Sign In / Register
Frustration at the state of local roads and how little funding Rodney receives compared to city projects was voiced at a Local Board workshop on November 22.
A panel of Auckland Transport (AT) staff gave a detailed presentation on its forward works programme and priorities for Rodney and Auckland for the coming year and beyond, with a view to getting feedback from board members over the next three months.
AT’s executive general manager for service delivery, Andrew Allen, said AT had a pool of money, albeit one subject to budget cuts, for delivering a range of outcomes across a dozen different programmes, including public transport, parking, cycling, capital projects, road safety and road renewals.
“We’re sharing our thinking on different projects and we want to hear if there is stuff missing or shouldn’t be there,” he said. “This is our (current) thinking and our projects to deliver in the next financial year, but there’s no way this is locked in and it will be subject to change.”
The AT capital programme for 2023/24 came in for particular scrutiny from members. This included $60.3 million for ‘Cycling & Active Modes’, of which more than half was going to urban cycleways (and a further $10 million on just one track), while of the $100.9 million for roads, more than a third was going on a road safety programme.
“Why do we have the road safety programme at $35 million and the unsealed road programme at just $6 million?” asked Wellsford’s Colin Smith. “That just seems stupid to me because everything in unsealed road improvement is safety. That just seems completely out of whack.”
Warkworth member Ivan Wagstaff was rendered almost speechless at where the unsealed road improvement budget sat in the scheme of things.
“This slide also shows you that there’s $10 million going towards a cycleway in Mangere and we get $6 million for the whole of Rodney for unsealed roads,” he said. “The inequity on display is … We don’t get urban cycleways. There are all these things we don’t get. It’s difficult to look at things like this.”
Allen said he got the point they were making and the apparent urban focus, but stressed that members had until February to make their feelings known via feedback on the programme.
Board member Michelle Carmichael asked if there was scope to push for reprioritisation of funding between different projects, particularly if there was a more urgent need, such as shifting cycleway funding to fixing a road where landslips had occurred.
“You’re welcome to give us any feedback you like – you have information on all the different programmes and level of engagement with board – if you want more engagement, let us know,” he said.
Board members have until March to provide feedback on 2024/25 programmes, which AT will then review and make adjustments to work programmes “where appropriate”. Finalised versions will be presented to the board in May before being signed off in June.
To see the AT presentation in full, go to https://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/about-auckland-council/how-auckland-council-works/local-boards/all-local-boards/rodney-local-board/Pages/rodney-local-board-meetings.aspx and click on the workshop programme for November 22.
