Auckland Transit by Alan Hoffman

These slides were shared with me by Alan Hoffman of Mission Group, USA, at a conference on public transport held in Sydney in 2002. I was there to talk about the design of the Northern Busway, as Chair of North Shore City Council's Works and Environment Ctte. Alan's presentation is as relevant to Auckland's situation today as it was then. He begins with the age old questions which have been asked repeatedly in Auckland....

He notes the classic "is it about fare prices or is it about time saving" question. We have the same question in Auckland. We have the same outcome as US - especially when it comes to bus transit that's not on the busway. It's generally regarded as a poor service for people on low incomes.

He makes simple points about market research which echo much of what has been found in Auckland. We are easily able to capture the patronage of the proportion of Aucklanders who "prefer to use public transport". The trick is the next tranche. What needs to happen for them to take public transport?

The big thing is time saving. He makes the huge point that "you have to want to save their trip times". That means the service provider has to be committed to saving travel times by building public transport services that are faster, and more reliable, than travelling by car. And the "how" is by increasing the number of direct, express services. We have some of these in the Northern Busway. We need more in other parts of the bus network.


This slide is a development of the same point. It is about making public transport indispensable. But that's not necessarily for absolutely everybody in Auckland. It is built up by targeting areas and targeting geographies.


This slide emphasises the need for connectivity. That was a key factor in my approach to straightening Auckland bus routes.  

These next two slides reflect Auckland's current land use and public transport planning strategy....

.... and emphasise the goal of making a network that is useful...

I was lucky to go with the Parliamentary Commissioner for Environment's study trip to Curitiba almost 10 years ago. It is an extraordinary exemplar, and one which is cited by Alan in this slide. You can read here what Curitiba's goal was - an unattainable goal a bit like Auckland's sometimes appears to be. So Curitiba responded by doing what it could. Step by step. Auckland needs to do the same. Existing radial bus services need to be reorganised into a high frequency network which connects Auckland's towns, and cross-town orbital or direct connections can follow.

What do Auckland's ethnic groups think of Regional Parks?

ARC has commissioned research to get some answers to these questions about its Regional Park network:

- why are Asian, Maori and Pacific people under-represented as parks visitors?
- why is the level of satisfaction for these groups lower, than for others?
- what are the barriers for ethnic groups to visit regional parks?
- how can those barriers be reduced?

An online survey was carried out, and 1000 surveys were completed. There is heaps of info in this report, and it is all very interesting. Why I've written this blog is that I want to use it as a vehicle to share some of the pictures I took when I visited Curitiba, Brazil (at the end of this blog). This city has an extraordinary ethnic mix (Brazilians, Japanese, Ukrainians, Germans and Poles - to name the majorities), and the city has a fantastic policy of parks diversity. Anyway. I digress. back to the ARC's research....

In summary the report explains:

...all Asian, NZ Maori and Pacific peoples are less likely to visit a regional park (than NZ Europeans)...
... the main barrier stopping people that currently visit (local) parks, but not regional parks, is a general lack of knowledge about regional parks, and in particular, their locations and what to at them...
... the things that appeal were similar for all ethnicities for many features, with seeing natural features, going to the beach, picnicking with friends, visiting the Botanic Gardens and going on a nature or bush walk receiving similar ratings across all groups....
... features such as booking a picnic site for a large group of 50 or more, attending an event, having children's facilities, and visiting a working farm, were all more appealing to Asian, NZ Maori and pacific peoples compared to NZ Europeans...
...Furthermore for nearly all features and activities, Asian, NZ Maori and pacific peoples would rpefer to have facilities such as BBQs, picnic tables, and places to prepare food available at regional parks...
...across all features and activities, around 15% of people were preparwed to travel for less than 30 minutes to reach the park they wanted to visit, 40% were prepared to travel around 30 mins to 1 hours, 20% 1 hour to 1.5 hours, 10% over 1.5 hours, and 15% were prepared to travel as long as it took....
...overall Asian people were more likely to want to travel shorter distances (less than 30 minutes), whereas Maori and Pacific peoples were more likely to be prepared to travel for as long as it took to reach the park they wanted to visit...

Interesting. The survey also was used to show respondents images of regional parks and information about what can be done at them, and after seeing that information, respondents indicated they were keener to visit reghional parks.

The report's executive summary concludes with the following:

...There is also an opportunity to increase satisfaction with regional parks for Asian, NZ Maori and Pacific peoples by providing more facilities and, if not making food available, at least letting people know where the opportunities to purchase food are close to or on the way to a regional park...

This is an interesting finding. ARC is in the midst of debate and discussion about the provision of concessions for operators to function provding backbacker accommodation (eg Hillary Trail), and perhaps food. There is a debate about having a cafe at Arataki. Visitors are becoming more demanding. ARC needs to respond. The challenge will be ensuring there are wild and remote sections of regional parks which are free of development, but there will also need to be other areas where much higher levels of amenity need to be provided.

Family and cultural groups clearly value and need the space of a regional park to hold a family gathering, and the facilities to feed them. That's an interesting demand to meet.

So. What about Curitiba?

Well. Just like Auckland, Curitiba has a Botanical Gardens which is very well visited and famous...

This is Curitiba's Ukrainian Park. Buildings and gardens and parts of the park layout reflect Ukrainian Culture. A "park" away from "home". Everybody goes there of course, but it's especially special to the Ukrainian population who have a significant say about what happens in this park.

This is Curitiba's "Open University of the Environment", built in another of its great park areas. The materials used to build this structure are all recycled. It is a bit like Curitiba's Arataki Centre - but with an emphasis on natural education, with strong links to the city universities and other places for learning.

And this is an image from Curitiba's "Polish Memorial Park". I didn't actually visit this one, and I suspect it's in a smaller more urban setting then some of the other Curitiba Parks. Nevertheless - a special public park space for another significant ethnic group that make up Curitiba's cosmopolitan population.

This is Tangua Park. Tanguá Park is an example of urban space being re-utilized on an old complex of quarries.

The Wire Opera House is part of the Pedreiras Park, together with the Paulo Leminski Cultural Space, where the Passion of Christ was enacted, and hosted many other big events since 1989, and can hold, in the open air, 10 thousand people seated or 50 thousand standing. (From Wikipedia)

The German Woods. The wood has various features to celebrate and promote the German traditions. There are 38 thousand square meters of native forest, which was part of the old farm from the Schaffer family. The replica of an old wooden church, built in 1933 at the Seminário neighbourhood, with neo-gothic decorative elements, shelters a concert hall called Bach's Oratorium. Other attractions are the John and Mary path, which tells the Grimm brothers tale, a children's library, the Philosophers Tower, a wooden observatory allowing a panoramic view of the city and the Ocean Ridge, and the German Poetry Square, with a reproduction of the Casa Mila façade, a German building from the beginning of the last century, originally located in the city centre. (From Wikipedia)

Interesting what a bit of creativity can do.
I wonder how Curitiba's ethnic populations would respond to a survey about its parks?

Auckland Leaders want WOW on the Waterfront

The commentators have used up all the words for the Queens Wharf Design Competition: farce, mockery, joke, sow's ear.... Senior officials have mentioned the sheer number fo design competitions that have been had, but not built.

Something's wrong in the state of Auckland.

I think we are trying to wrestle our city out of a state of urban barbarianism.

This barbarianism shines out for all to see when elected leaders make pronouncements about "wow factors", "iconic buildings" and Auckland being "world-class". Some Herald writers are just as bad. In Auckland, mayors, chairs and leader writers are not where they are because they are fantastic designers, or great urban designers, or even architects.

Most of them would say to this, "yeah, but I know what I like, and I don't like that..."

Some cities do things differently, and I guess we can learn from them, but more likely we'll just learn from our mistakes. I just hope we don't make too many more. At least Queens Wharf is on the back-burner. Wanton and hurried destruction followed by hasty construction won't happen.

I went with a dozen invited officials and local government politicians to Curitiba, Brazil, to see what they do there, and to understand the local government process. Morgan Williams, parliamentary commissioner for environment organised the study visit. In a nutshell, I learned this about City Hall:

- 30 years ago, or so, local business and community interests decided their city needed good governance if it was going to get anywhere;
- their plan was to get skilled people into Council;
- a design competition was held at the local university, architects and planners were invited to enter. The objective? A Master Plan for Curitiba; - a bunch of winning entries were selected. The prize? A couple of years post-graduate study in the Sorbonne in Paris, and the opportunity to implement the Master Plan, provided they got elected to Curitiba City Hall on their return

You get the picture. Jaime Lerner - Curitiba's famous mayor, who I met and talked with, trained as an architect. He was elected to Curitiba Council with a bunch of fellow councillors who were also architects, designers, and planners. Their mandate? to implement the Master Plan. And that's what they've been doing...

All this process took a couple of decades. The results are excellent.

Auckland has a lot of design and planning talent. You see them employed privately and in consultancies and agencies. A good number are also employed in Auckland local government. Many from the private sector got involved in the Queens Wharf design competition. Many did not because they felt the design brief was flawed (Cruise ship terminal would compromise Queens Wharf, inadequate budget, insufficient design time etc....). And some were included in the Design Panel, where they provided professional advice about the entries. Advice to Auckland Leaders and Ministers Gerry Brownlee and Murray McCully.

I get the impression their advice was ignored.

The "we know best" approach won the day.

Getting the best out of Queens Wharf and Auckland's waterfront should not be about Cruise Ships and iconic buildings. Nor should it be about one politician's idea of WOW.

I think Auckland people have been short-changed on their waterfront for decades. That is the need that should be addressed, and that is why I see the need for Urban Design and Urban Planning down there, long before I see the need for Architectural Designs.

In the past decade there have been two responsible initiatives at Auckland's waterfront. The first was Britomart - in the time of Mayor Fletcher. That project was a success - sure Queen Elizbeth Square could be improved and it still can be - but the overall result (including Takutai Square behind the railstation), the retention of heritage buildings, and the station restoration itself is outstanding.

The other project - in the time of Mayor Hubbard - was a visionary look Quay Street and the whole waterfront from Ferguson through to Westhaven. Didn't go anywhere fast, because ARC had not been involved in that visionary look and was concerned to protect the viability of Ports of Auckland.

And there's the rub. Ports of Auckland, and its viability, its appetite for wharf space and container space and cruise ship space, continues to be the tail that wags the dog of Auckland's waterfront. Perhaps SuperCity will keep it chained, and allow some sort of design renaissance to flourish in Auckland, beginning with Queens Wharf and Quay Street.