Presentation by Tony Randle on Wellington publci transport, it's cost structure, funding and whether the Greater Wellington Regional Council is meeting it's PT objectives
Wellington Public Transport Presentation 23Aug2012
1. Wellington Public Transport
23 August 2012
Tony Randle – Wellington Commuter
• Contract Business Analyst
• Lived in Johnsonville for 19 years
• Married with 3 children
• President & Transport Spokesman for
Johnsonville Progressive Association
• Public Transport Advocate
Tony Randle 23 August 2012 1
2. Agenda
• Wellington Public Transport (PT)
• Wellington PT Cost & Revenue Structure
• Local Subsidy through the Transport Rate
• Future Investment in Wellington PT
• Greater Wellington Regional Council
• Conclusion
Tony Randle 23 August 2012 2
3. Wellington Public Transport (PT)
Travel across the region All Modes (2006 Census)
Residents (exc outside
Area Total Waiirarapa
TLA Total Upper Hutt
TLA Total Wellington
Total Trips to GW
Total Trips by GW
TLA Total Porirua
Workplaces
TLA Total Kapiti
TLA Total Hutt
(excluding outside
region)
the Wellington
region)
Total Wairarapa 14,136 330 12 30 183 864 15,555
TLA Total Hutt 168 24,597 111 687 1,485 13,524 40,572
TLA Total Kapiti 48 756 10,488 879 171 3,768 16,110
TLA Total Porirua 45 1,449 255 7,779 303 8,193 18,024
TLA Total Upper Hutt 69 4,050 45 399 7,320 3,990 15,873
TLA Total Wellington 354 5,256 279 2,619 633 79,149 88,290
Total Trips to GW Workplaces 14,820 36,438 11,190 12,393 10,095 109,488 194,424
Tony Randle 23 August 2012 3
4. Wellington Public Transport (PT)
Origin/Destination
Census ALL Trips across the Region Origin
Destination
All Trips Origin
Inter-District
Destination % Inter-District Intra-District
Inter-District
Origin % Intra-District
Destination
Wellington City 30,339
9,141
60%
18% 79,149
60%
55%
Lower Hutt City 11,841
15,975
23%
31% 24,597
23%
17%
Upper Hutt City 2,775
8,553
17%
5% 7,320
5%
Porirua City 10,245
4,614
20%
9% 7,779
9%
5%
Kapiti Coast District 5,622
702
11%
1% 10,488
1%
7%
Wairarapa 1,419
684
1%
3% 14,136
10%
1%
Total 50,955
100% 143,469
100%
Tony Randle 23 August 2012 4
5. Wellington Public Transport (PT)
Origin/Destination
Census Bus Trips across the Region Origin
Destination
Bus Trips Origin
Inter-District
Destination % Inter-District Intra-District
Inter-District
Origin % Intra-District
Destination
Wellington City 900
339
63%
24% 12,075
63%
89%
Lower Hutt City 366
717
26%
51% 1,023
26%
8%
Upper Hutt City 204
14%
42
3% 117
3%
1%
Porirua City 54
69
4%
5% 228
4%
2%
Kapiti Coast District 27
75
2%
5% 117
2%
1%
Wairarapa 30
15
2%
1% 66
2%
0%
Total 1,419
100% 13,626
100%
Tony Randle 23 August 2012 5
6. Wellington Public Transport (PT)
Origin/Destination
Census Rail Trips across the Region Origin
Destination
Rail Trips Origin
Inter-District
Destination % Inter-District Intra-District
Inter-District
Origin % Intra-District
Destination
Wellington City 8,082
282
92%
3% 2,541
92%
83%
Lower Hutt City 3,609
336
41%
4% 255
4%
8%
Upper Hutt City 1,335
114
15%
1% 78
1%
3%
Porirua City 1,779
177
20%
2% 87
2%
3%
Kapiti Coast District 1,302
15%
57
1% 69
1%
2%
Wairarapa 519
60
1%
6% 33
1%
Total 8,826
100% 3,063
100%
Tony Randle 23 August 2012 6
7. Wellington Public Transport (PT)
What does the census tell us about PT ?
45,000
40,000
35,000 Most travel is by car
•
30,000 Most short PT trips are by bus
•
• Most longer trips (between cities) are by All Trips
25,000
rail
20,000
15,000 Over half of all PT in within Wellington City
• Bus
Rail
10,000
5,000
-
Wellington Lower Hutt Upper Hutt Porirua Kapiti Wairarapa
City City City City Coast
District
Tony Randle 23 August 2012 7
8. Wellington Public Transport (PT)
The two roles of Public Transport:
The appropriate role for public transport is to
provide an alternative to private
cars, particularly for longer journeys where
active modes are less attractive.
It also has a vital role in providing for people
who do not own a private vehicle, are unable to
drive or cannot use active modes to access the
goods or services they need.
(source: GWRC RLTS)
Tony Randle 23 August 2012 8
9. Wellington Public Transport (PT)
25,000,000
Wellington Public Transport Annual
Patronage 2005/06 and 20011/12
20,000,000
15,000,000
2005/06
2010/11
10,000,000
5,000,000
-
Bus Rail Ferry
Tony Randle 23 August 2012 9
10. Wellington PT Cost & Revenue Structure
Estimated Cost by Mode
$120,000,000
$120,000,000
$100,000,000
$100,000,000
$80,000,000
$80,000,000
GWRC Rates
$60,000,000 Non-Operational
Subsidy Funding
$60,000,000 NZTA Subsidy
Operational Costs
Operational Costs
Revenue Funding
Revenue Funding
$40,000,000
$40,000,000
$20,000,000
$20,000,000
$-
$-
Rail
Rail
Rail Diesel Bus
Diesel Bus Trolley Bus Bus
Diesel Bus Trolley Bus
Bus
Bus Trolley
Tony Randle 23 August 2012 10
11. Wellington PT Cost & Revenue Structure
Est. Rail Costs split by Line by City Patronage
$60
$60
Wairarapa
$50
$50 Kapiti Coast District
QWERTYUIOPASDFG
Upper Hutt City
$40
$40 Hutt City
Porirua City
$30
$30
Wellington City
$20
$20
$10
$10
$-
$-
Jville Line
Jville Line Waikanie Line
Waikanie Line Hutt Line
Hutt Line Wairarapa Line
Wairarapa Line
Tony Randle 23 August 2012 11
12. Wellington PT Cost & Revenue Structure
Public Transport Per Trip Cost Ave Bus & Jville
Hutt & Wairarapa
Waikanie Line
$30.00 $29.63
$25.00
$19.85
$20.00
$20.00
$15.00
$15.00
$10.80
$11.59
$9.10 $11.10
$10.00 $9.20
$10.00 $6.00
$5.70
$6.94 $6.80
$5.00 $3.86 $5.83
$5.00 $3.37 $3.44
$-
$- Well 211-4 Porirua 211-5 Kapiti 91-9 Sectns
Hutt City
Diesel SectnsSectns Upper 91/211-3 Sectns
91-4 Trolley Sectns91-7 Sectns Jville Line
Hutt Wairarapa
Tony Randle 23 August 2012 12
13. Wellington PT Cost & Revenue Structure
Summary of Costs by Mode & City
• Trolley bus costs significantly more than diesel
• Rail costs more than bus on an equivalent trip
basis
• The rail trip costs increase with distance
• The rail costs vary significantly due to
differences between patronage and vehicle
mileage
Tony Randle 23 August 2012 13
14. Local Subsidy through the Transport Rate
GWRC Transport Rates 2011/12 ($46.4M)
$12,000,000
$25,000,000
$10,000,000
$20,000,000 CBD Rates
Wellington City Diesel Buses
$8,000,000
$15,000,000
$ 4,464,250
50%
CBD
Wellington City Trolley Buses
$6,000,000 $ 2,241,994
50%
Business
Rates
Wellington Rail Costs
$10,000,000
$4,000,000
$ 9,579,679
42%Residential
Other City Buses
$5,000,000
$ 1,536,081
42%
$2,000,000
In fact the CBD Rail Costs are a bargain !
$-
Rail
Rail Bus2Rail Deisel Bus Trolley
Bus2Rail Deisel Bus Trolley Other
Bus Other Other
Tony Randle 23 August 2012 14
15. Local Subsidy through the Transport Rate
Greater Wellington uses the following funding
allocations in respect of expenditure on public
transport services, except for Total Mobility:
• A target of 45%-50% user charges
• The remainder from a community contribution
This community contribution is funded as
follows:
• The maximum contribution from Crown
agencies, primarily New Zealand Transport
Agency (NZTA), ... (this contribution ranges
from 50%-100%, depending on the type of
service)
Tony Randle 23 August 2012 15
16. Local Subsidy through the Transport Rate
The balance ... is from a Greater Wellington
contribution funded via a targeted rate
Inter-district services:
• Inter-district services includes all rail costs
and a portion of the cost of bus services that
connect with rail
• 20%-25% of rates required for inter-
district services are borne by the
Wellington CBD with the remainder borne
equally by ratepayers in the district of origin
and the district of destination using census
journey to work statistics
Tony Randle 23 August 2012 16
17. Local Subsidy through the Transport Rate
Intra-district services:
• Intra-district services include all ferry costs
and bus costs that have not been
apportioned to inter-district costs
• The rates required for intra-district services
are borne by the ratepayers in the district that
services operate in
• A cost apportionment is made where services
travel through more than one district
• Within Wellington city 50% of intra-district
trips are allocated to the Wellington CBD
Tony Randle 23 August 2012 17
18. Local Subsidy through the Transport Rate
Rates for Intra-District Bus and Ferry Services
$16,000,000
$14,000,000
$12,000,000
$10,000,000
$8,000,000 Other
$6,000,000 Trolleys
$4,000,000 Diesel Bus
$2,000,000
$-
Tony Randle 23 August 2012 18
19. Local Subsidy through the Transport Rate
Rates for Inter-District Rail and Bus Services
$14,000,000
$12,000,000
$10,000,000
$8,000,000
$6,000,000 Bus2Rail
$4,000,000 Rail
$2,000,000
$-
Tony Randle 23 August 2012 19
20. Local Subsidy through the Transport Rate
Factors Used to calculate the rates:
• Intra-District (Bus & Ferry) =
Contracted Subsidy Cost by City
Split 50% Original and Destination
• Inter-District (Rail & Bus to Rail) =
2006 Census Trips between cities
Split 50% Origin and Destination
with 25% of Origin charged to the CBD
BUT NOTE
Trips are ALL Trips (not just rail trips) AND
There is no adjustment for distance !
Tony Randle 23 August 2012 20
21. Local Subsidy through the Transport Rate
What does this mean ? Using Intra-District (Bus)
$14,000,000
$2,000,000
$14,000,000
$1,436,918 $1,446,437
$1,500,000
$12,000,000
$12,000,000
$1,000,000
$10,000,000
$10,000,000
$476,353
$500,000
$8,000,000
$8,000,000
$-
$6,000,000
$6,000,000 Bus2Rail
Bus2Rail
Well City Hutt City U Hutt Porirua Kapiti Wairarapa
-$500,000
$4,000,000 Rail
Rail
$4,000,000
-$1,000,000
$2,000,000
$2,000,000
-$1,500,000
$-
$- -$1,298,369
-$2,000,000
-$1,992,626
-$2,500,000
Tony Randle 23 August 2012 21
22. Local Subsidy through the Transport Rate
Summary of Transport Rates Discussion
• Rates to support Bus services are calculated on
a totally different basis from Rail Services
• There is significant cross-subsidies from
Wellington and Hutt Cities to Kapiti and
Wairarapa through the rates calculation
• The rail rates essentially penalise residents who
live closer to the CBD and favour residents living
far away
• The Transport Rates Calculation is a secret …
the information here was only obtained with the
intervention of the Ombudsman and some $$$s
Tony Randle 23 August 2012 22
23. Wellington PT – A Rail focused Strategy
Objectives for PT Growth in Bus and Rail
The overall public transport mode share is the
key indicator for public transport’s efficiency
and effectiveness. The target seeks a 4%
increase in public transport mode share
for journey-to-work trips. The strategic target
for public transport trips equates to around 5.6
million additional peak period trips per annum
(a 32% increase in trips from 2009/10).
RLTS 2010
Tony Randle 23 August 2012 23
24. Wellington PT – A Rail focused Strategy
14,000,000
Peak Patronage Past and Future
12,000,000 4% Growth + 3.1M
Trips
10,000,000
+ 2.3M
8,000,000 Trips
6,000,000
Actual RLTS
4,000,000
Bus
Rail
2,000,000
Ferry
-
Tony Randle 23 August 2012 24
25. Wellington PT – A Rail focused Strategy
GWRC Long Term Plan Transport Projects
Totaldescription
Project Transport Projects of $347M Total cost Year(s)
48 new two-car Matangi trains* $8 million 2012/13
•Refurbish Ganzon Rail
$236M Mavag trains $79 million 2012-17
Rail infrastructure renewal and minor $49 million 2012-22
•improvements** Trolley Buses Maintenance
$36M on
•improvements*** Integrated Ticketing (Mainly on Rail)
$39M on
Rail rolling stock heavy maintenance and minor $78 million 2012-22
$4M on Buses ($1M for Bikes on$52 million !) 2015-20
•Regional Rail Plan – reliability and frequency
upgrades Buses
Trolley bus overhead network infrastructure $36 million 2012-22
renewals
Bus shelters and interchanges $3 million 2012-22
Electronic/integrated ticketing $39 million 2013-16
Install bike racks on buses $1 million 2017/18
Customer information systems $2 million 2012-22
Total $347 million
Tony Randle 23 August 2012 25
26. Wellington PT – A Rail focused Strategy
The Transport Rate Increasing 5%
The costs of providing passenger transport
services usually increase each year. The last year
has seen an over 5% increase in costs with
operators being reimbursed by Council through
increased contract payments.
(GWRC Long Term Plan)
In fact the truth is:
• Rail costs are increasing 10% per year
• Bus costs are static
Tony Randle 23 August 2012 26
27. Wellington PT – A Rail focused Strategy
ALL fares are increasing due to rail cost increases
GWRC says bus fares must go up to be
An increase in fare levels is likely even
when they maintain themore expensive
needed to are already required contribution
than cars.
from passengers ... If the passenger
Meanwhile it was to rail users to get extra and
contribution funds drop, the ratepayers
discount fares thatto contribute more. A 3%
NZTA would have mean long distance
rail journeys are less than to a $0.7m impact
revenue increase equates half or even a
quarter that of a car !
on rates ...
In fact, bus users are being made to pay much
more than 50% of their costs to hide that rail
users are paying less than 50% of their costs !
Tony Randle 23 August 2012 27
28. Wellington PT – A Rail focused Strategy
The rail costs drive ongoing Transport Rate hikes
$70,000,000
$60,000,000
$50,000,000
Rail
$40,000,000
Other
$30,000,000
Trans Rates
Ferry
$20,000,000 Trolley Bus
$10,000,000 Deisel Bus
$-
Tony Randle 23 August 2012 28
29. Wellington PT – A Rail focused Strategy
GWRC Loves Rail so much
• It wants more new Matangis
• Ganz-Mavag refurbishment claimed = $80M
• The minimum cost is actually = $60M
• It states new Matangis will cost $135M
• But this is just the trains
• It states it needs the additional capacity
• But refuses to consider bus alternatives
• Want a good price, use the Superbus !
Tony Randle 23 August 2012 29
30. Wellington PT – A Rail focused Strategy
GWRC Loves Rail so much
• It subsidises rail more heavily than bus
• It rates Wellington City to subsidise others
• It increases bus fares to fund rail costs
• It provides rail monthly discounts but not
bus
• It keeps investing only rail not bus
• It refuses to subsidise alternative bus
services such as the 211, 97 or 91/Flyer
Tony Randle 23 August 2012 30
31. Wellington PT – A Rail focused Strategy
GWRC Loves Rail so much
They Bought the Company !
GWRL: owns rolling stock and stations
is now the 2nd Largest PT Operator
has no permanent staff, instead
it is operated by GWRC transport officers
who also decide PT funding for the region
recently applied to make GWRL “for profit”
The GWRC LTP has $80M for GM Refurb
but GWRL already budgets for Maitangis!
Tony Randle 23 August 2012 31
32. Conclusion
The Regional Council’s action do not match
it’s plans or strategy:
• The costs of PT services are not known
• The rates funding of rail is not understood
and kept secret by the regional council
• The PT Strategy cannot succeed without
investment in buses as well as rail
• How do ratepayers know that it is the
Greater Wellington Regional Council that
controls Greater Wellington Rail Ltd and not
the other way around ?
Tony Randle 23 August 2012 32
Hinweis der Redaktion
Totals by Mode from Fare Recovery ModelCar is the main mode of transport
Totals by Mode from Fare Recovery ModelBuses are the main mode of PT . . . Most PT travel is within Wellington City by bus.
Totals by Mode from Fare Recovery ModelMost Wellington city rail travel is Intra-District.92% of rail travel has Wellington City as Rail Destination vs 60% of ALL Modes (note latter % is paid by CBD, not former).
PT is not just there to get people out of cars at rush hour . . . It is to get the children, the poor, unemployed and sick to where they want to go.
Compare Census Year to 2011/12 year . . . Not much has changed.
Totals by Mode from Fare Recovery ModelAdjusted to a Total Cost Estimate by adding annualised non-operational (e.g. Interest on capital debt).
Split the rail cost by line based on rail vehicle annual kms (Main cost driver).Then split into cities by patronage levels by Line.
Further Calculate to Passenger Km Trip CostBlue = Average Bus Trip CostRed = Estimated Rail Trip CostYellow = Equivalent Commercial Bus Fare (91 Airport Flyer or 211 Mana Porirua-Wellington)
Show most rates goes on rail even though bus caries twice the patronage.By 2018/19CBD Rates Est. to be Diesel Bus: $4,808,121 ; Trolley Bus: $3,214,588 ;Rail:$15,731,890; Other City Buses: $1,631,605
Greater Wellington uses the following funding allocations in respect of expenditure on public transport services, except for Total Mobility:• A target of 45%-50% user charges• The remainder from a community contributionThis community contribution is funded as follows:• The maximum contribution from Crown agencies, primarily New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA), ... (this contribution ranges from 50%-100%, depending on the type of service) • The balance of the community contribution is from a Greater Wellington contribution funded via a targeted rate set as follows:
The balance of the community contribution is from a Greater Wellington contribution funded via a targeted rate set as follows:- 95% of the rates required are for congestion relief and concessionary and are allocated as follows:- Inter-district services:- Inter-district services includes all rail costs and a portion of the cost of bus services that connect with rail- 20%-25% of rates required for inter-district services are borne by the Wellington CBD with the remainder borne equally by ratepayers in the district of origin and the district of destination using census journey to work statistics- Within Wellington city, 10% of inter-district destination trips are allocated to ratepayers outside of the CBD- Intra-district services:- Intra-district services include all ferry costs and bus costs that have not been apportioned to inter-district costs- The rates required for intra-district services are borne by the ratepayers in the district that services operate in- A cost apportionment is made where services travel through more than one district- Within Wellington city 50% of intra-district trips are allocated to the Wellington CBD
The balance of the community contribution is from a Greater Wellington contribution funded via a targeted rate set as follows:- 95% of the rates required are for congestion relief and concessionary and are allocated as follows:- Inter-district services:- Inter-district services includes all rail costs and a portion of the cost of bus services that connect with rail- 20%-25% of rates required for inter-district services are borne by the Wellington CBD with the remainder borne equally by ratepayers in the district of origin and the district of destination using census journey to work statistics- Within Wellington city, 10% of inter-district destination trips are allocated to ratepayers outside of the CBD- Intra-district services:- Intra-district services include all ferry costs and bus costs that have not been apportioned to inter-district costs- The rates required for intra-district services are borne by the ratepayers in the district that services operate in- A cost apportionment is made where services travel through more than one district- Within Wellington city 50% of intra-district trips are allocated to the Wellington CBD
Why is the Ferry charged as Intra-District when it only travels between cities ?
Why is the Johnsonville Line changed as Inter-District when it only operates in Wellington City ?
Bus/Ferry changed on a quite different basis from Rail (and bus2rail)Rail rates are allocated on travel by ALL modes (not just on rail patronage) and not adjusted for distance.There is double charging rates for Ferry and inter-city bus.
Compare current rail rates allocation to what the rates would be if allocated by subsidy cost (i.e. The same as bus/ferry).Wellington & Lower Hutt Bare subsidising Kapiti and Wairarapa.
The overall public transport mode share is the key indicator for public transport’s efficiency and effectiveness. The target seeks a 4% increase in public transport mode share for journey-to-work trips. The strategic target for public transport trips equates to around 5.6 million additional peak period trips per annum (a 32% increase in trips from 2009/10).RLTS 2010
Does this support the PT Objectives of:Bus = 3.1M Additional Peak Trips ? $3MRail = 2.3M Additional Peak Trips ?$236M
Does this support the PT Objectives of:Bus = 3.1M Additional Peak Trips ? No additional fundingRail = 2.3M Additional Peak Trips ? 10%/year increased funding to support 4%/year patronage increase ??
Does this support the PT Objectives of:Bus = 3.1M Additional Peak Trips ? Bus fares increasing even though they are already above the cost of a car and there is no extra subsidies to bus servicesRail = 2.3M Additional Peak Trips ? Rail fares are not covering even half the OPERATING costs, the subsidies to keep the overall PT% above 50% come from bus commuters (mainly in Wellington City). Also note rail users can save 42% of cash fares through monthly rail passes (not available to bus users) even though they pay half or less than an equivalent car journey. The fare structure essentially encourages commuters to live further away.
Does this support the PT Objectives of:Bus = 3.1M Additional Peak Trips ?Rail = 2.3M Additional Peak Trips ?
“Superbus Services: An Overview of Opportunities”, Wellington Regional Council (May 1998) by Booze Allen & Hamilton (NZ) Ltd.“BAH (NZ) Ltd was engaged by the Wellington Regional Council to investigate the potential for new/improved bus services which would have a primary focus of attracting people from cars rather than from rail. These ‘Superbus’ services would provide an equivalent level of service to the existing rail service, but not run in direct competition with it. In addition, the opportunities for commercial bus services which would increase PT modal share were assessed.”“The overall finding is that there appears to be little if any scope for ‘Superbus’ services which attract more people from cars than from the rail service. However, the opportunity to increase PT share for peak period travel to the Wellington CBD is available if the WRC rail protection strategy were to be relaxed.”“Opportunities exist for introducing new commercial bus services which could increase total PT modal share, particularly for peak period travel to the Wellington CBD. Thee bus services would, overall, reduce peak period traffic to the CBD. However, rail patronage would decrease to some extent.”
GWRC claims to need more rail capacity yet refuses to consider alternative direct bus services even though the Superbus Report shows such services from low PT areas (e.g. Lower Hutt Western Hills and Titahi Bay) will increase PT use at low or no cost. The direct bus services from the Hutt Valley and Porirua (91 and 211 respectively) are commercial.Does this support the PT Objectives of:Bus = 3.1M Additional Peak Trips ?Rail = 2.3M Additional Peak Trips ?
How can any decision by the GWRC be seen as unbiased when it’s own income (as the rail PT operator) is dependent on heavy increasing subsidies.The GWRC cannot be seen to be serious in meeting it’s stated RLTS objective of 3.3M additional bus trips when it allocates no funding and no investment to support such an increase.Does this support the PT Objectives of:Bus = 3.1M Additional Peak Trips ?Rail = 2.3M Additional Peak Trips ?
PT Investment is not balanced.The GWRC is conflicted in deciding PT funding and investment by also being the passenger rail operator.