A couple of events in recent months that seem otherwise unrelated got me thinking about how Aucklanders perceive public transport – and the importance of that perception. The first is the ongoing construction of a large carpark almost on top of the Britomart railway station and the second was the massive opposition to the removal of on-street parking along Dominion Road: from residents but particularly from businesses.
In the case of the carpark next to Britomart station, it surprised me that there would be a perceived need for such a facility when you’re so close to what must be New Zealand’s largest public transport interchange. From Britomart you can catch a bus, train or ferry to pretty much every corner of Auckland, so it’s not like there’s a lack of accessibility to the area that this carpark will serve. So why the ‘need’ to effectively waste such a prime waterfront location on a massive carpark? I suspect it’s because the developer fears that the redevelopment of the Britomart area won’t be commercially viable without ‘good parking’. The difficulty there has been in leasing the refurbished office building just across from Britomart (the one with Dick Smith on the ground floor) – which doesn’t have any parking – has probably reinforced the developer’s viewpoint that it’s necessary to construct this parking building.
With the Dominion Road debacle, once again the businesses felt that without the provision of parking (in this case on-street) close to their premises, very few people would visit the businesses along Dominion Road leading to significant reductions in sales. The reliance of the businesses on through traffic stopping to pick up items from the stores was emphasised. The potential for public transport users to be significant purchasers of goods and services along Dominion Road was, for some reason, not emphasised.
In both these cases, and in countless other examples, I think that we’re finding in general there’s a perception (I will get back to the accuracy of this perception later) that public transport is utter rubbish, and only those who can’t afford to own and drive their car would ever catch the bus or train. Decades of neglecting public transport in Auckland has created this perception – which permeates incredibly deeply into the psyche of many Aucklanders – and in some respects I think that the results of our perception that PT is rubbish may be just as significant, when it comes to how Auckland functions, as the actual quality of our public transport system.
In the case of the Britomart carpark, clearly the developer feels that they will struggle to lease the buildings they’re refurbishing unless they can provide easily accessible parking. Perhaps they’ve done market research and prospective tenants have told them that they wouldn’t want to move into a building without parking, because they feel they’d struggle to retain top staff unless they can offer them a job package that includes a company car and carpark – or at the very least, free parking. Perhaps that is true, but whether or not it’s true is actually irrelevant: the important thing is that it’s perceived to be true (largely because of the perception that public transport is rubbish and staff wouldn’t want to use it) and so therefore we end up with lots of parking buildings.
Now obviously in many cases the perception that public transport is rubbish is quite true. Most of Auckland’s bus routes haven’t had any improvements over the past decade, Western Line trains operate at an excruciatingly slow speed, there are almost no bus lanes outside the Auckland isthmus (just a few transit lanes on the North Shore) and the complex ticketing system does everything it can to put people off using public transport. If we are to improve the perception of public transport, then one of the most important things we need to do is actually improve the quality of the system. Obviously, this takes time and a lot of money.
But what I really want to focus on here are the opportunities to highlight situations where the public transport system is actually pretty good – so that we can ensure the public perception matches the quality of the system. Furthermore, I also suspect there are many situations where the public transport system might be ‘decent’, but the perception remains that it is rubbish. Interestingly, in both the cases mentioned above – the Britomart carpark and Dominion Road – the public transport system is actually about as good as it gets for Auckland. You can get to most corners of Auckland from Britomart via public transport, while buses along Dominion Road enjoy extensive priority measures during peak hours and operate at very good frequencies – a bus every 5 minutes even at off-peak times during weekdays. How come there’s still a perception that public transport is so rubbish?
The gap between what people perceive to be the quality of public transport, and the actual quality of public transport, is not just a phenomenon restricted to Auckland. The excellent book “Car Sick: solutions for our car-addicted culture” that I got for Christmas, highlights some interesting examples from the UK about the gap between perception and reality when it comes to public transport:
The problem is that many people consistently remember public transport as worse than it actually is, and remember car travel as better than it actually is. Every time they plan a journey, they apply a distorting filter to the decision-making process. They are overly pessimistic about how long the trip will take by bus, and whether the bus will be on time. They concentrate their thoughts on the negative aspects of travelling by train, like the possibility that they will miss a connection. They think of how long it will take to walk to the shops. At the same time, they are overly optimistic about driving, assuming that the journey will be quicker than it really is, and concentrate on the positive feelings linked to car travel, like independence and flexibility, instead of the negative experiences, like traffic jams. They also underestimate the actual cost of travelling by car.
The research behind this shows up some quite interesting results:
In Darlington, Werner [the researcher] asked people how long they thought a particular journey would take if it was made by public transport, and how long a journey would take by car. He found that on average, people overestimated the public transport journey by 70 per cent., so that, for example, they assumed a 20-minute tip would actually take 34 minutes. They under-estimated the journey time by car by 26 per cent, assuming a 20-minute trip would actually take 15 minutes. In another survey, this time in Germany, he [Werner] found the same car-bias in people’s perceptions of the cost of travel. People overestimated the cost of public transport by 21 per cent, and underestimated the true cost of car travel by 58 per cent.
The reasons for the gap between the perception and the reality of car versus public transport are likely to be somewhat complex. In Auckland particularly, I think a big cause will be how bad public transport was in the not-too-distant past, and how bad it still is in many parts of the city. It would be interesting to see if the same results outlined above applied here – how long people thought it would take to get from Mt Roskill to the city via Dominion Road, how frequent people thought trains on the Western Line operated at peak times and between peak times, for example.
The lesson to take out of all this is that perception is incredibly important. If we want more people to use public transport (to reduce congestion, pollution etc. etc.) then not only do we need to make the system better, but perhaps just as importantly: we need to ensure that everyone knows how much the system has improved. It’s essential that people know a bus goes along Dominion Road every 5 minutes during the day, that people know how long it takes a Northern Express bus to get from Constellation Station to the city – and how reliable it is. To overcome the natural bias against public transport, it’s essential for PT marketing to focus on providing information so that people can be made aware that PT is no longer crap – at least for this particular route. B.Line goes some way towards that, although oddly for the two route it’s been applied along (Dominion Road and Mt Eden Road) it perversely undersells the quality of the route – promising 15 minute frequencies when actually there are at worst 5 (Dominion Road) and 10 (Mt Eden Road) minute frequencies during weekdays.
I have long maintained that people are logical with their choice of transport option. Most Aucklanders choose to drive not because they’re in love with their cars (though some may be), but because driving is generally faster, cheaper and more convenient. That’s not a surprise when we’ve spent most of the last 60 years vastly improving the road system and completely ignoring the public transport system – a trend that has only been rebalanced in the last few years. But there’s an important clarification to make here – that people are logical in their transport choices based on their perception of how fast, cheap and convenient the different options are. If we are to encourage more people to use public transport, then not only must we improve the system so it is logical for people to catch the bus, train or ferry – we must also improve the public’s perception of the system: so that there’s an awareness of the real costs and benefits of choosing to drive, walk, cycle or catch public transport for that particular trip.
We can do everything in the world to dramatically improve the system’s quality, but unless the public knows about it we won’t see nearly the results that we would otherwise. Unless the perception of public transport improves, we will continue to see illogical results like massive carparks being built next to Britomart and we will continue to struggle to convince retailers that they can live and prosper without carparking outside their shops.
good post.
Some of it isn’t just about experience, but about legibility.
I’ve always argued the best legibility isn’t a colourful map, or a great timetable or a web-based search engine (though these are important too) – but actually seeing the vehicle, moving at speed, going to where it is supposed to go.
Physical evidence of its path – for example, rails or overhead wires, and clarity about where that path leads (straight, direct to some attractor) is the best advertisement.
And certainty that it will turn up, and keep turning up, for years to come.
This is the advantage fixed modes, running turn up and go, along clear corridors have over all public transport alternatives. So good, that you can plan your capital investments around them.
The test I use is the London Underground (or HK MTR, or whatever) test. If you see the Underground symbol, as you walk down a London street, you know you are near a network that will transport you across London, interchange with other corridors, at high frequency, predictable service patterns, known fare levels, and will keep doing so year after year after year.
This is not to say the odd LU station hasn’t closed; a few have. Or that some obscure spurs on the edge of the system like Chalfont or Ongar weren’t underserved like your average Auckland station.
But generally the LU symbol, or the HK MTR symbol, is a promise to the public that is generally kept.
Something people can build on, metaphorically but then physically, as sites convenient to these systems become highly sort after.
What you are seeing with these massive carparks is people planning their capital investments around what they CAN be sure of – the road network – because Auckland and NZ have been so half-hearted, so patchy towards public transport they aren’t prepared to wager their investments on its success.
As much as I am a fan of public transport (thanks to using it in countries where it actually was good), going shopping by bus in Auckland is a bad idea, especially if it is serious shopping, because buses have no space for people with bags or bigger items on trolleys. London underground and buses in many cities in Europe typically have part of their interior seat-free and with something to hold on to, so that people can stand or sit there with big items, trolleys or many bags on the floor without causing a problem for others. Auckland buses are packed with seats like they were airplanes with space for luggage overhead (maybe that’s a good idea? joking…) – even one person standing or keeping their stuff in the narrow path between seats blocks the way for others, and the 2×4 seats facing each other with some space between them are very often taken. I did go shopping by bus when I had no car and no other option, now I have a car and while I still go by bus to uni, I go shopping by car.
The other things is that shopping and entertainment in the CBD happens mostly after business hours, when bus frequency decreases dramatically.
Vehicle seating always needs to be with reference to some service standard.
Turn up and go, with maximum journey time of 30 minutes per stage should have vehicles with bare minimum seating, to pack as many people in as possible. Especially trains and light rail, with minimum lateral movement.
Commuter services, with typically 30-90 minute journey times need seats for most/all people, to a good general comfort standard but still with generous doorway/vestibule areas.
Intercity services, of 60 minutes or more, should be fitted out like aircraft or long distance coaches, with toilets, separate luggage storage and smaller doorway/vestibule areas reflecting that the vehicle will spend most of its time travelling, not loading/unloading, and some passengers can board the vehicle well ahead of departure (eg at a terminal station).
Most Australasian networks struggle with these service standards because they want to standardise their vehicles, despite the obvious disparities in journey length. Someone from Glen Innes should be able to stand. From Papakura they should get a seat. From Hamilton they should get a comfy seat. However only the last of these three is guaranteed of this.
I think perception is huge in Auckland and it is something that needs to be challenged by AT, I do think a lot of stems from historically poor PT (well the last 60 years at least). My preference is for some free days, perhaps on some of the higher quality routes first. What is interesting is to see in Infratils latest monthly report they say the patronage on the Mt Eden route is up 20% which is pretty impressive and is most likely due to the B Line advertising despite the fact it is underselling itself.
In areas where there is dedicated route like bus lanes or train lines, I wonder if part of the problem is people might only see buses every 5-10 minutes but to them stuck in a traffic jam it seems like much longer so driving along and seeing an empty lane or track makes them think that our PT is completely useless.
One thing recently I think was good to help boost perception of the train services was that we had a timetable delivered to our letterbox seeing as we are close to a station, little things like that are probably going to help as it breaks down the barriers for people and makes them think about it.
Why bother doing actually something about it 18 months ago when you can whine about it on the internet today.
Didn’t they demolish a parking building to build that station?
Any prizes for who “Snore” posted as previously? Snore indeed…..
Bluewater built the carpark for two reasons. One, it would be lucrative financially, even before considered in conjunction with the commercial premises they are selling/leasing nearby. And two, nobody in the end could stop them.
Pretty simple really.
Haha… Take a guess
As for Dominion Road, there’d be a lot less complaining residents of we knocked a wee motorway down it. Tempting…
Is “parking around the corner” really a big deal?
You’re getting pretty close to being considered a troll snore. I do agree with you that parking around the corner shouldn’t be a big deal. It would be interesting for Auckland Transport to undertake a proper study about how important parking on Dominion Road actually is.
admin,
That shouldn’t be too difficult. Count the number of carparks, multiply by $660k…
(I’m joking, obvuiously)
admin,
That shouldn’t be too difficult. Count the number of carparks, multiply by $660k…
(I’m joking, obviously)
Kind of off topic, but there also seems to be a perception in this country (mostly thanks to the media) that if you ride a bicycle on a road, you’re going to be killed. In reality, the odds are low you’ll be in an accident, especially if you cycle sensibly. I’ve cycled to work in Wellington for 2 years, and have not had a single accident (a few close calls though).
Cycled in Auckland in the last decade?
I regularly cycle here in Auckland and generally you’re actually pretty safe. Biggest problem is with legally ill-informed bogans trying to tell you to get on the footpath.
I have cycled to work in Auckland for almost 2 years now, in the last 12 months i have not had any scares. I cycle to and from Balmoral and Ponsonby daily during peak times. I have found that both Sandringham and Dominion Roads offer quite a high level of safety for cyclists.
Sandringham Rd has wonderful bus lanes, the only hazard being right turning vehicles in heavy traffic. Crossing Balmoral road can be a bit of a challenge, at the Sandringham Rd crossing it is a fast road that has little in the way of extra space for cyclists.
Dominion Road has bus lanes but also, at peak times the traffic flow is rather slow so oftentimes i cycle in the traffic column to allow buses and scooters to pass by more easily in the bus lanes.
With many people cycling on these roads now, the awareness of drivers to the fact that cyclists and scooters will be in the bus lanes is a lot higher.
One problem is that, for a huge percentage of the population, public transport is shit. In the case of south-eastern residents it’s a whole sewage pond, and if you reside to the south-west it’s only just got somewhat better with the re-opening of the Onehunga line. One of my colleagues allows over an hour to travel from Botany to the CBD by bus for an 08:30 start, a trip that’s about 25 minutes off-peak. A former colleague used to allow similar to bus from Onehunga to Grafton, and I don’t want to think about how painful it is for residents of Mangere Bridge and Ihumatao.
I live in Ellerslie and have learned from bitter experience that peak-time buses will take longer door-to-door than the train even though the bus stop is almost right over the road but the train station is a five minute walk and it’s further from Britomart train station than any of the 5x(x) stops.
These are not perception problems, and they’re not historic. They’re observed within the last six months. I don’t care how wonderful B-Line is, or how fantastic frequencies are for rail (out west, or if you happen to live south of Otahuhu), when if I were to be unfortunate enough to live another couple of kilometres in another direction (not that I’d be there, since train proximity was a deal-killer when we were looking for a place) I’d be leaving home at 07:30 to ensure that my bus wasn’t going to make me late for work; and I’d have no option except bus.
Saying it’s cheaper than taking the car doesn’t account for the convenience factor of my own timetable, my guaranteed seat. When the bus trip takes longer than a peak-time drive of the same distance (yes, really), I’m a hard sell on using public transport. I’m definitely not alone, and I’m much better located for and disposed toward public transport than most of the population.
Matt you’re absolutely right that PT is rubbish for a great number of Aucklanders. My point is that even if we improve its quality, we also need to improve the perception of its quality for more people to start using PT.
We can’t market a crap service and trick people that it’s great. As much as Auckland Transport would love to do so.
No, you certainly can’t market a sow’s ear as a silk purse, but similarly you can’t market the silk purse heavily when all that’s available to the majority is a sow’s ear; in many cases, a very moth-eaten and flea-ridden one.
Do the former and people know you’re spouting porkes. But do the latter, and those who can’t get the silk purse will assume that you’re making stuff up because they can’t get the high-quality product. It’s a bit of a catch 22, but it’s definitely easy to improve the lot of the poorly-served suburbs. A quick win would be to put bus lanes bi-directional all the way along Great South Road (or at least sufficiently far south that they avoid the snarl-ups that occur through to Penrose/Otahuhu), Ellerslie-Panmure Highway, and reconsider the design of the Main Highway/GSR/Campbell Rd intersection so that buses don’t get held up by the ridiculous light phasing and sticking-out kerb. Likewise the GSR/Broadway/Manukau Rd intersection, which really, desperately needs a bus lane right the way to the traffic lights.
If you live in Botany / Howick then public transport is crap-ola! I grew up in Bucklands Beach and then lived in Botany (some years ago) I used the bus to get to the CBD for work and it was a mission X alot. The only way I can see improving it is to put a rail line from G.I. in a tunnel to Highland Park to Botany and out to join at Manukau ($+$’s) or put bus lanes from Panmure (or even Elerslie via Panmure) to Botany which have total right of way over cars and any lights turn green as the bus approaches.
If you wait long enough you’ll get an Eastern Motorway. AMETI is laying the foundations
No, AMETI is laying the foundations for a segregated busway between Panmure and Botany. Bulding a one lane per direction link between Mt Wellington Highway and Merton Road is not a precursor to an “Eastern Motorway”.
Harry, the core project of AMETI is a new six lane arterial road between the Mt Wellington Highway and Glen Innes, using the Eastern Motorway reservation. This is in addition to the Merton Link Rd you mention. Also there is a massive flyover proposed at Pakauranga Plaza, and modification to the South Eastern Arterial to bring it up to motorway standard.
If you honestly think the main goal of AMETI is to build a busway I suggest you take a close look at the plans on the website. AMETI is first and foremost about building massive new highways, it is very much the old Eastern Transport Corriodor project with a slight change of direction. The busway really is quite secondary to the main goal of building new roads.
Another way you can see the way PT is perceived is in radio ads, there are a few out there at the moment that either promote cars or actually put down PT. There is one ad selling Newmarket as a shopping destination that advertises over 4500 car parks but doesn’t mention at all that there is a train station with access right into the middle of Broadway. Then there is the Personalised plates ad says you can finally ditch PT and have the freedom of a car
Plus the only radio ads you ever hear about in relation to public transport are those reminding people the rail network is closed. If you didn’t catch the train you’d swear the rail network was never actually open.
I hate Personalised Plates with a vengence. Maybe a PT campaign needs to be waged pointing out how much of a wanker you look with a personalised plate.
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:ebBT2oVDBG8J:www.carjam.co.nz/car/%3Fplate%3DT055ER+t055er&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=nz
I liked the recent “POOCHY” ad taking the mickey out of personalised plates. I personally know someone driving around with a personalised plate given to them by a relative, fitted to the car so not to offend the gifter, that they’d rather not have.
I also think we should give honourable mention to two places that do advertise their PT amenity, being Lynnmall, with their free delivery service they had (trialled?) over Christmas, and Sylvia Park, whose ads boast “a full bus and rail service”. I try to support these two malls when going shopping or going to the movies, even though my local is St Lukes {shudder}.
Onehunga was also advertising before Christmas saying how its been a great year for the suburb and listing a number of positives including “The trains are back”
Auckland PT needs a major overhaul.
Even though they are not rapid transit the likes of Mt Eden Rd and Dominion Rd should become the major PT arterials with feeder services to them and other PT arterials such as the North Shore busway and the rail lines. Frequency should be increased on all the arterials to a maximum of 5 minutes during peaks, 10 minutes for non-peak between 06:00 and 22:00 with 15 minutes from 05:00-06:00 and 22:00-02:00. Then feeder routes can have reduced lengths the frequency of these services can be increased.
Then advertise the great new services and get people on to PT.
There are two things that need to happen for this to be fully feasible, CBD rail and integrated ticketing that doesn’t cost you a fortune to transfer with.
there, ah, used to be enough room on Dominion, Mt. Eden, Manukau, Great North, etc., for two tram tracks. be nice to get them back. if only. light rail bridge or tunel across the Tamaki, then out to Botany…less expensive than tunnelling.
The same thing happened in Wellington when the carparking for the Cake Tin (Westpac Stadium) was opened up for commuter use – despite it being next door to the railway station – and it found no shortage of takers, either.
Councils support public transport, but only as a second-choice solution to mobility problems. To promote public transport, not just by favouring it, but by impeding its car-based competition, is completely beyond them. The UK is mostly he same.
… and the UK is now getting worse; the new government has abolished a range of planning measures aimed at strategically reducing car use:
http://www.communities.gov.uk/news/newsroom/1809347
The general day to day cost of taking PT over personal car transport is too high. I travel from Pukekohe to the CBD. It is about the same cost which is ridiculous. To inconveniency oneself to catch a infrequent service that generally crawls along and is slower than driving which costs about the same or more is not on.
The cost of the PT tickets needs to be sufficiently lower. If the cost was lower people will be more likely to put themselves out to catch the infrequent PT network. The patronage would then dramatically increase on the PT network. Curitiba (in Brazil) is a great example of the effect that dramatically decreasing the cost of public transport ticketing, rapidly increased the patronage of all services.
I think the fares have been set to try and be just cheaper than it would for a single occupant rather than setting them to a level to get the maximum return. I also believe that if fares were cheaper more people would flock to services and that should make up the shortfall from having those lower fares.