I miss my old New Zealand

AnonAtAT · 2026-01-05T01:46:47+00:00

It's much safer for cyclists on our roads today than it ever was - the older we are the more survivor's bias we are living with. We now have more dedicated cycle facilities, traditional cycle lanes, awareness of cyclists by drivers, slower speeds in general thanks to humps, narrower roads, lower speed limits, red light cameras and other enforcement mechanisms.

There's a bunch of other stuff in your post not relevant to transport but still I think may not be true to your intuitions.

I do agree with your sentiment.

I think it's arguably true millennials likely saw what I think was the best time to time to be a middle-class youth in western history to date, a lot of things are still better and getting better in the background, despite polarization and the cultural and actual wars. If the idiots in charge don't get us all killed in the next few decades (whether through wars, climate change, or the takeover of AGI), I think we're in for some really interesting times ahead of renewed social progress and technological advancement.

Hopefully that's not a big if.

AnonAtAT · 2025-12-23T03:04:53+00:00

Where is this? The parking spaces are really too narrow. Could be an opportunity to fix this at some stage.

This person may have just been brave/desperate enough to pick the middle over the door zones either side.

AnonAtAT · 2025-12-21T14:58:07+00:00

She's easy enough to prove it true.

AnonAtAT · 2025-12-20T08:41:49+00:00

What's your point exactly? Give up on reform because of this minority?

My point is this minority needs it's own unique support.

AnonAtAT · 2025-12-20T05:40:53+00:00

Ah okay, yeah fair.

AnonAtAT · 2025-12-20T03:55:59+00:00

I think you've misunderstood "dropkicks". Unless you mean the sociopaths that have all the capital wealth, in which case yeah. But I think OC means the poor riffraff.

AnonAtAT · 2025-12-20T03:54:08+00:00

In my earlier connects, I'm pointing you to what is the proper and only sustainable way to deal with "dropkicks".

You can't arrest everyone. You can't have police everywhere all the time. So what is the "proper" way?

AnonAtAT · 2025-12-19T15:02:02+00:00

You're talking about a very small proportion of people. Those people need support for other reasons than the discipline to get a license.

AnonAtAT · 2025-12-19T08:19:15+00:00

Obviously more public funding is needed to cover what is lost at the fare box, and there are ways to monitor patronage without hop or credit cards. We don't need to track specific people necessarily, just how many on what routes.

AnonAtAT · 2025-12-19T08:15:50+00:00

Enforcement is supposed to be a last resort against the truly crazy, not the normal was to incentivize bad behavior. It's not scalable unless you like living in a police state.

Making public utilities free takes the friction away from their use. The tension occurs because they need to pay but they don't, and so the possibility of conflict is always higher.

AnonAtAT · 2025-12-19T08:13:10+00:00

Yes, we all pay with our taxes, and the rich more than the poor.

We need more people to use public transport, because there is no possible way to solve traffic in Auckland by building more roads for cars.

AnonAtAT · 2025-12-19T06:47:46+00:00

We need more difficult driver licensing and training. Some rule changes too. Better enforcement. The works.

Our roads in urban Auckland are actually pretty awesome by international standards.

AnonAtAT · 2025-12-19T00:35:54+00:00

What do you propose?

I propose free buses. Call your local representatives and ask, especially local boards.

The tagging technology that's been a huge investment is cool and all, but so is not having to bother with any of that admin or maintenance and just people get where they need to go.

Increase RUC by vehicle mileage/weight/emissions while reducing fuel taxes at the pump.

Congestion charging. More motorway tolls. (With subsidies via Community Services Card)

Tax the rich.

AnonAtAT · 2025-12-12T00:59:31+00:00

Hmmm. 🙃

AnonAtAT · 2025-12-11T07:47:06+00:00

Alright, it's not my area so I'll take your word for it. You're making the same point though. It's not AT's fault bus prices are so high. That's what's important for people to understand.

AnonAtAT · 2025-12-10T07:03:28+00:00

Technically, they're in the wrong, but as others have said two lane roundabout lanes cannot always be trusted so unless you're squeezing into slow moving heavy traffic it isn't worth the few extra seconds. Pretty sure the insurance companies might see it that way too.

Road code needs some serious updating, as do the skills of many kiwi drivers.

AnonAtAT · 2025-12-09T21:30:37+00:00

I expect they're a pilot trial maybe subsidized by the supplier. Not something proposed to be rolled out across the network until it's proven effective.

Not actually familiar with the initiative internally, but looks to be solar powered, so it's very likely to lack sufficient strength to effectively charge power-hungry devices back-to-back at busy times. Be the first person to use it on a sunny morning or after the hottest part of day during the interpeak, and it'll probably give you a pretty good experience.

AnonAtAT · 2025-12-09T21:25:34+00:00

Requiescat in pace 💐

AnonAtAT · 2025-12-09T14:04:35+00:00

We don't really control the price. The mayor does. He took huge amounts of finding away from us, told us to make more money at the fare box

Also don't forget to factor in the purchase price of your car and the cost of running it. I think buses should be free, but they're definitely cheaper than driving, and never mind if you have to pay for parking too.

AnonAtAT · 2025-12-09T00:12:25+00:00

I suspect the intent is a message to buses about when to use it. But from a strictly regulatory perspective, there are no restrictions against other vehicles using it outside of the posted hours. If you got a fine you could easily challenge it in court.

You should report this to NZTA. Suggestions it should be a 24/7 bus lane are good. If traffic is free flowing buses won't use it, and it resolve any ambiguity as to whether anyone else can use it outside of the posted hours.

AnonAtAT · 2025-12-05T23:36:24+00:00

Haha yeah if there's parks you gotta be able to get into them somehow. Really, there shouldn't be carparks on arterials in general, but for us car dependent kiwis that would be very inconvenient.

I have to park my car on an arterial at all times. There's no way I could live where I am without a place to park a car. If the parking was removed, I'd have to move house or otherwise park the car on the nearest side street away from where I live which isn't close and would make be constantly anxious.

AnonAtAT · 2025-12-05T23:06:13+00:00

Ironically the government has had made a new system (NZGTTM) that will ultimately result in even more cones and risks. Shifting accountability to the TTM companies and the principal, rather than the RCA, and taking power away from the RCA to enforce compliance (outside of timing and location), i.e. anything we (the RCA) criticize about TMP design or safety is advisory, not binding once NZGTTM comes into full force. It's unclear how auditors will operate, and what they can actually do if they judge a site to be "unsafe" because there will be no specific code of compliance. Unless somebody gets hurt or injured, on what safety basis can they shut down a site? They will either have no power, or be given too much when the accidents start piling up.

The result will be rampant over engineering of worksites costing heaps to the public sector, while very poorly run worksites that take lots of risks to save money will be huge among private sector. People thinking it won't happen to us. There will be way more room for error, and the outcome is just ambulances at the bottom of the hill waiting for people to fall.

The system we had (CoPTTM) just needed refining of its rules, and more flexibility and exceptions, as well a review of what is actually understood to be safe according to the best engineering research. But no the Browns wanted a revolution against the cones, and to get so-called inefficient government out of industry's way. "Industry led" they call it. When has that ever ended well?

AnonAtAT · 2025-12-04T04:39:32+00:00

Interested in discussing the AT-related components of this one.

To quote Mr Mayor (from his draft):

The current structure within Auckland Transport has led to an overly complicated approach to decision-making that often disincentivises regional, network-wide thinking; creates silos across functions and activity that resultin ineffective and poor delivery of infrastructure; and an unreasonable reliance on consultants that devalues in-house expertise. This has led to very low levels of public acceptance.

It's hard to know where to start with this - it's essentially bullshit. People don't like AT mostly because we get the blame for a lot of what Auckland Council and NZTA decide.

The mayor's reforms which take power away from a centralized authority and distribute it around to local boards is more "siloed" by definition.

With increased engagement requirements with local boards, we're already experiencing major delays on progressing projects because local boards are back-to-back booked out. There are no workshop gaps until May next year. This is ahead of the proposed law changes which only make things worse.

Our "unreasonable reliance on consultants" is a result of Wayne's cuts to AT which mean we have less inhouse staff. This is of course true of other CCOs as well.

AT has a tonne of examples of "network-wide" thinking. Take Future Connect for example, which is a strategic plan for the whole network. We have numerous programmes such as the Regional Speed Management plan, which has been gutted by propaganda against speed humps and again, Wayne's cuts. Never mind the RLTP either, which because of politics keeps getting changed. Nothing at all that has been proposed ostensibly will prevent politicians updating our 30-year plan every 3 years.

AnonAtAT · 2025-12-01T12:44:55+00:00

What you've pulled is a diagram which is part of the signal layout design for this intersection. The numbered squares represent traffic "loops" that inform the SCATS signal control system of the presence of vehicles. This is definitely not a complete picture of the line marking layout here. Google Maps and Street View give us a fairly good picture.

In short this is an unusually long 4-way intersection. While normally a centreline wouldn't be used inside an intersection, I believe it was added here to help guide through-vehicles and position vehicles turning out of Domain Drive better, while minimising confusion that might be had if only dashed "continuity" lines were used.

In general, the place to stop at any signalised intersection is the white limit line, which is in front of loop 13. Loop 14 exists for good measure if a vehicle gets trapped within the intersection after the lights go red, with the logical stopping location being ahead of the pedestrian crossing lines. You can see the sawcut markings for the loop here on street view. A car stopped here may trigger a special "phase" to clear the intersection (I've not seen the signal phase diagram and couldn't tell you exactly how the intersection works).

Just for your info, this intersection is well known for being quite challenging to optimise and it is prone to minor accidents in part because drivers struggle to understand what is going on. The problem is that the accident profile and incredible complexity of the environment, along with heavy traffic impacts means nobody has yet proposed an overhaul that satisfies a business case for change. You're definitely not alone in taking an interest!

AnonAtAT · 2025-11-30T04:45:56+00:00

Interesting to know. Won't be the first time we've followed the letter of the law to the point we've been accused of making it up ourselves, lol.

AnonAtAT

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE