Regional Land Transport Programme 2009 - 2010 (2MB) - Auckland ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Table 5.1 below compares the requested funding from the NZTA for the 2009/12 RLTP with previous years’ LTPs by groups of similar types of projects called activity classes. Table 5.1: Summary of 2007/08 and 2008/09 LTPs and 2009/10–2011/12 RLTP by GPS activity class (including commitments) Activity classes 2007/08 Final LTP 2008/09 Final LTP 2009–2012 Final RLTP 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 Final RLTP Final RLTP Final RLTP ($000) ($000) ($000) ($000) ($000) Transport Planning 4,699 3,690 17,215 13,193 13,450 Demand Management and Community Programmes 12,332 15,408 13,496 14,481 15,245 Walking and Cycling 27,939 29,270 27,807 28,731 35,611 Public Transport Services 184,317 191,546 212,750 240,464 260,367 Public Transport Infrastructure 17,466 57,034 141,063 132,159 85,297 Maintenance Local Roads 80,978 84,042 87,224 90,216 93,111 Maintenance State Highways 38,958 42,062 59,923 60,397 61,727 Renewal of Local Roads 86,310 93,513 117,132 118,459 121,398 Renewal of State Highways 28,309 27,427 36,043 38,928 40,086 Infrastructure for Local Roads 237,073 245,007 230,346 275,400 220,785 Infrastructure for State Highways 308,420 382,042 486,806 532,113 443,299 Totals 1,026,801 1,171,042 1,429,805 1,544,542 1,390,375 Note: The activity classes used in the GPS are not the same as used previously by NZTA or those used in the 2005 RLTS. In order to make the comparisons in Table 5.1 we have used the best available information to map the previous activity classifications into the new activity classes, however, the mapping does not ‘fit’ completely, and should be taken into consideration when analysing the results. From Table 5.1 the following conclusions can be drawn comparing the 2007/08 and 2008/09 LTPs with the 2009/10–2011/12 RLTP: > There has been a considerable increase in requests for funding for transport planning. This is in response to the NZTA signalling its desire for transport planning to be aligned with its refined funding processes. To support this, the NZTA has increased the Financial Assistance Rate (FAR) from 53% in the 2008/09 LTP to 75% in the 2009/10–2011/12 RLTP. > There is a large increase in funding requested for walking and cycling projects between 2008/09 LTP and the current RLTP. NZTA HNO have created a relatively large walking and cycling programme for the RLTP. This has offset a cut back in funding for walking and cycling projects by some local authorities. There is a danger that without local authority schemes to connect into the State highways schemes will not achieve their maximum effect. > There is a decline in funding requests for Travel Demand Management (TDM) and community programmes in the RLTP compared to previous LTPs. The reason for this is likely to be due to mapping of activity class definitions as walking and cycling projects that were previously classified as TDM activities. > Public transport services funding has increased for the RLTP period compared to previous LTPs. However, the increase is significantly less than was proposed in the draft RLTP due to both a shortage of local funding and a smaller increase in national funding through the 2009 GPS than was provided for in the 2008 GPS. The large increase in expenditure predicted at the time of the draft RLTP was considered necessary to cater for the increase in patronage which is predicted during this period. Without the additional funding, it is unlikely that patronage will continue to rise as sharply as it has recently. > > > > > Funding requests for local road maintenance have increased slightly while funding requests for renewals have increased significantly. The reason for this is that definitions of maintenance and renewals have recently changed. New local road infrastructure funding requests are similar to 2007/08 levels. While territorial authorities are generally reducing their transport programmes, this has been off-set by the inclusion of Penlink which accounts for between $50m– $70m for each of the three years of the RLTP. There has been a marginal drop in funding between the draft and the final RLTP; this compares with a significant increase in previous LTPs. This is indicative of a reluctance by Auckland local authorities to invest in new or improved infrastructure due to a desire to minimise rate increases. New State highway infrastructure funding requests have increased by 55% between the draft RLTP and the final RLTP. This is in response to the large increases in this activity class provided for by GPS 2009 and the desire of the Government to construct roads of national significance. In the Auckland region, the increase is mainly due to funding of SH20 Waterview Connection. Although State highway funding peaks in 2010/11, it remains significantly above the level of 2008/09. Passenger transport infrastructure has increased due to the inclusion of mainly rail related projects due to changes in funding arrangements as a result of not proceeding with the regional tax fuel. Compared to the previous one-year LTP planning cycle, this RLTP process requires Approved Organisations to have a detailed three-year forward plan for their transport programmes. This will improve transport planning and budgeting for the region and will require improved processes to be developed and resourced. 23
GPS Funding Allocations and Requested Funds > Public Transport Services and Operations The Minister of Transport issued the GPS to provide direction on the allocation of land transport funding, the GPS does this by allocating national funding to activity classes comprising: > Transport Planning > Maintenance and Operation of Local Roads > Renewal of Local Roads > Maintenance and Operation of State Highways > Renewal of State Highways > Improvement of State Highways > Improvement of Local Roads > Public Transport Infrastructure > Walking and Cycling Facilities > Demand Management and Community Programmes. The GPS has specified national funding ranges by activity class for the years 2009/10 to 2014/15 and supplied forecast funding ranges from 2015/16 to 2018/19. The range of available funding for each activity class has been defined by setting upper and lower funding bands. This RLTP matches these national funding ranges against the prioritised list of activities in each activity class. The comparison between current funding levels funding (as allocated in 2008/09 NLTP), funding that was proposed to be allocated in 2008 GPS and funding allocated in the 2009 GPS is shown in Table 5.2. Table 5.2: Comparison between past and future funding allocations Activity class Estimated current Indicative 2008 Indicative 2009 funding levels * allocation ** allocation ** three-year GPS funding GPS funding Difference between 2009 GPS and estimated current funding levels (1) (2) (3) (3–1) ($M) ($M) ($M) ($M) New and Improved State Highways 2,592 1,830 3,055 463 Maintenance of State Highways 837 930 885 48 New and Improved Local Roads 693 550 550 -143 Renewal of Local Roads 648 720 685 37 Maintenance and Operation of Local Roads 711 795 755 44 Public Transport Services 573 670 635 62 Public Transport Infrastructure 432 400 135 -297 Demand Management/Community Programmes 165 180 145 -20 Walking and Cycling Facilities 54 70 50 -4 Domestic Sea Freight Development 18 30 3 -15 Transport Planning 117 110 105 -12 * To estimate current three-year funding levels, the NLTP 2008/09 has been multiplied by 3. ** Values are the indicative funding level as defined by MOT/NZTA. Source: Data supplied by MOT and NZTA. Table 5.2 compares the proposed allocation in the three-year 2008 GPS with the funding allocation in the three-year 2009 GPS and the 2008/09 funding approved in the NLTP. In order to give a fair three-year comparison with current funding levels, the 2008/09 figures have been multiplied by 3 to give a three-year equivalent current funding estimate – this is shown in the column titled (1). 24
Page 1 and 2: 2009/10-2011/12 AUCKLAND REGIONAL L
Page 3 and 4: CONTENTS CHAIRMAN’S FOREWORD ....
Page 5 and 6: iv Figure 1: Major Construction Pro
Page 7 and 8: 2 CONTEXT ARTA’s Role Established
Page 9 and 10: Figure 2.2: Funding streams for lan
Page 11 and 12: What’s New in this Regional Land
Page 13 and 14: Figure 3.2: Population growth by re
Page 15 and 16: Figure 3.5: Road and rail freight m
Page 17 and 18: 6. Funding constraints The current
Page 19 and 20: Achievement of the expected increas
Page 21 and 22: 16 5. Completion of key links in th
Page 23 and 24: Walking and cycling initiatives Del
Page 25 and 26: 5 THE 2009/12 PROGRAMME 20 The Auck
Page 27: 22 Figure 5.1: Map of major constru
Page 31 and 32: When taking into account the popula
Page 33 and 34: Table 5.4: Summary of the RLTP by A
Page 35 and 36: Table 5.4: Summary of the RLTP by A
Page 37 and 38: R and C Funding It is estimated tha
Page 39 and 40: 7 ROAD POLICING ACTIVITIES Road pol
Page 41 and 42: 8 MONITORING Implementing the Regio
Page 43 and 44: The proportion of funding proposed
Page 45 and 46: 9 SIGNIFICANCE POLICY Legislation S
Page 47 and 48: With respect to the tables (and hea
Page 49 and 50: 44 Table 10.1: Activity Class 1, Tr
Page 55 and 56: 50 Table 10.2: Activity Class 2, De
Page 57 and 58: 52 Table 10.3: Activity Class 3, Wa
Page 59 and 60: 54 Table 10.3: Activity Class 3, Wa
Page 61 and 62: 56 Table 10.5: Activity Class 5, Pu
Page 63 and 64: 58 Table 10.5: Activity Class 5, Pu
Page 65 and 66: 60 Table 10.6: Activity Class 8 and
Page 67 and 68: 62 Table 10.7: Activity Class 9 and
Page 69 and 70: 64 Table 10.8: Activity Class 12 ,
Page 79 and 80:
74 Table 10.9: Activity Class 13, I
Page 81 and 82:
76 Table 10.9: Activity Class 13, I
Page 83 and 84:
APPENDIX 1: AUCKLAND RLTP’S LEGIS
Page 85 and 86:
The prioritisation principles Serio
Page 87 and 88:
Effectiveness Effectiveness is the
Page 89 and 90:
Table 3 below shows the generic pro
Page 91 and 92:
GLOSSARY ARLTP ARC ARTA ATP GPS NZT
show all

Regional Land Transport Programme 2009 - 2010 (2MB) - Auckland ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?