 | The Bullroarer - Tuesday 25th March 2008 | TOD: Australia/New Zealand | The Bullroarer - Wednesday 26 March 2008 |  |
15 comments on Public transport: making the right mobility choices
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
User login
Contact
- anz at theoildrum dot com
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.
Archives
GAIA Host Collective
Andre
The pax per bus km would have to be 5+ I feel to justify the network, It is at 0.99 and that is with it running near capacity at peak hours. I think the only way they could break even would be to reduce the frequency of service, which in reducing the publics expectations a difficult thing to do, The moral is the results of poor urban planning cannot be corrected by public transport.
I also feel they (the ARTA) would be far better served by encouraging Aucklanders to live closer to work and carpool where possible, in some ways their public transport network, which mainly reduces peak hour congestion makes this unsustainable lifestyle possible for longer
Neven
"I also feel they (the ARTA) would be far better served by encouraging Aucklanders to live closer to work and carpool where possible..."
I agree. Another obvious option which could help alleviate morning congestion into the city and evening congestion out of it is encouraging more flexible work hours. I recently had the misfortune of driving Auckland's 'motorways' in rush hour and the situation might also be helped somewhat by better road planning and usage. Those sets of green/red flashing traffic lights on the motorway inlets are confusing and unhelpful. In the longterm, Auckland needs to act like a real city and invest billions in public transport infrastructure. Sure construction along the isthmus geography poses its problems, but it also means riders are naturally funneled along routes north and south, so plenty of ridership would be guaranteed. Population density in Auckland is sufficient, so the project simply needs to be taken in hand - finally. Buses could then feed these lines.
Neven,
how did you arrive at '5' persons/bus-km? To be fair to the transportation analyst who responded to you, it really does seem to me like a judgement call as to where a city wants to spend its money. You say 5 is the right number, someone says 0.5. Still others might say, "Start where we start and let's grow it," which might be the commitment in the background of the people running that transit system.
The other trend to consider is higher unemployment. So one trend will be people leaving their cars. Another trend will be people having fewer places to go at a set time, i.e. the morning and evening commutes. It seems quite possible to me that the extreme range in ridership levels will become more compact. How that will impact the 0.99 will be interesting to see.
As for moving closer, I'm not sure that will be so attractive to people. In my experience living in bigger cities, rents get higher toward the center. For the moment, commuting is still cheaper for many people. Although this may change as oil gets more expensive, it seems just as likely to me that cities will always be much more expensive as people from outlying areas move to them because their services get curtailed and cities are the only places local government has the money to provide those services.
-Andre'