A few new things have happened lately, leading to a little catch-up note to summarise.
Firstly, I have a Canadian friend in the country for a few weeks. She’s been staying with me for a while, giving me a chance to play tour-guide again. The weather hasn’t been playing along, but we’ve seen some cool things. She has been covering the galleries and museums while I’m at work, and we’ve caught a couple Film Festival shows and another performance of Strike before it finished up.
As of Saturday, I have a new flatmate. She’s still settling into the house, but things should calm down in the coming week. It’s nice to have someone to share the house and great that I’m not paying 100% of the rent anymore.
Finally, after over a year of procrastination, I’ve resurrected my old laptop. It’s a Dell Inspiron 2650 and the disk drive died ages ago. Having been gifted a spare 40GB disk, I slotted it in last night and began to get the thing working again. I must say that I appreciate the physical handling of the laptop case. It was dead-simple to get the drive installed. If I could find a new battery for it, I could probably make a decent laptop out of it – 6 years after I bought it.
The draft plan starts in the wrong direction. The first thing it does is states that light rail is not an option.
Various light rail options were proposed and tested in the development of this draft plan, but none were found to be feasible within the next 10 years. The two key challenges are the high cost of the light rail infrastructure, and how to successfully integrate bus and light rail networks.
Having read the technical document that Opus delivered, I fail to see the basis for this statement. Yes, there are infrastructure costs, but they are not the most expensive of the infrastructure costs that are considered within the scope of this study. Further, the draft plan seems to ignore the run-time costs being lower per-person-per-kilometre than similar capacity for buses, and certainly for private vehicles. The ability for light rail and buses to integrate is not a technical problem. Many cities have implemented coordinated bus and light rail plans quite successfully. I think that the dismissal of light rail is short-sighted and overzealous.
The bulk of the peak-hour traffic in Wellington is based on the in-flow of traffic through a single major artery. Further north, this artery branches into two flows. This limited shaft of traffic into the city is exactly the problem that high-density transport solves. With flow into the CBD from the south, via Adelaide Road, and from the east, via the Mt. Victoria tunnel, we again see high density shafts. The Wellington region is especially well suited to implementation of light rail and enhancement of the existing heavy rail system. This is also true within the city. Many people insist that the topography of Wellington excludes light rail, but there is sufficient space to connect the railway station with the hospital with very little geological work, if modern articulated trams are to be used.
Public Transportation Focus
Light rail is just one piece of the public transportation network needed to keep Wellington moving. At peak hours, the bus companies fail to supply adequate service on multiple fronts. Firstly, buses on main routes are often running at full capacity, leaving behind passengers to wait for the next bus. Secondly, buses between the railway station and Courtenay Place struggle to maintain adequate scheduling, due to dwell times and increased congestion. Bus lanes and priority signalling are a major step to solving the congestion problems, but dwell times cannot be solved as easily. Transport intensification, again light rail, is the most effective way to battle dwell-time problems.
The draft plan does begin to put a focus on public transport, but it stops far too short. In an aim to be “flexible and adaptable”, the proposal does not accomplish much at all. Funding is largely stacked up to roading projects instead of public transport improvements, and given that Wellington City Council has already started backtracking on bus prioritisation projects along Courtenay Place, the mentions of public transport fall to mere lip-service.
Active Modes
This section should really be placed higher than public transportation. It is far too common for pedestrian and cycle plans to be placed last in the list of priorities – a gross injustice to the residents of the city. In fact, the draft plan defers any planning for pedestrian and cycle activities for other projects and allocates no funds. Active modes are a vital aspect to a city with a small footprint. Instead of residents taking short trips in a car or on transit, many choose to travel by their own power, using minimal resources, leaving minimal waste and needing minimal infrastructure. Transportation planners must stop impeding active modes.
Cobham Drive and Hataitai
Currently, the two roundabouts between the airport and Hataitai are dangerous for cyclists and pedestrians. The draft plan calls for extra lanes to provide extra road capacity. However, this only worsens the situation for active modes. With the proposed sports complex to sit aside Cobham Drive, this impediment to movement only ensures that patrons will drive; the pedestrian path faces Evans Bay and is fully disconnected from the site of the complex. A more productive measure for this location would be signalised intersections. The effectiveness of roundabouts breaks down at high volumes of traffic and makes safe pedestrian access impossible
The proposal to dual-lane Ruahine St is equally maligned. It is irresponsible to place a 70km/h speed zone in between a public park and a residential area. There is also no plan for a cycle lane or pathway, putting the faster flowing traffic in the same space as cycles on the road. Enhancing the roading that already exists will steal space from the park and further hinder access. Additionally, the corner onto Wellington Road will need significant geological work to safely route the traffic to and from Kilbirnie, which is ignored by the plan.
Inner-city Bypass
The plan places focus on a “ring or bypass route for vehicles”. The current implementation of the bypass is already a roadblock for residents to the south of the CBD. There is next to no priority for active transport modes to cross the bypass route. Further increases of traffic through this route must be accompanied with amenities for people to safely cross in a timely fashion.
Themes
The projects that are depicted in the draft plan should be measured against several themes that are relevant to the lives of those who work in, live in and travel to Wellington.
Many of the sections of the plan place focus on increasing capacity for the existing network. The city cannot widen streets each time there is a congestion buildup. Capacity must be increased via densification. As many trips as possible should be low-overhead. Active transport is cost-effective for everyone when it is safe and amenable. Public transport reduces congestion and waste over short and long distance travel. Private vehicles should not be restricted, but preference should be given to more energy- and space-efficient modes. Roading projects are a very costly solution, which scale poorly, to the problem of congestion. They encourage urban sprawl and reduce the effectiveness of transport planning.
Energy use and waste management of the transport options are becoming more important in light of climate change scenarios and rising energy costs. By placing many people behind a single engine, buses and trains carry far more people for the same amount of energy than private transport and put out much less emissions per person.
Costs associated with individual projects are contentious. Funding for roads comes from a different body than funding for public transport. It’s easy to see why conservative councillors would want to push for projects that they don’t have to pay for. Favouring projects along SH1 earns “free” money, whereas public transport options are funded internally. However, costs to the residents should also be considered. In this time of high petrol prices, many commuters are struggling to pay their commuting bills, while public transport users are sheltered from much of the cost – not by virtue of subsidy, but by efficiency, which becomes more pronounced with increased patronage. Investment in that efficiency is needed in the short term and medium term, based on predictions for petrol demand and pricing over the coming years. Siphoning money, free or otherwise, to roading projects would be contrary to the conditions that city and country are facing.
List of Demands
For whomever reads this and skims for the highlights, here they are:
Consider cyclist and pedestrian corridors first
Implement light rail
Implement bus priority measures
Stop building bigger roads – they don’t work
On the Consultation Process
Having made submissions for the two previous phases of the Ngauranga to Airport study, I have become aware of several problems that hinder public processes such as this. It is no surprise that the public is often disillusioned by their governments, but it is becoming apparent why that might be.
I saw a poster announcing the consultation process on a bus. It incorrectly indicated the internet address to be “http://www.gw.govt.nz.n2a”;. This address will lead to a “Server not found” error. I can understand that mistakes happen, but no action was taken to correct this as of July 21st, 2008. For advertising that is targeting public transportation users, this effectively biases the responses away from those who stand behind public transport or demand improvements.
The evolution of the three phases paints a very dark picture of the consultation process. It’s not important to point fingers; it indicts the whole system. Despite a very strong public response favouring enhanced public transportation options, including light rail, the draft plan dismisses the light rail option with a hand-wave and proceeds to put forth a plan that fails to reflect any public input.
The activity of the local body gets closer to the daily lives of people as any branch of government. When residents transition from being interested and involved to disillusioned, the local government is not healthy. One should worry about the consultation process when finding a reaction like this:
“I’ll have to be honest and state that after the reading about the urban corridor I’ve done I’ve decided not to make a submission to the Council. Primarily this is because I’ve been becoming increasingly convinced that it’s entirely a waste of time and effort.”1
I noticed something funny on the bus tonight. It was a poster advertising the Ngauranga to Airport consultation. It looked pretty good: a bus in a bus lane, a cyclist not getting run down and an overhead picture of a mass of cars funnelling into Wellington. But one thing in particular caught my attention:
www.gw.govt.nz.n2a
I’m pretty sure that n2a is not a root server, even after ICAAN has opened up the field. I also happen to know the URL that is being used for the process. It’s a simple error; the last period should be a slash.
How did this not make it through proof-reading? It would have been designed and sent to the printers – two sets of eyes, at least. When it was received, didn’t it get looked at? Or when it was being put up in the buses1? That’s got to be nearing a half-dozen people in the chain.
The conspiracy theory: people who take buses would likely complain about problems with public transport and demand improvements. This is not what the councils seem to want, having seen the evolution of the corridor plans. Instead of listening to these people, just send them to the wrong place and hope they are sufficiently deterred to bother making an actual submission.
I hope I’m wrong, but you do have to wonder what the odds are that so many people would have been involved who just didn’t think to check the address the poster advertises.
I had seen the poster ages ago and was intrigued, but it was on a whim that we bought tickets for Elemental, the new performance by Strike Percussion. The show was quite good, both visually and musically. It started with the ignition of 2 pairs of mallets, providing a fiery light show to go with the heavy, driving rhythmic introductory piece and setting the expectation level quite high. The overall quality was high, playing with water and fire through the program – arguably with air as well, but there were a couple of segments where the broad noise of the cymbals drowned out the melodies. The good far outweighs the bad, and the show is well worth the ticket price.
I’ve got two main wishes for public transportation in Wellington1: real-time information and integrated ticketing. And within a hairs-breadth of my birthday (yesterday), there is motion on both fronts.
Metlink and Greater Wellington Regional Council are seeking feedback on use and expectation for real-time information. I’ve already filled it out and suggest that everyone within the region does, regular PT user or otherwise. If we’re going to implement a system, it should at least meet our needs. There are so many benefits that from the user point of view, it’s hard to lose, though.
While following the links, I saw another little news entry on Metlink. They are trailing a combination train/bus ticket from September through December. It’s a far cry from actual integrated ticketing, but the notion is starting to spread. I don’t know if Snapperactivation will may the process any easier. So far, it seems limited to Go Wellington buses, and I think that the problem is more political than technical anyway. We can only wait and see.
1 There are more than two, but these are at the top of the list. Actually, light rail is on the top of the list, but that’s a much different battle.
I realise that Vodafone is subsidising the cost of the phone, but those data plans are horrible no matter what you think the phone is worth. Given that Vodafone offers data plans for non-iphone users, it might be better to buy a phone off-plan. The Broadband Everyday plan, comparably 1GB/month, is only $59.95/month. Over two years, that would cost $1438.80. Add an 8GB iphone for $979 or a 16GB model for $1129 and you’re sorted. No need to waste the extra $4500.
Actually, I think it’s more than about price for me. I think the phone is overly hyped. More gadget than I want or need. I’m more interested in what’s about to happen in the used-phone market.
I just had a chance to read this article about administration of Auckland’s regional public transport system. It is something I’ve been musing about for a few weeks, Why is there a lack of coordination within the regional transport bodies? It looks as if it’s national policy, mandated 15 years ago in the name of privatisation. The unfortunate side effect of open competition is an extreme lack of regard for public useability.
This topic demands public discussion. Even in Wellington, which boasts about public transport utilisation, we’re struggling to get from bus to train without paying a second full fare. The people are losing out and this policy needs to be examined.
Our bus operating contract has cost us $2.4 million more this financial year, due largely to oil prices, and is estimated to increase a lot more next year for the same reason. Our rail operating contract has cost us $2.5 million more this financial year, largely because of higher labour-related costs. We’re also paying more to maintain our infrastructure such as bus shelters, car parks and trolley bus overhead wires.
The increases listed cover zone-based travel within the region. It’s good to see that the short trips are not changing in price. For regular commuters, though, the extra costs will add up quickly. Monthly bus passes are not listed in the schedule, but I’ve been assured that they will see the increase as well.
The Gold and Platinum passes are products that the operators offer and set the price on (they are not specified by us). The operators are increasing the prices of these in line with general fares on 1 September, to $99 and $180 respectively. Our web site will be updated to include all fare products by tomorrow.1
The fare increases were opposed by Councillor Paul Bruce, but he was unable to sway the decision. With the higher price of petrol at the moment, there is a shift towards public transport modes becoming apparent. Increasing the fares will push back at commuters who are considering leaving the car at home, which is unfortunate. However, according to the Q&A page, there is a silver lining:
17. If patronage is increasing, doesn’t that mean that Greater Wellington is receiving more money to pay for the cost increases?
Patronage is increasing, but not at a rate fast enough to off-set the cost increases. And patronage increases bring their own costs, with extra vehicles and services being needed to meet the increased demand.
Well done, GWRC, on avoiding those extra costs of increased demand.
Where is the extra money to go? Are users expected to get any better service for the extra money going into the system? Well, no.
14. Why not raise fares when significant public transport improvements have begun?
Fares are going up to meet increasing costs, not to fund improvements. Greater Wellington is facing hefty cost increases to merely keep current services operating.
Service is not at a standstill, though. There is capital funding coming from Central government to help with service quality, with a small portion coming from fares. There have been noticeable service improvements to both train and bus services since the fare increases of 2006. Unfortunately, we’re still waiting on some major usability issues: integrated ticketing and real-time information.
Amongst other things, users have contributed through fares to general service enhancements, the new Wairarapa trains, the new trolley buses (which are gradually coming into service), and the real-time information project. The last of these is well underway – tenders are to be called later this year, with the system to roll out in 2010 (a user survey for this will appear on our web site in the next week or so). New electric trains have been ordered and will also start arriving from 2010. Integrated ticketing will be a little further away, but we are in the process of beginning the design of such a system.1
I find the time-delay for implementation to be disappointing, to say the least, but at least it is being worked on. I’m not holding my breath, however, on the integrated ticketing. Trying to get the separate bus companies to agree on cost sharing will be a nightmare.2
Looking to the future, we’re told that we should expect more increases like this one.
20. The last fare increase was in 2006 – is a fare increase going to be a regular two yearly event?
In future, fares will be increased annually so the level of increases can be kept to a minimum.
The issue of the 50 cent rounding will remain a challenge until electronic ticketing makes it possible to adjust all fares by a similar percentage if required. Until then, and until all zones are relative in price, fare adjustments will be lumpy. Every effort will be made to ensure that increases will be spread evenly over time and that those fare payers affected more than others one time will not be affected so much the next time.
I am not thrilled by this. The council seems very quick to collect funds from user charges. I believe that public transportation should be considered an essential service to be provided. Effort should be made from local and central government to bear a higher proportion of the operational costs. Again, will not be holding my breath.
A side note, only slightly related. I’d sent an email to Snapper asking about the future of monthly passes in light of the planned replacement of 10-trip concession cards with a smart device. They didn’t quite answer my question, and have yet to answer my request for clarification, but the reply seems valid for the near-future:
As of 14 July 2008 we will be replacing the 10 trip tickets with snapper in the future we will also change the passes. More information will be available closer to the time. Passes like Gold card will still be available.
1 Thanks to Doug Weir for answering my questions.
2 Why we can’t have a stronger regional transport authority that can mandate/arbitrate in cases like these is beyond me. My best guess is that we’re stuck with a weak-willed government which believes that the free-market genie will solve everything.
For the second time since moving into this house in March, I find myself living alone. This isn’t surprising. When Aditi moved in, I knew she’d be leaving for Auckland about this time. My rationale was that I’d have plenty of time to search for a new flatmate and that it would be after all the initial costs of setting up a flat. Both items were true, but the extra time has not helped to find someone to move in. To date, the ad I placed on TradeMe has been viewed nearly 200 times and has garnered 1 phone call and 2 emails. Ouch.
In the downtime, there are some fringe benefits: there is more available shelf space, I was able to move my (unused) car back into the parking spot and I can be as loud or as quiet as I want to be at any time. But I’m a very social creature; I’d much rather live with someone than live alone, and have someone to split my bills in half, including the rent.
I’m a little late off the mark on this one. It’s nearly the end of my first day of July, but there are several timezones still spinning around the sun on the 141st birthday of my country. I was pleased to hear a couple people humming O Canada for me this morning, mentions of The Logdriver’s Waltz and watching a new ad campaign for the CFL.
I don’t know of much actual celebration going on in Wellington. I don’t have anything planned for it, but I’ll be up in Auckland this weekend, so I might bump into a few Canadians then.
