Bus routes revisited

You know its flawed when bus drivers remain unhappy with the route and a boycott is still not off the agenda.

On the same day a fellow from WCC was taking photos of any cars using the new manners road (if they dared). I had a chat with him and he blamed the accidents on the timing of the lights, which could not be changed until after Xmas?

I thought this was a strange conclusion? You only have to look at the junction of 4 merging roads (meeting each other at odd diagonals) to see a perfect storm of cars, buses, blind spots, and people – for serious accidents.

I was also told that the changes (and vast amounts of money spent) were all about getting cars out of the bus lanes? If that was the real aim, surely the cheaper option would have been to just ban cars from the streets that buses used during peak hours? Or perhaps just remove cars permanently from existing bus routes.

For example, why couldn’t buses have continued up Dixon St and turned right into Willis st (making Dixon St and upper Willis St a buses only road). This would also have allowed all of the portion of Victoria St (between Manners and Dixon St) to be used to shift traffic out of the city. Similarly, the portion of Wakefield St (between Willis St and lower Cuba St) could also have been made buses only. This simple re-routing would have saved a vast amount of money, avoided digging up Manners Mall, and removed cars blocking buses during peak hours. The only cost would have been some signage.

Why can’t we have dedicated bus lanes used only by buses, service vehicles, and emergency vehicles?  We need some serious long-term planning, rather than the piecemeal solutions (and planning u-turns) we are constantly witness too.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/4463424/Fourth-pedestrian-hit-by-mall-bus

Transport questions

As I promised, I will be posting answers to questions that have been asked of me when they are published.

This time its on transport. The full report and answers from other candidates can be found on http://wellingtontransport.wordpress.com/2010/09/18/wellington-city-council-candidates-respond-to-our-transport-questionnaire/

Here’s what I said.

1. What proportion of the transport funding in the Long Term Council Community Plan (LTCCP) of the Council you are standing for would you want to see devoted to:
a. Public transport?
b. Walking (facilities and promotion)?
c. Cycling (facilities and promotion)?

Please explain these choices.

Without having received costings on a bike hire scheme (something I’d like to see put on the agenda) and the councils ability to influence the revised bus fares, as well as being able to rank projects already approved by council that could be suspended or deferred – this would seem hard to provide any meaningful answer to this question. However, what I think I can say is that the over-arching focus should be on improving public transport utilising all 3 mediums in the best possible mix, that reduces dependence on other transport mediums, for the dollars spent. For example, if lighting was provided through central park, how many more people would walk between Brooklyn and the city, rather than use other transport modes. Such a project would also improve public safety. So why hasn’t council already done it as part of the central parks recent revamp? I would like to see these type of initiatives explored and undertaken.

2. Do you support the following transport projects, where applicable:

Note: Options a-c are mutually exclusive. Each assumes that essential service vehicles would have limited access.

a. Turning the Golden Mile into a public transport corridor Y/N

b. Turning the Golden Mile into a pedestrian corridor Y/N

c. Turning the Golden Mile into a dedicated public transport/pedestrian space Yes/N.

d. Extending the rail system through the Wellington CBD, by developing modern trams as a priority for the short term Y/No – $140+ million is unaffordable in the short-term given the impending water supply crisis (we may need the $140 million for a dam) and the fact council have already incurred substantial debt – and now we have to accommodate the leaky homes bail-out. Water has to come before transport – and I’m not sure if the public want another rates increase. That said, there are other alternatives in the short-term that can be done to improve public transport – see below. Best we can do now is explore costings and implementation plan for rail extension – and put out to public for feedback with alternative options.

e. A Basin Reserve flyover Y/No. There are much better alternatives that also provide greener spaces and safer access to nearby schools. I’ve cited these on my blog. The recent use of the traffic warden camera cars would seem to suggest the council are also concerned over safety around schools? So a flyover should logically not get much support if any. However, voting history on transport issues would suggest otherwise.

f. Doubling the Terrace Tunnel Y/No – Not in the short term. Poor decision making by existing councilors in locating the new indoor stadium in Cobham Drive will put pressure on this tunnel to be expanded. An outcome every councilor who voted for it knew would happen. Make sure you publish the names of those councilors who voted for it. And make sure they do not get in again. They had their chance to show their support for reducing unsustainable transport systems – and failed. Unfortunately we have more pressing short term pressure on the public fund – our water supply. We cannot afford to fund a $176 million dollar tunnel expansion project until we have sorted out our water supply.

g. Doubling the Mt Victoria Tunnel Y/No – Not in the short term. See comments above.

h. The Kapiti Expressway Y/NA – Not a city or ward issue. But it does appear to divide that region in two. Is that desirable? What are the alternatives?

3. Do you support the creation of an integrated public transport system across the region? If so, what changes would you propose making to bring this about?

Yes, an integrated system would be desirable. How? For a start, getting all the different parties and stakeholders together to agree on such a vision. And then making it happen through an agreed plan. Definitely part of a long term vision plan that the public are aware of – which is something we do not appear to have at present.

4. What do you consider should be the top transport priorities of the Council for which you are standing?

Short term – ensuring all council actions reinforce the message to use public transport. At present, council are sending mixed messages. Why are we increasing fares for public transport, if we want to reduce congestion? Why didn’t our council do something to prevent this before it went public? Why did our council support the indoor sports facility at Cobham Drive – knowing full well it would put pressure on traffic congestion. A tunnel expansion could have been avoided. We also need to improve our bus system, improve flow management and shift it to sustainable energy. Our buses can be made a more appealing option over the next 3 years. If light rail can have a dedicated corridor, why can’t buses? What other improvements can we make to our bus services to make them more appealing. Finally council need to clearly communicate a long term vision for public transport and be responsive to public feedback. Unfortunately, the council have not been very good in listening to its communities. Clearly there is support for light rail – so we need to sound this out and put in place costings and if this would be rolled out in an affordable manner – as well as offer alternatives (improved bus electrification and design). It might be more transport hubs are the way of the future (eg an integrated mixed solution)? We need to be re-examining all those reports comissioned by the council some time ago that are gathering dust.

5. What are your own top transport priorities for the region?

(1) Better decisions that do not put pressure on our existing transport system. The existing council have put unnecessary pressure on the Mt Vic tunnel and the wider basin area by locating the new Indoor Sports Facility in Cobham Drive. The facility should have been located next to the stadium to maximise the existing public transport hub and to enable broader use by the local business community. Any councilor who voted for Cobham Drive should be held accountable and not receive your vote if good transport systems are important to you.

(2) Improving our bus service through better flow management. Light rail proposals will require a dedicated corridor – why can’t we provide this for buses? There are a number of small improvements we could make to our bus system in the short-term.

(3) How are council incentivising car pooling? Not much action here either.

(4) I’d also like to see a bike-hire scheme (already in Paris and London) considered. This would require more consideration for providing space for cycle use in the city.

(5) Better co-ordinated infrastructural maintenance that reduces traffic congestion.

(6) We need to have a long-term plan, and be heading towards it. Something that has been seriously lacking.

(7) All my thoughts on transport issues can be found by clicking “transport” on the tag cloud of my blog.

Its about our buses

Recently we have heard a lot about light rail, as part of a long term public transport vision.

But what we really need to be focusing on NOW, are our buses.

Why?

Because if we continue to send the wrong messages, we are going to end up with even more congestion in our city. And we have certainly been getting a lot of mixed messages from our council.

We need better incentives to use public transport. We need improved flow management and travel times. We don’t need more cars passing though our city, which is exactly what the Cobham Drive Sports Centre development will do.

Take the recent bus fare increases.

For the vast majority of people who use buses to travel to work, they subsribe to the “Monthly” bus pass. And if you are a zone 3 user, that amounts to $99 per month (unlimited travel). A great incentive to use public transport.

Well, from 1 October, the price of a monthly bus ticket increases from $99 to $185.

How? Well, the monthly pass has been terminated and not replaced. So bus users will either have to use the new $185 “Get About” pass or use snapper.

A snapper zone 3 user will pay $3.23 per trip (20% discount on normal fare). If you are travelling twice a day, 7 days a week, for 4 weeks (eg, “monthly”) you will pay around $180.88. And this is not unlimited travel.

For unlimited travel (as per the old monthly pass) you wil need to pay an extra $4 for the $185 “Get About” pass. Which will let you travel outside of zone 3, as far as the Hut Valley.

A price increase of nearly 90%. So much for promoting affordable bus travel in our city.

And has our council made any noise about this? None. Absolutely zip.

We need to be subsidizing our buses, not parties.

We need to be sending the right messages, not mixed messages.

We need change.

http://www.metlink.org.nz/assets/Home-Page/Publications/J0099WRCFares-Leafletweb.pdf, http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/local/4090106/Fare-rises-will-nearly-double-cost-of-monthly-bus-passes

A pedestrian’s view of the world

A lot of heat is coming from citizens, and now businesses, over the manners st debacle.

An $11 million debacle, that had 74% opposition from 722 submissions during consultation.

Did our council listen? No. It rubbished dissent as a “a pedestrian’s view of the world.” And did its own survey that spun the line that 68% were in favour (how many participated in that survey is unknown, but I bet it wasn’t  nearly as large or representative). So much for transport policies that seek to get more people walking to work. Instead we are left with an open wound. One wonders what fate awaits the basin reserve.

So in accordance with transparency and full disclosure, you can find out who voted for this (list in the comments below the article), and make your own mind up about the wisdom of spending $11 million on it, rather than more pressing priorities – like reducing water leakage or removing the sewerage stink.

In 2-months time you get to hold them accountable.

http://wellington.scoop.co.nz/2009/12/manners-mall-the-council-knows-best, http://wellington.scoop.co.nz/2010/07/the-misery-of-manners-street-and-willis-street-and-taranaki-street, http://wellington.scoop.co.nz/2010/06/mind-your-manners-the-upheaval-begins/

Light ideas

Where do I stand on light rail?

If its 20 years away, its a red herring for this election. We have more pressing priorities, and new technology is making it redundant.

Why do we want to spend $140+ million on light rail when we need urgent action on our water supply. We are going to need that $140 million for a new dam. Otherwise heavier water restrictions and water meters will be on the council agenda (or a rates\debt increase to fund both).

Countries that adopted light rail a decade ago did so to use electricity instead of fossil fuels and remove overhead wiring. New bus technology makes overhead wiring unnecessary. And bio-diesel is here.

So why invest in laying rail tracks and maintaining another mode of transport?

Light rail might be romantic, but we have more immediate concerns.

Its about priorities.

http://eco-thinker.com/no-plug-in-hybrid-wirelessly-rechargeable-bus-by-hino-motors/, http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/SC0612/S00039.htm, http://www.stuff.co.nz/marlborough-express/news/3865043/Businesses-consider-plan-to-buy-biodiesel-in-bulk, http://wellington.scoop.co.nz/2010/03/the-future-of-fuel-do-oil-and-water-mix/

Making our communities safer

Council have recently proposed a change to the Mt Vic bus tunnel that will allow more buses to use it.

Whether you agree with the proposal or not, what I found concerning was the comment that “changes that could make the tunnel safer are cost-prohibitive”. How can this be, when council can easily find funds for other projects?

Surely public safety must be a higher priority than spending $11 million modifying manners st or building a $350k monument?

http://www.newswire.co.nz/2010/07/residents-chip-away/

Parking, its a problem

Parking in our city is a real problem for both residents and non-residents.

Its getting more expensive and much more difficult to find. Non-residents struggle to find parking and are left to infringe, impacting on residents. Residents are then left to infringe in order to find a park themselves, and the only winner is the parking warden (and council) who fines everyone. No doubt this problem is a massive revenue earner for the council. Talk about stakeholder capture.

Clearly the problem is a manifestation of poor management, planning, and design.

One of the problems is poor signage. People are not able to see where residential or public parks are. I’m not a fan of signs (another form of visual pollution), and have always wondered why they don’t colour code the lines on the roads to indicate permitted parking areas.

An easy solution is to increase supply. Existing roads are a good source. We could provide more parking spaces on wide roads by having angle parks (even if its only on one side of the street). We could use idle land that is waiting re-development. Of course all of these ideas would just invite more cars coming into the city – resulting in greater congestion.

What about reducing demand? Increasing pricing would put pressure on usage. Apart from the fact, this has already been done several times already, pricing strategies merely benefit the rich, who have greater disposable income. Pricing has little impact on the decisions of the wealthy. Parking policies need to be fair.

Perhaps we could better manage existing parking spaces? For a start, we could mark out individual car spaces on the road. So often poorly parked cars result in wasted street parking, because other cars are unable to fit. Could we incentivise car and mini-van pooling by providing dedicated car-pool parking space that is free? Perhaps we could also improve our bus services. What about supporting inner city vehicle leasing and bike usage (see earlier post about the Parisian solution).

Perhaps we should ask why people are bringing their cars into the city? A study would be useful. Where are the flow of cars coming from, that puts pressure on residents parking? Is there a parking problem in another area of the town (eg, around the polytechnic) that requires attention? Taking pressure off one place, may flow though to other places, reducing parking pressures.

It’s about better management and planning of our parking.

Let them eat cake

The Mayor has called for cars to be banned from Wellington’s golden mile … after the Manners Mall redevelopment, Basin Reserve motorway, and Mt Victoria Tunnel have been constructed. This should be around 10 to 20 years time.

Talk about hot air and mixed messages. As Sue Kedgley has pointed out, “we don’t need to wait 20 years to make the city people-friendly” adding “there needs to be some logic to our transportation projects”. I agree.

Although not sure we can afford light rail yet (and then there is integration with existing public transport to consider). Enhancing our bus service is probably more realistic, and would deliver more immediate benefits for residents and tourists. Its good to have aspirations. But we need action, and now, not in 20 years time.

At the same time, another trade delegation from Wellington heads to china. Fantastic. But why is the Mayor of Wellington going? Isn’t this the domain of the Minister of Trade or embassy people – people with real clout? That’s why we have embassy’s, right? Can we afford this?

I thought the council was telling us that local services will have to be pruned back. Surely, now is the time for the Mayor to be at the office, doing the hard yards, leading by example – and saving money.

Perhaps talking to the Mayor of our sister city in China on the phone (or skype),  and inviting them to look after our cities delegation of business people? Or working with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to ensure our business people have all the support they need. Or perhaps this trip sums up the state of our council – give them dreams while we eat cake.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/local/3756104/Mayor-and-business-group-head-to-China, http://www.greens.org.nz/press-releases/light-rail-golden-mile-should-come-first

Traffic congestion is environmental pollution

Its raining today and traffic this morning was at a stand still. Traffic congestion is a major problem in our city and causes of congestion are many and varied (as are solutions).

Is WCC  really committed to solving traffic congestion and reducing pollution? Its a question Sydney residents are beginning to ask.

Congestion studies show that about half of traffic delay is non-recurring, attributable to temporary disruptions of the transportation system like traffic incidents, work zones, poor weather, and special events. The other half is recurring congestion, delay that occurs in the same place at the same time, day after day. Today its definitely the weather.

So what can be done?

I believe our thinking needs to be open to other solutions, rather than just increasing vehicle capacity (ie building more roads). Don’t get me wrong, road construction has its place. But what we need is to shift our thinking, from construction to management of the transportation system. And that includes collaboration and co-operation between traditional and non-traditional players in the transportation system.

That’s where WCC can make a difference. Transportation policies must encourage an appropriate balance between different modes of transport. Are we encouraging walking and cycling?  Do we encourage school children to walk to school? Do we encourage freight to use alternative routes or modes of transport. Why aren’t more people using public transport to get to work? How are we planning for electric cars? Do we maintain our roads properly so there is minimal disruption (so often we see roads being sealed and then dug up).

Its just crazy. Wellington is a small village in comparative terms to other cities. Surely it cannot be hard to put a coherent plan together that places our resident’s well being at its centre.

Lets reduce the emissions pollution and have better transport policies.

http://pollutionfree.wordpress.com/2009/09/08/traffic-congestion-and-emissions/, http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/05/12/2897702.htm

Encouraging environmentally sustainable transport

Wellington is full of cafes and restaurants. One wonders how much oil is actually disposed of by all these eateries.

Here’s an idea that is a proven solution from Graz (Austria) that WCC could develop in partnership with businesses. The WCC needs to encourage (and facilitate) the growth of local markets for bio- fuels as a low carbon fuel for Local Authorities and other public sector transport fleets (ie cabs).

Its about leadership and making our public transport enviromentally sustainable.

http://esteast.unep.ch/default.asp?community=est-east&page_id=5A94ED08-0788-405B-8680-C12296ACE3AF