TalkingTransportChristchurch

@JG_moves_NZ @OliverLewis @jono_dw @_Simon_K I don't know about Wellington. But to elaborate, in Christchurch 30 years' growth equates to about 40% of the current population. Te Waihanga says that in the old days we used to zone for 300-400% of current population.

@TalkingTranspo1 @OliverLewis @jono_dw @_Simon_K doesn't even Wellington (the city) claim they have 30 years worth zoned capacity too?

Does CCC still have enough undeveloped land that's not in the airport zone that it could try do the same as claimed here for Auckland?

@jono_dw It also seems strange when Auckland calculated their BCR as 9 for a similar programme. I would've expected something similar to that. at.govt.nz/media/1990950/…

@jono_dw I thought they might have brought these benefits into the analysis when they recalculated it (they were ignored in the original calculation because it was coming out so high). But it doesn't sound like they did.

In this interview Simeon Brown said Wellington's speed limit plan calculated a BCR and it was "negative". I found that quite surprising - does anyone know where/if that's published?

@jono_dw Ok I wonder what the basis for that "should have been negative" comment was. That wasn't what I concluded from the relatively minor error, nor anyone else as far as I knew.

@TalkingTranspo1 Stated here. Skeptical the BCA is a good way to analyse the worthiness of the project though. thepost.co.nz/nz-news/350062…

@smithcorptweet The original BCR was 7.7, so even with the double-counted benefits removed surely it's still going to be positive.

@smithcorptweet But travel time disbenefits were already monetised in the originally published BCR and they were tiny. I was expecting that they'd recalculate the BCR following the discovery of the calculation error, it would still come out positive thus not really changing anything.

Scathing assessment of former govt.’s GPS by treasury, warning billions unfunded after 3 yrs, the costings of projects were poor, would increase emissions and projects would required hiring 100k. Recommended dropping a list of new roads nzherald.co.nz/nz/politics/as…

@urbantui Yea that's why it's so odd. A car crash survivor advocating for more car crashes.

@TalkingTranspo1 That’s just silly! We know what higher speeds do to our most vulnerable & it aint good!

Matt Doocey's well-known in Canterbury for advocating for higher speed limits on unsafe roads. I just found out he's also dedicated his life to improving mental health services ever since suffering head injuries in a car crash in his teens. thepress.co.nz/nz-news/350120…

@urbantui No *higher* speeds. stuff.co.nz/the-press/news…

@TalkingTranspo1 Do you mean lower speeds on unsafe roads?

"Doocey was in a serious car crash in his late teens that left him in hospital for weeks with serious head injuries... His head injuries meant he would get easily distracted and frustrated and eventually led to periods of anxiety and depression." Seems like a slight disconnect?!

@jono_dw @dubpeee Yes and no. Because the RLTP comes out first it has to be based on a best guess as to what will end up in the LTP.

@TalkingTranspo1 @dubpeee It's it linked to the CCC LTP or completely separate thing?

But it does have $700+ million for Woodend bypass, wow Northern Corridor was $290 million for 16.5km. National has claimed Woodend bypass will cost $270m - why the massive difference? thepress.co.nz/nz-news/350045…

@dubpeee @jono_dw It's kind of messy. The $148m classified under "locally important" public and active transport does include some major cycleways, although not all of them. The detail is still being worked out through the LTP process which will be publicly consulted on in March I think.

@TalkingTranspo1 @jono_dw Ok that's clearer thanks What do you make of the major cycleways not being shown in the tables in the transport plan?

@dubpeee @jono_dw Yea the regional plan was mostly developed prior to the election and is a statement of what the region wants, not necessarily what central government are willing to fund.

@TalkingTranspo1 @jono_dw It is confusing. the regional land transport plan shows $700M for the project mostly funded by waka kotahi, but the national manifesto say $270M will be allocated. Quite a gap

@rustie5555 @A_G_Hawkins Waka Kotahi do attempt to split up spending by mode. Here's the Wellington numbers. Roughly 60/30/10 ratio for cars/PT/walking/cycling. nzta.govt.nz/planning-and-i…