Sign In / Register
Snapped
I have been wondering what the justification is behind New Zealand Transport Authority (NZTA) spending many millions of dollars installing point-to-point cameras on Matakana Road, a tertiary corridor that’s hardly speed central and which carries a fraction of the traffic of heavier traffic corridors like Dome Valley.
The incongruity of the camera locations stand out like the proverbial.
The road sees few accidents, apart from a couple of serious anomalies in 2023 and last year, and rarely experiences anything but the sedate pace of chilled holidaymakers (sitting in traffic jams) and rural/local folk (often driving at 60km/h).
While I’m not an Omaha resident, I do recall that these cameras were installed under the Labour/Green coalition government and have to ask if the justification suffered a little political influence?
The reported cost of near $6 million per camera is just a little difficult to reconcile with tertiary road traffic volumes and return on investment is likely never to be recouped, in either dollars or accident mitigation.
John Griffin, Sandspit
NZTA head of commercial transport regulation Tara Macmillan responded:
Matakana is one of 17 locations around New Zealand where NZ Transport Agency Waka Kotahi (NZTA) is installing new average speed cameras. The volume of traffic, driver behaviour and types of crashes that happen and are likely to happen, on this stretch of road in Matakana, all tell us that there is a serious risk of people being killed or seriously injured in crashes here.
Once we identified this was a site with high risk we ran a speed survey to better understand driver behaviour. That speed survey (run between April 4 and 10, 2023) showed that 12 per cent of vehicles were speeding.
Crashes are not the only indicator of risk, however we do note that between 2015 and 2024 there was one crash that resulted in someone being killed and seven that resulted in people being seriously injured on this stretch of road.
It is difficult to put an exact dollar figure on the cost of an individual camera. NZTA invests in the operating system for safety cameras across the country as a whole and leases the cameras rather than owning them.
Of course, the devastating and wide-reaching social cost of a death or serious injury far outweighs any investment made in cameras. The risk of crashes is significantly reduced if more people drive to the speed limit. By installing average speed safety cameras, we are reducing that risk and making these roads safer for everyone who uses them.
Tech tips for seniors
I thoroughly enjoyed reading John Bluck’s Retirement column, headed The Digital Divide, in the recent issue of Mahurangi Matters. As a senior myself, I could relate to much of what he wrote.
As a tutor at SeniorNet Warkworth, I would like to bring to the attention of your readers that help with their digital device is much closer than an hour away – it is available every Friday at midday at Totara Park Village Hall in Warkworth.
SeniorNet has a number of skilled tech seniors who are available to help with technology questions, be they computer or mobile device-related, Samsung, Apple or Microsoft.
In deference to those in the district who make their living from doing this, we offer our services to SeniorNet members only, and all you need to qualify for membership is to be over the age of 50 and pay a very small annual subscription.
We are a friendly group and provide all help on a one-to-one basis. We do enjoy our annual break, though, so will be reopening next year on Friday, January 23.
And as for asking the nearest seven-year-old for help? Forget it! They will help all right – they will do it for you, leaving you no closer to knowing how to do it for yourself.
Marilyn Goodwin, Warkworth
Wasted rates
I have just sat and watched the very inefficient use of time and resource of a digger, trucks and men on Snells Beach Road and became infuriated that my ratepayer dollars are being wasted with very poor productivity.
I saw our Mayor and the government at loggerheads over future rates increases. Justifiably so, however an intensive drive to reduce costs via better productivity and design would go a long way towards the outcome of having zero-rate increases I should think.
The fiasco of Omaha Flats Road of late is one example. Granted the road has seen large volumes of increased heavy traffic movements over the last 10 years or so, however that doesn’t mitigate the fact the road was both poorly maintained and more poorly reconstructed.
Maybe three years or so ago, the maintenance contractor saw fit to stabilise (rotary hoe and administer binding additive) patches along the road in various areas.
This isn’t in itself a bad technique so long as used for the right purpose and given some proper aftercare. This isn’t and wasn’t the case.
Yes, the patches were probably undertaken okay, but I didn’t witness any subsequent looking after the surface for a number of days to ensure the area was well trafficked, compacted and a suitable surface obtained for seal adhesion prior to sealing.
What I did witness was a quick smack over with a large vibrating roller (not recommended on a highly flexible sub grade), no wheel traffic variation, and no lengthways drag broom and/or watercart use to better enhance, smooth and tighten up the surface.
What I did witness was hoe it one day, seal it the next (potholes included) right before it rained.
The road slowly but surely deteriorated from sealing onwards for the next three years till the next fiasco took place.
How much better would it have been for the ratepayers if the surface had been looked after properly after stabilising, weak spots remedied, and once the rain had passed after a few days, then the seal coat applied. The cost of this little bit of time to do a job correctly would have ultimately save us poor suffering ratepayers a fortune.
Then it became a marathon of “chase the pothole and bumps” every time, the result being a substandard pavement outcome, traffic disruption and very expensive traffic control.
One of the main issues with this road is that it’s based upon an old metal road floating upon peat material subsoils, so it is always going to flex (a bit like a skin on a rice pudding).
In addition to this, ‘stabilising’ destroys whatever lateral permeability the sub-base and base course material may have had. Therefore, the problem is exaggerated as hydraulic pressures created by heavy axle loads cause the entrapped water to break through the surface or weaken the sub grade, rather than dissipate sidewards to the water table drainage (route of least resistance).
The advent of the cycleway also did the road carriageway no favours, so yet again those that pay vehicle registrations and road user charges can be added to the list of ratepayers that have had their dollars compromised by other factors that may or may not be administered, designed or constructed well.
Albeit as of today the contractor has provided a very good two-coat chipseal undertaken with professionalism, which looks to have adhered to the surface, however the resulting ride is well below par and shouldn’t be accepted.
I would be confident that many key performance criteria and even recognised standards have not been achieved.
For instance, one would be surprised if it met the basic road roughness test limits, an acceptable beam test deflection result and/or even a primary target of less than 5mm variation under a three-metre-straight edge.
Along with the poor design, poor productivity, poor results, and huge frustration we endured, all ratepayers I know wanted substantially better. We entrust our money to Auckland Council/Auckland Transport to do the job correctly and efficiently to the best of their contractors’ ability (otherwise the consensus is to get someone who can).
Back to the rates increase debate. The government is on the right track to limit rate increases, however it would be much better to avoid any rate increases at all.
This should be the councils mandate, ‘to limit spending by way of cutting out unnecessary expenditure, along with an honest drive to eliminate costs, reduce cost because of poor productivity, design and construction practices’.
Better use of the funds you already have is always a place to start if income cannot meet expenses. Not every mortgage holder can increase their income if the debt bill goes up, so in the real world they need to “cut their cloth to suit”, as the saying goes.
On a personal note, it now seems the council wants me to pay more to fund a tunnel and train I never wanted or voted for in the first place. Where does it end?
As a local ratepayer, my choice would be to see the Matakana Road traffic flow sorted, most likely needing a bypass of the school and roundabout in the village.
I would think there’s any amount of ratepayer funds from this area that would cover these sort of costs.
Steve Dodd, Omaha Bay
