Interesting to note today, during question time in parliament, that Green Party co-leader Russell Norman managed to get Transport Minister Stephen Joyce to admit that no full benefit-cost ratios had been carried out prior to the Government establishing it's seven roads of national significance. This means that we are allowing the Government to sink loads of money into these projects without actually knowing how much benefit they will be or whether they will be of any benefit at all. It would be interesting to stack this up against some other transport projects such as Auckland's rail electrification or CBD underground rail loop. For a government that claims to be financially responsible and business savvy this is worrying indeed.
Also of note today is that Stephen Joyce has hinted at delays to the Auckland rail electrification scheme because the Government wants to explore the possibility of a private-public-partnership (PPP) to purchase rolling stock. Considering how far down the, er, line this project has already gone this action makes little sense, perhaps simply being a delay tactic by a Government that's a bit cold on both rail and public transport in general. In addition, as we are in a recession right now private capital for such a project is the last thing the Government should be expecting or even seeking. Stephen Joyce, apparently, has been in Australia to see how a PPP might work, but he obviously didn't take much notice as PPP's in rail and public transport aren't flush with success there. Seriously, it's a crazy New Zealand right now. Keep you powder dry.
Thursday, May 28, 2009
Wednesday, May 27, 2009
Christchurch Roads Getting National Funding
Three major Christchurch road projects were announced as part of the Government's 'roads of national significance' scheme, the Southern Motorway, the Northern Arterial and the Western Bypass. Of note, all three are hangovers from the 1960's era Christchurch Transportation Masterplan, of which a major part was to build an extensive motorway system for Christchurch (which obviously was never built!). The total cost of the projects is meant to be $650 million to $800 million and will be paid for out of the Government's increase in State Highway spending from $6.2 million to $10.7 million over the next ten years. Essentially what this means is that our local transport authorities will potentially save millions of dollars as these projects will now come under central government funding. Local authorities were going to put $176 million into the Southern Motorway alone which now means that money can be spent elsewhere. In addition the roads are to be given priority and may be further fast tracked through the consents process.
The Western bypass is perhaps the road I support the most. It's function is rather unique and would be hard to replicate by other transport modes. The plan is to four lane Russley and Johns Roads and build a flyover at the Memorial Road intersection. The flyover I am intrigued about as it could allow much improved traffic flow into the airport by separating north-south traffic from airport bound/origin traffic. However, what are we really getting? Until I see dedicated plans its hard to comment, but other intersections will cause problems and delays if they remain as roundabouts (even if the road is upgraded to four lanes). The other problem is at the north and south ends. At the north the bypass slots into Main North Road as a regular intersection and currently causes painful back-ups. What will happen here? At the south end the bypass flows straight into Hornby and a busy commercial and retail area, slotting into Main South Road at a busy and hazardous traffic light intersection. Continued population and traffic growth will eliminate any gains made on this road if it is not done properly and if steps aren't taken to reduce road use by investing in public transport.
The Northern Arterial is just a rehashing of the 1960's transport master plan albeit on a lighter scale. It could improve the dispersal of traffic from the north but will likely fail in reducing traffic congestion in the long term. The Waimakariri area is one of the fastest growing in New Zealand and is heavily dependent on the car. A large and ever increasing percentage of Waimakariri residents commute to Christchurch everyday so unless measures are also taken to get more commuters on to public transport the potential gains to be made by improving road access into Christchurch from the north will be nought and it will be money poorly spent.
The Southern Motorway has been on the drawing board for years and has been delayed time and time again as money has been diverted to North island projects. It basically involves widening the former Southern Motorway to four lanes (as it was always intended to have been) and extend it south around Wigram and towards Halswell Junction Road (which in turn will be upgraded). Ultimately the motorway will be further extended to just beyond Templeton (and State Highway One upgraded to four lanes from here to Rolleston), but many think this latter extension should be accelerated, an idea with which I agree. The benefits of this road are enormous as it will allow a better flow from the industrious south to the port at Lyttelton. However, once again it will be all for nothing unless other efforts are made to get less people dependent on these roads and allow them to do their job. The Selwyn District, like the Waimakariri, is one of the fastest growing in New Zealand and spending on improved public transport will be needed for this project to be feasible long-term. In addition a perfectly good double tracked railway runs from the south to Lyttelton, getting more freight moving this way would have obvious economic benefits.
All in all I believe this to be a good thing, but I must stress that developing these roads at the expense of public transport will not be beneficial and will not get these roads working the way they should. I hope the money saved by local authorities is put to good use and is largely spent on improving public transport (perhaps my wish list?). Unfortunately I believe most of it will probably be put to use improving local roads, particularly those that inter operate with these projects. However, it is early days yet and these roads might never get built such is the way of New Zealand. Remember that most transport infrastructure proposed for Christchurch in the 1960's never got built, Christchurch not only being a 'car city' but a poor one at that.
The Western bypass is perhaps the road I support the most. It's function is rather unique and would be hard to replicate by other transport modes. The plan is to four lane Russley and Johns Roads and build a flyover at the Memorial Road intersection. The flyover I am intrigued about as it could allow much improved traffic flow into the airport by separating north-south traffic from airport bound/origin traffic. However, what are we really getting? Until I see dedicated plans its hard to comment, but other intersections will cause problems and delays if they remain as roundabouts (even if the road is upgraded to four lanes). The other problem is at the north and south ends. At the north the bypass slots into Main North Road as a regular intersection and currently causes painful back-ups. What will happen here? At the south end the bypass flows straight into Hornby and a busy commercial and retail area, slotting into Main South Road at a busy and hazardous traffic light intersection. Continued population and traffic growth will eliminate any gains made on this road if it is not done properly and if steps aren't taken to reduce road use by investing in public transport.
The Northern Arterial is just a rehashing of the 1960's transport master plan albeit on a lighter scale. It could improve the dispersal of traffic from the north but will likely fail in reducing traffic congestion in the long term. The Waimakariri area is one of the fastest growing in New Zealand and is heavily dependent on the car. A large and ever increasing percentage of Waimakariri residents commute to Christchurch everyday so unless measures are also taken to get more commuters on to public transport the potential gains to be made by improving road access into Christchurch from the north will be nought and it will be money poorly spent.
The Southern Motorway has been on the drawing board for years and has been delayed time and time again as money has been diverted to North island projects. It basically involves widening the former Southern Motorway to four lanes (as it was always intended to have been) and extend it south around Wigram and towards Halswell Junction Road (which in turn will be upgraded). Ultimately the motorway will be further extended to just beyond Templeton (and State Highway One upgraded to four lanes from here to Rolleston), but many think this latter extension should be accelerated, an idea with which I agree. The benefits of this road are enormous as it will allow a better flow from the industrious south to the port at Lyttelton. However, once again it will be all for nothing unless other efforts are made to get less people dependent on these roads and allow them to do their job. The Selwyn District, like the Waimakariri, is one of the fastest growing in New Zealand and spending on improved public transport will be needed for this project to be feasible long-term. In addition a perfectly good double tracked railway runs from the south to Lyttelton, getting more freight moving this way would have obvious economic benefits.
All in all I believe this to be a good thing, but I must stress that developing these roads at the expense of public transport will not be beneficial and will not get these roads working the way they should. I hope the money saved by local authorities is put to good use and is largely spent on improving public transport (perhaps my wish list?). Unfortunately I believe most of it will probably be put to use improving local roads, particularly those that inter operate with these projects. However, it is early days yet and these roads might never get built such is the way of New Zealand. Remember that most transport infrastructure proposed for Christchurch in the 1960's never got built, Christchurch not only being a 'car city' but a poor one at that.
Monday, May 25, 2009
Public Transport Wish List
Looking back at my post before last I see that I've mentioned my 'wish list' for Christchurch in terms of improving public transport. So I thought id flesh it out and pop it on here to compare with what is currently on offer and see how on the money I am. Note that this is aimed to be a list of projects realistically obtainable within a five year period. Anyway here it is;
- Bus lanes on Papanui, Colombo, Riccarton, Sumner, New Brighton, Queenspark and Lincoln routes.
- Metrocard top-ups off buses.
- Park and ride at Rangiora, Kaiapoi, Rolleston and Lincoln.
- Cycle lock-up facilities at key locations allowing 'cycle and ride'.
- Suburban bus interchanges with waiting lounges, real time info, security and Metro help desks at key nodes including: Riccarton, Papanui, Shirley, Linwood and Hornby.
- Ferry terminal and bus interchange at Lyttelton.
- Upgrade and extension of CBD tram aimed at opening up the city centre to locals and visitors (including use of metrocard on tram).
- Investigation into future light rail routes on busy bus routes.
- Investigation into utilising existing three rail lines for heavy commuter rail.
Most of these measures are reasonable to expect in the next five years (note the final two are investigations only) and all would certainly make public transport a more feasible transport option for Christchurch commuters as well as making the city a much friendlier place to get around for locals and visitors alike.
In addition, most of my proposed bus lanes have been announced recently, which is excellent, while tenders have already been called for a new integrated smart ticketing system which should see top-ups made off buses when implemented. Park and ride at Rangiora, Kaiapoi and Rolleston is now beyond investigation and is waiting for funding as too is the Lyttelton ferry terminal and some suburban bus interchanges. Moves towards investigating light-rail and commuter rail have both shown promise in recent years with Christchurch mayor Bob Parker being a keen advocate.
All in all I think that my list is relatively on the pulse. It's a good, realistic, blueprint of what we need and can achieve in the next five years. However, with the pace things have been moving, coupled with uncertainty over funding (not helped by the withdrawal of a regional fuel tax), don't be surprised if we are kept waiting. Over the next few days I'm going to try and flesh out a few of the issues on the wish list, in particular the proposals for the CBD tram. Also, Christchurch has benefitted recently from the announcement of the Government's 'roads of national significance', with a number of projects getting the hurry-up and national funding. I will discuss the good, bad and ugly of that as well but until then, keep your powder dry.
Thursday, May 21, 2009
Where is our (transport) money going?
I would like to apologise in advance for this. Mostly because I like to keep things non political. I am not associated with any political party in any way and don't consider myself left or right on the political scale. However, this issue is important for it impacts significantly on this nations ability to build an effective transport network, and therefore it impacts on the very future of Christchurch itself.
Why is our Government doing this? Why are they taking money from public transport and shovelling it into roads? New Zealand will always need to invest in roads but why at the expense of other transport modes? New Zealand's economy suffers from an over reliance on roads not because we have not invested enough in them but because we have not invested in an efficient sustainable transport network overall. Moving freight and people by higher capacity transport modes is vastly more efficient, requires less long-term transport spending and reduces short-term costs. It also allows choice, making us less vulnerable when economic hard times hit. Spending money on public transport, rail etc isn't about denying people the right to travel the way they want to. Where public transport improvements have been made people have flocked, and capacity on roads has reduced or ceased its rapid growth. Take a look at Auckland where they have had 70 per cent growth in patronage on the Northern Busway, congestion on the Harbour Bridge has eased and traffic growth in general has slowed. The obvious benefits to the economy barely need pointing out.
So why has our Government done this? They are going by the logic that 84 per cent of New Zealander's commute using private vehicles and that 70 per cent of our freight is hauled on roads. Oh dear. It doesn't take half a brain to realise that this is flawed. New Zealand has a poor reputation for public transport investment while rail has been crippled and coastal shipping practically murdered. With that in mind what does this government expect? If anything, those figures legitimise greater spending on more efficient, higher capacity transport modes and illustrate New Zealand's brittle economic position. Ironically, petrol increased by 5c a litre the same week as this announcement!
The end result is that it will cost you and me more and more to get from 'A' to 'B', it will cost more for goods to be transported around this country, it will cost more for goods to be sent from this country, it will result in a less accessible New Zealand and it will turn away visitors and business alike. End result, it will hit you and me in the pocket. Big time.
Why is our Government doing this? Why are they taking money from public transport and shovelling it into roads? New Zealand will always need to invest in roads but why at the expense of other transport modes? New Zealand's economy suffers from an over reliance on roads not because we have not invested enough in them but because we have not invested in an efficient sustainable transport network overall. Moving freight and people by higher capacity transport modes is vastly more efficient, requires less long-term transport spending and reduces short-term costs. It also allows choice, making us less vulnerable when economic hard times hit. Spending money on public transport, rail etc isn't about denying people the right to travel the way they want to. Where public transport improvements have been made people have flocked, and capacity on roads has reduced or ceased its rapid growth. Take a look at Auckland where they have had 70 per cent growth in patronage on the Northern Busway, congestion on the Harbour Bridge has eased and traffic growth in general has slowed. The obvious benefits to the economy barely need pointing out.
So why has our Government done this? They are going by the logic that 84 per cent of New Zealander's commute using private vehicles and that 70 per cent of our freight is hauled on roads. Oh dear. It doesn't take half a brain to realise that this is flawed. New Zealand has a poor reputation for public transport investment while rail has been crippled and coastal shipping practically murdered. With that in mind what does this government expect? If anything, those figures legitimise greater spending on more efficient, higher capacity transport modes and illustrate New Zealand's brittle economic position. Ironically, petrol increased by 5c a litre the same week as this announcement!
The end result is that it will cost you and me more and more to get from 'A' to 'B', it will cost more for goods to be transported around this country, it will cost more for goods to be sent from this country, it will result in a less accessible New Zealand and it will turn away visitors and business alike. End result, it will hit you and me in the pocket. Big time.
Tuesday, May 19, 2009
The bus goes first?
I've been waiting for development for some time now on when Christchurch is finally going to get a proper network of bus lanes. I need wait no longer! The Christchurch City Council has finally announced that it will begin rolling out bus lanes this year and include a raft of other bus priority measures. It seems the Colombo, Papanui and Queenspark routes will be the first to gain from these bus priority measures with construction due to begin mid-year. This is logical as historically Papanui-Cashmere is the busiest and most dense corridor in Christchurch (it was the last tram route and was originally to be a trolley bus route because of this). Queenspark is quite far from major nodes making it a good way of judging the effect of bus priority measures on car dependent areas.
Bus lanes on these routes will consist of both part-time and full-time types, while bus signals and improved bus stop locations will also be introduced. I have no idea what the later really means, I hope its not those awful bus stops that jut out into the traffic lane allowing a bus not to lose its place in traffic. This measure proved unpopular when trialled on Hills road, and while I say ''tough sh*t'' to those 'poor drivers' who are 'held up' by the 'nasty' bus, nevertheless the object is not to cause too much controversy on such an important and much needed public transport project.
Apparently investigation and planning is now underway for bus priority measures on the Riccarton, New Brighton and Sumner bus routes. Wider consultation still has to be carried out with local business owners and the like which means we'll probably have to wait another year or so for these to see fruition. However, once all these aforementioned bus routes have the priority measures introduced it will mean that the first box of my own personal wish list has been ticked, which makes this quite a milestone (of sorts). Bus lanes on the Riccarton, Papanui, Colombo, Sumner, New Brighton and Queenspark routes have been the logical first step in developing an efficient sustainable public transport network for Christchurch as a significant proportion of Christchurch bus services uses them.
Anyway, what will these priority measures achieve? They will allow buses to by-pass traffic congestion and give them their own signals at traffic lights. The result will be faster, more reliable bus services making public transport in Christchurch a more feasible alternative to the forever costly (both to the individual and the wider community) and inefficient car dominated system we have. To read up on bus priority yourself the City Council has a rather informative website http://www.ccc.govt.nz/buspriority/.
Bus lanes on these routes will consist of both part-time and full-time types, while bus signals and improved bus stop locations will also be introduced. I have no idea what the later really means, I hope its not those awful bus stops that jut out into the traffic lane allowing a bus not to lose its place in traffic. This measure proved unpopular when trialled on Hills road, and while I say ''tough sh*t'' to those 'poor drivers' who are 'held up' by the 'nasty' bus, nevertheless the object is not to cause too much controversy on such an important and much needed public transport project.
Apparently investigation and planning is now underway for bus priority measures on the Riccarton, New Brighton and Sumner bus routes. Wider consultation still has to be carried out with local business owners and the like which means we'll probably have to wait another year or so for these to see fruition. However, once all these aforementioned bus routes have the priority measures introduced it will mean that the first box of my own personal wish list has been ticked, which makes this quite a milestone (of sorts). Bus lanes on the Riccarton, Papanui, Colombo, Sumner, New Brighton and Queenspark routes have been the logical first step in developing an efficient sustainable public transport network for Christchurch as a significant proportion of Christchurch bus services uses them.
Anyway, what will these priority measures achieve? They will allow buses to by-pass traffic congestion and give them their own signals at traffic lights. The result will be faster, more reliable bus services making public transport in Christchurch a more feasible alternative to the forever costly (both to the individual and the wider community) and inefficient car dominated system we have. To read up on bus priority yourself the City Council has a rather informative website http://www.ccc.govt.nz/buspriority/.
Wednesday, May 13, 2009
'Get in my car...'
Today I came across this kewl little website, www.letscarpool.govt.nz. Basically it is an initiative from the Greater Wellington Regional Council, through it's transport authority Metlink, allowing people to register and locate people with whom they can join in a car pool. 'Car pooling' or 'ride sharing' is a concept you would probably be aware of through movies and TV programmes rather than from first hand experience. However, it is gaining popularity in New Zealand, and even Christchurch, with websites such as www.carpoolnz.org and www.dunedinrideshare.co.nz offering ride share programmes. However it is great to see a local authority getting in behind such a project on an official level, showing great commitment at reducing single occupancy among car commuters.
Ride sharing allows people to pool resources in their daily commute. Four people ride sharing in a car has direct benefits such as saving on fuel etc but also has indirect benefits by reducing the need for expensive roading infrastructure (four people ride sharing could effectively take three additional cars off a road), has environmental benefits and also increases social capital. I would like to see ride sharing officially promoted in Greater Christchurch, particularly in the Waimakariri and Selwyn urban areas. Roading and public transport infrastructure is poor in these areas and do not properly disperse commuters as they approach the city. Reducing the number of cars on the daily commute could help loosen the tight grip of congestion in a number of key areas within the city and is a relatively inexpensive way of doing so. If the Christchurch City Council, Waimakariri and Selwyn District Council's and Ecan are committed to reducing traffic congestion and developing a world class sustainable transport system (as they claim) then ride sharing is a logical step to take in the early days. Hopefully they can follow the good example now being set in Wellington (bloody Wellington with its trolley buses and trains and stuff!).
For those of you at UC who travel some distance check out;
www.sustain.canterbury.ac.nz/transport/carpool_index.shtml
Definitely worth it if your beyond a walk or bike in these troubled financial times. Out.
Ride sharing allows people to pool resources in their daily commute. Four people ride sharing in a car has direct benefits such as saving on fuel etc but also has indirect benefits by reducing the need for expensive roading infrastructure (four people ride sharing could effectively take three additional cars off a road), has environmental benefits and also increases social capital. I would like to see ride sharing officially promoted in Greater Christchurch, particularly in the Waimakariri and Selwyn urban areas. Roading and public transport infrastructure is poor in these areas and do not properly disperse commuters as they approach the city. Reducing the number of cars on the daily commute could help loosen the tight grip of congestion in a number of key areas within the city and is a relatively inexpensive way of doing so. If the Christchurch City Council, Waimakariri and Selwyn District Council's and Ecan are committed to reducing traffic congestion and developing a world class sustainable transport system (as they claim) then ride sharing is a logical step to take in the early days. Hopefully they can follow the good example now being set in Wellington (bloody Wellington with its trolley buses and trains and stuff!).
For those of you at UC who travel some distance check out;
www.sustain.canterbury.ac.nz/transport/carpool_index.shtml
Definitely worth it if your beyond a walk or bike in these troubled financial times. Out.
Friday, May 8, 2009
Snap? Infratil bidding for 'Metrocard' replacement
Earlier this year the Christchurch City Council issued a tender for a new integrated ticketing system to replace the current 'Metrocard' system. On Monday it was announced that New Zealand company Infratil had made a bid for the supply of this system utilising it's 'Snapper' card system currently in use on some Wellington buses.
Seeing as we want to get the absolute best possible public transport system for our city, it makes sense to invest in a ticketing system that is world class and saves patrons time and money. Moving top ups off buses and into agents (such as dairy's), seamless integration between different services and transport modes (ferry, CBD tram), and allowing future expansion of services offered (small purchases, new transport modes) are all benefits we can expect from a new system.
Now here is the funny thing. Infratil is actually the operator of most of Auckland and Wellington's bus networks as NZ Bus. Critics have argued that this forms a conflict of interest and that it would be unhealthy for Infratil to operate the ticketing system. Most of this came up due to Infratil's recent failed bid to supply an integrated ticketing system for Auckland's public transport network and their subsequent, and very public, spitting of the dummy and associated throwing of the toys out of the cot in response. Infratil argued a back lash would ensue as the Auckland Regional Transport Authority (ARTA) chose a foreign firm to supply the system instead, but the fact was that Infratil offered an unproven system that has yet to fully roll out anywhere and presented a substantial conflict of interest.
Now here is the even funnier (and fishy) thing. Auckland's integrated ticketing scheme has stalled due to the governments cancellation of the regional fuel tax. As this tax was to help pay for the new system uncertainty remains over the legitimacy and status of the current successful bid, and Infratil seem to remain confident that they will eventually be awarded the contract despite ARTA's preference for an alternative supplier.
Now here is the hilarious bit. The Christchurch tender stipulates that the new ticketing system be interoperable with Auckland's! Ha! So basically who knows what will happen and when. Personally I want to see something that is up with London's Oyster card, can be used over the entire network, is easier to use (quick boardings), can be topped up online and at shops and means we don't have to wait behind someone fumbling about with coins and notes waiting to top up their card on the bus.
For what it's worth the Snapper card in Wellington is only able to be used on some Wellington buses. It can also be used for a number of small purchases and has scope to be used for more (such as online music etc). It isn't used as an integrated ticketing system. Wellington trains, ferry's and other bus companies still issue their own tickets. There is clearly uncertainty over the Snapper system representing a world class integrated ticketing system and as public transport in Christchurch is deplorable and needs all the help it can get I am starting to think it might be better to go for a proven firm, even if it is overseas based.
Nevertheless, what Christchurch needs is an integrated ticketing system that is easy to use and top up and can easily be adapted to advances in Christchurch's public transport system. Whatever system is eventually chosen it is good to see the local authorities pressing on with investment in a more sustainable and efficient form of transportation. Improving Christchurch's public transport system with initiatives such as this can only be good.
Seeing as we want to get the absolute best possible public transport system for our city, it makes sense to invest in a ticketing system that is world class and saves patrons time and money. Moving top ups off buses and into agents (such as dairy's), seamless integration between different services and transport modes (ferry, CBD tram), and allowing future expansion of services offered (small purchases, new transport modes) are all benefits we can expect from a new system.
Now here is the funny thing. Infratil is actually the operator of most of Auckland and Wellington's bus networks as NZ Bus. Critics have argued that this forms a conflict of interest and that it would be unhealthy for Infratil to operate the ticketing system. Most of this came up due to Infratil's recent failed bid to supply an integrated ticketing system for Auckland's public transport network and their subsequent, and very public, spitting of the dummy and associated throwing of the toys out of the cot in response. Infratil argued a back lash would ensue as the Auckland Regional Transport Authority (ARTA) chose a foreign firm to supply the system instead, but the fact was that Infratil offered an unproven system that has yet to fully roll out anywhere and presented a substantial conflict of interest.
Now here is the even funnier (and fishy) thing. Auckland's integrated ticketing scheme has stalled due to the governments cancellation of the regional fuel tax. As this tax was to help pay for the new system uncertainty remains over the legitimacy and status of the current successful bid, and Infratil seem to remain confident that they will eventually be awarded the contract despite ARTA's preference for an alternative supplier.
Now here is the hilarious bit. The Christchurch tender stipulates that the new ticketing system be interoperable with Auckland's! Ha! So basically who knows what will happen and when. Personally I want to see something that is up with London's Oyster card, can be used over the entire network, is easier to use (quick boardings), can be topped up online and at shops and means we don't have to wait behind someone fumbling about with coins and notes waiting to top up their card on the bus.
For what it's worth the Snapper card in Wellington is only able to be used on some Wellington buses. It can also be used for a number of small purchases and has scope to be used for more (such as online music etc). It isn't used as an integrated ticketing system. Wellington trains, ferry's and other bus companies still issue their own tickets. There is clearly uncertainty over the Snapper system representing a world class integrated ticketing system and as public transport in Christchurch is deplorable and needs all the help it can get I am starting to think it might be better to go for a proven firm, even if it is overseas based.
Nevertheless, what Christchurch needs is an integrated ticketing system that is easy to use and top up and can easily be adapted to advances in Christchurch's public transport system. Whatever system is eventually chosen it is good to see the local authorities pressing on with investment in a more sustainable and efficient form of transportation. Improving Christchurch's public transport system with initiatives such as this can only be good.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)