Patronage results for August have been released and they are once again spectacular, especially for the rail network. The results are even more impressive when you realise there was one less weekday in August 2014 compared to August 2013.
Auckland public transport patronage totalled 73,174,770 passengers for the 12 months to Aug-2014, an increase of +0.6% on the 12 months to Jul-2014 and +6.6% on the 12 months to Aug-2013. August monthly patronage was 6,934,914, an increase of 434,383 boardings or +6.7% on Aug-2013, normalised to ~ +9.3% accounting for additional special event patronage, one less business day and one more weekend day in Aug-2014 compared to Aug-2013. Year to date patronage has grown by +6.3%.
Rail patronage totalled 11,729,130 passengers for the 12 months to Aug-2014, an increase of +1.5% on the 12 months to Jul-2014 and +16.0% on the 12 months to Aug-2013. Patronage for Aug-2014 was 1,181,117, an increase of 176,487 boardings or +17.6% on Aug-2013, normalised to ~ +19.0%. Year to date rail patronage has grown by +14.9%.
The Northern Express bus service carried 2,499,332 passenger trips for the 12 months to Aug-2014, an increase of +1.6% on the 12 months to Jul-2014 and +9.7% on the 12 months to Aug-2013. Northern Express bus service patronage for Aug-2014 was 253,328, an increase of 39,155 boardings or +18.3% on Aug-2013, normalised to ~ +19.9%. Year to date Northern Express patronage has grown by +17.5%.
Bus services excluding Northern Express carried 53,870,990 passenger trips for the 12 months to Aug-2014, an increase of +0.4% on the 12 months to Jul-2014 and +5.2% on the 12 months to Aug-2013. Bus services excluding Northern Express patronage for Aug-2014 was 5,119,656, an increase of 217,396 boardings or +4.4% on Aug-2013, normalised to ~ +7.4%. Year to date bus services excluding Northern Express patronage has grown by +4.8%.
Ferry services carried 5,075,318 passenger trips for the 12 months to Aug-2014, no change on the 12 months to Jul-2014 and an increase +1.4% on the 12 months to Aug-2013. Ferry services patronage for Aug-2014 was 380,813, an increase of 1,345 boardings or +0.4% on Aug-2013, normalised to ~ +2.0%. Year to date ferry patronage has decreased by -4.4%.
In many ways the results are completely unsurprising for regular users of PT as services have definitely been busy in recent months and my own personal experience is many of the services I catch are full to bursting – both train and bus. I wonder how much of the increase is coming as a result of the introduction of HOP which has made in considerably easier for people to use PT, especially on routes which are served by multiple operators. Even more impressive is we still have many major changes to go including the full roll-out of electric trains and the new bus network.
As mentioned the rail network continues to see spectacular growth with the August result one of the highest individual months Auckland has ever seen. Further it appears to not just be the result of the electric trains as some of the strongest growth has been on the Western line despite there having been no changes to the weekday timetable for about two years. The growth and lack of change to the timetable explains why on average 15 services a day are over or very close to being considered over capacity based on the number of people standing vs sitting. The growth also means that Auckland Transport only needs around an extra 370,000 trips by July 2015 to reach its recently lowered State of Intent target.
If the rate of growth was to continue at its current level then we would hit 20 million trips some time in early 2018. This is well ahead of the patronage target the government set for an early start to the CRL of being on track to hit 20 million trips by 2020.
Of course it’s not just the rail network growing strongly as the bus network is also seeing good growth, particularly on the Northern Express. Again this is a service I regularly use and many times the buses are completely packed to the point of leaving people behind – and I’m travelling counter peak (to the North Shore in the morning and to the City in the evening). There are also regular reports of huge queues for NEX services even later at night. I do think AT need to seriously look at bumping up off peak and counter peak frequencies. The later would be quite easy as there are a number of the buses travelling counter peak out of service so they can do a peak service run. The large increases on the rail network and Northern Express also highlight the pull that Rapid Transit services have (frequent largely grade separated routes). Other buses are also seeing good growth too.
Both rail and bus services are are likely to have been helped by improving punctuality with both modes managing to achieve 90.5% (although rail is based on arrival at destination and bus at departure from start of route).
As with last month the one disappointment in the figures has been the cycling ones which was down 8% compared to August 13 although there was above average rainfall in many parts of the country which may have been a factor.
Processing...
Looking forward to the briefing to the incoming Minister of Transport in the next 10 days. Wonder what comments will be made on both the demand for PT and the failing VKT numbers?
It will be ignored, I have an OIA report back on the info that fed into the GPS saying that in Auckland PT growth is predicted to be strong while VKT per capita will only seem low growth and remain below 2006 levels for another decade. Problem is they just ignore it.
I think Gerry thinks lower VKT per capita is a problem to be solved by building more roads. High VKT? The people have spoken and they want moar roads! Low VKT? People aren’t driving enough, need moar roads!
Yes; if the she floats then she’s a witch and must be killed, if she drowns, then….
Definitely PT is growing, and the rail, despite regular bitchy comments from Quax and co about how “no one uses the trains”. It seems that Aucklanders do – in droves, and in bus and train loads.
The World Cup 2011 induced “speed bump” is now well behind us, and we have moved on – both in time and in patronage numbers, from this brief one off effect and are now 73 million journeys and growing in a pretty linear fashion.
At this rate AT’s lowered SOI numbers will be a standing joke before too long – and not just amongst those standing train and bus users either – but amongst the rest of us too.
So how long before Quax and co start bollocking AT for having “too low” PT growth forecasts and AT’s “planning failures” ? About 2 months I reckon.
The real “stand out” here has to be the Manukau Line – presume thats mostly because of the MIT campus/station opening, and this is without any EMUs on that line as they started properly mid-September – so I imagine when the September stats are released, the Manukau Line will show, as big, if not, a bigger jump in numbers.
And I hear stories now of how the (new) 3 car EMUs on the Eastern Line are already nearly full at Peak morning runs – only 2 weeks after they were put in service there.
So, how long before At need to start putting longer trains there as well like 6 car EMUs and more frequent services? Seems they have tons of EMUs to start doing that – even for a short time until they open up the Southern and Western lines later this year and early next.
Good also to see (not shown here but the AT board agenda webtsite) that HOP usage for all journeys has climbed further, so its getting near 70% fare penetration – no doubt those cash fare hikes helped ram the message home – that “HOP is your friend”.
On a not so good note, I note the board reports are still syaing that they are “progressing the business case for integrated fares”. I’d have thought by now they would have had sign off and be planning the roll out.
Given we have the new network rolling out down south from next year, its time to get this part under way – so as not to “miss the bus” AT.
Yes Manukau growing strongly but it is off a lower base – still it’s good to see. Also yes hearing stories about packed EMUs already. I notice Onehunga ones are pretty busy in the mornings too.
Would have been phenomenal growth for Manukau if they’d carried rail to the shopping centre.
Ae. Daft decision by people then. Now they need to move the weight of the centre towards the station, which will happen where possible.
300m to the mall. Underneath the MIT campus. Opposite the future bus interchange/development site.
Not sure what is wrong with that.
On closer thought, how much of the growth on Eastern line is actually due to bus to train transfers happening now at Panmure station since it opened in January?
Anyone got details on the relative loadings of the Eastern line stations of Manukau and from Sylvia Park north?
Because if it was Panmure transfers causing the boost, Panmure should either be leading the pack or be the busiest of second busiest station on that line.
Anecdotally I’ve heard reports of “lots” of people now transferring at Panmure, would be good to hear if there is any actual data on the subject.
Presumably AT could work that out just by asking the HOP system for the numbers of people who got a bus to train (or v.v.) “transfer discount” applied because they tagged on or off one mode at Panmure and tagged off or on another mode at about the same time?
would also show in the relative loadings before and after Panmure. Perhaps the “weight based” passenger counters on the EMUs could give numbers using the train just before and just after Panmure. That would be a nice story I’m sure.
Presume AT has access to those figures.
AT being secretive about HOP data. Places like San Francisco all data is published the following month. Means advocates, academics, and others can get to work with straight away for everyone’s benefit.
Sorry can someone remind me, are the new EMUs supposed to be run as six car as the ‘base’ peak option? Is that how/when the Britomart access will be judged as full? Presumably running an Onehunga 3 car into Britomart at peak will waste that capacity.
The 57 units on order is enough for some but not all of the peak timetable to be run as six car sets. The Onehunga branch can’t take six car sets anyway, platforms are too short and not easily extended.
Only about half of peak services will be 6-car.
Also I would watch the Pukekohe extension is not made as a ‘sop’ to not doing the CRL. I can see your national government looking for any excuse to be dojng something without doing something, and outer suburban/regional always plays better to the base.
Re: excessive demand on the Northern Express: This could be solved in one of two possible ways, i.e. increasing service frequency and/or increasing vehicle capacity. In terms of the latter AT and Ritchies are trialing double-deckers already. It’d be good to know more about the success of this trial and whether it might be expanded. As I understand it the axle load limits set by NZTA are something of a barrier, and require double-deckers in NZ to have two rear-axles, whereas in other countries they get by with just one. We could, in the long run, almost double the capacity of the NEX service by upgrading the fleet to high-capacity vehicles.
It’s not just double-deck buses that require a third axle, so do 12m single deckers – one reason why NZ Bus has gone for smaller buses, I suspect..
Another way to increase vehicle capacity would be to make them longer, eg by articulation (as per the ARA of old). Modern buses can have double articulation, increasing capacity significantly.
Longer buses present a problem on city streets however, that double deckers do not.
Rail needs higher frequency (as much as Britomart can handle) and the busway generally has great frequencies at the peaks so needs higher cap vehicles. Plus better freqs counter and off peak.
With the current operations around Britomart and Victoria Park longer buses wouldn’t do much, the isn’t the stop and layover space free for them to use. Longer buses would just squeeze out other buses, one long bus taking he space of two short ones, which is why going up a deck makes more sense.
Both long and high buses have their problems, which many cities have solved – artic use is widespread worldwide (more so than double deckers).
The Northern Express route is nearly all away from city streets, and the ones it does use are pretty wide or straight (or both), pretty much ideal territory for artics.
Mike that just not true, the constraints on bus size and number are real at the city end, even if most of the run is elsewhere and has spare capacity.
…and at the busway stations. Already the platforms get congested with more than three buses arriving at a time. Artics would only make that worse.
Yes we could put on larger buses but counter peak services are only every 10 minutes and while your standing on a busway platform you can often see one or two out of service NEX buses drive past on the motorway. I think moving the NEX to at least every 5 minutes in each direction at peak times would be the best first step and likely to help encourage additional patronage while doing so.
https://at.govt.nz/media/340450/northern-express_may-2011-web.pdf
Try every 5 minutes 6am to 9pm everyday both ways…….
And at least 8 an hour til midnight. Sick of being on over full NEX buses, and it will go mental when RPTP is implemented.
More double deckers to add capacity during peak (to keep labour to a minimum), and then using what we have off-peak to up the frequency.
Unconfirmed reports that Ritchies have 20 DD’s on order, 3 for delivery this year and 17 next.
Matt – are per-capita boardings up or are these increases being driven by population growth? Might be difficult to tell until SNZ release their 2014 population estimates. On the one hand this might not matter much as increased patronage is good, but if we’re looking for mode shift then we’d be hoping to also convert existing car users.
good question – I suspect population growth is driving some of the patronage growth, but would not expect the former to be running at more than say 5% p.a. So PT boardings per capita is likely to be increasing, albeit at a more moderate pace than overall growth in PT patronage.
Well population is growing at about 1.5% pa, so public transport seems to be growing four times faster than population so surely per capita rates will be inching up (from a very low base).
Nicolas, I think Auckland’s population growth is likely to be much more than 1.5% p.a. at the moment. I’ll buy you a beer if it’s not …
Reason being that in the last year 1) NZ’s net migration has surged to 10-year highs and 2) house prices in Auckland have increased considerably, and much more so than other parts of the country except Chch.
So I’m picking 2-3% p.a. population growth, so the increase in PT trips per capita will be whatever the gap between that and raw patronage growth.
Yes waiting on Stats NZ but based on their pop increase predictions PT boardings per capita is up too by around 2 boardings per person over the last year. Currently at about 47 trips per person.
It is very very clear from these figures that what we have been consistently saying is absolutely right: deliver real high quality Rapid Transit and the people of Auckland will respond with enthusiastic uptake. And that this is gold economically for the city, the region, and the nation.
This is why we developed the CFN, to show that it is possible, affordable and desirable to do this.
Even if the government doesn’t want to hear this evidence we still should expect the MoT, NZTA, AT, and AC to repeating it over and over. There is no possible better investment in Auckland right now than in a region wide Rapid Transit network. It is affordable, it meets the public’s stated and revealed preferences, and returns multiples of value on the sums invested.
Auckland has a unique set of problems and opportunities compared to the rest of the country. It is different in scale, density, and growth, and requires tailor-made solutions. City shaped ones.
On the issue of whether it’s new or established residents driving the growth it is interesting that cities such as San Francisco and Washington are seeing that their increases in carfree households are mostly coming from new residents: http://greatergreaterwashington.org/post/24180/88-of-new-dc-households-are-car-free/
And that changes in commute habits are more likely to occur with some other change like moving house or job. Either way the best thing the city and gov can do gain more riders from either group is make sure that the necessary high quality service is there:
http://www.citylab.com/cityfixer/2014/09/a-universal-lesson-in-breaking-the-habit-of-car-commuting/380764/
Is the following statement correct? Is there an extra zero on the number for this statement?
“The growth also means that Auckland Transport only needs around an extra 370,000 trips per day to reach its recently lowered State of Intent target.”
If no thats a lot of extra trips..
haha good spotting, should be 370k trips over the rest of the financial year (to 30 June 2015)
At 1.5% monthly growth, should hit 12m this October (if not September). 🙂
Note that the 18% increase is still based on investment during project DART, and doesn’t yet include
– the spark effect (except on the Onehunga line; there were relatively few EMU’s on the Eastern line in August)
– the attraction of increased speeds (which aren’t yet in place)
– the increased capacity of the EMU’s means fewer passengers are put off by having to wait for the next service
– the bus network redesign in the south and east
– integrated fares
So there are still more increases to come. Are there enough train carriages on order ? Several major rail projects in Australia underestimated demand for the improved service, and had to quickly place further vehicle orders. These include Perth’s Mandurah line, Adelaide’s tram upgrade, and Victoria’s Regional Fast Rail Project. The latter started with an initial order of 38 new DMU carriages, but there are now 134 in service and a further 40 on order. How would AT arrange an additional carriage order ? It’s not currently in the budget.
We will need new trains, what a great problem to have! Especially as there are still those who interview their own prejudices and conclude that no one is using the rail network.
When will we need them? Before CRL? When it becomes apparent that we are working the current network as hard as possible and three car sets are just not sufficient when they are deployed we make a case to government for a special grant. After all as 140million can be found to avoid one set of traffic lights the the case for a similar sum for additional trains will be very easy to support.
They won’t be hard to get CAF making more, we have the depot and support contract all set.
We already know that our demand modelling for PT is always wrong on the low side because of the pro-driving assumptions built into the models, we expect that to be the case now too for all the reasons you point out above.
I just can’t get worried about this; I repeat, what a great problem to have.
I’m looking forward to that problem, because when we get there, there is likely to be undeniable evidence for transit in Auckland.
Currently there can be councilors that don’t believe, whether they aren’t served by it or they have other imagined issues.
My only question is whether it will be before or after the second Waitemata crossing makes it to the front of the queue.
The number of trains on order is enough to run the network at its current maximum peak capacity, with about half the trains as six carriage sets and half as three. The isn’t much more they could buy sets for, perhaps another dozen or so might make every train on the network six carriages.
However, that ‘problem’ of peak trains really only relates to commuters going to Britomart on weekday mornings, and to a lesser extent coming out again in the afternoon. The question is how much growth is being driven by weekday commute time trips to Britomart, and how much growth/potential there is happening at other times and other places.
The commuter peak is only about four hours a day, five days a week. Twenty hours. The non-peak is about 100 hours a week by comparison. There is massive growth potential at non-peak times that can basically just climb and climb without constraint.
Likewise with trips that don’t go to Britomart, and trips travelling in the counterpeak direction, we are far away from not having enough trains to meet those demands.
Yes, and as cities grow, then the ratio of peak/base trips reduces, i.e. proportionally more off-peak trips occur. Brisbane, for example, already has more trips occurring in “off-peak” periods, as well as faster growth in off-peak trips.
We really need off-peak fares asap.
Yes. Should be one flat fare of $1.90 for the whole network between 10am and 4pm. That would encourage massive growth and I am sure would actually help the fare box recovery in sheer numbers.
Flat off-peak fare is quite an interesting concept. Do you know of any cities that have implemented such a product?
Given capacity available off-peak, then the marginal short run costs of carrying some extra kms is close to zero, i.e. costs to system are determined solely by the act of boarding. Only problem is it will stimulate more demand for long distance off-peak services and in the long run create the conditions under which more services are required.
On balance I think I prefer a % discount, i.e. 50% fares off-peak, but fare structure remains the same. Open to being convinced otherwise …
Doesn’t the New York MTA charge a flat-fee to ride the Subway (its $2 from memory).
Not sure if its off-peak only, but makes it cheap and easy to get around the place.
I went from Lower Manhattan (TriBeCa) to JFKs SkyTrain – quite some distance some 15 or so stops – for a flat fare of $2 last time I was there and didn’t need to change trains either.
Stu Donavan – Actually not off peak, no. Christchurch and Prague (world’s most used Metro system) are two cities I have lived in that offer an all day flat fare as their tickets are time based not distance.
I am a big fan of a flat fare as I think it evens out in a more holistic sense. People closer in pay more per km, but have access to far more services and so have the option of lowering their travel costs by not driving.
People further out, who will pay less per km, usually have much less in the way of options for PT and so less chance of lowering their overall travel costs – they probably just use PT to get to work.
A 50% discount also sounds good though. As you say, the additional cost of supplying travel services in off peak are pretty much zero. It makes no sense to charge the same at 11am as at 8am.
Vancouver do a off peak flat fare (basically a single stage price) after 6:30pm and all weekend and public holidays.
I’ve observed a significant growth in counterpeak and offpeak trips on the western line – usually find a dozen or more people waiting at Ranui for weekend trains, and a few get off the morning Swanson services.
But there is also still strong growth on peak services, in particular from inner stations – Kingsland has grown from a dozen boarding each morning service to several dozen.
Does anyone know where I could find out how many people travel each day between Newmarket and Britomart by Train so I can include it on a diagram of people movements?
HOP data! We all would like that HOP data, perhaps you can use your engineery powers to get hold of it?!
I will try but I have been using my engineery powers to annoy the hell out of AT lately!
Wellingtons August Patronage figures are now in.
And they are still ahead on rail usage, but out only just – 55,649 ahead (11,784,779 v Auckland 11,729,130) on a 12 month rolling basis to end of August 2014.
They seem to have a Sparks effect of their own as well, with annual rail patronage up about 460,000 over same 12 months a year earlier otherwise we’d have passed them by now.
Which is the only mode that seems to be growing.
I expect Auckland will definitely surpass Wellington as the leading rail patronage city in September, as Auckland bursts through the 12m annual figure for rail on its way to 20m+
Overall we are just over than twice Wellingtons PT usage on a 12 month rolling basis (Auckland: 73m versus Wellingtons 36m)
Yes was just looking at that last night.
The Wellington figures are at http://www.metlink.org.nz/customer-services/public-transport-facts-and-figures/patronage/, and interesting is the way that the Kapiti Line has overtaken the Hutt Valley Line as the busiest one – a few years ago the HVL was 20% ahead . It’s not just that the Waikanae electrification has increased traffic, but also that HVL patronage has been on a level or downward trend for the last five years – doubtless helped recently by the large amounts of money spent on the SH2 Dowse to Petone project.
But NZTA are planning to restore the status quo ante: the effect of Transmission Gully will be to reduce Kapiti patronage by 20+% below what it would otherwise have been, according to figures they presented to the TGM BoI.