<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Regional Land Transport Strategy &#8211; a quantum shift?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://transportblog.co.nz/2009/05/18/regional-land-transport-strategy-a-quantum-shift/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://transportblog.co.nz/2009/05/18/regional-land-transport-strategy-a-quantum-shift/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 21 May 2012 15:26:19 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: jarbury</title>
		<link>http://transportblog.co.nz/2009/05/18/regional-land-transport-strategy-a-quantum-shift/#comment-77</link>
		<dc:creator>jarbury</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 18 May 2009 08:55:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://transportblog.co.nz/?p=429#comment-77</guid>
		<description>Nope the Waterview Connection won&#039;t be tolled. Petrol tax is my prefered method, as it&#039;s cheap and simple to collect. Not sure how transport will be funded in an &quot;electric cars&quot; future.

Clearly these Metro lines are a &quot;dream&quot; project, and they would be underground heavy rail rather than a London Underground style Metro. But it&#039;s certainly better to be talking about this kind of stuff than whether we&#039;ll need to double-decker the Southern Motorway.

The future of Auckland&#039;s transport is public transport. The ARC realise this, we just need to convince the government now. Oh, and the new super-city (damn I hope they&#039;re an empowered ARC and not an expanded Auckland City Council).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nope the Waterview Connection won&#8217;t be tolled. Petrol tax is my prefered method, as it&#8217;s cheap and simple to collect. Not sure how transport will be funded in an &#8220;electric cars&#8221; future.</p>
<p>Clearly these Metro lines are a &#8220;dream&#8221; project, and they would be underground heavy rail rather than a London Underground style Metro. But it&#8217;s certainly better to be talking about this kind of stuff than whether we&#8217;ll need to double-decker the Southern Motorway.</p>
<p>The future of Auckland&#8217;s transport is public transport. The ARC realise this, we just need to convince the government now. Oh, and the new super-city (damn I hope they&#8217;re an empowered ARC and not an expanded Auckland City Council).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nicholas O'Kane</title>
		<link>http://transportblog.co.nz/2009/05/18/regional-land-transport-strategy-a-quantum-shift/#comment-74</link>
		<dc:creator>Nicholas O'Kane</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 18 May 2009 08:18:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://transportblog.co.nz/?p=429#comment-74</guid>
		<description>I too like the good news that Auckland could get a decent rail system. I wouldn&#039;t get too excited about the metro. I don&#039;t know where you got the news about Parsons Brinkerhoff and their proposals from, as I can&#039;t find it in the document. Even if they did use the word a metro, I suspect what they meant was a normal underground heavy rail link. And we just don&#039;t have the population density to support a real metro, like the ones in Europe and the one they are planning for Sydney.

I agree wholeheartedly with you and them that a Manakau-Botany-Panmure link, the CBD rail link, a rail link to the airport, and preferably North Shore (if not extending the busway through a dedicated bus tunnel or special bus lanes on the bridge to the CBD) are important, but the whole metro idea is pie in the sky, and too expansive to construct.

Regarding road pricing, is the waterview connection going to be tolled. Tolls are my favourite road pricing method. petrol tax ain&#039;t bad either, and it is a pity National dumped the regional fuel tax idea.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I too like the good news that Auckland could get a decent rail system. I wouldn&#8217;t get too excited about the metro. I don&#8217;t know where you got the news about Parsons Brinkerhoff and their proposals from, as I can&#8217;t find it in the document. Even if they did use the word a metro, I suspect what they meant was a normal underground heavy rail link. And we just don&#8217;t have the population density to support a real metro, like the ones in Europe and the one they are planning for Sydney.</p>
<p>I agree wholeheartedly with you and them that a Manakau-Botany-Panmure link, the CBD rail link, a rail link to the airport, and preferably North Shore (if not extending the busway through a dedicated bus tunnel or special bus lanes on the bridge to the CBD) are important, but the whole metro idea is pie in the sky, and too expansive to construct.</p>
<p>Regarding road pricing, is the waterview connection going to be tolled. Tolls are my favourite road pricing method. petrol tax ain&#8217;t bad either, and it is a pity National dumped the regional fuel tax idea.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jarbury</title>
		<link>http://transportblog.co.nz/2009/05/18/regional-land-transport-strategy-a-quantum-shift/#comment-76</link>
		<dc:creator>jarbury</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 18 May 2009 02:54:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://transportblog.co.nz/?p=429#comment-76</guid>
		<description>Yeah I agree that road pricing will be a tough proposition to push for. Parking restrictions are quite likely to be imposed in the near future - with the ARC Draft Parking Strategy being quite a revolution in that respect.

I&#039;m more of a fan of petrol tax rather than road pricing - largely because it&#039;s far cheaper and less of a hassle to administrate.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yeah I agree that road pricing will be a tough proposition to push for. Parking restrictions are quite likely to be imposed in the near future &#8211; with the ARC Draft Parking Strategy being quite a revolution in that respect.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m more of a fan of petrol tax rather than road pricing &#8211; largely because it&#8217;s far cheaper and less of a hassle to administrate.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nick R</title>
		<link>http://transportblog.co.nz/2009/05/18/regional-land-transport-strategy-a-quantum-shift/#comment-75</link>
		<dc:creator>Nick R</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 18 May 2009 01:43:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://transportblog.co.nz/?p=429#comment-75</guid>
		<description>Hi Jarbury,

The quantum shift is along the lines of what I&#039;ve suggested in the past. However, as you note the road pricing might be very politically difficult to pull off in Auckland, especially without a lot of high visibility PT projects in place before hand.

There could be a lot of success with a &#039;soft quantum&#039; option, basically high PT development, limited road network extensions and a series of softer push measures such as the 10c a litre petrol tax, much tighter restrictions on super cheap sh*tbox jap imports (a younger fleet is good for emissions and safety aspects also), new urban highway/motorway projects developed as toll roads, maximum rather than minimum parking requirements for developments, and a parking levy in centres with good PT access.

That would probably achieve a lot of push, without a massive, expensive and politically troublesome road pricing system. The only downside is you would lack the ability to target particular areas or corridors (except the parking levy) or to manage access based on time of day, congestion etc.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Jarbury,</p>
<p>The quantum shift is along the lines of what I&#8217;ve suggested in the past. However, as you note the road pricing might be very politically difficult to pull off in Auckland, especially without a lot of high visibility PT projects in place before hand.</p>
<p>There could be a lot of success with a &#8216;soft quantum&#8217; option, basically high PT development, limited road network extensions and a series of softer push measures such as the 10c a litre petrol tax, much tighter restrictions on super cheap sh*tbox jap imports (a younger fleet is good for emissions and safety aspects also), new urban highway/motorway projects developed as toll roads, maximum rather than minimum parking requirements for developments, and a parking levy in centres with good PT access.</p>
<p>That would probably achieve a lot of push, without a massive, expensive and politically troublesome road pricing system. The only downside is you would lack the ability to target particular areas or corridors (except the parking levy) or to manage access based on time of day, congestion etc.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Served from: transportblog.co.nz @ 2012-05-22 07:20:56 -->
