State Highway 20: A bit sneaky

Yesterday I took the opportunity to walk along the new section of State Highway 20 before it opens for traffic next Friday.

NZTA claim to have made provision for rail in the future as part of the SH20 project. Despite looking through a number of NZTA documents over the past few months I have found very little detail on what this means, besides leaving a little extra room under the bridges.

I couldn't see where the railway line would go, so I asked one of the representatives in the public NZTA information tent. He pointed to a narrow section of grass running alongside the eastern side of the new motorway, where "light rail" for passengers could run. He confirmed this ruled out heavy rail like the rest of the Auckland network, carrying both freight and passengers.

There is only room for a single track light rail - it seems NZTA planners are oblivious to the huge amount of recent double tracking work over the rest of the Auckland rail network. A passenger service that is single tracked over 4km is going to have limited service frequency.

The guy I spoke to was a good natured sort. He even ventured to say with a smile that building SH20 on a designated rail corridor was "a bit sneaky'. You could say that.

It sounds like top dogs in NZTA and the Government decided to do the minimum they thought would be required to build their road. Unfortunately it sounds like we have lost rail options for the future already.

So while NZTA claim they have left provision for rail, "including ARTA's promosed rail link to the airport", this does seem at odds with ARTA's draft 2009 Auckland Transport Plan which includes a Southdown to Avondale link for both freight and passengers, following the proposed route of SH20 to Waterview.

Its also worth noting that Onehunga residents lost their beach in 1984 when a motorway was rammed over the waterfront, despite a Government promise to fix up their mess when they next extended the motorway. Well that is now happening, and it looks like Onehunga will be given what NZTA believes is the bare minimum to make the problem go away. The Onehunga Enhancement Society is to launch a legal challenge.

These examples ought to be a warning to the residents of Mt Roskill as NZTA start the "consultations" about the extension of SH20 to Waterview.

As I was walking back I heard another couple asking those in uniform where the railway line was going to go. Good.

I predict a double tracked rail line will be needed at some point, but because of the decisions made over SH20, its likely to become a more expensive project. I fear that Auckland's transport problems will never be solved while there remains a focus on the ultimate sovereignty of the car and short term economic cost/benefit analysis. Particularly when such decisions limit options for the future.

PS: At least they let the kids draw on the Motorway for one day (see pic above). If Auckland City Council gave out free chalk - would there be such a graffiti problem?

At least there are plenty of ways to undermine the proposed Auckland Toll roads

Via Tumeke : The NZ Herald reports that Auckland drivers without passengers could face fast lane tolls. "Drivers may have to pay tolls to join the fast lanes on costly new Auckland motorways - or earn free use by carrying at least two passengers."

Transit New Zealand Chief executive Rick van Barneveld said "reserving fast lanes for high-occupancy vehicles or those whose drivers were willing to pay would help to limit congestion by "managing" demand for travel, a legal obligation for road-builders."

This raises some interesting possibilities. If there was no charge for cars with two passengers I wonder if we would see professional 'passengers' who would mingle at either end of the bridge or motorway, offering to be a 'passenger' for less than the cost of the toll!

Better still - people who are opposed to toll roading (like me) could become 'free' passengers to ensure the whole toll collecting shenanigans was totally uneconomic. Hehehe.

The Land Transport Management Act, passed by Labour and the Greens, allows a toll road to be built only if it has strong local support and an alternative free route is available.

While it may start out with public and private roads side by side, roading companies no doubt would want to build roads where the alternative is inconvenient or via Temuka to gain 'greater market share' (aiming for a monopoly).

There is a significant danger a two tier roading system would lead to creeping privatisation, especially if a right wing government thought it could penny pinch by not maintaining/extending public roads on the grounds there is a private alternative available - provided by roading companies that just happen to be big financial supporters of said right wing government.

Under a part privatised roading system there would be fewer public roads, and it is likely the remaining public roads would not be maintained as well as they are now.

I was in London when Ken Livingstone bought in the congestion charge - and I suspect this will become a favourite example for Treasury boffins and the usual suspects who love to privatise things. But London has had a well developed public transport system for years, so when Ken says the poor use the buses he is right, but given we lack the same infrastructure here I strongly doubt the same argument could be sustained for NZ cities.