Tuesday, September 6, 2011

Parnell Station Jumps the Queue

Auckland Council recently unveiled aspects of its planning work. Generally it looks good, but it is peppered with classic Auckland ad-hockery (not sure if that's a word, but you'll get my drift. This blog and two others below (Waterfront Conflict and MUL Buster) explain why I think this.
The draft Auckland City Centre Masterplan reveals the possibilities for the future of Auckland’s city centre through a 20-year vision.

It identifies eight ‘place-based’ transformational moves intended to:

* Develop the ‘Engine Room’ that is the core CBD and celebrate the waterfront opportunities.
* Enable growth around the City Rail Link stations.
* Create a better-defined network of green spaces through street-based ‘green carpets’.
* Celebrate the unique characteristics and attributes of the urban villages, quarters and precincts, and create better connections between them.
* Transform the public transport and offer the city centre a more pleasant place to walk around.
* Add greater depth and choice to the city centre retail, visitor, cultural and residential offer so as to ensure that Auckland’s City Centre becomes a destination, not just a gateway.
* Develop a compelling value proposition and climate for individuals, corporate citizens and business to invest in their city centre.

All good.

The Council has adopted "...eight moves to transform the city..." These are "key moves" to transform the performance of the Auckland city centre.
These moves are as follows:

1. Uniting the waterfront and the city centre – The north-south stitch
2. Connecting the western edge of the city to the centre ‐ The East‐west Stitch
3. Queen Street Valley CBD and retail district ‐ The Engine Room
4. Nurturing an innovation and learning cradle
5. New public transport stations and urban redevelopment opportunities at K Road, Newton and Aotea Quarter - Growth around the City Rail Link
6. Connecting Victoria Park, Albert Park and the Domain as part of a blue - green park network The Green Link
7. Connecting the city and the fringe – City to the villages
8. Revitalising the waterfront water city
I look closely at the waterfront one of these in the postings below (Waterfront Conflict and MUL Buster - which is the bigger regional Auckland Plan). It's not clear what's what in these plans. They overlap. Use different words, goals and outcomes. We'll be kept on our toes. I hope the Councillors are on theirs...

What I want talk about a little in this posting is transformation step 5. One of the reports that Council has considered relates to "The Engine Room" - a rather post-industrial term for the Auckland CBD (far too business oriented I think. Successful central city areas are known for muuch more than business. Culture for a start... which isn't only about business).

Anyway. When you get into that report it also explores the need for new stations on the proposed city loop (transformation step 5), we suddenly find - at page 61:
...In addition to the 3 new City Rail Link growth node areas, a Parnell station is to be reopened to better connect the eastern side of the city fringe to the city centre. It will also enable growth and access to the medical research centres and university in the Park Road area....


Here's a picture of the site which I've borrowed from the site of the group that has been lobbying for a station there. (http://www.parnell.net.nz/Station/Lobbying.htm)

While the Auckland Regional Council supported the idea of a station there, and the Auckland City Council noted that: "...is not materially inconsistent with the Future Planning Framework's Newmarket/Parnell area plan..." this hardly constitutes a mandate or requirement on Auckland Council to suddenly begin work on a station there now.

If the Council finds itself wallowing in cash to improve the rail network, the highest priority must be unblocking the various rail crossings on Auckland's rail network which will continue to act as bottlenecks on the capacity of the network - especially once it is electrified. (There is a myth that Auckland rail is the same as Perth rail. It's a myth because Perth rail was largely grade separated from the roading network. Auckland's was built on the cheap with a huge number of road crossings at grade.)

These crossings are bottlenecks. They need to be removed. Until they are, investment in electrification and new rolling stock will be prevented from delivering the promised benefits. Building ad hoc new stations is - I think - an irresponsible use of public money now.

My recollection of the debate at Auckland Regional Council is that it was largely driven by the desire to protect the heritage buildngs. That's a good project. The buildings have merit. But it shouldn't be driving Auckland's rail development strategy.

Far more rigour is required before this project should be supported by Auckland Council for funding. Someone even mentioned to me that work on regrading the corridor - so that the station could be built - is scheduled for Christmas! Who is making these decisions? Is this genuine consultation?

This project reminds me of a very poor Auckland Regional Council political decision. One taken against officer advice. And that was the ill-fated Helensville Rail service which had to withdrawn because it was so slow and poorly patronised.

The wording in Auckland planning documents around this Parnell station project is disturbing. It talks about "reopening" the Parnell station. But there was never one at the spot. The line is sloping and a station is unsafe there. It is also a myth that it will be widely used by students at Auckland University. Sure some might use it, but the climb is significant.

I know. I bike it and walk it several times a week.

With the City Rail link project on hold at the moment, there appears to be a cunning plan for the Parnell Station to jump all the queues and get what funding there is. Wrong project. Wrong process.

I'd like to know what does Auckland Transport think about this? And by Auckland Transport I mean its skilled staff. Where is the mandate from the Auckland Transport Statement of Intent that justifies this project?

No comments:

Tuesday, September 6, 2011

Parnell Station Jumps the Queue

Auckland Council recently unveiled aspects of its planning work. Generally it looks good, but it is peppered with classic Auckland ad-hockery (not sure if that's a word, but you'll get my drift. This blog and two others below (Waterfront Conflict and MUL Buster) explain why I think this.
The draft Auckland City Centre Masterplan reveals the possibilities for the future of Auckland’s city centre through a 20-year vision.

It identifies eight ‘place-based’ transformational moves intended to:

* Develop the ‘Engine Room’ that is the core CBD and celebrate the waterfront opportunities.
* Enable growth around the City Rail Link stations.
* Create a better-defined network of green spaces through street-based ‘green carpets’.
* Celebrate the unique characteristics and attributes of the urban villages, quarters and precincts, and create better connections between them.
* Transform the public transport and offer the city centre a more pleasant place to walk around.
* Add greater depth and choice to the city centre retail, visitor, cultural and residential offer so as to ensure that Auckland’s City Centre becomes a destination, not just a gateway.
* Develop a compelling value proposition and climate for individuals, corporate citizens and business to invest in their city centre.

All good.

The Council has adopted "...eight moves to transform the city..." These are "key moves" to transform the performance of the Auckland city centre.
These moves are as follows:

1. Uniting the waterfront and the city centre – The north-south stitch
2. Connecting the western edge of the city to the centre ‐ The East‐west Stitch
3. Queen Street Valley CBD and retail district ‐ The Engine Room
4. Nurturing an innovation and learning cradle
5. New public transport stations and urban redevelopment opportunities at K Road, Newton and Aotea Quarter - Growth around the City Rail Link
6. Connecting Victoria Park, Albert Park and the Domain as part of a blue - green park network The Green Link
7. Connecting the city and the fringe – City to the villages
8. Revitalising the waterfront water city
I look closely at the waterfront one of these in the postings below (Waterfront Conflict and MUL Buster - which is the bigger regional Auckland Plan). It's not clear what's what in these plans. They overlap. Use different words, goals and outcomes. We'll be kept on our toes. I hope the Councillors are on theirs...

What I want talk about a little in this posting is transformation step 5. One of the reports that Council has considered relates to "The Engine Room" - a rather post-industrial term for the Auckland CBD (far too business oriented I think. Successful central city areas are known for muuch more than business. Culture for a start... which isn't only about business).

Anyway. When you get into that report it also explores the need for new stations on the proposed city loop (transformation step 5), we suddenly find - at page 61:
...In addition to the 3 new City Rail Link growth node areas, a Parnell station is to be reopened to better connect the eastern side of the city fringe to the city centre. It will also enable growth and access to the medical research centres and university in the Park Road area....


Here's a picture of the site which I've borrowed from the site of the group that has been lobbying for a station there. (http://www.parnell.net.nz/Station/Lobbying.htm)

While the Auckland Regional Council supported the idea of a station there, and the Auckland City Council noted that: "...is not materially inconsistent with the Future Planning Framework's Newmarket/Parnell area plan..." this hardly constitutes a mandate or requirement on Auckland Council to suddenly begin work on a station there now.

If the Council finds itself wallowing in cash to improve the rail network, the highest priority must be unblocking the various rail crossings on Auckland's rail network which will continue to act as bottlenecks on the capacity of the network - especially once it is electrified. (There is a myth that Auckland rail is the same as Perth rail. It's a myth because Perth rail was largely grade separated from the roading network. Auckland's was built on the cheap with a huge number of road crossings at grade.)

These crossings are bottlenecks. They need to be removed. Until they are, investment in electrification and new rolling stock will be prevented from delivering the promised benefits. Building ad hoc new stations is - I think - an irresponsible use of public money now.

My recollection of the debate at Auckland Regional Council is that it was largely driven by the desire to protect the heritage buildngs. That's a good project. The buildings have merit. But it shouldn't be driving Auckland's rail development strategy.

Far more rigour is required before this project should be supported by Auckland Council for funding. Someone even mentioned to me that work on regrading the corridor - so that the station could be built - is scheduled for Christmas! Who is making these decisions? Is this genuine consultation?

This project reminds me of a very poor Auckland Regional Council political decision. One taken against officer advice. And that was the ill-fated Helensville Rail service which had to withdrawn because it was so slow and poorly patronised.

The wording in Auckland planning documents around this Parnell station project is disturbing. It talks about "reopening" the Parnell station. But there was never one at the spot. The line is sloping and a station is unsafe there. It is also a myth that it will be widely used by students at Auckland University. Sure some might use it, but the climb is significant.

I know. I bike it and walk it several times a week.

With the City Rail link project on hold at the moment, there appears to be a cunning plan for the Parnell Station to jump all the queues and get what funding there is. Wrong project. Wrong process.

I'd like to know what does Auckland Transport think about this? And by Auckland Transport I mean its skilled staff. Where is the mandate from the Auckland Transport Statement of Intent that justifies this project?

No comments: