Yesterday was Daffodil Day and in two different locations people put a lot of effort into creating neat displays that enhanced the urban environment and made people stop and look.
The first one I saw was on Durham Lane where Daffodils had been tied to a netting which was hung like a canopy above the lane.
The second was at Takutai Square at Britomart. Here hundreds of Daffodils had been planted into the grass (this was done a few years ago with poppies for ANZAC day).
What a fantastic way to raise awareness for a charity while also making the city more interesting at the same time.
17: A Greater Auckland?
What if we felt like we lived in an Auckland that was greater than the sum of its parts?
This is perhaps one of the reoccurring themes in my 100 days project. It reflects the public discussion and debate happening in Auckland around our future growth challenge, and how best we should invest public money in supporting that growth and our existing communities.
The parochialism of old Auckland was notorious. It was one contributing reason for the governance reforms and creation of the one council.
Only being concerned with one’s own lot in life is not a great basis upon which to debate the future of a city. Neither is only being interested in one’s own patch of the city to the extent of actively fighting against investment or even just change in other parts of the city. These aspects of Auckland seem to relate to a deeper issue around the way this city has grown and developed over time.
It says a lot about the urban geography of Auckland; how the way we have shaped the city then shapes how we feel about each other and the city in which we all live. How do we view a sense of a community? Do we relate to any sense of a greater Auckland, or not? Is there any sense of an Auckland that is greater than the sum of its parts? And what might this all mean for our future?
Arguably one of the best things that has happened through the creation of the one council has been a growing sense of one Auckland While we won’t always and shouldn’t always speak with one voice, a common understanding that we are generally better off together than apart seems a good basis to understanding of why we are all here together living in and around this beautiful Tamaki Makaurau.
Events and public festivals and celebrations that attract big crowds from right across Auckland are one of the few occasions where we all have the opportunity to come together and have a sense of being a part of and connected the other 1.5 million odd residents in this increasingly diverse city.
It has now been three months since Janette Sadik-Khan visited Auckland and showed us how easy it was to create a more liveable city by making things better for people to walk and cycle around, and best of all we could do this really quickly and cheaply.
Since the excitement of that time their has been some positive noise about some cycleway projects such as Karangahape Road and Nelson St, however there is so much to do around the city in the pedestrian realm. So now I am going to look at a number of really simple and cheap things we can do around the city to make things much better for people.
The first place I am going to look at is the Britomart precinct. This has become an immensely successful area over the last decade, revitalising a formerly very rundown and seedy area, preserving a large collection of heritage buildings, with a few sympathetic additions. However the streetscape is still very plain, and the design prioritises cars, even though walking is the dominant mode of travel through the precinct. While it is better than many areas of the city, there is still much to be done.
Pedestrians should really be the priority throughout this area, however the road layout still gives priority to cars, and several streets are used as rat runs. In the medium term we could look at pedestrianisation and shared spaces in this area, however with limited budgets and uncertainty about bus movements this is best left for the longer term. So therefore I am going to focus on easy and cheap improvements.
The East-West site link is probably the most important, linking the station to the atrium of the Westpac building through Takutai Square. For some unknown reason this link is totally devoid of zebra crossings, which would prioritise pedestrians, slow cars and improve safety.
Britomart Place, looking towards the disaster of Scene Lane
Zebra crossings could be added to all three of these roads tomorrow with tiny cost, yet make things so much better for people walking in this precinct. Zebras with raised tables should also be added to all the side streets, such as the corner of Galway and Commerce Streets.
Galway and Commerce St
In a slightly longer timeframe consideration should be given to closing at least one of the north-south links to through traffic. These streets are much busier than they should be because of rat-running and cars circling for parking. At least in the short term, Commerce Street is important for bus movements so that will need to stay. Gore Street is probably the most likely candidate, the main use of the area seems to be taxis illegally parking in the median.
While Britomart Place has some traffic calming in the use of lane narrowing and pebbled surfaces directly opposite the Westpac atrium, the two ends at Quay St and Commerce St are totally oversized, and for 4 lanes so every turn movement can have their own lane. The slip lane from Britomart Place to Beach Road is also very dangerous and should be removed as a priority.
Britomart Place – 3 southbound lanes for one quiet street
The area could be narrowed substantially, with traffic lanes roughly halved. The narrowing would be best done on the western side, which would allow popular places like Mexico, Brew on Quay and several cafes to expand their tables over more of the pavement, and provide more room for pedestrians. This can be done without any expensive reconstruction in the short term, just by allowing planters and tables to cover part of the existing road.
This rather crude drawing shows how much space could be freed up for people and street life, while still allowing 2 lanes of traffic through the area.
There is also one change that could benefit people cycling. If you are cycling from the (rather pathetic) bike racks at Britomart you can head east along Tyler St. However heading towards Britomart there is no obvious direct legal option, and people are forced to cycle the wrong way down Galway St between Commerce and Gore Street. If this section was flipped this would make things much easier.
Another option is the provision of contraflow bike lanes. These are used with some success in Adelaide, the use of which in their laneways was noted recently by the excellent Cycling in Christchurch Blog. If flipping the streets was not possible for some reason, then these could be installed to allow cyclists to travel east-west through the area.
Adelaide Laneway – c/ Glen Koorey, Cycling in Christchurch blog
All these changes suggested would help ensure Britomart could continue to be an exciting area and further enhance its reputation as a great place to be.
16: A Retail Renaissance?
What if Topshop Topman was just the beginning?
Over the past year or so there has started to be some recognition in the media that change is afoot in the central city retail scene (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11269705, http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11262222 ) . Queen Street in particular, much-maligned for many years as the home of tacky souvenir and $2 shops, is really stepping up. Later this year, we can expect a number of new retail openings. These include a number of new to NZ flagship stores, including Topshop Topman, Prada, Dior and Camper, all opening along and just off Queen Street.
Wouldn’t it be great if this was just the tip of the iceberg in invigorating the city centre’s retail scene? Historically, Aucklanders used to flock to the shops in town on late nights and weekends. Is this likely to start happening again? Would more global brands such as the middle market, fast fashion stores many New Zealanders shop at on international holidays help achieve this?
Last week I looked at how hard it was to safely walk around Manukau City. Today I am going to look at the cycling infrastructure that has been provided.
On the various regional cycle network maps a lovely grid of completed cycling facilities is shown (solid lines).
This is a 2011 version, but can’t fund anything newer on the Auckland Transport website. All the dark red lines are existing facilities, which are fully complete as far as AT is concerned. However the reality is somewhat different. Luckily I was walking around Manukau when I took these pictures, because I sure wouldn’t have wanted to bike along any of them, even though I am quite a confident cyclist.
This is Manukau Station Road. For starters a narrow painted lane with no buffer is totally inappropriate for a road that is signposted at 60kmh.
Things quickly go from bad to worse. While running cycle lanes through bus stops isn’t great practice it is rather common place in Auckland. However is this is not just a bus stop where a bus stops momentarily, it is a bus layover area where buses park up for extended periods of time. Potentially even hours. So anytime a bus is parked here people cycling have to veer out into 60kmh traffic.
This is Manukau Station Road again, between the MIT campus and the council offices on the left. The cycle lane just suddenly ends without warning, and there is not even a ramp that leads to the path to allow people to leave the road safely. It seems as though a dedicated right hand turn lane is more important than safe cycling
This is Manukau Station Road at Lambie Drive. The motorway on-ramp is straight ahead so people cycling need to turn left or right here. The little green patches show a narrow cycle lane up against the kerb on the left hand side. Then there is another cycle lane starting in the foreground of the picture. However to get between the two you have to veer across 2 lanes of 60kmh plus traffic. Again totally unacceptable.
This is now on Great South Road. The cycle lane is less than 1m wide. Note to designers, if you are struggling to fit the bike stencil in the lane it is definitely way too narrow. Cyclists have to chose between riding close to the debris filled drain on one side, and fast traffic on the other side.
Also on Great South Road by Redoubt Road. Again have cycle lane that is about 1m wide with no buffer next to 3 lanes of fast traffic. Again cyclists have to cross several lanes of traffic to keep going straight ahead.
These issues are of course not unique to Manukau, and I’m sure anyone that rides a bike could tell you there are serious issues all over the city. However Manukau probably the worst example of a “completed grid” that is complete rubbish. Unsurprisingly the lanes are a total failure and it is rare to see people cycling here.
This highlights a big problem with the 1000km Regional Cycle Network that Auckland Transport claims is 30% complete. Very little of this 30% is actually up to scratch once you discount shared paths through reserves. At least 5% of the network is bus lanes (not great), or even transit lanes (awful) so none of that should be counted. Then there are the many painted sections that are narrow, unsafe and disappear without warning. Bike lanes like this can be worse than nothing, as they force cyclists weave and merge into moving traffic, rather than just staying in the traffic lane and making drivers overtake. Of course this style of cycling is only for the brave, and will never get more than a hardcore cycling in these conditions. Cycling should be a relaxing everyday activity, not an adrenaline rush for the fearless.
With the opening of our first section of urban separated cycleway on Beach Road next week lets hope Auckland Transport has turned it’s back of the pre-amalgamation ways of doing things. Successful cycling requires build cycling infrastructure that everyone is able to comfortably cycle in.
Vancouver has it spot on with their Transportation 2040 Plan:
C 1.1. Build cycling routes that feel comfortable for people of all ages and abilities
Many people are interested in cycling but are afraid of motor vehicle traffic. For cycling to be a viable and mainstream transportation choice, routes should feel comfortable and low-stress for people of all ages and abilities, including children, the elderly, and novice cyclists.
Design details depend on a variety of factors, but especially motor vehicle speeds and volumes. Bicycle routes on arterials and other busy streets should be physically separated wherever possible. Routes on neighbourhood streets may require traffic restrictions, speed management and/or parking restrictions to ensure comfort for a broad range of users. Designs should ensure sufficient visibility at intersections and driveways, and minimize the potential for conflicts with car doors, pedestrians, and other cyclists. Other factors to consider include topography—by providing well-marked alternative routes around steep hills, for example—and requirements for un-conventional bikes and other forms of active transportation, including recumbents, cargo cycles, bikes with trailers, and skateboards.
The last few months has seem much more positivity about cycling from Auckland Transport and Auckland Council with talk of separated lanes along Nelson Street and a trial along Karangahape Road. Over the next year we should see if results on the ground match this rhetoric.
Here’s an on-line certificate program that may interest some readers. It has been put together by Gordon Price (Pricetags) at Simon Fraser University in Vancouver. The program is multi-disciplinary and taught by a diverse range of practicing professionals.
Here’s a synoposis of the course:
SFU’s new online Certificate in Next-Generation Transportation is designed to help mid-career professionals use next-generation transportation strategies to advance livable and sustainable cities of the future. We’ll emphasize case studies from around the world with policies and practices that resolve conflicts and explore trade-offs between different modes of transportation.
There are a few people in Auckland enrolled, so students may have opportunities to connect locally. The first course, Next-Generation Cities & Transportation starts in mid-September.
This course provides a foundation in the principles and practices of next-generation transportation and its role in advancing liveable and sustainable cities of the future.
Our current transportation system will undergo significant change, responding to climate, energy, technology, and cultural and economic shifts. Next-generation transportation anticipates these changes and advances multi-modal solutions that balance mobility and accessibility for people and goods.
The aspiration of next-generation transportation is this: people accessing most of their daily needs within walking distance while maintaining the social and economic benefits of being tied to larger region. At the same time, the transportation system should ensure effective goods movement. Next-generation solutions look at least five years out, and so are innovative and yet applicable today.
For people interested in learning how transportation can be a means for planning, designing, or otherwise influencing the future of cities, this seems like a great way to start.
Stuart Houghton’s 100 ideas for Auckland continues
13: Victoria Park Market
What if Victoria Park Market actually was a market?
Victoria Park Market, the city’s old municipal refuse station and ‘destructor’; is a unique collection of historic buildings on the edge of the former foreshore across the road from Victoria Park. It has recently undergone an extensive programme of refurbishment of the old coupled with what are quite sensitively placed new buildings. By and large a good job has been done on this physical built environment side of the equation.
But that isn’t the real challenge in getting the VPM site to hum as a thriving and successful place.
You have to crack the nut of activity to be a real destination and draw. The problem is that the location is something of an island apart from everything around it. It is too far from the heavily frequented core of the city centre, the waterfront and up the hill on Ponsonby Road. While the western edge around Victoria Quarter is readily redeveloping and bringing new people to within proxy of the market, I don’t believe this will be enough anytime soon to support the large concentration of retail and hospitality they have gone with.
What would work to draw Aucklanders from far and wide? Isn’t it time Auckland could support a permanent food market? This seems like the ideal location. There could be the opportunity for the beginnings of a foodie precinct with the Daldy Street Linear Park connecting VPM with Sandford’s Fish Market. Really go to town with a focus on food; get La Cigale to relocate and work towards a vision of an Auckland version of Queen Vic Markets in Melbourne.
Image credit: Craig https://www.flickr.com/photos/craigsyd
The Green Party has some great transport policies, and have recently announced their support for the Congestion Free Network as one of those policies. However, I haven’t been as impressed with the Greens’ energy policies (or any of the other parties’ ones, for that matter).
Earlier this year, the Greens announced their Solar Homes policy, aimed at encouraging the uptake of solar electricity. There aren’t any (direct) subsidies involved, but instead the government would offer low-interest loans for solar panels, and the homeowner would then pay the loan off over time as an extra item on their rates bill. As National correctly point out, this is still a subsidy, to the extent that the interest rate is below market levels.
Incidentally, I see Dr Susan Krumdieck is not a fan of the policy either, based on the comments on the Youtube video…
There are a number of flaws in this policy, as I see it. Firstly, the desired outcomes don’t seem to be well defined. What is the goal of this policy? Is it about encouraging renewable energy generally, or reducing greenhouse gas emissions? If so, there are more direct ways of tackling the problem. Or is it about solving a perceived market inefficiency, i.e. households are underinvesting in solar because they don’t value the future benefits enough? If so, the policy might be a good idea, but there are market inefficiencies everywhere, and no government can solve them all. Solar may not be the best one to tackle: perhaps we’d get more bang for our buck by focusing on another area, e.g. encouraging active transport for its health benefits, or something different altogether.
I talked to quite a few people about this at the NERI Energy Conference this year, and views were quite mixed. Some people thought the policy was a good idea, and others thought it wasn’t the right time or place. Mike Underhill, chief executive at EECA, is in the second camp, and he spoke on this at the conference, as well as writing a column which was published in the Herald.
The Wider Issues
There are some general issues with solar power in New Zealand. It provides power during the daytime, and with more generation in summer. That’s not a good fit with our electricity demand profile: demand is highest in the evenings, and in the winters. This isn’t the case for some countries, incidentally – in hotter climates like Australia, the Middle East, or California, air conditioning use means that demand is higher in summer, making solar a great fit.
The other thing is that solar is relatively high-cost compared to other sources of generation, and isn’t likely to be cost-competitive for NZ. Prices continue to fall, and it probably will be competitive in the medium term, but are we better off waiting a few years until prices are lower? Besides, solar will become more attractive as we develop better ways of storing energy – e.g. electric vehicle batteries (I expect this to be a long-term factor) or pumped hydro storage – and those will also be more viable in the future.
Another important factor is that New Zealand already generates most of its electricity from renewable sources. If we’re switching out other electricity for solar, we’ll get the most benefits from making sure we displace non-renewable sources, not renewable ones.
This doesn’t mean that solar won’t have its uses in New Zealand. Ideally, we could use it in a targeted fashion, to avoid having to make expensive upgrades to the grid. For example, Auckland is growing rapidly, and is a long way away from our hydro resources in the South Island. Solar here could take the edge off that demand growth, and perhaps also reduce reliance on thermal plants like those at Huntly.
Turning to the rural areas, solar may look like an attractive option for remote rural communities, where electricity is expensive. However, it may not actually save that much money. Firstly, unless households can go “off grid” entirely, they’ll still need to pay for the fixed costs of maintaining the grid – but spread over a smaller amount of purchased electricity. And if they do go off grid, they’re shifting those costs onto other people in their communities, who are still connected – that’s a bit unfair on the people left behind. Not to mention that most of these communities have a shrinking population to begin with, and therefore are likely to have a declining demand anyway.
As Mike Underhill wrote in the Herald column, “the price of solar panels has dropped but it still costs about $10,000 to install a grid-tied 3kW system without storage batteries”. The Greens would lend the money for this at the Crown’s sovereign interest rate, and at 4.1%, the interest would work out to $410 a year. Would households even be able to save more than this on their power bill? I’m sure some could, but I’m sceptical that the average household could, and certainly not if the interest rate was much higher.
As Cliff Turner, an electrical engineer, pointed out on the NERI Hub:
Rather than households investing $12K or so in a PV system, in many cases they would be better investing in a more efficient vehicle, especially for city use. As an example, a Toyota Corolla GX Hatch is priced at $34K (from Toyota’s website) with efficiency 6.6L/100k and if the household was prepared to go to a Prius C at a similar or cheaper price depending on the model they could increase efficiency to 3.9L/100km. Assuming 10,000km pa this would save about $500 pa which is getting close to what the PV system might save in electricity cost. If the premium for a pluggable option was small, then even further fuel savings are possible. This is a better strategy than PV from the perspective of carbon emissions, given that NZ has low emission electricity generation options with good EROI.
I’d agree with those points.
As policies go, the Solar Homes one isn’t a shocker. But it’s not particularly helpful either. Overall, I don’t think now is the best time for a blanket, nationwide policy like the one proposed. I’d be more interested in a cohesive strategy to wean us off thermal generation, to get us to 100% renewables, which I’ve written about previously. With the Greens’ policy, I’d be inclined to wonder how much solar would simply be displacing other renewables, rather than non-renewables.
The Greens are also advertising a policy called Solar Schools, which, from a quick look, seems like a good idea (and is a better match with solar’s generation profile). However, if it gives substantial cost savings as implied, I can’t see why the Ministry or schools wouldn’t do it themselves, and why it would need a political party to come up with a specific policy to make it happen.
Just over a month ago I was out at Manukau City, at the open day of the new MIT, which doubles as Manukau station. This is a brilliant facility, with world class integration of land use and transport. If you haven’t been out to check it out, you really should. Very impressive coming up the escalators from the station and straight into the concourse of the campus. If you haven’t been there my fellow blogger Patrick has a post with an excellent photo essay of the new campus.
After looking at the campus I decided to go for a walk around the wider area. Note the whole time I was within the Manukau Metropolitan Centre, and less than 800m from the station entrance. This is an area with a wide variety of shops, apartments, restaurants, offices and services including a large Westfield Mall, courts, MIT and AUT campuses and Rainbows End.. It would certainly be reasonable to expect people to walk from the station (soon to be joined by neighbouring bus interchange) to any of these areas, following the route I took. Would also be very reasonable to walk between any of these activities which is what would usually happen in an urban environment. Manukau is also one of the premier Metropolitan Centres outlined by the council in the Auckland Plan and Unitary Plan, so the pedestrian environment should be of a high standard.
However unfortunately what I found was just plain awful, dangerous and embarrassing to roading engineers everywhere (yes I know there are good ones, but your colleagues are largely responsible). These are the 7 photo locations overlaid on a council aerial photo.
This is Great South Road. Almost adjacent to Westfield Mall. Totally out of scale for what should be an urban street, especially considering there is an 8 lane motorway 200 metres away!
This is on Lambie Drive, within 400 metres of Manukau station, and is on what might seem to be an obvious walking route from the station to the Supa Centre, which contains a large amount of big box retail shops. But no consideration given to anyone who might want to go shopping who does not have access to a car (or even chooses not to drive!).
But it gets more embarrassing. Half way along this missing footpath are a few pram-ramps longing for a footpath. Great ‘future proofing’, but ridiculous that the footpath didn’t follow.
This is the roundabout at the corner of Cavendish and Lambie Drives. Like many roundabouts in suburban centres it is designed for speeding truck and trailer units. This of course means usual cars travel very fast around the roundabout. To get the other side one pretty much has to run to the island. People that are elderly or infirm, well, too bad. If you want to visit the Red Cross(!) on the other side of road, get a taxi!
This is Davies Avenue. Doesn’t look anything out of the ordinary for Auckland. However this is a brand new street, that has just had a large amount of money spent on traffic calming. However that calming still required 2 turning lanes, and no zebra to allow people to safely cross the road.
This is Manukau Station Road. Up until 5 years ago this was Wiri Station Road, and also State Highway 20. This meant people on the motorway at Manukau needed to drive along here to head towards the airport. However this has been bypassed by a large motorway, 300m to the south. However no attempt has been made to calm the road to match the vastly reduced traffic volume. Probably could close half the road and it would be fine. While this road may be ok in an industrial area, once again this is a few hundred metres from the station and mall. There is also a very good reason to walk along here, and that is Rainbows End, just out of sight to the right of the picture. Only 500m from Manukau Station, and could be good patronage generator. However no chance when people have to walk along a miserable highway that barely caters for pedestrians.
This is the main entrance to Rainbows End, looking back towards the mall. While there is a signalised crossing, there is only a pedestrian crossing on one out of 4 of the intersection legs. Again what should theoretically be an obvious walking route is awful for pedestrians, and thus encourages more people to drive.
If Auckland Council and Auckland Transport are serious about making Manukau one of the key Metropolitan Centres in the region, they really need to fix totally unacceptable pedestrian environments like this. I would also hope that Auckland Transport realises fixing these issues would help drive public transport patronage, by increasing the reasonable walking catchment. Acceptable walking distance is heavily dictated by the form of the urban environment, and in places this bad people will be put off walking 100m. Sadly Auckland Transport seem to totally ignore walking as a mode of transport, and don’t bother fixing these type of environments.
Some readers of the blog may also be interested in what it is like to cycle around Manukau. The Regional Cycle Network suggests there is a great connected cycling grid, however I can tell you it would certainly be worse than walking. I’ll blog those pictures next week.
The Ministry of Transport has released a detailed and interesting look into some of the results coming out of the 2013 Census Journey to Work question. Both the executive summary and the full report are worth a read. As we’ve noted before, the 2013 census results confirm a shift in the way Aucklanders are travelling, with much stronger growth in public transport than in driving (especially in percentage terms). Interestingly, even within people travelling to work via private vehicle, there is a big difference between those who drove themselves (which increased and roughly maintained its modeshare) and those who were passengers (which declined fairly dramatically). This is shown in the graph below:
I’m struggling a bit to explain why private vehicle passengers has declined to significantly – perhaps they are the ones who are shifting mode to public transport to a greater extent than drivers?
The report compares Auckland’s mode-splits with a number of Australian cities, highlighting quite an interesting trend that although our public transport use is generally lower than those cities, our active transport modeshare is often higher:
Quite a lot of the report is analysis of different parts of Auckland, comparing travel patterns and modes for the CBD, CBD fringe area (called other central), inner urban (isthmus and lower North Shore), outer urban and rural areas. The graph below is a fairly nifty way of representing the overall share of Auckland’s trips that start and end in these different areas:
The Outer Urban area is reasonably “self-contained” in its trips, with a very large share of trips originating in Outer Urban areas also being destined for those areas. The CBD is a strong destination for Inner Urban areas, along with employment in other parts of those Inner Urban locations.
Looking closer at the CBD, the report analyses where people who work there are coming from, showing a strong focus on the isthmus and the lower North Shore – the “Inner Urban” areas highlighted above:
It is worth noting the difference between the west and the south in the map above – both areas reasonably equidistant from the city centre, but with the south having much more local employment and therefore much less of an employment connection with the CBD. One would expect, post City Rail Link, for the west to be even more strongly connected and also for the south to begin to benefit from improved city centre access and the employment opportunities that will provide.
Another interesting part of the report is the comparison between different local board areas, which unsurprisingly show some pretty dramatically different modal splits:
Waitemata Local Board obviously stands out from the rest, with a private vehicle modeshare of below 50% and a very high proportion of people walking or cycling to work. Clearly Waitemata benefits from having so many jobs located within the local board area, as well as the increasing number of people who live in the city centre unsurprisingly having a very high ‘walk to work’ share. Another point of interest is how work from home varies by Local Board – higher in rural and richer areas and very low in parts of South Auckland. I guess this reflects most ‘work from home’ jobs being either rural in nature or well-paid professional work.
One of the clearest patterns highlighted in the report is the relationship between residential location and trip length, with journeys to work getting longer and longer as you live further away from the city centre – even though only a relatively small proportion of Auckland’s jobs are actually located in the city centre:
This finding is unsurprising and a core part of why urban sprawl concerns us so much, because people living in far flung parts of Auckland need to travel a very long way to work – which is both expensive and places a lot of pressure on the transport network. It’s also clear that West Aucklanders are stuck with long commutes more so than most other parts of the city – highlighting once again the huge benefit City Rail Link will bring to the west as well as the need to increase the level of employment available in that part of Auckland.
Flipping the above map around, to instead focus on length of journey by destination reveals a much less clear pattern and some interesting anomalies – people who work at the airport have to travel a very long way to get there (rail to the airport will be very useful for them!) while people who work in the Howick/Botany area seem to have very short commutes, maybe highlighting the extent to which that area is disconnected and isolated from the rest of Auckland (only people who live in the area are prepared to work there):
Looking at private vehicle modeshare by point of origin highlights clearly the more and less car dependent parts of Auckland. The inner areas are doing pretty well here while the northwest and the southeast (in particular) are the most car dependent parts of Auckland. Hopefully the AMETI and Northwest busways will change this in the future:
Bus modeshare is highest on the North Shore and the Central Isthmus – reflecting locations where high quality bus service and infrastructure is available:
For rail, a key analysis relates to the question of “for trips heading to the CBD from a particular area, what proportion of those trips are carried by train”. The south does pretty well in this respect, reflecting that it’s a pretty long car journey from Papakura or Pukekohe right through into town:
Looking at the above map it’s quite telling to see how along the inner parts of the Western Line, rail is capturing a pretty low proportion of CBD-bound trips – I imagine due to the very long an convoluted path the train takes via Newmarket. With the City Rail Link in place there’s some huge growth potential in these areas for much higher levels of train use as there’s a pretty huge untapped market at the moment.
Looking at overall public transport modeshare, the dominance of the isthmus is quite clear. This is a large reason why we were so frustrated to see intensification on the isthmus watered down in the Unitary Plan to such a great extent last year.
There are a myriad of other fascinating maps and graphs within the report, but they can wait for a future post. Perhaps commenters might have a think about what they think might be behind a few of the results above – particularly:
- Why might private vehicle passenger trips have decreased so significantly compared to all other modes of getting to work?
- What impact might CRL, Airport Rail, AMETI and other major projects have on these patterns over the coming decades?
- What’s up with Stonefields? – its travel patterns are much more like an ex-urban piece of sprawl than a fairly dense inner-urban suburb.