|
Resolution
number FR/2021/78
MOVED by Chairperson A Baker, seconded by Deputy
Chairperson A Fulljames:
That
the Franklin Local Board:
a) note the urgent decision on 7 May 2021 towards
a governing body submission on congestion charging in Auckland; with input as
follows:
· support in principle the implementation of
congestion pricing in Auckland with the following feedback to be considered
in the development of Auckland Council’s submission to the Transport
and Infrastructure Committee inquiry into congestion pricing in Auckland:
i) support
congestion charging as a full replacement to the Regional Fuel Tax as the
preferred option noting point (ii) below. If not adopted, as a minimum, the
congestion charge should offset the Regional Fuel Tax to enable faster
delivery of much needed safety and improvements in areas outside the city
centre.
ii) suggest
that a clear purpose for implementing congestion charging is critical. The
primary driver for congestion charging should inform how revenue is used. For
example, if the primary driver is to accelerate delivery of the Auckland
Transport Alignment Project (ATAP), including climate change mitigations
identified within, then funding would be allocated to a mix of roading,
public transport and active transport projects. If the primary driver is to
reduce emissions, then investment in electric vehicle (EV) incentives and
infrastructure may be a priority alongside public transport development.
iii) note
that a congestion charge will create equity issues both in terms of those who
cannot afford the implications of congestion charging (financial
deprivation), but also those who don’t have existing public transport
(PT) services/alternative solutions available to them - the transport choice
deprived and physically isolated communities of Auckland.
iv) note
that effective and accessible public transport services and public transport
infrastructure beyond the central area/what is planned within the Regional
Land Transport Plan (RLTP) will need to be a priority to enable uptake of
transport alternatives e.g. park and ride, rapid transit, cross-city network
enhancement - to ensure equity
v) note
that Auckland’s linear transport system is a unique issue that needs to
be considered in the design of the congestion charging system. There is a
risk of creating ‘rat-runs’ through established neighbourhoods as
users avoid charging gateways. This would create a need for additional
roading investment (to make these routes fit for purpose) and generate
unintended quality of life implications for residents. Work that considers
how similar challenges were addressed in overseas examples should be
undertaken.
vi) support
congestion charging being implemented initially in the central city, staged
to coincide with the opening of the City Rail Link (CRL), noting that
transport options to the city centre are already available for high
population areas. There should be no assumption however that initial
expenditure is based in that central area where there are already services in
place
vii) agree
that congestion charges/tolls should be considered to fund new roading
projects and projects in early development e.g. Mill Road and Pukekohe
expressway
vii)
express concern at
possible operating cost of technology using the existing tolling systems
(gantry mounted plate recognition cameras) and suggest that more modern and
cost-efficient methods are investigated as alternatives to maximise return on
the scheme e.g. GPS in cars and phones as used in Singapore
ix) support
exemptions for trailers, emergency vehicles, public transport network buses
and motorcycles. Would consider pricing that supports equity, including for
those groups that are financially deprived or that are
transport-option-deprived
x) believe
that organisations representing heavy vehicle interests are best placed to
comment on equitable approach to heavy vehicle charging
xi) suggest
that Auckland Transport (AT) lead the development of the project as the
agency best-placed to understand local constraints and implications
xii) support
charging occurring between times of the day where congestion and current
demand is greatest e.g. charging between 6.30am and 7.00pm or similar
xiii) note that
like the Regional Fuel Tax, clear and publicly accessible communication
outlining which projects benefit from revenue generated from congestion
charges is critical.
b) note that staff anticipate that the
council will continue to be involved in this work as a full decision-making
partner and request that staff ensure that local boards are enabled and
supported to fully participate and engage in the project on behalf of local
communities.
CARRIED
|
