safely?
    Is ‘road rage’ considered ‘violent offending’ and are there any legal consequences for offending, or does someone have to be physically injured and killed first?
    What are the behavior boundaries? Does an act of “revenge passing”meet the threshold? What if there are children involved? Should there be enhanced consequences if the ‘revenge pass’ involves a cyclist carrying children?
    I think all road users need answers to these questions, and motorists who behave this way should face legal consequences and challenges to their rights to drive a vehicle, similar to someone who is caught drunk or drugged behind the wheel.
    Motorists who are so captured by ‘toxic anger and self entitlement’ that they feel the ‘need’ to behave in this way, and treat their driving privileges as a competitive sport, are just as unfit to continue driving as someone driving under the influence of drugs and alcohol. They are as much a danger to other road users, and should have their driving privileges legally challenged, restricted or revoked, and face other consequences such as restricted insurance cover and cyclists should have the right to riding safety equal to that of motorists and pedestrians, that does not involve choices of living with unnecessary risk and inconvenience, or unjustified restricted use of their vehicles.

    1. IMO “revenge passing ” has its roots in jealousy,l ,a motorist have spent $50,000 upfront on a vehicle ,and shell out $200 per week to feed it,and a “bloody peasant” on a bicycle can get around faster than “me”. The price of fuel,will be a factor in the end ,our dollar against the US, is abysmal 59 cents . The country is broke ,hence any election spending promises,are couched with tax increases,private funding. When the true cost of “expanding roading” hits home, there will surely be a sobering reality,and the bicycle will show the way. Increased cycling numbers will force increased facilities,and improved laws.

    2. It sounds like you have had personal experience.

      For walking and biking safety, not much can beat taking road space back from motoring.

      Compliance is voluntary, enforcement relies on enforcers, but when you write the law in concrete, everyone can read it.

      1. Re “Compliance is voluntary, enforcement relies on enforcers, but when you write the law in concrete, everyone can read it.”
        Lynching in the time of black slavery in the Deep South of the US had the same effects; but do NZers want this type of activity to be valorized? In that instance – we know who these people are, but you just identified what they are as well….LOL

      2. So have many others. How much influence on motorist behavior would be exerted if ‘revenge passing’ etc penalties and enforcement have on this behavior?
        NB if you, park in the wrong place, break the speed limit or drive in a bus lane you get caught by a camera and get an infringement notice…I wonder how many motorists in this video got infringement notices-go figure…https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/300945561/bike-lane-bullies-bad-drivers-putting-cyclists-at-risk-with-repeat-offences

        1. Nice compilation. This is why we need more car-free spaces.

          Bollards and concrete are better at building compliance than rules and enforcement.

  5. Also, the Labour announcement on the North West, of a busway, which is totally not a knee-jerk response to National’s announcement some weeks ago and please don’t ask about the Light Rail we promised in 2017 to get elected and then did no work on.

    What’s even more infuriating is that there’s no decision on whether this is going to be actually fully separated or a reallocation of road space. So until you know what that is, it’s hard to understand if it will come close to the North Shore busway which was touted as the poster child for the project. In other words – there’s every chance it could just be literally what we have now but with some stations that cost hundreds of millions of dollars; with no mention of how this will link up with Lincoln Road or the current logjam which is the Tat offramp.

    So in other words, we have a vague plan, more of a loose commitment, which is far removed from the thing we also floated a vague plan for last time then didn’t deliver anything on, but this one is totally different, trust us guys, even though it’s essentially a hair cut on the actual infrastructure promised, while the Shore gets road tunnels and a light rail line.

    1. Both Labour and National have reverted to their usual stance – spend all the money on the outskirts because the people that live closer to the CBD can use standard buses on standard roads. This of course encourages sprawl: if it is quicker and nicer to get to the CBD on a busway from Hobsonville Point than on a crappy bus from Mount Roskill, people will choose Hobsonville Point. Labour do still have LR but it will never get built because it became more about Mangere and the Airport, and National seem to have nothing at all for the central suburbs because they love sprawl.

      1. I’m not sure you could realistically call Hobsonville Point ‘sprawl’ anymore. Maybe 10 years ago, but that’s part of Auckland now. And if they’re spending all the money on the ‘outskirts’ like Massey/Westgate/Hobsonville (again, not really outskirts anymore) then the total lack of rapid transit over the last six years suggests otherwise.

  6. In Pt Chevalier they are building an apartment with 6 or more storeys and 60 units.
    They are using modules and each one is quite large and all have good views front and back.
    They are onto the 6th level and it has taken about 2 months..
    I have noticed that most buildings like these are situated where the shade is at the back and developers do care about the neighbour’s.
    The people moving in will give a good boost to the already busy suburb.

  7. The Nelson bus changes are significantly more than just adding E Buses. Changed routes, far more services particularly off peak, new routes (including airport), etc. I’d suggest these are more important than the engines.

  8. And on the Papkura – Pukekohe section of the Auckland Network this has been happening , and with now over 40% has now been Wired and also showing the works at what will be the new Pukekohe Station .

  9. And also last week the Te Huia carried 3,835 passengers , which was free as an apology for not being able to go to the Strand and that worked out as an average of 175 passengers per trip and they also ran a 6car train .

  10. Auckland Council and Auckland Transport increasing the targets for Death and Serious Injury is a real warning sign of an organisation in trouble.
    If you cant meet the goals or the challenges, redefine them.
    Raising the Acceptable Dead and Seriously Injured targets is a green light for faster traffic, less mode-shift and a clear statement that AC and AT are safety third organisations, and are out of their depth.

    To the 14 councillors who voted to accept the increased Death and Serious Injury on our roads. You do not speak for me – or those you are putting in harms way.
    Do Better.

Leave a Reply

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