By Timothy Welch*
The old joke about “just one more lane” being all that’s needed to solve traffic congestion has been heard a few times since the National Party released its transport policy this week.
The plan is nothing if not ambitious: more and bigger roads worth nearly NZ$25 billion over ten years, including a four-lane motorway from Whangārei to Tauranga at a stated cost of $6 billion.
That might sound like a lot, with the cost per kilometre of road being about $20 million. But recent big road projects suggest it could be a significant underestimate.
Wellington’s Transmission Gully spans just 27km and cost an estimated $1.25 billion – that equates to over $46 million per kilometre. The recently opened Ara Tūhono (dubbed the “holiday highway”) from Puhoi to Warkworth north of Auckland cost about $1.05 billion for just 18.5km – almost $57 million per kilometre.
A four-lane motorway between Whangarei and Tauranga would face more challenging terrain than Transmission Gully or Ara Tūhono and would span much longer distances.
Given the significant cost overruns of recent big roading projects, as well as the time it will take to build these roads, it’s likely the bill will be much more than $6 billion.
Nats plan to link Whangarei and Tauranga with new transport policyhttps://t.co/oKIgwCjhQM pic.twitter.com/yBRuY3ujIo
— 1News (@1NewsNZ) July 30, 2023
Private versus public transport
The opportunity cost of these projects also needs to account for those who don’t – or don’t want to – drive a car.
National’s proposal calls for scrapping most of the “Let’s Get Wellington Moving” project, including a long-planned light rail line. This is on top of the party’s promise that it will axe the proposed Auckland light rail scheme.
Both light rail proposals have been a point of contention: National argues that additional motorways and tunnelling in Wellington would be more cost-effective, and tunnelled light rail in Auckland has an enormous price tag.
But the transport mode itself is fast, efficient and equitable. A similarly controversial light rail line in Sydney opened a few years ago, with patronage more than doubling in a single year, despite the pandemic.
Public transport pollution is far less than that from personal vehicles. Buses and trains produce about 80% less carbon emissions per passenger kilometre than personal vehicles.
Luxon hits back at critics of National's $24b transport planhttps://t.co/ySPAxJmUjH
— Newstalk ZB (@NewstalkZB) July 31, 2023
Roads versus climate
Around the same time National was releasing its transport policy, July was confirmed to be the hottest month ever on Earth (though August could replace that soon).
The northern hemisphere is experiencing extreme heatwaves. Some places are reaching the upper limits of human survival. In the American southwest, the pavement got so hot people were treated for second-degree burns.
Records are also breaking around Antarctic sea ice melt, with the most significant deviations from historical averages ever recorded. Wildfires have raged across Canada, Sicily, Algeria and other countries.
Human-generated carbon emissions have exacerbated these extremes. Of those emissions, almost 25% are from the transport sector, and passenger transport (cars and light trucks) accounts for about 45% of the sector’s emissions.
Given the observable realities of the climate crisis, many have questioned the logic of leaning into road expansion as a policy, especially at the expense of efficient public transport.
More roads encourage more traffic and more driving, often leading to even worse congestion. Expanded road networks also encourage development in lower-density areas by making them more accessible, at least in the short term.
While this is a selling point in National’s transportation plan, it often leads to more car-dependent development that make traffic congestion even worse. Combined with National’s proposal to build housing in “greenfields” zones away from cities, it risks locking the country into a car-dependent, high-carbon future.
The EV mirage
National leader Christopher Luxon has made the point that “even electric vehicles need adequate roads”. But this begs a bigger question about relying on EVs to solve transport and climate problems.
Despite years of generous subsidies, battery-electric vehicles still make up just 1.3% of New Zealand’s total fleet. This is nowhere near the numbers needed to make a meaningful dent in transport emissions.
EVs require the same amount of road space and, due to their increased weight, potentially cause more road damage. But EV owners don’t buy petrol, which means they don’t pay excise tax – the same tax that pays for expanding roads.
Even with inflation around 7%, the excise tax has not increased in more than four years, meaning every year the tax’s purchasing power diminishes.
National’s plan to build more roads rather than focus on better public transport is reminiscent of transport policies from the 1950s and 1960s. That era saw the construction of the car-centric cities we now struggle to maintain and move around in.
That era also moved us closer to climate disaster, and generally made transport less efficient and less equitable. In hindsight, massive roading infrastructure projects weren’t the solution they might have seemed 70 years ago. But they have at least provided a lesson in what not to do today.
*Timothy Welch, Senior Lecturer in Urban Planning, University of Auckland. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
89 Comments
NZ has an ancient roading network constantly falling apart. The resistance to road building is scary. The inability to connect regions through vehicle transportation is backwards. We have mostly a 1950's road structure outside the pitiful number of motorway kilometres that currently exist. Our rail "network" is also frail and antiquated. Narrow gauge rail not able to handle high cub 40 foot containers through curves or tunnels. Highways connecting regional centres to other regional centres are either tiny or barely exist. SH1 north of Warkworth is stepping back in time. The Dome Valley SH1 looks like we just got over WW2. SH1 in the Brynderywns also fails continuously essentially shutting off the Northland region to the rest of the country. SHI north of Whangarei still closed now for going on two years. Yes money is the main thing. You could create a NZ Toll road corporation and sell interest paying bonds on the world market to raise the funds. These could be 10 year, 20 year bonds. The Corporation would be a NZ state owned enterprise corporation. These have been used successfully in the US in Massachusetts (Massachusetts Turnpike Authority), New York State (New York Thruway) and Maine (The Maine Turnpike).
Most western countries have infrastructure that is falling apart - us, uk, ... no government has the money available (or the will) to pay for it.
Better would be a government with the courage to find other ways to solve issues than building roads. Here in Tauranga they have to spend a fortune on road building because we have such a low take up of public transport (even more funny is the take up of public transport is lower in the new developed areas....). however taking public transport tends to take 2-3 times longer. So - the obvious solution is to build more roads and encourage more cars.
Genius.
Most western countries have infrastructure that is falling apart - us, uk, ... no government has the money available (or the will) to pay for it.
The issue almost appears to be a make-work arrangement, or dare I say it, a scam.
We all pay for the roads, with the intent that they last x years/decades. Yet we repeatedly see them dug up/resealed/closed/full of potholes within 6-12 months of opening. We then pay again to resolve - rinse and repeat.
Ignoring the poor quality workmanship and shoddy materials clearly in use. We also plan for current traffic flow for roads that wont be built for 10 years. Thus they are already overcapacity upon opening and the shoddyness of the materials and workmanship is exposed even more rapidly than expected.
Yep, and most of the land for the Avondale to Onehunga link is still owned by the govt/kiwirail. You could then run light rail down dominion road (on the bloody surface, not tunneled at outrageous cost) to join up with it. Hell, you might even get away with just turning most of dominion road into a high frequency bus only route at peak times instead of light rail.
Including a four-lane motorway from Whangārei to Tauranga at a stated cost of $6 billion.
You've fallen for Nationals spin, their announced policy make no such promise. 4 lanes all the way is an aspiration for some decades in the future.
They have promised a couple motorway extensions, but the bulk of the route remains as it is. There are two 50km sections of the route missing (through the Brynderwyns and Kaimai Ranges). No way the whole route would be anything like $6 billion.
The other opportunity cost is that National plan to divert $4 billion of road safety funding into their road building plan, and once again cap the road policing budget - this is the reason the police basically stopped doing random breath testing under the last National government.
So expect to see the road toll rocketing up again.
At least they have learn their lesson on road maintenance and haven't talked about cutting that again.
So what's the reason they're doing even less now? Or are we still blaming National for this one too?
https://www.1news.co.nz/2023/01/01/police-carrying-out-significantly-fe…
Not really big picture thinkers these opposition people, are they?
Just listened to an interview with Kevin Anderson and to be frank, Nats inhabit a fact free zone when they dream up policy. You could even say they are a threat to a survivable future.
No one seems to consider what these motorways do to cities. I have no problem (other than funding) with the highways connecting cities, but having massive motorways within cities creates all sorts of issues and forces people to drive everywhere. There is a reason that Auckland is not the amazing city it should be and that is because the city centre is surrounded by motorway and completely cut off in every direction. Wellington has a much better city centre (other than the weather) due to the lack of multilane roads, National's plan will destroy the best part of Wellington.
Look at the amount of valuable land wasted in Auckland City in that image of Spaghetti Junction, all of that was once houses. And we are doing it again out east, demolishing hundreds of houses to build a busway instead of converting some of the existing road space to bus lanes. Some people will only be happy once the entire city is covered with tarmac, and even then we will have bad traffic!
False dichotomy, not the right question.
Last time I looked there's approx 220k people in Wellington city. At that pop density light rail is an uneconomic pipedream promoted only by idealogues who have no intention of ever paying for it.
Anyone who looks even superficially at other recent light rail examples such as the GC will quickly find out that there is no possibility of any economic business case: it requires 10s of millions pa of ongoing ratepayers subsidies & the usage is no more than the previous buses which were canceled.
The best solution for Wgtn public transportation is buses/bus lanes. Flexible & a largely variable cost with easy peakload capacity solutions.
GC light rail has been a massive success such that since its been built they've been constantly expanding its reach,
As for the claim of not matching the patronage of the previous bus network: "6.6 million passengers were carried on the line in its first year, and total public transport users on the Gold Coast - across buses and trams - increased by 25 per cent."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G:link#Patronage
The 2015-16 year after opening, patronage of 7.68 million trips was almost 1 million above target, and by 2018/19 they were at 10.7 million.
Word is light rail had bounced back to pre-covid patronage before any other modes.
https://www.publications.qld.gov.au/dataset/?q=tmr+annual+report&organi…
https://www.stlr.wssmedia.com.au/stage-1-review/
"OperationStage 1 loses $45 million per year on its operating costs,
We, the taxpayers, pay for it through the Department of Transport and Main Roads, (see their annual reports 2015/16 page 262 and 2016/17 page 228).
The subsidy paid is equal to half again of the subsidy paid for the whole of the Gold Coast bus routes, or 7% of the whole of Queensland bus subsidies, for just a 13km length.
Patronage
The Broadbeach to the Gold Coast Hospital and the University station is the Gold Coasts most popular route
Prior to the tram service, the bus patronage numbers on the same route were approximately 17,000 per day. The light rail reported in the first year of operation 16,436 passengers/day, with increases to 21,800 in the year ended 2017.
With the opening of the Gold Coast Hospital and the extension to the University, the daily patronage has increased to about 22,000,
That is a natural increase that either the tram or the bus service would have picked up"
All very interesting conjecture (which it seems you might be wrong about where GC patronage is concerned), but you didn't answer the question.
Forget costs - I'm just curious why you are so wedded to your personal vehicle? Or whether it is a necessity for you/your type of work during the day. Or whatever other reason you are looking forward to a motorway to the Eastern suburbs?
A legitimate question (I would have thought) and I am just genuinely curious about people's thoughts about public transport.
Really. Evidence? You try making a living where you have to compete strongly for every bit of work, Take all the risks of weather, geology and incompetent specifications. The margins on this work are wafer thin, to the point that sometimes it is simply not worth wasting time bidding. Sometimes the margins are zero, but you take the work on just to keep your staff employed and hope that somewhere in the project you can find some areas where you can make some small profit or at least offset the losses that you will inevitably encounter from the points that have been missed. It is one of the few if not only sectors where there is true meaningful competition. If things are expensive in this sector it is because the customer('s) and their advisors are complete idiots.
Landlords and property investors operate in an environment of government mandated perpetual housing shortage and government mandated ever increasing demand through immigration. They can charge what they like and people are still lining up to give them their money for the falling down hovel which is barely ever maintained.
You haven't a clue what you are mouthing off about.
You have misinterpreted. This is about direction, influencing outcomes and policy, not your margins.
Proof is in the outcome. Broken roads, no publics transport of note, underfunded rail, no regional ports.
the pro-roading lobby, including road carriers, the motor vehicle industry and farmers, has proved a very powerful voice in Wellington. Allowing used-car imports in the 1980s only accelerated traffic growth and the demand for roads
How Auckland missed the bus - New Zealand News - NZ Herald
A bit like the people all over social media ridiculing road workers for being lazy, standing around leaning on shovels, doing a piss poor job of fixing roads etc without a single clue what they're talking about.
They wouldn't dare hop out of their cars and bring it up in person.
And re transmission gully holiday highway and the southern motorway to Cambridge are all relatively new so really haven't seen the full benefits. Also suggest Timothy takes a drive out of the urban area and drive from Auckland to Invercargill and look at how our SH1 is an abismal goat track. With 25k and 15k corners while modern trucks use single lane roads which since we really don't have a rail system we need. Cost wise a double lane highway is cheaper than a rail system. And the cost is only going to go up to many people clipping the ticket while not a tally turning the sod. We are the only so called first world country with a main SH as a single lane both Ireland and Scotland comparative populations have a way better double lane roading system plus better public transport. Scotland also very similar terrain. So rather than all these so called experts having a talk fest let's get someone who says and does something about it. Also must mention those roads overseas are 70 miles an hour that's 120ks not 80ks and yet they still have a lower death rate. I thought speed kills nope shitty roads kill
We have a very big land area to road with only 5 million people to pay for it, we can't build multilane highways everywhere. Yes SH1 and a few others could be double lane, but most fatal crashes don't happen on those roads. Yes shitty roads kill, the irony is that National's mega projects divert money from large scale safety improvements into just a small percentage of the road network. There are some really dangerous intersections out there that wont get a few mil to be fixed because $17 billion is being spent on 6 roads.
Jimbo Jones the price is now when it comes to infrastructure there is always a cost short term but long term way more benefits. Look at all the money printed over the last few yrs on be kind huggie projects. Yet go back to the time we were in debt to build the think big projects. All still going all still making money (just not for us). Lake Dunstan prime example everyone complained about the cost yet now that lake not only provides power it also allowed all that unproductive land to grow high quality export cherries and wine plus provides great fun lake
Birdie but not the interstate. Look at Key West 100 miles off the mainland all the keys connected by Bridges with the likes of 10 mile bridge yet Key West is small permanent population but when the snow birds fly in. Imagine what would happen if we did that from Auckland to Waiheke. More land to build houses cheaper products services in Waiheke cheaper fuel and Waiheke is only 6 miles off
"when it comes to infrastructure there is always a cost short term but long term way more benefits"
This is incorrect. Sometimes there is cost short term and no benefits long term. Sometimes there are even disbenefits long term. National's RONS projects were such projects, that's why they bypassed the normal business case process, it demonstrated that the investment didn't stack up.
Agnostium how's the Harbour bridge was that a white elephant and then the clip on. How's all the hydro schemes built all the infrastructure projects so far in NZ taken for granted. And alot were boo hooed yet have all contributed to NZ. Look at the Bombay hills remeber when that was a single lane going over it people said NZ will never need a dble lane as we don't have the population
I used to commute daily via car to Welly from the Kapiti Coast - and once they installed the wire barriers on the (then) SH1 between Paekakariki and Pukerua Bay - there was not one more fatality on that stretch of road. So many fatalities on two-lane roads are someone crossing the centre line - median wire barriers eliminate that head-on crash problem.
WW2 the US said to NZ govt we will build a dble lane highway from Auckland to Invercargill our govt replied ah no we will never need it. Scotland also spends alot more on Rail than us so let's not waste money on rail spend it on SH1 also Soctland UK just announced more permits to drill for gas and oil in the north sea because our people need security to cook and heat and power themselves also businesses need reliable energy. If NZ did the same and the royalties we got from that we and spent on roads. In the end infrastructure returns way more benefits in the long run to initial costs and repays itself many times over
No it doesn't. You're really out of your depth on this.
It's a really weird trait of old Kiwi men that they seem to always know more than experts in a subject because they either built a few houses or have "life experience". It's a particular type of arrogance that I haven't seen in other countries. It extends to pandemic management, education policies, transport policy, health policy, etc... apparently there is no topic old Kiwi men are not experts on
Agnostium built 17 houses for myself and God knows how many for other people. You obviously have the power of your convictions that you can't even use your name and stand up for what you say. And I an barely 50. So see what you have done in your life by the time you get there
WW2 the US said to NZ govt we will build a dble lane highway from Auckland to Invercargill our govt replied ah no we will never need it.
No country builds roads in other countries for free. Even if that is what Luxon is trying to sell us.
"let's not waste money on rail"
A heavy truck literally does thousands of times more road damage than a car. I would suggest money spent on rail is not wasted at all. Make the truck companies pay for the damage they do to our roads, and they would all but disappear. Then we don't need an extra lane on the main road to get past them.
Ahh this old wives tale again. We could have gotten Transmission Gully for free too if we had just said Yes to Uncle Sam.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/comment/columnists/9010925/End-of…
I used to catch the train every day to work for years in Wellington. Wellington has a great train network which is seriously fantastic. A huge investment in public transport is what we need. Train lines all across these cities so people can walk to work easily.
I have no idea how this is a hard question, if there are more train lines absorbing traffic, then there is less need for cars on the road. The primary problem we have is the train network has been left to die since the 60s, existing only to transport heavy freight from the regions.
In Wellington, they are currently in the project planning and early implementation phase of the highway rebuild to remove all traffic lights and move traffic faster. It will cost probably a billion dollars to build given the price gouging of the contractors, yet there is no thought to running a second line down the other side of the hutt valley. They had semi-trams with the electric buses for decades, a return to trams running around the city would infinitely improve the city.
Roads are not money making infrastructure. They are simply a huge money pit which allows third party beneficiaries (transport and freight companies particularly) to offset the cost of transporting goods (damage to roads, maintaining infrastructure) onto the state. Railroads do not have the same dynamic. Trucking companies damage the road immensely due to the weight of their vehicles and cause far more damage than ordinary cars, requiring all the maintenance spending to repair the damage of their weight. We should aim to move more and more transported goods to rail, with more lines, with only the last few miles delivered by truck.
Von Metter So can I load all my tools an Materials on a train. Can a farmer (still NZ main earners) load a truck load of ewes on the train. How many times a yr do you hear of Wellington trains being stopped for some reason. Also maybe that is why the Wellington Region is the most un productive region in NZ all well and fine when you are a civil servant
Jim Jones Japan is a totally different economy to NZ more tech and the main heavy industry is close to major cities. NZ one of the largest softwood exporters in the world obviously milk and rural that need to get product to manufacturers and or ports. Hence heavy vehicles even the train advocates say you can't build a rail line to a forest to harvest or every dairy farm. Most on here look at NZ from there little suburb and how they get to work. SH1 should be a interstate to move people and Goods and Services not some little scenic drive
You're being silly Colin.
Most trips are one person per vehicle commuting to work. Get them off the road and there will be plenty of room for those like you who need it - without the need to build monstrous motorway systems.
Look up the cost per k and you feel even sillier.
In your opinion have you ever driven from Auckland to Invercargill. Maybe once I do regularly and alot of people do. Most on here are thinking of themselves and their small little world and then complain about how our productivity etc and how we need to pay for things . Well open up the country with good infrastructure will allow business to relocate people to shift out of Auckland which will allow Auckland house prices to drop. Opens up more opportunities in those regions. You sound like alot of people when the proposal for the ETA the ring road around Taupo was muted many years ago. All the negatives yet now after 10 yrs approx everyone says it was the best thing to happen plus it's opened up growth for Taupo.
A SH bypass is a different issue/business case altogether (i.e., as compared to a Transmission Gully/commuter route) for central government.
Certainly (to my mind) livability in Taupo has been massively improved by the bypass but the ratepayers are now spending big on the CBD redevelopment project, substantially supported/justified by bringing the tourists back in (i.e., a bypass the bypass type strategy);
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/local-focus-taupo-cbd-upgrade-world-class…
I think it's a great plan and as an out-of-towner it certainly will make stopping at a lakefront eatery more attractive than grabbing a pie at a petrol station bypass off ramp.
Kate the by pass also opened up Taupo to expand as 20 yrs ago it was hemmed in house prices were going thru the roof business wouldn't locate here as they couldn't get land to build on an access in and out was atrocious. That is all a bonus to the initial cost of building the ETA. My point being and alot on here with their small view of just their neighborhood and what it will do etc is that a great dble lane SH1 will improve NZ and open up the regions way more than the initial costs. The ETA being used as a small example. Imagine a DBL lane highway that by passes Taihape Bulls Sanson Blenhim Kaikoura etc etc call in to those towns if you want move on if you don't.
Settle down Colin. You drive because the options are limited or you need to because of your job tools..
House prices issues in NZ are not related to roads.
Fully supported Taupo ring road.
Noticed that the 8 lane motorways in LA are choka? Think there might be a message in that?
edit. Yes Colin I drive, Ham-Northland-Harwkes bay- Wangaui quite regularly. Sth Is usually fly. Flew to Napier last time, better than driving the goat track. Most of these regional roads are potholed to buggery.
Imagine how much space the tradies would have on the roads if, rather than sitting on front of them, at least half the cars disappeared because the occupants were sitting on the train to the CBD.
Clearly there are many people who still need to use roads, the answer is how to free them up so they can be used more efficiently.
I get that, and I completely agree we need a fully developed state highway system to enable more efficient long distance transit. However, I'm not convinced by building roads in cities for the sake of trying to move more vehicles. I'm in Hawkes Bay and the loss of the Manawatu Gorge road has put a serious dampener on my travels, so I can't wait for the new crossing to be completed. That project is an example of necessary roading, as is the extension of the bypasses heading North from Wellington.
I visited Auckland a little while back and sat in gridlock traffic, heading for the CBD, marveling at the thousands of cars all stuck there noisily idling and churning through fuel, with nary an EV in sight. It's a massive waste of resources that could be met by smarter urban transit systems, which would free up roads for those who truly need to travel in less defined directions at less defined times, such as tradies and couriers.
For what it's worth I live rurally and "work from home" so I'm not looking at my small part at all, I'm observing the ridiculous rat race in which urbanites live, getting in each other's (and productive enterprise's) way because either there's no viable option, or they're scared of sitting next to a stranger on a bus/train, or scared of getting on a bike and commuting for basically free because...there's so much traffic on the roads.
And that is my point not once have I mentioned city roads or how people get to and from work.i have always said SH1 needs to be a interstate or equivalent yeg alot of small minded look at how I get about people on here state that this is stupid yet don't drive the different island or for that matter outside their city yet profess to know everything about NZ roads. For NZ to get to its full potential and to open it up so just not Auckland with all its issues (plenty of those) we need a dble lane interstate
I suspect that's where the disconnect is in this conversation.
Many commenters are urban-based, so their default definition of "roads" are the transport links around their towns and cities, and that is what they are considering when talking about light rail and buses.
A smaller number are rural or more mobile, and to them roads are mainly the connections between those urban areas. Accordingly they are advocating for better inter-urban roads, as you are.
Just trying to spread some harmony here.
Most of SH1 (and of the other state highways) does not have sufficiently high traffic count to justify 4 laning. It is more sensible to look at more passing lanes, 1 + 2 roads, by-passes around towns and safety alignment and road design.
And much, much more money on electrified rail for freight and for regional passenger services - much more efficient transport system in terms of significantly reducing carbon footprint and the very necessary massive reduction in the use of fossil fuels.
Rural roads cost almost nothing to maintain or build. Something like 2k per km for a MacAdam road.
The problem that is addressed by rail is two fold. Firstly, Moving urban workers to and from work. This an obvious problem because CBD working areas are compacted space with limited areas to park in a 360 range. It is obvious that suburbs should be laid with trains. Second, the problem of Freight destroying roads is huge. It is hidden by the fact that the government catches the cost for the roads for the benefit of road freight. Restoring and extending those train lines is the way to go, since the heavy freight (cattle, timber, ore, grain, oil etc) can then move to a distribution railyard then trucks for the last few KMs. Far less road wear, far easier to move etc.
As for construction workers, I used to catch the train and the bus to break my back digging sumps as an apprentice. Vehicles still have a huge place in cities for all sorts. I want fewer vehicles in the city for stationary workers who are working in some office building. There will be more parks for all the tradies and service workers, but far fewer spaces consumed by works who choose public transport instead.
Wrong again Colin. Congestion costs Auckland over 1 billion a year in lost productivity. Being stuck in traffic is one of the biggest causes of lost productivity in cities. And hey guess what, you can't build yourself out of congestion. The more you try the worse you make it.
well said - we are importing more people at a rate of knots... needing housing and transport (which will be cars) and i suspect more of our existing populations drives too because public transport is generally unreliable and useless. So more roads, more cars, less time.
I got out years ago - i can walk to the beach to surf, work from home, and can walk to the supermarket. i kind of enjoy driving every now and again just to marvel at how much the humans love to suffer and whinge -> instead of simply changing their lifestyle.
I drive a car when I need to but if I can I will walk / bus / cycle / not go. For example I just got back from a 2km walk to get lunch, very pleasant it was, most people would have driven, I could see them all on the road. I don't order unnecessary crap off temu and get some dude to deliver it to my home. We walk our kids to school.
Cars have a place, but if we all cut back a little we wouldn't need to keep building more infrastructure, just like we wouldn't need to keep buying bigger clothes if we stopped eating so much.
An essay heavy in ideology, but light on insight.
Nobody wants more roads than the amount required to have a functional transport network . Why not propose a credible alternative?
The best that the Urban Planning crowd have come up with is patently ridiculous lefty boondoggles such as the Auckland Light Rail project.
The more roads they build, the more people will use them. LA kept on trying to build their way out of the problem and failed dismally. The amount required to have a "functional transport network" is pretty much infinite. My dog would keep eating forever if I kept feeding it treats.
I can assure you that none of the Urban Planning crowd came up with the ridiculous tunneled light rail option. That was the infrastructure lobby (in their eyes the bigger the project the better) and the car lobby (to keep a car tunnel on the table for the additional Harbour crossing).
The Urban Planning crowd have been pulling their hair out trying to get the original proposal of four surface running light rail options for less than the price of the current clusterf****.
It may surprise you that one of the major concerns of the Urban Planning Crowd is affordability, sustainability (in terms of maintenance and running costs) and congestion busting. That is why they are generally opposed to urban road expansion as it is neither affordable, sustainable nor does it address congestion. Most do not have any problems with rural roads. It's the right solution for the right context.
National under John Key and Simon Bridges understood this and supported both public transport and cycling investment, neither of which are "lefty".
National are sleep-walking us into a climate disaster. They've not got a single meaningful policy to help NZ fight climate change.
If it wasn't for their promise to abolish interest deductibility on rentals I'd show them the finger. I'm in a pickle here because for all my good intentions on climate, money talks.
Reinstating interest deductibility on mortgage interest (borrowing) for residential rental accommodation business owners. Where TOP is concerned, that is somewhat offset by the land-value tax (where government revenue is concerned). I think TOP's general perspective on taxation is that it should be horizontally equitable (meaning like things - be they businesses, land, consumption - are treated alike, tax-wise).
But that's just my reading of their broad approach.
"If it wasn't for their promise to abolish interest deductibility on rentals"
Have they actually promised that with a timeframe for implementation or is it like their 4 lane highway between Tauranga and Northland that when pressed they said ermmmm well we didn't mean all of it and we didn't mean anytime in anyone's lifetime?
It amazes me that there isnt more focus on the huge number of linehaul trucks, and trucks in general on our roads. I can only imagine they must be a very powerful lobby group in wellington.
Ive got no idea of the numbers, but surely investing in rail, and/or coastal shipping to move that freight would take a huge amount of pressure off the roading system.
Sluggy if you want an example take a drive on a Wed thru night at a out 10 30 pm down SH1 between Wellington and Auckland you will either pass or see around 600 plus a night line haulers upto if not more than 5 in convoy been over the desert rd a 4 am and its like Piccadilly circus
yup, we drive down to Palmerston north through the night , 3 or 4 times a year. constant parade of trucks.
The whole system is set up for next day delivery , by 6 a.m(at the linehaul depot) in the morning , wether its needed then or not.
Rail can't get it there until a couple of hours later.
The advantage trucks supposedly have is that its door to door . But most linehaul trucks go depot to depot, offloading and loading on to smaller trucks for delivery.
Ideally , a few billion would knock a couple of hours off the rail time, but thats not going to happen soon. someretweaking of delivery times would achieve the same end.
The "rail" ferries , actually favour road , as only one ferry ferry can take rail now. once the new ferries arrive , rail will be able to compete better.
We are stuck in such a horrible transport recursion loop because we only ever do reactionary infrastructure/transport. Trains are hard to make truly viable/effective because we don't have the population density to support them and we don't have the population density to support them because we don't zone for it.
Then, when we do zone for it we don't have in the infrastructure already in place and it just turns into a traffic nightmare because everyone has to take their car everywhere. Then to cap it off, because the infrastructure wasn't already in place or planned for, it becomes wildly more expensive to attempt to provide it later.
We need to get back to basics and good economics in NZ.
1) Roading is meant to be user pays. Repeat after me - Roading is meant to be user pays.
2) (When inflation is under control) Lift the fuel excise tax / RUCs. They havent been increased for 4 years. They need to be set at a level that can adequately fund all maintainence & then improvements above a B/C cutoff aligned to the funding level.
3) 4 lane highways between cities are fine if the traffic volumes are 20,000 to 25,000 per day as they are much safer & we have Road To Zero. Any with lower volumes can wait & have safety works undertaken on the 1x1 carriageways.
4) We dont need foreign capital - we need users to actually fund User Pays. Foreign capital is just debt loading users with more cost.
5) We do need congestion tolling. This caps peak travel demand, and defers/deletes the need for expensive future road improvements. They also cause mode shift and thus reduce PT subsidies.
6) We dont need standard toll roads. Its meant to be User Pays. Toll roads simply brings forward capital expenditure. A B/C cutoff can be used to manage infrastructure demand vs funding ability. If we want to change the B/C cutoff then go to the public and set out what projects can and cant be built for a certain petrol price (excise duty). The problem with toll roads is that they are arbitrary. Why apply a toll to one certain road and not another? Fuel excise tax/RUC is a much better approach.
7) Get rid of the taxpayer and ratepayer subsidies for roading. Road users should pay through excise duty/RUCs.
8) Get rid of subsidies for greenfield development.
9) We do need a population strategy that sets the rate at a level which maximises wellbeing (economic+social+environmental) per capita. The high immigration rate is one of the main drivers for the need for expensive road network improvements.
10) Proper User Pays would see higher petrol prices, which would induce mode shift and help towards climate change goals. Its would also reduce demand for expensive road network improvements.
Add another lane to an already congested network and get another lane's worth of vehicles UNLESS you also provide other modes of transport. However, the minimum for SH1 should be 4 lanes to provide efficient routes between main centres.
I will continue to bang of about the fact that Labour gave away $60B in Covid. How much roading would that have given us?
You a so so right and can look pass your neck of the woods while many on here think me me and oh this is how I get to work or live. For NZ to move on and compete in business globally and attract good immigrants we need to be able to connect our cities and move stuff around. And not just dump new Immigrants into Auckland and carry on exasperating that city and overloading the infrastructure.
We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment.
Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.