While it’s exceptionally pleasing to see Super City mayoral candidates almost falling over themselves at the moment to promise Auckland significant development of its rail network, an interesting issue was highlighted in a NZ Herald article today about the idea of rail to the North Shore. In particular, current North Shore mayor and hopeful Super City mayoral candidate Andrew Williams was promoting railway and road tunnels to the North Shore as the big project that he will push for.
Here’s what he said:
North Shore Mayor Andrew Williams is promising a new harbour crossing of four tunnels, two each for rail and motor vehicles, as part of his bid to be the first Super City mayor.
Mr Williams said he would begin by building the rail tunnels by 2018, followed by the road tunnels in 2022. The road tunnels would effectively be State Highway 1 through lanes connecting with Spaghetti Junction, leaving the harbour bridge as the main route to downtown Auckland.
Current Auckland City mayor is a bit more circumspect in his vision for rail, possibly because he doesn’t want to upset the government’s holiday highway plans.
Auckland City Mayor John Banks said the plans were promises costing billions of dollars, although he has promised progress on a $1.5 billion underground rail tunnel through Britomart so 36 trains an hour can run under Albert St to Mt Eden and back.
Mr Banks said the rail tunnel could be built with infrastructure bonds, but his priority was projects already started.
Current Manukau City mayor Len Brown is perhaps the most visionary of the three in terms of his vision for rail in Auckland, while at the same time being a bit more realistic in terms of the timeframe for delivery such large projects – and also seems to realise the need to finish certain parts of the rail upgrade before moving on to other parts. Here’s what he said:
The other heavyweight mayoral contender, Manukau Mayor Len Brown is promising to complete plans for rail to the airport, the rail tunnel and rail to the North Shore within 18 months of coming to office. Then build them within 15 years.
Asked how Wellington would view the plans, Mr Brown said he was confident the Government would listen to the vision and mandate of the new Super City mayor.
As I’m sure all regular readers of this blog know, it all has to start with the CBD rail tunnel. There’d be no point starting with the North Shore Line as that wouldn’t fix train capacity problems with the current system as there’s still be only one way for trains from the south, east and west to get into the city. There’d also be no point starting with an Airport Line because the rail system wouldn’t have the capacity to squeeze the extra trains into the CBD.
In terms of the Airport Line, the benefits of this project are potentially quite difficult to measure as they will include things like Auckland’s international image, the improved experience for tourists (potentially encouraging other tourists), a reduction in the amount of money needed to be spent on taxi fares and so forth. I do think that it’s probably Auckland’s second-most needed rail project (although a southeast RTN might give it a good run for its money).
Which leaves us with the issue of a railway line to the North Shore. Certainly it is a grave mistake in the planning of Auckland over the years that a railway line was not put across a harbour bridge (although it would have had a different design because the current one is too steep for trains), and certainly in the longer term the busway will be overwhelmed by passengers and require upgrading to a full train line. But is it really a top priority for Auckland to look at spending probably up to $3 billion on rail tunnels under the harbour and upgrading the busway to a rail standard (which would require huge earthworks and extensive tunnelling around the Sunset Road ridge)? In fact, Andrew Williams has said that he wants the line to run all the way up to Orewa – potentially adding another few hundred million to the cost.
The main reason why I question whether a North Shore railway line is a priority or not is because there is a pretty brand spanking new busway that was completed just over two years ago at the cost of around $400 million. The Northern Busway has proven to be a raging success, with patronage on the Northern Express continuing to increase at around 20% over the same month the year before. In fact, the Northern Busway has been so successful that it’s contributed to the number of vehicles crossing the Harbour Bridge falling over the past few years. With so many other projects around Auckland crying out for funds – and with those projects often being pretty small like just small road widenings so that bus priority measures can be improved – it’s a bit of a stretch to say that spending many billions of dollars on a railway line to replace a perfectly good and pretty damn new busway is a high priority.
Now that’s not to say that the North Shore will never get a railway line, and it’s certainly not to say that road tunnels under the Waitemata Harbour should be built before the rail tunnels. In fact, the idea of spending many billions of dollars on building road tunnels (or a daft bridge) when the number of vehicles crossing the harbour bridge is actually falling must be one of the craziest plans I have ever heard. If the clip-ons on the existing harbour bridge need replacing, then maybe by that point the number of vehicles would have continued to fall so much that we’ll be able to get away with having the bridge as 6 lanes for the time it takes to replace the clip-ons one at a time. If we did have railway tunnels by the time the clip-ons on the existing bridge were replaced, I’m guessing that the rail line could easily accommodate those two ‘missing’ lanes of traffic.
Furthermore, I do think that the busway will eventually be overwhelmed by passengers to the extent that it will need upgrading to rail – simply for capacity reasons. Already at peak times the Northern Express buses are absolutely jammed with passengers, while I have heard many of the other buses that use the Northern Busway at peak hours are packed completely. And, as shown below, every good long-term rail plan for Auckland includes a railway line to the North Shore:
But in the end, when one compares the need for a North Shore railway line with the need for other big (and small) projects – and the level of “bang for your buck” that would be achieved – I simply can’t see how it can be a super-high priority. This is particularly so given its pricetag, as for possible a similar price you could create – for the first time – a rapid-transit system out east following the southeast section of the Dark Green line in the image above. While it would certainly be “nice” to have rail to the North Shore, there is a busway there – it works pretty well and it will continue to work pretty well for a number of years to come (as long as we don’t let people drive on it).
Perhaps Andrew Williams needs to remember he’s running for mayor of the whole of the Auckland area, not just for the North Shore.
Would a North Shore Tunnel that joined up with one of the other lines to form a through line not increase capacity by taking the trains from that line out of britomart? Obviously this would still require a cbd tunnel just a different one, as you have proposed here in the past.
Having said that, I am a bit reluctant about rail to the North Shore as a concept. I understand the capacity argument, but surely we are a very long way from that at the moment. Articulated buses at 2 minute headway would be pretty high capacity I would have thought. The main reason I am not sure about the rail concept is that the busway corridor doesn’t really pass through the actual development nodes.
I am just guessing, but I would expect a lot of the north shore busway users are actually boarding off the busway in the ‘burbs with buses then running onto the busway? I understand that you would use feeder buses to rail, but given that not many people actually have the busway stations as an origin/destination I feel that the current system might actually be better even in the long run.
Arguably you could convert to a light rail/ tram system for capacity reasons in the long term and you could then run trams into Takapuna/Birkenhead etc on exclusive at grade corridors along the arterials?
Matthew, yes you would link up a North Shore Tunnel with the existing Britomart tunnel, however you still have 20 trains per hour that need to get in from the south, east and west that will all have to use one track into Britomart. That’s about the maximum so you wouldn’t increase capacity by simply joining the line up with the North Shore line.
The CBD rail tunnel gives you real extra capacity because Western Line trains can enter the CBD from Mt Eden, rather than from Newmarket. Also Onehunga/Airport line trains could enter via Mt Eden. This mean you could have 40 trains per hour entering the CBD from the south, east and west (20 via Mt Eden, 20 via Quay Park).
I agree with you about the lack of development around the busway stations. Hopefully by the time a rail upgrade is feasible we would have had some huge intensification around the stations – particularly Akoranga which is in the middle of nowhere at the moment. If I had the money I’d buy out that golf driving range and turn it into high-rise apartments and office buildings!
and I would buy one of them…
So would I
While I generally agree with you that it isn’t urgently needed there are a couple of things we should consider.
1. Waiting till the busway is at capacity before upgrading it is a disaster waiting to happen. We are not going to be able to run services on the busway at the same time as converting it to rail (which I imagine would take at least a year if not longer), this means for that time period we will have to put those buses back on the motorway by either taking a lane and dedicating it to buses or using the shoulders. Either way it prevents us using the stations and will hurt patronage for some time at least.
2. While we may think it is a great idea to put rail out to South Eastern Auckland and people I have spoken to from out that way say they would love it, it doesn’t seem to be even on the agenda of politicians. It will be hard enough to get the 3 big projects already proposed built let alone something that has never really been discussed. Raising it may just get politicians to say “there is another rail nut” and put it back further. I think it may be best to get what has already been proposed built first and then we can say “look at how successful this has been, we really need it out east as well
Rail to SE Auckland may not have been discussed but I think I’ve heard it been mentioned by Len Brown in a radio interview a wee while back. I’m not sure about the priority of it myself but I think it should start from the Manukau side first.
I think you’re absolutely right, admin, keep extending and intensifying around the busway, but prioritise new spending around areas with no RTN service. In an ideal world it would be great to have the Shore RTN connected to the rest of the system without needing to change modes in the centre of town, but there is so much work desperately needed that I think it wise to wait for that, esp. given the cost of crossing the harbour and those falling traffic figures. For me the CBD loop and a link from Wiri to the airport should be started tomorrow, hell no, today. Then I agree the SouthEastern line is the big game breaker. The catchment is huge, the connectivity it offers north and south [Manukau- Airport] is fantastic, shape changing for Auckland, we really need to try to bring civilisation to the car crazy wild east. That the Herald or the politicians haven’t heard of it is something we need to try to correct. As for Onehunga-Airport, and Onehunga-Blockhouse Bay they will then just look like no-brainer completion tasks. Northwestern Busway should be built also…. As for rail promotion, yes free days etc, but what we really need for that is the Electrification done, get marketing when your product is as good as it can be. If Joyce set out to take momentum out of the revival of rail in AK, he’s doing it well. Onward.
“If we did have railway tunnels by the time the clip-ons on the existing bridge were replaced, I’m guessing that the rail line could easily accommodate those two ‘missing’ lanes of traffic.”
You’d guess wrong. While the numbers say traffic volume crossing the bridge each day is dropping, the reality is that it’s still as awful as ever. In fact, traffic is probably worse than 12 months ago. I tried using the bus system but it was so awful I reverted back to sharing a ride into the city each day. Most of the car parks at the Northern Busway are at capacity before 730 in the morning… where was the future proofing there? Even if I had a car I could drive to the busway I can’t get a park at the time I want to go into work.
I like the idea of public transport, I want the investment in Auckland’s public transport but I think it’s niave to believe Aucklanders will simply leave their cars in the garage and take a bus/train to work. There’s too many years of engrained mistrust of the substandard PT we’ve had to put up with.
Tim, the thing is that people clearly ARE getting out of their cars and onto public transport – particularly on the North Shore. Bus patronage on the Shore continues to grow (especially the Northern Express) while traffic numbers crossing the bridge continue to fall.
What made your bus trip so horrible?
Tim, people are leaving their cars at home and using PT, the latest figures show that total PT use is rising by about 4% a year with trains increasing 10% and the northern busway 20%. Many people catch a feeder bus to a busway station or catch a service that goes from their home to town via the busway. Future proofing for a park and ride is a hard thing, you either have to make the car park bigger which costs money for the land and can hinder intensification around the station which helps to make it more viable or build higher which costs money for construction and maintenance. Personally I would rather the money go to providing better feeder services that have the potential to benefit far more people or things like secure bike lockers so people could ride a short distance to the station.
My wife and I live in Henderson and both work in town. It would probably be cheaper for us to drive and pay for parking than catch the train but we both prefer the train as it is a nicer journey and we don’t have to worry about traffic. Yes things can go wrong and out west we have had more than our fair share of delays while all the work has been going on but for us the positives outweigh the negatives, it has also enabled us to only require 1 car.
I don’t see the airport line as a major project. 1 – It will only shuttle people to and from our small to-medium sized airport 2 – Nobody is going to base their decision to come to Auckland on whether there is a train. 3 – Despite all the talk, the airport is not that far nor difficult to get to currently by bus or car from the CBD. Rail to the growing areas near Henderson – Te Atatu and through the Meola / Jervois corridor should be a priority, in my opinion.
There’s a lot of employment growth around the airport and a rail line out there would also pass through suburbs like Mangere so it would be more than just a line to the airport. I definitely think an airport line has priority over a North Shore line – admittedly such a line would be great for the tank farm but PT there can be better served by light rail in the short term.
As someone who lives very near Jervois Rd, there is no way there is enough residents for any sort of rail transport in the next 50 years
You mean rail transport in Ponsonby/Herne Bay i.e. where Jervois Rd is or not enough people in Mangere to support it?
A rail line would be an extension of the Onehunga line and would connect into Manukau, I’m pretty sure that it would be an extremely popular line.
No I was responding to dan who was talking about a line to Jervois Rd. I am 100% in favour of an Airport rail line
Dan, on cost benefit the 8 km of flat farmland from Wiri to the airport is basically low hanging fruit for making the system more connected and useful and is a much easier sell than trying to drive expensive capital works through areas without protected routes. Operationally a little fiddly, like the new Manukau station as it would be a terminus until the loop is completed to Onehunga, but I don’t see how you can discount the quantity of humans who turn up there everyday ALL WITHOUT A CAR, as well as all those who work there. Personally, as a fairly frequent user of the airport I would love to able to more efficiently avoid the rapacious car parking fees, let alone the drive. Tactically it’s clever too, I really like these little additions to the network as when they work it becomes harder to resist the call to join them up… I look forward to the day when the general call to ‘complete the system’ refers to our rail network not to the motorways.
I think all candidates are promising the same things aren’t they? Its just the priority and timing that differs. So there are some positives there.
The CBD tunnel should be the major priority, followed by a second harbour crossing to the north shore. No brainer.
I agree with someone above who suggested that the focus should then go on areas without an RTN – and the elephant in the room none of the candidates talk about is SE Auckland. That could have a massive impact and should be next.
With regards to the Northern Busway, its a victim of its own success, and so some hard decisions are going to have to be made about its future. Intensify bus services immediately, or give in to the inevitable and start preparations for heavy/light rail now.
I think the airport line, along with planned links (e,g, Avondale-Onehunga) can be further down the track. But I do like Len Brown’s 15yr timetable. I’d really like to see him commit to that.
Dan, you might be a bit narrow on the concept of the airport line. Firstly it wouldn’t just be to shuttle people to and from the airport, the preferred option is a line from the Auckland CBD to the Manukau CBD via Newmarket, Penrose, Onehunga, Mangare, the airport, it’s industrial park and Wiri. Effectively it is a new rail line for south-west Auckland that also takes in the airport on the way. Those are some big residential areas with poor PT access plus some of the largest employment zones in the region. Together with the proposed line through Mt Roskill this would create a rail network covering most of the city. All of a sudden it would become very easy to catch trains from a whole lot of places to a whole lot of places.
Another thing to consider is that an airport station would be as much for airport workers as travellers, there is a huge amount of people going to the airport each day for work or other reasons, and right now almost every one of them drives there. Anyway the airport in projecting 24 million passengers a year within the next decade. That around 65,000 a day. If there was a fast and easy direct link via rail to the CBD and Manukau (and connections to the west, north and further east) then a big chunk of those travellers will see no reason to sit in traffic and pay extortionate parking or to pay through the nose for a taxi each way.
On rail to the Shore, personally I think it is the least of our priorities. The busway is brand new, working well and has plenty of capacity in it yet. An extension from Akoranga right into the CBD via fulltime bus only lanes over the bridge would be a useful upgrade as part of the new harbour crossing project.
I just can’t see how spending two or more billion dollars to turn a new high quality busway into a rail line is a good use of scarces public transport funds in the near future. There are much bigger fish to fry and much better uses of that money.
The Shore has it’s RTN link, sure let’s improve that where we can but there are other regions that have nothing at all at the moment!
Sorry Nick, I still don’t see the airport line as any form of priority. It might also serve Mangere and provide an extra 3 stops or so through that area, but is otherwise limited to that catchment and the airport. Another comment above noted that it would be cheaper to acquire farmland through Wiri than through Ponsonby. That is undoubtedly true. However, an airport rail line would require an additional bridge or tunnel across the harbour all for the purposes of leading trains directly to the Otahunga line.
Secondly, I agree with your assertion about airport workers not currently having enough travel choice. However, a train line between the airport and CBD will likely cater to very (very) few of these employees.
If I had to choose between rail on the shore or through Mangere, I’d choose Mangere. However, I stand by my assertion that the next rail should be prioritised from the northwest, not from the airport.
Dan, going to the north-west is an extension of existing lines out from the Western Line. The airport, on the other hand, is unserviced by any form of rail. It also forms a loop line, unlike extensions to the Western Line, and loops are beneficial because they open up existing infrastructure for more services.
A lot of business fliers would love a reliable transport option between the city and the airport, especially when it’s at less than a third the cost of the cheapest shuttle, never mind a taxi, and has a similar, but certain, trip time. I’m a couple of weeks from starting a new job based downtown, moving next year to offices at Britomart, and doubtless involving at least semi-regular travel. The thought of being able to walk out of the office, onto a train, and be at the airport 30 minutes later is wondrous.
Oh, and who’s pushing for a rail line through Ponsonby/Grey Lynn? AIAL, to its credit, is fully behind a rail line to the airport. Getting hundreds, if not thousands, of cars off the South-Western Motorway at peak time would be worthwhile for people destined for the airport and for other places. Giving people on the Onehunga Line the option of riding straight south rather than back to the Southern Line and then changing at Penrose to go to Manukau would similarly be worthwhile. All comes back to creating another loop line, in the same way that the CBD tunnel will open up some services that will be beneficial but are currently difficult.
Speaking of which, Josh, is there any official reason for not having South/West cross-line services? I seem to recall reading that a third of pax and NMKT are switching lines, which seems like a spectacular justification for trains between, say, Otahuhu and New Lynn. Would ease some of the load at Britomart, too.
I’m sympathetic to the view of building a bus/light rail tunnel first that can be changed to rail later. the beauty of a bus based system is it can work like a tree, buses can diverge of the the busway to local roads to areas like Brikenhead, Takapuna and Browns Bay that a train can not get to. If capacity is an issue the Northern express can be replaced with light rail.
Also on this issue, how sensible would a single lane bus tunnel to Devenport be. it could open a new route to Takapuna and improve public transport to the city from the Devenport peninsuila (although undermining the ferry network).
Light-rail would offer minimal advantages over a busway. Furthermore, the main capacity problems with the busway exist at stations (particularly in the CBD). That won’t be fixed by any bus tunnel.
I think that we basically need a lot more articulated buses, run more all day services via the busway and squeeze all we can out of it before going the whole hog and upgrading to heavy rail.
I think it is safe to assume that in Auckland the motorway crossing is quite likely to be built (hopefully as a toll road), but the public transport crossing much less likely.
With that in mind extending the busway right into the CBD can be done more or less for free once a road tunnel is built, it would be simply a case of using two of the now superfluous motorway lanes from Akoranga to the Fanshawe St as exclusive 24/7 busway lanes (and hopfully two more for cycling and walking over the existing bridge).
In this application light rail would be a big waste of time and money. It would cost almost as much to refit the busway, the city streets and the bridge for light rail as it would to refit the corridor for heavy rail, as the only saving is the difference between the cost of retrofitting light rail lines to the harbour bridge vs building a new rail tunnel.
Yet it would have pretty minimal capacity gains over the existing busway, the busway could handle about 12,000 pax per hour each way before becoming majorly congested, while a two track light rail line would max out at about 15,000. The fact that the busway has dedicated lanes, no traffic, no traffic lights, large custom designed off line stations etc means that the capacity approaches that of rail based systems, as running buses and headways at fractions of a minute is perfectly feasible. It would also be just as slow as the exiting busway as LRV’s max out at about 80km/h which is the same as the signposted limit on the busway. However it also have the limitations of specific rolling stock and compulsory transfers as heavy rail. Light rail is best for crowded street corridors with intersections and the like where a lot of buses isn’t possible and the extra capacity per vehicle of light rail is needed.
I say let them build a toll tunnel to re-align state highway one as a bypass of the CBD, and let the existing bridge be used for city-only lanes, walking/cycling, and to extend the busway right into the city. That way the road crossing is paid for out of the road budget and by road users, while the shore’s rapid transit and cycling links get extended to the rest of the network for basically nothing. Then we can save the billion dollar upgrade to full heavy rail with high capacity (40,000+ pax per hour) and high speeds (120km/h) for when it is really needed.
“I think it is safe to assume that in Auckland the motorway crossing is quite likely to be built (hopefully as a toll road), but the public transport crossing much less likely.”
I wouldn’t be so sure, at present I totally agree with you but I don’t think in 10-20 years time when we get around to building it that NZ’s government will be quite so road-obsessed. I for one think Joyce will be the last of the dinosaur transport ministers.
Great post Nick. The constraint on expanding the busway other than the bridge is space in the city for those extra busses to stop and return. And of course rail tunnels are cheaper to build and run than road tunnels but yes, I’m sure you’re right, with the people making the decisions at most levels in this town road tunnels look likely.
The solution has to be road tunnels with future heavy rail capability. I fear this will not happen.
The road tunnels and rail tunnels would be totally separate anyway, as they’d have different grades and alignments, different cross section size, different portal locations, different ventillation requirements and would be dug by different tbms. There is really nothing gained by building them at the same time, so building the road first would still be ‘future proofed’ for rail.
Vincent, for that a simple answer would be to avoid having any buses terminate and turn around downtown, but to run them through the city and distribute them out. For example the northern express could run past britomart and on to the central connector to turn around at Newmarket. Meanwhile some of the suburban buses could head up queen st to aotea square, turning around using mayoral drive, while others might head up Albert st and turn around in the vicinity of k rd. a couple could head up to ponsonby road or wherever else. One other benefit of this is that people could transfer at some point like fanshawe st, to easily swap from the bus that goes past their house to one that goes closest to their destination.
“Len Brown is perhaps the most visionary of the three in terms of his vision for rail in Auckland”
I’ve decided to stand for mayor. I promise that within six months of my election I will have completed the planning for an Auckland spaceport and a monorail system that will travel to all suburbs and will feature free wifi and coffee in every monorail pod. However to show how realistic I am, neither the spaceport nor the monorail will be implemented until 2040. I am confident the Government will listen to the vision and mandate of me, the new Super City mayor. Does that make me more visionary than Brown?
“Perhaps Andrew Williams needs to remember he’s running for mayor of the whole of the Auckland area, not just for the North Shore”
Williams deserves to be the idiot of a much bigger urban area than a village. But I can’t imagine that he thinks he can score more than a couple of percent of the mayoral vote. He must be hoping to raise his profile for a North Shore council seat. After all, did any other council candidates get to debate the serious mayoral candidates on TV the other day? The parochialism involved in promoting North Shore specific projects while pretending to have an all-of-Auckland strategic view is as good a reason as any for why Auckland needs joined-up government.
I know this blogpost was focused on the priority (or lack thereof) for North Shore rail, its obviously developed into a discussion on what should be the focus for the next big rail project (after the CBD tunnel).
And just like with the politicians, the posts on this board don’t seem to make SE Auckland – an area starved of anything resembling a RTN – a priority. Which I think is a massive oversight.
Is there any reason for this? (No – I don’t live there….)
I do actually think that if we were to take a completely fresh approach to rail in Auckland the southeast RTN would be number 2 after the CBD rail tunnel.
Although then one has the issue of how do you link that in with other services – as my longer term plan has the southeast RTN linked in with the North Shore Line.
KLK re The Southeastern line, read my earlier post above, I’m all over it. It is clearly the next big one to tackle after the CBD. And I not only don’t live there, I hope to never go there again. But lots + lots of people do and they have no hope of moving around or out of there at the moment except on heavily congested roads. Arbury’s scheme is elegant and clever and runs brilliantly sideways to the roading, and links in perfectly with the quick Eastern line to the North and to Manukau Centre and the airport to the south west. It will be expensive, especially over the Tamaki River so is prob. best taken in chunks, perhaps from the south? And this is where the opportunity of the easiest connection to the airport, form Manukau City/Wiri is extremely helpful.
And Dan I still don’t get your problem with the airport. I live in Grey Lynn and I’d love a station closer than Kingsland but it just isn’t rational compared to the places with no service, zillions of people and with great connections to make. I still think we need to get to the airport as soon as we can, it’s affordable, and sellable, and there’s a good real catchment. Also except for some sort of express service, trains to the airport would hit stops along the way to get travellers and workers, so of course it isn’t just about CBD travellers….
I would say because it falls into the too hard + too expensive basket, and because there is very ground work on it either.
The North Shore route has the busway/motorway corridor to run in, plus there is plenty of momentum on the harbour crossing including rail tunnel concepts. Likewise with the airport line, there is a nice big study from ARTA, a clear motorway corridor to use, plus the new bridge and widening works have been done in a way that they still leave a viable rail corridor up one side. Furthermore both of these lines have been on various plans dating back to the 60s. Ok so either of these would be expensive to actually build, but where the lines would run is relatively straightforward.
But if we head out east, what is there? No rail reserve for sure, and not really any straightforward motorway corridor to run it alongside. There is some apparent ‘future proofing’ in the width of Te Irirangi Drive, but not much else. There would need to be a new crossing of the Tamaki river, a way for the line to leave the eastern line, and an alignment stretching across (or over/under) kilometres of developed land. There have been some good routes suggested here but even those require a long bridge, land purchaces and a couple of stretches of tunnel. All that adds up to a massive project with a lot of expense, a lot of potential for conflicting interests, and a big political headache.
Personally I think SE line would be the greatest benefit on the rapid trasit network, aheady of an airport or shore line for sure. However I think it would end up costing two or three times as much as either of the other too also.
For that reason I can’t make it the number one priority myself. Number one needs to be realtively affordable, easy to build and very effective, as it would be the first new line it needs to set an example of how building rail is an efficent way to use funds.
Vincent – sorry mate, saw your earlier post. Didn’t mean to infer that no-one who had posted had dismissed the SE…just most
I also agree with you on the airport line and the various users (tourists, airport workers, people living or working in between). But I do think it should be after any SE line.
By my count, there are 13 stops between the airport and Britomart under Jarbury’s model above. Obviously it can’t stop at all of them, but how many stops would we be looking at to get the best return (use and time savings over the shuttle buses)?
Nick – I agree that the SE would provide the greatest benefit, so I am inclined to think that cost, while not irrelevant, should not be a reason not to make this no.2 on the list (behind the tunnel).
But then again, I may be in la-la land considering that its already tough getting govt money for PT projects in Auckland…..
I think it is very important to include costs and feasibility when making priorities. FYI I have it number two after the airport link (including the Avondale-Southdown line as per ARTAs preferred option). To me a rail tunnel to the North Shore is last on the list of priorities on account of the excellent busway with plenty of capacity left.
Shortly we shall (hopfully) have a very successful outcome with the Onehunga and Manukau branches, proving to Aucklanders and the powers in Wellington that extending the rail network is effective and worthwhile… but these projects cost merely $10 million and $50 million respectively. Thats chump change when it comes to capital expenditure on transport infrastructure. Next up is the CBD tunnel, a mega project of $1.5 billion but it improves all lines at the same time. But from there it is a huge leap to spending $2,000 million to $3,000 million on either a North Shore line or a South Eastern line. The next step needs to be something fairly affordable that can be built without any specialist work (i.e. subsea tunnels) nor any hoohaa from affected residents.
So this leaves the ‘airport’ links in best place in my opinion. It would cost less than either of the two other options, but it would allow two new lines (e.g. the blue and orange above) and come close to doubling the size of the rail network. More importantly it would turn the rail system into a true network rather than just a collection of radial lines converging on the CBD. Sure it would still be primarily for that radial travel, but people could move across the city just and easily as heading downtown.
Obi, compared to a spaceport, a lot of people actually believe in those proposals, and a realisation range of (what did he use, 15 years?) is actually quite realistic. Why belittle Len for injecting some reality – if he went the other way, would you accuse him of hyperbole?
If a politician says “I’m going to bring you the rail tunnel” and in 3 years it’s not there, will you consider that politician as having broken his election promises?
At the current stage of PT funding in Auckland, all they can really reasonably expect of a mayor is he/she will fight for it. I once believed John Banks would be the right one to send in the ring for that, but thankfully he showed his true colours before I got to mark the ballot.
I think it is very easy to make a shopping list of “promises” that you’ve decided someone else will pay for. Anyone can do it… which I’d like to demonstrate by adding “free chocolate for everyone” to my election manifesto.
Does Brown have a record of delivering visionary projects, or is he a slightly pathetic man who goes to pieces when the media asks him to justify rorting the ratepayer for his own birthday party? Does he have a record of making hard choices? I’d actually respect Brown if he’d announced, say, a $10billion 10 year program of public transport improvements and decided to finance half of it by selling the councils shares in the port and airport and by a $500 an Aucklander annual public transport levy. And then invited the government to pick up the tab for the rest. That’d let Aucklanders weight up the costs and benefits. Instead he is telling people there are no costs because his force of personality is sufficient to convince someone else to pay for his promises.
I think he has the experience to estimate a time frame esp. since hes worked closely with the current CEO and previous Mayor who are both town planners.
better thanks sex
That’s rail to the Northshore.
Come on Start next year.
It would be better if a “NORTHERN LINE” had stations in the Town Centers (Takapuna, Albany etc) because the Busway Stations are almost in the middle of nowhere. The when people get off the Train, they could just walk across the street to a Mall or Beach etc. Just my Suggestion. It would cost heaps and take a long time, but I think it would be nice.
It might actually be easier to bring the people to the railway line than the opposite. Around Akoranga station there are huge undeveloped areas, same around Smales Farm (a giant carpark makes up half of its catchment). I imagine a railway line would pass through Albany.
Yeah but you look at the Southern, Western and Eastern line, they all stop in Town Centres. A Northern Line should do the same and serve the Town Centres across the Waitemata Harbour. Plus the view of cars on the motorway would just be annoying.
The North Western Motorway looks like a good place to have a railway or a busway installed.
Indeed. I have been a strong proponent of a NW busway for quite some time.
Even more so as I believe that the NW corridor from Westgate to Kumeu is the most logical place for future expansion of the city over the next 30 odd years