March FIX our CITY

Transcription

1 March 2015 FIX our CITY AN ANALYSIS OF THE TRANSPORT BUDGET IN THE LONG TERM PLAN, AN ALTERNATIVE PROPOSAL OF ESSENTIAL PROJECTS WITH POSSIBLE REVENUE STREAMS.

2 For the next 10 years Auckland s budget needs to focus spending on the things that actually help fix our city s problems, rather than low value projects that foster urban sprawl. - Dr Sudhvir Singh, Auckland Director of Generation Zero 2

3 Foreword 4 Executive Summary 5 Introduction 6 Problem 9 Basic Plan Network 9 Auckland Plan Network 10 Solution 11 Funded 13 Conclusion 15 Appendix 16 Published March 2015 by Generation Zero. Lead author and researcher: Ryan Mearns. Contributing author: Dr Sudhvir Singh Designer: Niko Elsen. Other contributors and reviewers: Niko Elsen and Leroy Beckett. 3

4 Foreword Auckland has hit a crunch point. We need new thinking to find solutions. And this is what Generation Zero has set out. Critical factors are geographic constraints, the unrelenting force of in-migration, the demographics of the 21st century that are shaping new ways of urban living, and the severe risks of unmitigated climate change. What this means is that more of the same won t work. Historic approaches to transport planning and land use explain why the city looks the way it does now. In many respects, they are part of the problem. We need new thinking to find solutions. And this is what Generation Zero has set out to provide. I applaud Gen Zero for their boldness, the fresh and original analysis they provide, and the hard work that has gone into the nuts and bolts of the proposal. This is an important document everyone in our beautiful city should read it. Professor Alistair Woodward is Professor of Epidemiology and Biostatistics at the University of Auckland, with a special interest in environments and health. He has worked for the World Health Organization and other international agencies in many parts of Asia and the Pacific. He led the writing of the health section of the latest report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, is presently studying the effects of urban renovation on air quality, injuries and physical activity, and rides a bike to work. 4

5 Executive Summary : An Analysis of the Transport Budget in the Long Term Plan proposes Auckland Council focus on a transport budget that prioritises the essential public transport, walking and cycling projects in the Auckland Plan Network in the Long Term Plan. The report outlines an Essential Transport Budget (ETB) for Auckland, laying out which projects in the Auckland Plan Network are required to deliver on Auckland s goal of becoming the world s most liveable city and outlining the nonessential projects that should be delayed. By prioritising only the essential transport projects, the ETB saves ratepayers $220 million a year over the next 10 years compared to the Auckland Plan budget. Both proposed transport budgets in the Long Term Plan - the Basic Plan Network and the Auckland Plan Network - fail to address the issues facing Auckland. The Basic Plan Network doesn t deliver the level of investment required to keep up with growth, and in the Auckland Plan Network there is still a large number of business-as-usual roading projects, designed in a vain effort to solve traffic congestion. The Essential Transport Budget proposes spending $7.7 billion over the next 10 years, which is $2.5 billion cheaper than Auckland Council s Auckland Plan Network ($10.3 billion). This reduces the $300 million a year that Auckland Council is attempting to raise through alternative funding to only $80 million a year. At the core of the ETB is a commitment to prioritise public transport and cycling projects, and delay non-essential roading projects such as Mill Road. This will save money and reduce the burden on ratepayers, ensure we build a turn up and go congestion free public transport network, and make Auckland the world s most liveable city. Over the first 3 years of the ETB walking and cycling would receive $114 million and public transport improvements would receive $621.1 million. The budget saves just over $400 million in the first 3 years by reducing expensive and non-essential road improvements. Every alternative funding mechanism has its issues, which is why the report explains how each option could be used, highlighting the implications of different options, including: a fuel Levy, an innerring Congestion Charge - post 2023 (CRL opening), selling low value assets, minor rates rise and delaying of state highway projects. To fund the additional $80 million a year needed through alternative funding over the next 10 years, the report highlights the ease of a Regional Fuel Tax of 5 cents per litre starting in 2016 as the easiest way to raise funds, while investigating a congestion charge in the 2020s that deals adequately with issues of equity. The report also explains possible revenue-raising options in the short term, including government coming to the table by delaying some motorway projects, and the possible sell off of Council assets such as the downtown car parking buildings. By selling low value assets in the next year Council would be able to cover the $268 million for the ETB over the first 3 years. 5

6 Introduction Every 3 years Auckland Council produces a 10 year budget for the city. This lays out highly detailed spending plans for the next 3 years, as well as an overview of major projects and broad spending categories for the 7 years after that. At the same time, Auckland Transport, in conjunction with the New Zealand Transport Agency and Kiwirail, produce a Regional Land Transport Programme, which has the same timeframes as the Long Term Plan. These documents are the most significant opportunity for citizens to have their say over the direction and priorities for Auckland. Transport is the largest single area of the budget, accounting for 40% of all council capital spending. In the 2015 to 2025 Long Term Plan two distinct options for investment in transport have been presented to Aucklanders for feedback. One is the Basic Plan Network, which involves significant cuts to the levels of transport spending that has been seen over the last few years. This will result in serious delays to major transport projects of all types across Auckland, with much of the budget taken up by projects that Auckland Transport has committed to undertaking, such as contracted projects, developer agreements and renewals of assets. The one major new project to go ahead is the City Rail Link, and the enabling works will commence by the end of 2015 under the Basic Plan. However it must be noted that, because of the way Auckland Council accounts for capital project, there is no rates impact of capital spending until the City Rail Link opens in the early 2020 s. The second option for investment in transport is the Auckland Plan. This largely matches what was outlined in the Auckland Plan in This involves a very high level of continued investment in transport projects across the full range of categories, meaning that major arterial road upgrades, local congestion fixes, public transport improvements and cycling will all go ahead over the next several years. However to fund this high 6

7 level of investment Auckland Council will need to raise additional revenue. A further two options have been presented to the public, with these options resulting from a consensus building process undertaken over the last several years with major stakeholders from across the city. Neither of these two options are desirable. There are major deficiencies in the burden they put on ratepayers and on their inadequacy to deliver the desired One Network approach of Auckland Transport in a timeframe that deals with the complex congestion, health and environmental issues within Auckland. A budget of the essential transport projects is therefore required, which prioritises the desired step change in transport choices in Auckland. By prioritising bus interchanges for the New Network, particular park and rides, walking / cycling infrastructure, rail station upgrades and ferry upgrades Aucklanders will finally have quality transport choices. Delivering a budget of essential projects requires excluding nonessential projects to reduce the burden on ratepayers. Non-essential projects include major arterial road upgrades such as Te Atatu Road and Lincoln Road and urban park and rides that have not been determined essential, so are excluded. 7

8 Background For nearly 50 years from the early 1950 s Auckland invested solely in roads, and especially motorways, with all other transport modes being almost totally ignored. This one-sided level of investment was not seen in most Australian cities, who invested in mass transit alongside new motorways. From the early 2000 s we finally started to invest in public transport with the opening of Britomart, the Northern Busway and rail electrification. This has shown huge dividends with this high quality rapid public transport being responsible for the big patronage gains we have seen. However the current core bus network is inefficient, confusing and unnecessarily duplicates the rail network. Buses also often lack dedicated lanes so are stuck in the same congestion as single occupant vehicles, which means there is little incentive to catch a bus, buses are unreliable and operations are inefficient as lots of buses as needed to run the slow, meandering services. increasing by 20% per year - while it has become clear that the level of per captia driving is unlikely to return to the highs of the mid 2000 s. Changing trends are also especially notable for younger people, with teenagers delaying getting their drivers licences, and more people choosing to live without a car, especially in inner suburbs. As this generation grows up, we must ensure we build a city that matches their transport preferences, not the transport preferences of previous generations. Auckland also faces significant challenges as to how we respond to the challenge of climate change. Transport is the single biggest source of emissions for Auckland, with 39% of our cities emissions being from transport alone. We need a transport plan that works to reduces our cities transport emissions by investing in low or zero emission alternative such as public transport, walking and cycling. The 50 years of almost sole investment in roads has also left our streets designed purely for the movement of cars, ignoring the needs of people who want to walk, ride a bicycle or use mobility aids for local trips. This has resulted in cycling only having a 1% mode share for all trips, and 49% of children being driven to school. We are now aware of variety of significant trends that affect transport in particular. Public transport patronage has continued to grow quickly - rail patronage is 8

9 Problem Basic Plan Network The Basic Plan Network includes only projects which can be funded from existing sources such as rates, other council income and subsidies from government. This represents a 25% reduction in funding compared to what was planned in the previous Long Term Plan. The Basic Plan includes some projects that are important for the transformation of our city, including enabling works for the City Rail Link starting in late 2015, and the main works starting between 2017 and 2020, dependent on funding negotiations with central government. It also includes a number of committed projects which are already under construction, or required as part of previously agreed funding commitments. However there is a major funding squeeze placed on important transport projects, and this is especially stark in the first 3 years of the Basic Plan. Cycling: There is almost no money included for new cycling projects for the first 3 years of the plan, with the only exception being the Waterview cycleway which was required as mitigation for the Waterview Connection motorway project. to allow connections between buses and trains. Similarly Auckland Transport s plans to roll out 40 kilometres of new bus lanes over the next 3 years will be postponed. Without these bus improvements, commuters will be stuck with inefficient and frustratingly slow bus services for several mores years. This will be significant drag on public transport patronage, as well as costing Auckland Transport money from higher operating costs and lower fare revenue. Rail: The Basic Transport plan delays upgrades of the remaining poor quality railway stations, which means commuters will be stuck with substandard facilities for years to come, again stalling patronage growth. Grade separation is also excluded from the Basic Plan, so this will lead to more dangerous incidents at our level crossings as rail frequencies increase over the next several years. This also has the potential to restrict peak frequency on the Western Line. Ferry: The Basic Plan delays upgrades to Ferry terminals, including the congested Downtown ferry terminal. This will means commuters are stuck with substandard facilities, and increases to peak services will be restricted, again affecting patronage. Buses: The Basic Transport Plan would result in the full roll-out of the new bus network being delayed a further 5 years, until 2021, as new interchanges at locations such as Otahuhu are required 9

10 Auckland Plan Network The Auckland Plan was confirmed in 2012 as the spatial plan for the new Auckland Council. While it set out a 30 year vision for Auckland, it also failed to make hard decisions around prioritisation of transport projects, and called for a very high level of continued transport investment across all modes. In the short term it also carried on with a significant number of legacy projects that local councils had been investigating, even if these were unaffordable. rates and NZTA subsidies. This has led to the Auckland Plan requiring significant alternative funding from extensive motorway tolling, or further rates rises and fuel taxes. These alternative funding plans as currently proposed will heap high costs onto vulnerable families due to the current poor state of alternative transport modes across wide areas of Auckland. This is especially true of road tolling where in some areas such as along the North-Western Motorway and the Manukau Harbour Crossing where there are no local road alternatives. The Auckland Plan budget continues the issues seen in the 2012 Auckland Plan, and once again Auckland Council and Auckland Transport have failed to set a strategic direction for the future of Auckland. The Auckland Plan includes significant investment in public transport such as the City Rail Link enabling works and interchanges to allow reorganisation of the bus network. It also invests in the tripling of the cycling budget. However at the same time there is still a large number of business-as-usual roading projects, designed in a vain effort of solve traffic congestion. However Auckland has been pursuing these projects for 50 years, and they have not solved congestion, and by inducing traffic they often make congestion across the city worse, not better. This attempt of the Auckland Plan to fund all possible transport solutions means it comes at a very high cost, around $300 million a year more than funding available from existing income such as This attempt of the Auckland Plan to fund all possible transport solutions means it comes at a very high cost. 10

11 Solution Essential Transport Budget New thinking is required to solve the issues identified with both the Basic Plan Network and the Auckland Plan Network. The solution is to prioritise funds within the Long Term Plan on the essential projects needed to deliver a real step change in the direction for our city. This will save money, reduce the burden on ratepayers, ensure we get started on the building blocks of a turn up and go congestion free public transport network and work towards making Auckland the world s most liveable city. A budget of the essential projects, otherwise known as the Essential Transport Budget, prioritises the projects that offer the most benefits to the region. A project is considered essential based on an analysis, project by project, of its necessity within the next 3 to 10 years to deliver on objectives as stated by Auckland Council and Auckland Transport s strategic themes. The essential budget has also been determined by evaluating which projects combine to deliver a new direction for our city which can face up to the changing trends we have identified. By using these strategic themes to evaluate projects in the Long Term Plan, projects will be able to be considered essential or non-essential forming the core of our suggested transport budget. Through an analysis, project by project, Table 1 lays out the essential projects that should be prioritised over the next 3 years on top of the projects within Basic Plan Network. These projects will deliver us a tripling of the walking and cycling budget, the major infrastructure required to implement the planned restructure of our bus network, work on major bus routes to increase speeds and capacity, station upgrades, and works to improve our ferry terminals. The Essential Transport Budget comes to a total of $240.1 million more than the Basic Plan Network over the first 3 years. The Basic Network Plan, Auckland Plan Network and an Essential Transport Budget can be broken down into 8 categories; new roads, operational, public transport improvements, renewals, road improvements, safety, walking and cycling and city centre upgrades. Table 2 provides an overview of where money has been saved. A budget of the essential projects, over the first 3 years, would carry over the funding for new roads, operations, renewals, safety and city centre upgrades from the Basic Plan. The major change to the Basic Network is the increase in spending for public transport improvements by $188.8 million to $621.1 million over the first 3 years. The other major increase, if essential projects are prioritised, is a change in the walking and cycling budget. To deliver on the key projects in the Auckland Cycling Network $110 million is needed in the walking and cycling budget. This would bring it to parity with the funds set aside in the Auckland 11

12 Plan Network for walking and cycling. The major decrease from the Basic Plan Network over the first 3 years is the budget for road improvements. This is from dropping non-essential projects such Lincoln Road. This brings the total budget for the essential transport projects to $1,559.6 million over the first 3 years. This is compared with $1,319.5 million for the Basic Network and $2,334.9 million for the Auckland Plan Network. Over the next 10 years the Essential Transport Budget priorities public transport, walking and cycling projects. It matches the funding in the Auckland Plan Network for: public transport improvements at $ million, which includes the City Rail Link, and walking and cycling at $372.8 million. The major saving of $2,513.5 million, compared with the Auckland Plan Network come from the reduction in new roads and road improvements. The specific major roading projects (over $30 million) that wouldn t be included in the Essential Transport Budget are in Table 3. With only $80 million a year of alternative funding for Essential Transport Budget, which delivers the transformational walking, cycling and public transport projects for Auckland, the issues of funding becomes easier to solve. With only $80 million a year of alternative funding required for the Essential Transport Budget - the issues of funding becomes much eaiser to solve. This makes it a compelling alternative to both the Basic Network Plan and the Auckland Plan Network. 12

13 Funding In 2014 the Independent Advisory Group reported back on two alternative funding options for funding the Auckland Plan Network. The two options were a Rates and Fuel Tax package, or Motorway User Charge. These options are currently both being consulted on as part of the Long Term Plan. These funding options need to be reviewed in light of the $220 million a year saved in with an Essential Transport Budget. Both options in the Long Term Plan to fund the addition $300 million a year rely on a change in the current government s position. This makes the short term viability of the options highly variable. The better option would be to diversify potential revenue streams in the short term, look for long term savings by delaying non-essential projects and continue to build consensus with the government on one of the options below. There are 5 potential options we have identified for covering this funding gap for the Essential Budget. This includes variations on the 2 options presented for consultation in the Long Term Plan, as well as other ideas that are worth investigating. FUEL LEVY The advantage of the fuel tax is both the ease of implementation and that it affects everyone relatively fairly, and does not cause undue hardship to any particular group. Increases in petrol tax must be seen in the context of large swings seen in retail fuel prices. Petrol dropped from $2.21 per litre in early October 2014, reaching a low of $1.73 per litre in early January 2015, a drop of 48 cents. Since then it has risen back up 18 cents. The changes in magnitude often resulted in price swings of seven cents in a week. Work undertaken in 2009 by the government showed that a 1 cent petrol tax rise across the Auckland region would raise $12 million a year, so a 7 cents per litre petrol tax could conservatively raise $84 million per annum. This would be enough to cover the cost of the essential budget. This 7 cents petrol tax would also mean that an accompanying additional 1% per annum rates rise would not also be required to fund the transport programme. MOTORWAY TOLL Road tolls covering the entire motorway network would put some families at risk of severe hardship. This is because in some areas the motorway network is the only realistic option for travel between adjacent areas, this is especially true of the North-Western motorway corridor (suburbs such as Te Atatu and Massey) as well as parts of the South- Western (Onehunga to Mangere). Many of these areas also still have very poor public transport options. Even across many central areas public transport connections are poor between adjacent areas. Therefore motorway tolling needs to wait until we have significantly improved public transport to give people transport choices. We also have concerns about the diversionary impact of motorway tolling, and the impact 13

14 of traffic diversion onto local roads paralleling motorways such as Great South and Great North roads. As substantially less income is required to fund the Essential Budget, the charge would only need to apply for a much smaller area. While it is difficult to quantify the extent of motorway tolling that would be required, the motorways around the central areas of the city have significantly higher volumes than those on the fringes. Therefore the funding gap could be covered by a toll within the Western Ring Route, keeping this as a free alternative for cross city traffic, and avoiding areas in the North-West and South-West where hardship is expected. SELLING LOW VALUE ASSETS As the Essential Budget costs significantly less than the Auckland Plan budget, this opens up more options to fund the essential projects using existing legal mechanisms. For example the Downtown Carpark building is worth $73.5 million, so the sale of this could fund nearly one years worth of essential transport projects. Opportunities such as this may be an option to fund the first several years of the transport programme while government agreement is gained on the preferred option. RATES RISE The Long Term Plan consultation document raises the prospect of a targeted rate to fund transport improvements. According to the document, to fund $300 million worth of transport projects a targeted rate of $58.99 per household would be required. Therefore to fund the Essential Budget a targeted rate of only $15.73 per household would be required. DELAYING OF STATE HIGHWAY PROJECTS The Regional Land Transport Plan notes that the New Zealand Transport Agency are planning to spend $2.2 billion in the first 3 years of the RLTP. The funding gap from the Essential Transport budget is $240 million, which is only 11% of the total planned spend by NZTA over the same period. There must be opportunity to review NZTA spending plans for the next 3 years, to see if any projects can be downsized or delayed, freeing up money for the more transformational Essential Plan projects. SUMMARY To fund the additional $80 million a year needed through alternative funding over the next 10 years, a Regional Fuel Tax of 7 cents per litre would be the easiest method. A congestion charge should not be ruled out in the longer term. The efficiency of petrol tax will continue to decline as cars become more fuel efficient, and alternative technologies become more prominent. However questions raised by the congestion charge surrounding equity, traffic impacts and potential smaller tolling areas are in need of more investigation. Research needs to continue, and tolling may be more appropriate from the mid 2020 s once significant public transport improvements like the City Rail Link are opened. 14

15 Conclusion Auckland s transport budget needs a significant change in direction to both deliver a city that is well prepared for both the opportunities and challenges of the future. Both of the options presented by the Auckland Council as part of the Long Term Plan consultation fail to meet this standard. The Basic Plan under invests in key infrastructure needed to transform our city, such as rebuilding our bus services; upgrading rail, bus and ferry interchanges and building a safe, separated cycling network. The Auckland Plan builds the infrastructure required, however it also builds a large amount of extra roading projects that have no strategic purpose, apart from desperately trying to solve congestion. Therefore it comes at a very high cost, at an extra $300 million a year more than the funding available. The Essential Transport Network we have presented focusses on building just the important infrastructure we need to fix our cities problems, which saves us $220 million per year compared the Auckland Plan. This also significantly reduces the burden of alternative funding, and opens up more possibilities for innovative funding to fill our budget gap in the shorter term while agreement is gained from the government. 15

16 Appendix Table 1: Project list on top of Basic Network Plan in Essential Transport Budget, years 1-3. Essential Budget Projects 2015/16 (millions) 2016/17 (millions) 2017/18 (millions) AIFS - installation of gates at stations Avondale Interchange Bus Priority Improvements & Transit Lanes Bus Stop Improvements Programme Double decker network mitigation works Downtown Ferry Basin Development Homai Station Interchange Long Bay bus turnaround facility Manukau Interchange (was Manukau City Rail Link) Minor PT capex allowance for bus stops, minor improvements at stations, wharves, provision of PT information etc Mount Albert Interchange Newmarket Terminus Otahuhu Bus Interchange Parnell Station Point Chevalier Shops (bus-bus connection) Rail Crossing Separation (including Newmarket Crossing) Real Time Passenger Information System enhancements SMART (Airport Rail - Planning and Route Protection) Station Amenity Improvements Tactile paving / pram crossing upgrades Takanini Station Upgrade Te Mahia Station Upgrade Walking and Cycling Programme - AT Westfield Station Upgrade Wynyard Bus interchange TOTAL

17 Table 2: Category of spending for Basic, Essential and Auckland Plan, Years 1-3 Category Basic Y1-3 (millions) Essential Y1-3 (millions) Auckland Plan Y1-3 (millions) New roads Operational Public transport improvements Renewals Road improvements Safety Walking and Cycling City Centre upgrades Grand Total Table 3: Roading Projects excluded from Essential Transport Budget. Project Name Cost (millions) Reasoning Mill Road Duplicates Southern Motorway East West Connections (local component) Government led project, should be NZTA funded Penlink designation 89.7 Penlink too expensive for low population Private Plan Change 12 Drury South Transport Implementation 76.6 Privately led project AMETI Morin to Merton Link 51 Low value new roading link Dominion Road Corridor Upgrade 51 Uncertainty because of Light Rail proposal Lincoln Rd - Corridor Improvements 47.3 Poor value and poorly designed Long Bay Southern Corridor 46.9 Low value suburban roading link Anzac St (Auburn to Fred Thomas) 35.1 Low value suburban roading link 17

18 Table 4: Category of spending for Basic, Essential and Auckland Plan, Years 1-10 Category Basic (millions) Essential (millions) Auckland Plan (millions) New roads Operational Public transport improvements Renewals Road improvements Safety Walking and Cycling City Centre upgrades Grand Total

19 BASIC PLAN BUDGET $6.9 BILLION Auckland Council and Auckland Transport want us to choose between two budget proposals to fund our city s transport over the next 10 years. our F I X C I T Y by G E N E R A T I O N Z E R O However one is way too basic. While the other is way too expensive. Instead we came up with our own proposal. Our Essential Transport BUDGET $7.7 BILLION SAFETY PROGRAMS $299 CARS $3.8 BILLION ROAD IMPROVEMENTS $1008 BUS INTER- CHANGE $212 BUS LANES $130 PUBLIC TRANSPORT $3.2 BILLION RAIL $343 PARKING $8 NEW ROADS $68 CBD BUS $218 FERRY $43 CITY RAIL LINK $2309 RENEWALS $ Our Essential Transport Budget focuses funding on the kinds of proejcts that will actually fix Auckland s problems. We would make sure only the most essential projects get funded and low value ones get cut. WALKING AND CYCLING $372 AUCKLAND PLAN BUDGET OPERATIONAL $230 $10.3 BILLION LEGEND Total LONG TERM PLAN BUDGET BASIC PLAN BUDGET OUR ESSENTIAL TRANSPORT BUDGET AUCKLAND PLAN BUDGET $57 BILLION =$1 BILLION