The shortlisted options for congestion charging

The road to congestion pricing (aka “time-of-use charging”) is certainly not a fast one. So far, we’re at nearly a decade of official investigations into the idea. (It’s also over a decade and a half since the question was first raised on our predecessor, Transportblog – and we’ve covered the topic regularly since then, again and again)

Granted, a decade still seems like quite a short amount of time compared to some transport projects. And that’s not to say there hasn’t been progress.

Late last year, legislation was passed by Parliament to enable congestion charging schemes to be developed and implemented, with Auckland the first city in New Zealand to be considered.

Even before the enabling legislation was in place, Auckland Transport has been working to come up with a scheme, including exactly where it might apply. In July last year, we highlighted how they’d narrowed thirteen location options down to six.

Just over a month ago, Auckland Council was asked to approve the latest round of work, which brings the shortlist down to three options for public feedback, with consultation set for mid-November (after the election).

Even so, the image below highlights that there’s still a long way to go before anything goes live. We’re currently in only that first block and even if everything goes smoothly, a pricing scheme likely won’t be in effect until 2030/31.

There was plenty of media coverage of the three options a month ago, and I’ll go over them again in today’s post. But most of that coverage was based off a report released ahead of the Council meeting – and thus missed one key piece of information.

Before going into the options, it’s worth a reminder that the main goal of congestion pricing isn’t about raising money; it’s about using pricing to shift behaviour, and incentivising people towards optimal outcomes. As Auckland Transport puts it:

This charge encourages some drivers to shift to alternatives such as public transport, travel outside the peak period or not drive at all. These reductions in demand can have a significant impact in improving wider network performance, while providing those Aucklanders who decide to pay the charge with a faster and more reliable trip.

A key challenge in coming up with options is that the bigger the scheme, the greater the impact – but also, the harder it may be to get public and political support… unless the stakes are made abundantly clear.

The three shortlisted options vary in size and impact, so let’s look at them in turn, from smallest to largest.

Option 1: City Centre Cordon

The first option focuses on a pricing cordon around the city centre. This is relatively easy to delineate, as the motorway presents a clear barrier around the area. Moreover, this is the part of the city with the best public transport access – which has just become a lot better with the opening of the City Rail Link.

The final prices would be subject to review, but Auckland Transport offers an indication:

The illustrative charges needed to largely remove congestion at the cordon are in the order of $3-$4 during the morning peak and $2 to $3 in the afternoon.

In terms of results, they say this is what such a scheme would likely deliver:

• 3.1% of AM peak trips are charged
• Approx 4 mins saved for charged drivers, more reliable travel
• 21% of uncharged drivers get a faster, more reliable trip; 3% are slower
• 3.6% increase in public transport patronage
• 2-4% regional congestion reduction
• 1% to 2.4% average vehicle speed increase
• 1% average public transport speed increase
• 6,800 hours travel saved per day
• Very limited net revenue and long payback period

While the focus is on congestion reduction, these schemes do bring in revenue. And a clear message from previous discussions has been that any pricing scheme should go hand in hand with improvements to alternatives, especially public transport.

So the last bullet point is very important, and Auckland Transport notes that after paying to install and operate the system, there would be limited net revenue – meaning they could only fund “a modest level of public transport improvements“.

Option 2: City Fringe Cordon

A big concern that has been raised in the past is the fairness on city centre businesses, if a scheme only applies to that area. So the second option under consideration expands on the City Centre Cordon, by extending the boundary to cover Eden Terrace and Newmarket – and potentially Parnell and Ponsonby as well.

This option looks to involve a slightly higher charge to address morning congestion:

Illustrative charges needed to largely remove congestion at the cordon may be in the order of $5-$6 during the morning peak and $2 to $3 in the afternoon.

Auckland Transport notes that this option “offers significantly improved effectiveness compared to the city cordon, while still retaining many of the advantages of improved public transport alternatives and relative simplicity“.

This is reflected in the stats they provide, which show some big increases in performance:

• 5.1% of AM peak trips are charged
• Approx 5-7 minutes saved for charged drivers, morereliable trip
• 30% of uncharged trips are faster, more reliable; 5% are slower
• 6% increase in AM peak public transport use
• 3-6% regional congestion reduction
• 1.4 – 4% increase in peak average vehicle speeds
• 1.6% average public transport speed increase
• 9,900 hours travel saved per day
• Limited net revenue and long payback period

Note that last bullet point: because this is a larger scheme, it would cost more to build and operate. This means the payback (in revenue that can be reinvested into better public transport) is not too different from the city-centre-only option.

Option 3: Core Motorways & City Centre

The final option takes one of the options above, and adds charges to the core of the central motorway network; longer-distance trips would be able to use the Western Ring Route to avoid being charged.

At first glance, you might conclude this option would be the hardest to get over the line politically, in that the impact is broadest. That said, there’s a good story to tell about the benefits that would accrue to the city as a whole, and the much greater potential to pour investment back into improving alternative modes. A big swing, as it were.

Auckland Transport says that a $7 charge would be optimal here, but that $5 still produces good results and is what they’ll use in the consultation. That’s a good move, as starting the conversation at $7 would almost certainly attract opposition, just because it’s a higher charge.

Importantly, this option provides potentially a big step-up in performance across the outcomes:

• 6.9% of AM peak trips are charged
• Approx 7-12 mins saved for charged motorway drivers, 5 mins over the cordon
• 31% of uncharged trips are faster, more reliable; 12% are slower
• 7% increase in AM peak public transport use
• 13% regional congestion reduction
• 4-6% increase in average vehicle speed
• 1.2% increase in average bus speed
• 18,200 hours travel saved per day
• Significant net revenue with fast payback period

The revenue generated by this option is said to be big enough to not only fund significant public transport service improvements, but would also have money left over for other investments.

The Missing Detail

A key part missing from previous reporting is just what else Aucklanders might see from the proposed investment. As noted above, Auckland Transport is suggesting not all that much for the first two options, but a lot of potential with the third option.

The map below shows the range and variety improvements Auckland Transport could make to services under Option 3: Core + Motorways. It suggests a wide range of fairly significant wins across the region, including what looks like a City Centre to Mangere route. Is surface light rail back on the menu?

There are versions of this map for the other two options showing far fewer improvements – and which weren’t included in the presentation to council.

I did ask them if we could show all three maps, but Auckland Transport say they won’t provide me with them at this time. However, I hope they do include all maps in the public consultation, as I think that will really help to drive home that pricing isn’t simply a negative thing affecting only driving – it can underwrite major improvements across other areas too, rapidly expanding the transport choices available to Aucklanders.

When you put these improvements on top of the recent opening of the City Rail Link, and our existing frequent bus network, public transport starts to look increasingly more viable for many more people.

What’s more, AT say that even after funding these additional public transport improvements, there would still be money left over which could be reinvested elsewhere. They don’t currently have a view of what it would be used for but is no shortage of projects Auckland needs.

Lastly: if you want to see how Auckland Transport presented the three options to the council, check out the videos below.

Share this