Stats:

  • Posts 1,888
  • Words in Posts 1,415,159
  • Comments 30,940
  • Words in Comments 2,690,256
  • Tags 303

Staging the CBD Rail Tunnel

As I have outlined in the past, Britomart station is a major bottleneck in Auckland’s rail network. There are only two tracks in and out of the station, which means that – at the moment – only 18 trains can get in and out of the station in an hour. By the end of this year that will be increased to 24 trains per hour, due to both the lines being able to operate ‘bi-directionally’ (trains running either way up and down the line causing fewer conflicts between trains). However, as I detailed in my post on Auckland’s rail plan a few days ago, it is highly likely that Britomart will reach capacity by 2016 – if not earlier.

The solution, as outlined in that rail plan, is for a rail tunnel to be built between Britomart and Mt Eden stations. This would create somewhat of a “loop” around the CBD and would mean that trains don’t have to terminate and Britomart and leave the same way they came in. This would double the capacity of the station and certainly at least buy us a few more decades before any further significant upgrades to Auckland’s railway system are necessary. The idea of a CBD rail tunnel has actually been around for about 80 years – first proposed in the 1920s. Further iterations of the plan emerged in the 1950s, while a similar proposal almost happened in the 1970s before an incoming National government vetoed the idea. Anyway, a few years ago the idea emerged once again, as rail patronage started to “take off” subsequent to Britomart’s opening. A study was commissioned, and outlined the following alignment as the prefered option:

CBDloop-route Basically we end up with two additional stations – Wellesley (Midtown) and Karangahape. This would improve rail access to all parts of the CBD significantly and I think there is potential for the midtown station in particular to become even more popular than Britomart, given its location in the heart of Auckland’s CBD. Crucially, what we also end up with is the ability for trains from the west to access the CBD far quicker than they do at the moment as well as the capacity improvements that I talked about above. One way the system could operate is outlined below (assuming we end up with an airport line at some point):

CBDloopcopy

Now this rail tunnel is obviously GREAT. Once electrification is complete I think it is Auckland’s most important transport project. More important than another harbour crossing (as the current situation works quite well), more important than rail to the airport (in fact you can’t actually have rail to the airport until you build this due to the Britomart bottleneck) and – in my opinion – more important than the Waterview Connection. The problem with this project is of course the price, which is fairly hefty at around $1.5 billion. It is worth noting that this is a very similar price to that of the Waterview Connection, but when we consider the current government’s transport funding priorities I can’t really see the CBD rail loop managing to find $1.5 billion of money any time soon. However, the capacity issues with Britomart are fairly critical – so could we do this in some sort of staged way? Perhaps so:

CBD-stepsThe above image proposes a three-step way in which we could build the CBD rail tunnel and future rail to the North Shore.

Step One: build a new two-track cut and cover tunnel along the route shown in blue. At Quay Park Junction organise the tracks so that ideally the Eastern Line can feed into this track without having to cross over any other lines. The Western & Southern Lines could also access this track if necessary, but typically they would continue to use the existing entrance to Britomart. Hopefully this would coincide with either triple or quadrupling the NIMT down to Papakura.There would be a new two platform station directly to the north of Britomart. The station would be shallower than the current Britomart station (immediately under Quay Street if possible). At a guess this project surely couldn’t cost much more than $300-$400 million. The station wouldn’t have to be particularly grand – I imagine it as something similar to your typical London Underground station, linked to Britomart’s first level down (where the toilets are). There may be a case for bi-furcated platforms here.

Step Two: continues the new line into the CBD rail loop. Link to Mt Eden. Step one means that step two could probably be put off for a few more years – then perhaps we will see what happens to patronage and whether there’s a point in having a four track tunnel. The Western Line would eventually link with the Howick/Botany Line along these tracks. Similarly a future Cirle Line could also pass through these tracks. (Hence the potential need for bifurcated tracks).

Step Three: takes the tracks that current go to platforms 1 and 5 at Britomart, continues them straight ahead, underneath the two tracks in Green (remember they are shallower than the current Britomart tracks) and eventually underneath Customs Street and Fanshawe Street to the North Shore.

Of course there are still some issues, like dealing with where the green and red lines intersect. There are also issues relating to whether the existing buildings (of future buildings that have been consented) could work in with this design. Furthermore, it does go against what is being worked towards at the moment (the very top image of this post). However, what step one of this proposal would do – quite crucially – is over a way in which the capacity constraints of Britomart could be eased as a relatively low cost and also relatively quickly. While the other benefits of the CBD rail tunnel are significant, easing the bottleneck is the most important and will be required first.

4 comments to Staging the CBD Rail Tunnel

  • Nicholas O'Kane

    I like the staging idea.

    My main problem is the stage 1 bit. My worry is a government might build it, then go problem fixed, and not do stage 2. Instead I propose the Mt-Eden-Pitt St bit be built first, with half the western line trains using it (the other half the usual route). Then future governments will be more, not less likely to build stage 2.

    In fact, the best option could be instead of expanding the present Britomart access, build a whole new east-west tunnel, from Parnell under the Domain to a Univesity station, before going to the Wellesley St staion, before going to a tankfarm or Ponsonby station to head of to north shore. This would add rail access to the University (one of the few downsides to Britomart is they removed the old station, closer to uni) and compliment the North South tunnel, and give greater potential for future growth.

    On another issue, i read all your old posts. There is a 5 year 03-08 gap, and the 2003 and earlier posts say nothing about transport (that I can find) and almost all the posts are about your personal life. You mention quite a lot a person called Nats. Who is she? (you don’t have to answer this if you don’t want to.

  • Regarding the CBD rail loop, yes I do see that doing stage 1 could result in that being all that ever gets done – and that would be rather less than ideal.

    On the other hand, the capacity issues at Britomart will start to wreak havoc on our rail system in about five years time I reckon. There’s no chance we’ll have the full loop consented, funded and built by that stage – in fact we’ll be lucky to have it completed by 2020 I reckon. Therefore we NEED to do something to keep things going in the meanwhile – and that’s the best outcome.

    Regarding the blogging. I have had a personal blog since 2001 – the whole thing is here: http://www.jarbury.net

    I am slowly transfering the posts from that blog over to http://jarbury.wordpress.com – after which I will shut down the old site and change the domain name over. Up until late last year my blog was simply a personal blog, although I found myself writing less and less often and felt like it needed a change. Then I started writing about transport issues and it has really taken off. I do plan to keep a personal blog going too in the future (that’s why I am transfering over the posts, wordpress if far superior to the blogging tool I used for that site). And yeah, ex girlfriend.

  • Nicholas O'Kane

    Can I ask if there have been any studies on this relating to cost/benefit analysis of this project or others (Avondale-Southdown, Airport link, integrated ticketing). I know you hat the normal costs/benefit analysis, but that is what public transort funding is often decided by.

    I did take a look at the internet for such cost/benefit ratios. Didn’t quite find what I was looking for, but I did find http://www.arta.govt.nz/assets/arta%20publications/2008/Planning%20for%20rapid%20transport%20corridors%20in%20sw%20auckland.pdf placing the toatl cost the Airport link at $1.4-$2.1bn depending on which route is used (not good). You might also be interested in http://www.arc.govt.nz/albany/fms/main/Documents/Transport/RLTS/RTLS2010WP21%20Strategic%20Option%203%20Public%20Transport%20Network.pdf which has some not very detailed maps showing the routes proposed by Parsons Brinckerhoff for their proposed metros.

  • I haven’t come across a cost-benefit analysis of the CBD rail loop. I don’t dislike the IDEA of a cost-benefit analysis – as obviously when spending any money you should analyse what benefits you’re going to get from spending that money and use that to work out whether or not it’s worth it.

    The problem I generally has is the way in which the cost-benefit analysis is undertaken. In particular, the importance placed in time savings benefits for roading projects when most of the benefit will simply be reduced commuting times (so therefore more time people can spend at home). If increasing private leisure time was really that valuable, the government would buy everyone a dishwasher.

Leave a Reply

  

  

  


*

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>