Another week down and another weekly roundup on all things cities. Can you believe it’s almost summer?
This Week in Greater Auckland
- On Monday, Matt delved into all the various consultations Auckland Transport is currently running after the local election.
- On Wednesday, we had a guest post from the esteemed Darren Davis on The frequentisation of public transport in Tāmaki Makaurau
- On Thursday, Matt took a look at the Minister of Transport’s admission of the unaffordable reality of the RoNS programme.
This roundup, like all our work, is brought to you by the Greater Auckland crew and made possible by generous donations from our readers and fans. If you’d like to support our work, you can join our circle of supporters here, or support us on Substack.
Only a few days left on the AF Thomas Park consultation
Consultation on the proposed changes to the AF Thomas Park to create more flood resilience for the North Shore closes on the 23rd of November.
Make sure to have your say!
With just days remaining until public consultation closes, Auckland Council is calling on residents and community groups to share their vision for the future recreational use of A F Thomas Park. This is the final chance for Aucklanders to help shape the park’s transformation into a unique destination following major blue-green infrastructure works currently in design.
Opportunity to Shape a Landmark Park
The proposed transformation of A F Thomas Park is a landmark project, featuring both new flood storage wetlands and dry flood detention areas designed to increase flood resilience in the Wairau catchment. The park, given its size and amenities, could stand out in the future as a resilient, multi-use open space, with the potential to rival other iconic Auckland destinations such as Cornwall Park.
Spinoff Firing
There were some great pieces from The Spinoff this week.
Public transport in Auckland is actually pretty good
First up we have Hayden Donnell noting that public transport in Auckland is actually pretty good.
When politicians started getting serious about congestion charging in Auckland in 2023, RNZ went to ask people on the street what they thought of the idea. The response was unanimous. “Firstly, we need more access to public transport and probably more affordability for that as well,” said Emily. “Those ideas only work in places where there’s viable alternative transport options,” said Simon. “The alternatives really need to be in the form of very, very efficient and easy-to-use public transport,” said Public Transport Users Association chair Niall Robertson.
The interviewees were repeating received wisdom. As the saying goes, only two things are certain in life: death and Auckland’s public transport network sucking balls. The idea of putting a charge on people driving to work seems, in the words of Emily, “outrageous”, when you’ve only encountered a sparsely serviced network of diesel-chugging buses and often cancelled trains.
But is that actually a fair reflection of Auckland’s public transit system as it currently stands? Though it might be a controversial, even viscerally disgusting thing to say, these days public transport in Auckland is in many respects fine, and in a number of areas, bordering on good.
…..
The change has been profound and relatively speedy by transport project standards. In 2016, Auckland only had seven frequent transit routes, which Auckland Transport defines as lines where buses run every 15 minutes between 7am and 7pm, seven days a week. By 2022, that number had risen to 29. This year it has 43. AT expects to add five to seven more to get to 50 by 2030. The numbers are startling, and more so when they’re drawn up on a map.
MRCagney Auckland Frequent Transit Network Map. Image credit: MRCagney
On Auckland’s Congestion
Hayden had another great piece explaining why Auckland’s traffic is bad in one map.
The root of the dilemma is starkly illustrated in a recent Statistics NZ release with the snappy title “Subnational population estimates: At 30 June 2025”. It contains a map showing New Zealand’s annual population change broken down by district. Selwyn is expanding. Ruapehu is shrinking. But inset is a breakdown of Auckland’s population data organised by local board area, and it reveals the city has got things, to use the official planning terminology, arse backwards.
The central suburbs of Auckland are dying while the rest grow. (Image: Statistics NZ)
Not only are the central suburbs of our biggest city failing to grow; they’re shrinking at a rate similar to the Tararua district, which is home to a place RNZ described as “the town you’ve never heard of”. Though that may have been harsh to Herbertville, its growth still shouldn’t be on par with areas that sit next to the country’s most productive economic centre and a new $5.5bn rail line.
…..
The effects are visible in the traffic compacting nose to bumper at rush hour on the motorways every morning. Auckland’s public transport is improving, and in some areas is even good, but it’s difficult to efficiently serve such a spread out city. For most trips, the residents making their home in Kumeu and Papakura are still going to have to drive. Some will travel to the city centre, some will stay local, and some will go to jobs across town, but unfortunately all of them will require a car, and one little-known fact is that traffic is made of cars. Greater Auckland’s Matt Lowrie sums it up. “As a city we have focused on spreading people out and that has resulted in people being more likely to have to drive, and therefore we have more congestion,” he says.
City Centre, not “CBD”
And finally a fantastic piece by Joel MacManus delving into the language used around Auckland’s City Centre, and the (long true) reality that its more than just a ‘central business district’.
City centres are places of businesses, but they’re also full of residences, recreational facilities, public gathering spaces, religious and cultural centres, tourism attractions and more. When we think of city centres only as business districts, we forget what gives those areas value: the people. In most English-speaking countries, “central business district” is synonymous with the financial centre; a cold, soulless part of town dominated by glass towers full of bankers and wankers. It’s really only in New Zealand and Australia that “CBD” has come to refer to the entire urban core.
Coming to work or a place of business is one of the reasons people spend time in a city centre, but it’s a far less important reason than it used to be. Since the emergence of Covid-19, city centres across the world have seen a decline in daily commuters and overall economic activity. A PwC report in Canada found declining retail trade and rising commercial vacancy rates in all six of the largest cities. A UK study estimated £3 billion in lost revenue for city centres due to changes caused by Covid-19. In the US, office vacancy rates hit a 30-year high of 18.2% in 2023.
The same trend is clear in New Zealand. In Auckland and Wellington, office vacancy rates spiked in 2020 and have continued to rise. Christchurch has managed to buck the trend thanks to the ongoing rebuild and population increase.
The world’s best cities for walking and cycling
A new study examined the data to figure out the best cities for walking and cycling. Via Scientific American:
The authors of the study, which was published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, used data from Google to determine walking and cycling rates in 11,587 cities in 121 countries, a far larger sample size than in any previous research. Perhaps unsurprisingly, they found that cities with lots of cyclists and pedestrians tend to be dense and filled with bike lanes.
The authors also found that higher gas prices meaningfully increase national walking and cycling rates. “You need carrots and sticks,” says John Pucher, an emeritus urban transportation researcher at Rutgers University, who was not involved in the study. “You need incentives for cycling and walking [combined with] disincentives to car use.”
Cities’ steep terrain can discourage cycling. But the study showed that climate—even frosty winters, scorching summers and ample precipitation—is not a major barrier to high walking and biking rates. In fact, some of the world’s most bike-friendly cities are windy and rainy, Pucher says.
Notable that you needed both carrots and sticks for walking and cycling to thrive, and that infrastructure plays a key role. (It’s not rocket science.)
Blocking the way
Back here in Auckland, Stuff reports:
A road safety sign has been planted in the middle of a cycle lane near a primary school in Auckland, prompting injury concerns and frustration from residents and the local board chair.
Auckland Transport (AT) has acknowledged the positioning is “far from ideal” and says a contractor put it in the wrong spot.
The sign, urging motorists to slow down around a school, went up on Wednesday in the centre of a shared path on Joshua Carder Drive in Scott Point, a new development in Hobsonville in the city’s north-west.
It’s a route heavily used by students walking and cycling to Scott Point Primary. The pole blocks the cycling side of the path, forcing riders to divert around it or move onto the footpath.
“Tim Tam” audit shows bike infrastructure is good, actually
An independent audit of the headline-grabbing bike lane separators in New Plymouth, have found the project had significant safety benefits for everyone who uses this stretch of road, which correlates with international research on the subject.
The safe system audit report, conducted by Becca, was due to go before the New Plymouth District Council for consideration on Thursday.
The audit found the $3.8 million project, which was wholly funded by NZ Transport Agency Waka Kotahi, had “created a safety improvement for people who walk, ride and drive” the section of State Highway 45 despite protests from large sections of the community.
Four key findings from the report found the project had significantly improved safety due to reduced speed at intersections, additional crossing points, reduced crossing distances at intersections and the physical separators which were known almost universally as “Tim Tams”.
Despite this, local politicians are still looking into taking them out. In doing so, they’re also ignoring the positive changes seen by schools in the area.
However, schools directly affected by the project reported the changes had provided positive changes with motorists’ habits.
That included West End School principal Hamish Hislop, who believed the changes around the main intersection leading to his school had made it safer for the young students.
Hislop believed the safety improvements were needed given the behaviour of drivers around the school who continued to speed and use their phones at peak times.
“I do not believe removing the safety measures are in the best interests of the students from our school or the ratepayers,” he said.
As always the evidence is clear: what is actually needed is the political bravery to wait for changes to bed in, before rushing to rip stuff out at the slightest squeak of disgruntlement.
Brown’s ideological GPS coming home to roost for Bishop
A story broke this week of Minister of Transport, and MP for Hutt South, using Kāinga Ora money to fund a walking and cycling bridge in his electorate.
Senior minister Chris Bishop used housing money earmarked for a stormwater project to fund a walking and cycling bridge in his electorate – against the advice of his officials.
The $27m in funding from state housing agency Kāinga Ora was needed because the Government’s new transport policy had slashed any funding for non-car infrastructure, documents exclusively obtained by The Post reveal.
As Henry Cooke reports, Bishop signing this off was seemingly against the Cabinet Manual.
It seemingly goes against a Cabinet Manual directive that ministers should not make major decisions about projects within their electorate, but Bishop says making the decision with Finance Minister Nicola Willis was an adequate safeguard.
As Cooke points out, the only reason money needed to be taken from Kāinga Ora, was due to the government’s ridiculously ideological GPS, authored by Simeon Brown.
Bishop, who is both Housing and Transport Minister, had promised to fund the “City Link” bridge between the Melling railway station and Lower Hutt city centre as part of a wider RiverLink project when running to win the Hutt South electorate.
But the Government’s 2024 transport policy statement halved funding for walking and cycling, and introduced severe new restrictions on the money left.
“Investment in walking and cycling should only take place where there is either clear benefit for increasing economic growth or clear benefit for improving safety and where there is an existing or reliably forecast demand for walking or cycling,” the policy statement reads.
This left a $27m deficit in funding for the bridge.
But the Hutt City Council had an idea for where some more public money could be found – an Infrastructure Acceleration Funding agreement between state house developer Kāinga Ora and the council.
The ongoing ramifications of Simeon Brown’s bizarre and petty crusade against walking and cycling continue to spread far outside of just Auckland.
Videos and socials
View this post on Instagram
View this post on Instagram
That’s everything from us this week! Enjoy your weekend.
Processing...
Waving away the Riverlink bridge decision as ‘pragmatic’ or any other responsibility deflecting term is not correct. It is an example of corrupt practice by a minister of the crown covering for the dumbass decision of his predecessor. We like to think New Zealand is above this is the sort of corruption. We are not. This is us. And some of us don’t like it.
Simeon Brown’s dumbass decision to remove alternate mode spending from ‘roading’ projects created the problem. Chris Bishop was forced into a corner by his colleagues ideologically driven anti-woke dictat so had to get creative because he had ‘promised’ his electorate there would be a cycleway connection across the river.
The Hutt Council laid the groundwork by identifying the unspent Kainga Ora funds. As Minister of Housing Chris Bishop approved the transfer to the bridge project. As Minister of Transport Chris Bishop approved the funds be spent on the bridge project. As the MP for Hutt South he gets to parade his corrupt practice as “what we campaigned on” as if the ends justify the means.
Alongside Chris Bishop the Hutt Councils have to answer questions about their role in initiating the transfer of funds from one spend area to another. There are possibly grounds for the Auditor General to look into all of Hutt Council’s cross-project spending to see if this is an isolated issue of corrupt practice or the tip of an iceberg. Both Lower Hutt and Upper Hutt have new Mayors. Maybe they should be championing this investigation.
I think its just as bad that Luxon and Brown (demanding Eastern Busway completion to be sped up) and Bishop (his bridge) see active or public transport as worthy of their electorates, but slash funding so no one else gets similar benefits.
yes indeed. This coalition is corrupt to its core to the point and where they can’t legislate against the views of others being heard they just ignore the advice or lie about it. See https://newsroom.co.nz/2025/11/21/confusion-reigns-as-climate-minister-appears-unaware-of-own-announcement/
That’s obsessive proceduralism and the chief reason why the country is so far behind in infrastructure development. Presumably, you think that it would be better for Kainga Ora to spaff the unspent infrastructure money on unnecessary projects then it be deployed for something that Lower Hutt taxpayers would actually utilise?
The only people genuinely upset by this are people who are being led by their personal dislike for National.
Partially agree. A better walking and cycling link across a river is a good active mode project without having looked into details.
However, it seems like KO might have some houses to build (see homeless people in Auckland and elsewhere and the generally tough housing market), so why take money for a transport project from them and not from the transport budget?
Heaven forbid the transport budget be used for anything but roads.
I take your point, but the KO money wasn’t earmarked for actual houses (just supporting infrastructure).
To have spent the money on housing would have involved that same redirection of funding that people are complaining about for the bridge (although arguably to a lesser degree of seriousness, as at least it would be within the same department than across ministries).
That said, I mostly agree with people who generally think that this government’s priorities for transport and housing don’t reflect the Country’s needs, our means and the relative benefits of car-focused infrastructure v mass transit.
If spending $300M+ on a cycleway in petone didnt get the attention of the auditor general, then that dragon is truly deeply asleep at the wheel.
Its so odd to be complaining about inappropriate spending on walking and cycling infrastructure. Ministers being caught out doing the right thing.
If the gps is generating outcomes that take $27M mis-allocations to repair, then imagine the cost of Simeons wrath across not just the country, but our future.
Thanks Mr Bishop for delivering for the Hutt, i guess its possible some of those walkers and cyclists will one day drive a car.
“It’s weird how this never happens in the middle of car lanes.” Maybe if some idiot built a carlane in the middle of a berm it would.
Plenty of car lanes would have been berms once upon a time.
It is this sort of stupidity by the contractor who placed that pole that drives the growth of a bureaucracy to require multiple evaluations and sign-offs before anyone does anything. The right (aka Act & NZF) want to ‘solve’ this by getting rid of the bureaucracy when in reality it is a problem with the quality of people contracted to do what is a relatively simple task but one that requires them to engage their brain and think about the impact of their actions on others.
The pole will now have to be moved at someone’s expense while off to stage right we are all trying to comprehend why infrastructure costs so much in this country.
Its classic contracting. Give the contracting company $200 an hour, they send a kid to do the job and pay them $30 an hour. You’re better of paying a top quality FTE $100 an hour.
Same with street name signs in Auckland. It seems they are replaced every year because they do such a crap job of installing them. I guess because the contractor then gets paid to replace it, so you are better off to do a bad job. When they changed from blue to green, it seemed like half the city had a new sign within a year.
Now it seems they have gone back to blue again? Only in the former ACC area?
Simple Simeon Says effect again. That road ought to have a permanent 30 km/h speed limit throughout and not need a [read the small print] occasional limit. So no need for a sign there at all.
Imagine if the cops actually enforced those speed limits, there would be an uproar. People would be getting fined all the time because who actually thinks about the current time while driving. If the cops enforced it I bet people would much prefer a fixed speed limit.
We should figure out if there exist any other countries that build footpaths and bike lanes on streets, and see how they solve the traffic pole placement problem.
And oh hey turns out I grew up in such a country. If I recall correctly they tend to put traffic signs on the outside edge of the footpath if there is no berm in between.
Reminds me of another problem with a well established solution, that of temporary traffic signs that don’t block almost 2 metres of width on the footpath. Overseas they’re already living in the future.
It only looks like they’re living in the future when you’re in a country living in the past.
I wouldn’t be surprised if the placement of that Scott Point cycle-lane sign was a product of contractors being insufficiently fluent in English.
I’ve seen similar issues on building sites all over Auckland – particularly where you have different groups of contractors from different countries (having different mother tongues and communicate with each other in English – with varying levels of fluency).
It’s a good reminder of the risks associated with choosing the lowest priced tender.
Or it might be rooted in the long disregard for every form of active transport and foodpaths and bike lanes in particular.
In my neighbourhood, many native English speakers will mow the berm weekly but cannot be bothered to quickly cut branches hanging on the foodpath obstructing anyone taller than 150cm.
Bins will block narrow paths and never the road or the on-street parking.
Cars parked on a footpath is considered ok, “people can just walk around it”. Cyclists riding two abreast on a road however, all of a sudden going around it is a problem.
Personally I don’t like either of those…
Somebody please save this slightly-above average height man from the dangers of medium-hanging branches!
I don’t need to be saved, but it shows that people care about the looks of the berm but not about the usability of the footpath just outside their house.
The problem is almost certainly that a lot of people consider footpaths a useless vestige left over from another time. Present simply because they’re supposed to be present for some long forgotten reason. Even the most dumb contractor would not put that pole there if they had any idea of why those paths are actually there.
Or maybe this is documented by Auckland Transport as standard practice.
I see this comment as probably coming from a very online type of person. If true this would be very ironic and funny.
Unfortunately, standard practice is the enemy of thought and practicality. It is curable by changing the instructions.
the footpath connects the couch to where the car is parked.
Every car driver is a pedestrian !
A photo showed a blue mark where the pole should have been placed. Looks about 100mm from where it was placed. 100mm from the centreline of the bike lane is still in the centre of the bike lane in everyday language. Any language. Even everyday english.
Take the Busway out of that rapid transit map and is the Shore’s bus network that good?
and 10 years ago the proposal was THIS.
https://www.greaterauckland.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/RPTP-Proposed-2025-Network.jpg
So the Onehunga line will be officially renamed “Crosstown”.
AT still have it as the Onehunga-West Line/OWL on their CRL page, I don’t think the MRCagney map is official
I think I prefer Crosstown….
maybe they’re saving it for the Henderson-Glen Innes via Avondale-Southdown routing when that comes around in (checks notes) the early 2050s?
If it wasn’t for the impact of his changes Auckland-wide it would be amusing that complaints about the mix of short speed limit changes around the Reeves Rd overpass are entirely due to Simeon’s irrational imposition. They complain about 80-50-60 but the overpass was designed for 50, to match with the speed limit it merged with pre-change and due to space/budget constraints…
50kph max on any urban arterial road that isn’t a motorway is such a sensible idea, too
the ✨consistency✨
Why is it Simeon’s fault Robin? AT were the ones who lowered the speed limit on Pakuranga road without any evidence or public support. Note referring to the phase 3 reductions the only reason used for lowering it was “to keep speed changes consistent ” nothing says consistency like reducing some speeds to 30 and some to 40 and keeping others at 50 lol AT are pathological liars. Simeon was just changing the speed limit back to what 90%+ drivers were already doing down the corridor , when it was 50kph there was lots of passing and tailgating which has now reduced significantly. Also Burrower NO 50 is far too slow for roads like Te Irirangi dr just accept people aren’t going to support that sort of nonsense and move on. Read this article and you’ll understand there’s actually a genuine reason for the higher limit. https://www.times.co.nz/news/speed-limit-commonsense-prevails/#:~:text=%E2%80%9CThis%2520past%2520Saturday%2520was%2520a,Photo%2520supplied
lol nope, Colah, 50km/h is a evidence based proper speed limit where the greatest risk is a side-on collision, on roads with T or X intersections.
But i’m sure your cult of running over kids for the golden cow of getting to your destination a microsecond faster doesn’t care about that
Pseudo motorway arterials are urban blight, and hopefully the Airport to Botany busway will allow some detuning of that road.
Last time I drove on it I did 60, and was absolutely fine. I doubt going 80 would save more than a few seconds. Don’t be a greedy impatient brat. Reality, or car-ma, will hit you one day
Are you ok mate for a start I don’t know what’s this “Colah” nonsense you’ve banged on about? If you’re going to engage treat others with respect as per the user guidelines see that for reference at least call me Burwood or Sam (my first name). You did in the same comment say you should never go above 50 then said “last time I did 60 and was fine” so you’ve just contradicted yourself you drove 60 and you were fine so therefore 60 must be fine for urban areas. Also I use the route a lot and do 80 all the time it’s significantly faster as you get more traffic lights missing one light can waste over a minute (there’s your few seconds). Can you not put words in my mouth also where have I said running kids over to get a microsecond faster? You’re upset I’m making a good point perhaps and want to try shut down debate with personal attacks, which is against the user guidelines for this blog.
One more thing I just looked up some more of your comments they are always attacking others that don’t suit your viewpoint and it appears you call others who don’t agree with you “Colah” for some weird reason. While looking at some of them you’ve tried gaining sympathy by saying “I have to do a 2 hour trip on foot as I can’t drive” blah blah blah but then in this recent comment you’ve just admitted you indeed drive at 60kmh above what you claim is the maximum safe urban speed. Seriously why is no one honest here, yes I might not be as much of an urbanist as others on this site but it doesn’t mean I should be insulted just because I think 80 is fine in urban areas where the roads are seperated from driveways by slip roads. Calm down breathe a bit and we can all engage civilly. 🙂 if you’re going to troll at least keep the story consistent.
don’t be obtuse, the sentence structure and your constant “democracy for the stupid, speed good” rhetoric matches exactly a troll commenter who’s been using the names of NSW suburbs or towns over the past year or so. It’s pretty damn recognizable you’re that same sociopath who likes to gloat at people who just want a better environment and more pleasant cities.
Look Burrower idk about NSW I’m from Christchurch hence the name “Burwood” you can call me Sam if you want. And I just told you to stop trolling and your response is to call me a troll and not respond to that genuine criticism I just uncovered. NOW did you LIE about “having to walk 2 hours on foot because I can’t drive” because you’ve just admitted you indeed CAN drive and above what you think is a safe urban speed. Seriously you’ve said 50 should be the max speed but that you drove 60kmh in the same comment I don’t see how that isn’t trolling? Stop lying please.
lmao sure “sam”, remembering conversations you had with me, you are definitely the same person who used Colah and Fassifern and all those other usernames before.
and shock horror, people can learn to drive! i know, such a crazy concept, since you seem to think that driving is an inherent thing humans are born with and meant to do.
And Michael Wood is standing for Labour again in the next general election.
One of the least inspiring Ministers of Transport and Ministers and Auckland in any Government. Ever. Part of a government that turned a modest scalable surface tram proposal to alleviate bus congestion from Mt Roskill into the CBD into a completly unaffordable high-speed full blown underground full metro line from the airport to the cbd, that just happened to pass through Mount Roskill, his electorate.
Thus killing any chance of light rail for decades.
His final shot was a proposal for more mega motorways from the North Shore terminating in the CBD, with no ideas as to what to do with all these extra cars once they had arrived in the already congested CBD.
His obvious non performance to acheive anything sensible, figured strongly in Labours poor showing in Auckland in the last election.
Ministers for Auckland
Interesting stuff, great about that funded walking cycling bridge.
Racing the City Link Bus was a fun vid.
oh and yes, “Tim Tams” should be rolled out at speed everywhere we can.