NZ In Tranzit

Knee-deep in central Christchurch history?

2012-02-10T15:36:00.000+13:00

I have been very busy researching some early Canterbury history lately, for a very specific project (only marginally related to public transport) making regular blog postings a little more difficult during this month gone and February.

One bit of background reading I was doing is "The Early Days of Canterbury" compiled by Selwyn Bruce and published in 1932. There is still a copy available to borrow from Christchurch City Libraries. This history scanned back across the previous 80 years, I presume the author/editor was himself fairly elderly at the time.

Here is a description, page 57-58 of a facet of what is now the central business area of Christchurch - one that I have never heard described before anywhere.

It is certainly is of great interest following the great damage caused in the 10,000 earthquakes, particularly to buildings built on areas once swamp only compacted in the last few centuries or since settlers arrived or beside waterways. I quote; -

    "The large gully which ran across the grounds of St Michaels parsonage, [presumably adjoining said church on Durham Street, near Lichfield St] wound its serpentine course in a north-easterly direction across what today is the hub of the city, and carried a large body of water emptying itself into the Avon near Manchester Street. In winter time this gully resolved itself into a deep creek only negotiable by boat and one of the advertisements in an early issue of the "Lyttelton Times" invited application for the position of ferryman across this water-laden gully, and stipulated that preference would be given to a man of sober habits.

    Tuam Street west, therefore, developed both as business and residential areas, and many of the early early settlers erected pretentious homes in Windmill Road (now known as Antigua Street) [and in 2012 all industrial now, north of Moorhouse Avenue]

   A son of the proprietor of the White Hart hotel [in High Street] records the fact that in order to obtain meat from the butcher, whose establishment was on on Oxford Terrace, near Cashel Street, he had to go along the eastern bank of this gully through the fern and tutu, as far as Manchester Street before he could get across the stream."

Eighty years after these words were written I thought I'd see if I can find the original ad for the ferryman in the "Lyttelton Times" (on Papers Past). As usual what you are looking for can be devishly difficult to find even with a range of keywords (but will often pop-up later while searching for something else!). Perhaps because the scan is of old, uneven, blotched (at times) 19th century type face, in my experience Papers Past will miss many keywords entered on some scans. In the event I did not find such an ad, but did find some reference to central city area gulleys ...

From the Lyttelton Times October 7 1857 - "Several contracts were let last week. In the town ofChristchurch, the contract has been let for metalling the junction ofthe North and Lincoln Roads, or Oxford Terrace from the Papanui Bridgeto the Scotch Church [sic - St Andrews, which stood for many years opposite the Hospital at the top of Antigua Street]. This piece of road has been formed and therebymuch improved, hut the metalling is necessary to give substance to theroad and to obviate some of the unpleasantness of the dust which arises from the sandy soil on a windy day. The gully between Skillicorn's and Fisher's store is also to be immediately improved by being filled up.

Both the two properties named, if being those presumed, fronted onto Hereford Street, one each side of Columbo Street. It seems either the city still had this large gully cutting crossing its centre diagonally, or, and I suspect more likely, the original gully had been filled in but over time the full had compacted and sunk creating a minor gully in the Hereford Street/Colombo area ...still rather weird, but Christchurch was of course built on in an area of much swamp.

Central Station Bus Station fast, effective, open and attractive in style

2012-01-09T07:50:00.001+13:00

Christchurch; after a month or two in operation our post-quake temporary "Central Station" Bus Station appears to be fast and effective for bus movements. The design is simple and attractive and open in style.

This latter aspect probably well captures the preference and mood of local citizens! Even if the existing Bus Exchange was not demolition material the public enthusiasm for waiting in enclosed spaces (accessible through tunnel corridors) with several floors of car-parking above is at an all time low in a city where the earthquakes just keep on coming.

Unlike the previous Bus Exchange, which quickly grew to small and had buses queuing to get in and out at peak hours, the new "Central Station" has a simple grouping of bus stops into four main groups, with room for several buses to pull in and out at each and room for buses to move easily past each other.

In a previous blog posting I suggested that a portacom bus station was a degrading of bus facilities, and sure to last more than 2 years (particularly given the council's six year record of inaction on far simpler suburban bus transfer stations). I wrote, ...." buildings "never designed for use by thousands of people each day have great potential to create a shabby refugee camp status [with] unpleasant windswept platforms". I think there is still this capacity - when earthquakes subside and the normal bitter southerlies and freezing rain of winter returns - waiting and movement facilities may become rather miserable and forlorn.

In other blogs I chucked off at the lack of integration in our previous bus exchange which was without an adjacent cab rank, had no news and snack food kiosk, cafe or food outlet, nor long distance coach and shuttle stops, left luggage facility etc (comparing Hamilton's NZ Transport Centre and even small town Oamaru facilities). I have even mentioned the desirability of including a small supermarket (as per Wellington rail station, and elsewhere) in any new bus station.

Plenty of casual bike park space and security hoops

Well this is only a temporary bus station, with more platforms and in the opposite direction eventually to come in any larger permanent design not least to avoid travelling around several needless blocks. This was a hugely clumsy, inferior and off-putting element in the last Bus Exchange and is still so in the temporary one as at current, for north and westbound services. Spending the first five minutes of a journey from the city sitting in traffic queues heading in the wrong direction of one's journey maybe ok on an long distance coach but is the sort of thing that does enormous damage to urban bus credibility and brings buses into contempt and lesser use by commuters.

And temporary that it may be it does offer pleasant landscaping with large potted trees and shrubs, bicycle spaces and a bus stop opposite the station on Tuam Street being used by at least some long distance shuttles and coaches (though I notice also that InterCity Coachlines have set up office in a portacom office on Bealey Avenue in a position not even so easily accessible by most urban bus routes).

Also arguably Christchurch's premier and best coffee wagon - outside cafe tables included - Escarto Espresso has tucked itself into a niche created between bus station and the large new car park (all of Christchurch is a large new carpark!!! ...this recent You Tube says it all. (may need a wee nudge at start up)

Joking aside, heaps of cheap parking is sure to negatively impact upon patronage, particularly as lack of bus priority measures **will give bus travel no great advantage over the heavy traffic at peripheral entry points to the CBD such as Lincoln Road or Moorhouse Avenue). Facilities at the new Central Station themselves are not bad, but will probably need upgrading before winter to keep out cold winds from the shelter buildings and provide greater shelter for boarding queues or tickets to be presold by groundsmen under cover. While several overhead veranda style waiting areas ("three seasons" quality?) are great for room to move, or even move further away from unwanted neighbours, it remains to be seen (or experienced) how effective mesh walls and other design elements are against Christchurch's trademark colder winds.

Underlying all this for me is the new Central Station embodies the truth that the most sophisticated technological systems are those that carry out complex functions with simplicity, so simple they can be taken for granted, go unnoticed.

Perhaps the politicians were too busy to interfere with their grand schemes and ill informed opinions and left those who are professionals in transport planning and infrastructure just to get on and do the job!

** See second part of this posting - "Protecting our public transport corridors - Not" for an example.

Christmas Gifts for Auckland - rejected by Christchurch?

2012-01-03T07:58:00.002+13:00

You'll probably need a magnifying glass to spot The Orbiter bus in this congestion under the new Barrington St motorway over-bridge - a small hint of things to come under present council policies??

Has anyone noticed something rather strange. The road on Barrington Street under the over-bridge on the new southern motorway extension has no room for bus lanes.

This is a piece of infrastructure built for decades to come, even for the day when the city may have a million people. It would seem common sense to have added an extra couple of metres each side combining with the cycle lanes to ensure buses [or even possibly] light rail trams always had guaranteed free flow access.

However we don't have to look ahead fifty or one hundred years to see how lacking in vision the current council leadership as the key local stakeholder that could have pushed NZ Transport Agency to add provision for bus lanes.

Barrington Street to Riccarton Road (via various name changes - Barrington Street, Whiteleigh Avenue, Clarence Street) is one of the busiest stretches of road in the city and very slow and congested in peak hours already - and was so well before the earthquakes.

I say "already" because to the current congestion mix add the completion of around 6000 workspaces and this just in four office parks alone*, let alone all the other work spaces likely to be developed in the vast semi- derelict area around Woods Mill. On the typical current peak hour loadings of 1.25 commuters per car another 4,800 cars to this area peak time business days [the mind boggles]; add the completion of the southern motorway which will doubtless bring thousands more into this area from southern and south-west suburbs via the Barrington Street off ramps, seeking to access Addington, Riccarton etc; add the planned removal of one way streets in the central city which also likely to greatly increase traffic use of adjacent roads that skirt the central city [as the red zone closure has clearly revealed] ; add a further cherry on this glutinous cake mix - conversion of Rugby League Park into a major sports zone, the "new Lancaster Park", which along with the existing 8000 seat CBS sports/concert/expo stadium and the Metropolitan Racetrack will guarantee thousands of cars also in the evenings and weekends.

I say "already" as well, because although Barrington Street at this point is only currently used by one bus route, The Orbiter, by any standards it is a very successful bus route, with 12 buses an hour travelling along this stretch of Road, Barrington Mall to Riccarton Road (or vice versa).

According to a 2009 report, when Christchurch buses were recording over 17 million passengers a year, The Orbiter was carrying 12% of all passenger trips, which means around two million passenger trips per annum. This is with only minimal infrastructure support - lanes, traffic signal priority, bus transfer stations or integrated stops with other services and schedules - the sort of structure greatly boosting bus use and bus status overseas. This suggests 3 million passenger trips a year could be an achievable goal with better land use and council support and better scheduling off peak.

Even so, rwo million passenger trips per annum is about one sixth the the total annual patronage on the Wellington commuter rail network, which carries around 12 million passenger trips a year.

Or it is about one fifth of the rapidly growing but hugely funded Auckland commuter rail system

As a professional organisation led by our most generously paid and equally professional CEO Tony Marryat will be fully aware from monitoring overseas trends, technology, funding availability etc in other cities (to ensure we get the best possible transport system and comparable benefits pro rata from central Government) almost $600 million has been spent on the Wellington rail network and commuter system in the last decade and well over a billion in Auckland.

It appals me that it appears to be beyond the capacity of our council to have levered up an extra couple of million in the NZTA $246 million motorway extensions to give a very successful bus route the same sort of infrastructure support that rail gets.

Apparently the council leadership is unaware (but professionally unaware, that's what we pay for!) of the worldwide trend to give bus services the sort of infrastructure support once only enjoyed by rail. Cities all over the world [including Auckland] are building bus lanes (many permanent and curbed from other traffic etc), segregated cut throughs, shoulder lane bus corridors, on-street and entirely segegated busways, under passes, overpasses, bus trenches and tunnels, and in some cases high speed guided busways.

Well yes we do have bus lanes, part part way being painted on some roads and even The Orbiter route is to get some long overdue council support in the way of lanes or signal priority in a 2013 review. This said the 23 year project (1996 - 2019!!) to introduce a mere nine painted bus lane corridors of the lower order technical standards would be judged by some to be rather less than dynamic progress!! Many residents will die of old age long before the part route bus lanes - slightly - speed their journey.

So presumably the same council planners must have been fully aware the bottleneck planned for Barrington Street would cut directly into bus lane potential and either ignored this or got knocked by those up stairs, possibly those busy building light rail dreams.

So let's forget any earthquake excuses for being late for school. This motorway project was planned years ago, funding for these bus lanes was probably there for the asking when first planned in the Helen Clarke Labour Government era.

Also planned years ago - the strategic mass transit plans of Auckland (mid 1990s) and Wellington (early 2000s) that have shaped the extension and upgrading of the commuter rail and busway and bus systems in these two cities over the last decade. And - wait for it - won hundreds of millions in tax payer finding (I estimate pro rata over $250 million from Canterbury taxpayers!)

Auckland continues to reap the benefit of (belated) visionary public transport planning with record growth in public transport use and Santa dropped another hundred million in presents in the Auckland bag just before Christmas, according to this Transport Auckland press release.

Ironically Auckland planners even have the forsight to build a bridge specifically for a busway which itself is not yet built (mostly funded by taxpayers).

Auckland is a city three and a half times the population of Christchurch, so it is only fair that it gets about 30 times the funding per capita for public transport projects than Christchurch. Yeah right, good thinking!

I think it is time this city got real. Not only will Barrington Street - Whiteleigh Avenue need to be four or even six laned (probably with minimal on street parking in bays) but it needs full time exclusive bus lanes, guaranteeing whatever the time of day, peak hours or evening show crowds, buses deliver on time every time. And the sooner the better seeing the way new apartment buildings and motels built to boundary are squandering hope for our future!

We accept hundreds of kilometres of footpath sit empty most of the time - what is such a big deal with having full time bus lanes, also empty much of the time (sign of a succesful bus lane if you can;t see a bus!) but always there when needed. Is it so much to ask a few kilometres that have the status of being for buses only. why must we degrade buses to the back of the queue.

To my mind there is very little point running in running our current, randomly co-ordinated, largely 50 year old style bus system that costs $68 million dollars a year (half from fares) to deliver poor results and attracts very small portion of the population, even compared to similar size cities elsewhere.

We must start giving buses the infrastructure support to have consistent free-way - same running time every hour - as is happening in other cities, notably with on-street or segregated bus rapid transit corridors.

Most of all Christchurch needs a genuine gutsy committed "mass transit" strategy, a dedicated prescriptive identification of mass rapid transit corridors, NOW before more are lost or compromised, something which appeared to be noticeably missing from the Urban Development Strategy however thought through it was in other areas.

This includes specified commuter rail corridors from outer areas, with equally specifically defined express busways corridors to areas beyond or between rail, and identified high frequency conventional bus corridors also with supportive infrastructure.

* According to a report in the business pages of The Press August 5 2008, "Addington Building Boom", planned projects allowed for ultimately 1500 at jobs at Hazeldean Business Park; 1500 jobs at Show Place; and WorkStation55 (Princess Street) capacity 2000 workers. Several other developments were listed (to five storeys and obviously hundreds of workspaces) but precise worker capacity not quoted. Note- The full text of this article appears to be now available on line only at ProQuest ANZ

** The highly congested Whiteleigh Avenue stretch is also served by the new 40 Middleton bus route.

SEE ALSO - Full time (24/7) bus lanes introduced in central Wellington's Courtenay Place

Happy New Year - Despite Everything!!

2012-01-02T00:57:00.001+13:00

Last New Year's greeting from NZ in Tranzit included a photo of rather pensive and doubtful Charlie Chaplin in front of one of Christchurch's venetian gothic style buildings.

I like to think it summed up a mood of our city, still getting severe after-shocks, such as on Boxing Day following the 7.1 richter scale earthquake on September 4th 2010. Nobody died and so few were injured in that first huge pre-dawn quake it seemed too good to be true. And alas it was. On February 22nd 2011 a smaller but far more violent, intensely localised quake, hit directly under the city itself in the lunch hour, causing massive damage and injury and killing 182 persons, most of these in two older high rises buildings that suffered catastrophic collapse. The building behind Chaplin in the aforementioned photo, suffered irreparable damage and has since been demolished, as with many other historic buildings, almost all in fact, destroying much of the city's strong heritage character.

Over 8000 quakes (about a third strong enough to be noticeable and some of these quite violent) later the future remains uncertain, especially for residents in the eastern areas. The pattern appears to be periods of receding shakes followed by sudden new large shakes, months down the track. We have to live with this, believe there is light at the end of this tunnel, what else can one do.

The thoughtful pose of the young girl in the advertising on the back of this bus in some vague way echoes the inner mind expressed in the Charlie Chaplin picture, but in this photo above youth and hope exude; there is a future; caught on a moving bus it symbolises for me the promise we can move forward.

Well let's hope so! Happy New Year to all readers!

Public transport - Let's get our priorities right!

2011-12-30T21:20:00.002+13:00

(Sorry 'bout the long break ....too much eating, drinking, walks and craic... and all the other good things of Christmas...alas a few unexpected nasty earthquakes too!)

A few months ago I tried to put together a more or less hierarchical listing of the functions and roles of public transport, listed - roughly- from the most important [in most cases] role downwards, through secondary or subsidiary roles

It helps to have a generic template of what is sought, even if unique circumstances and locations cause variations from the basic. For example in towns and small cities easily accessible by car and where life for a working age person would be difficult without a car the foremost priority I identified - transporting people to work and study - might actually come in behind "social roles" of transport for older and disabled people.

But having a priority ranking also can make the small town organising authority say "Wait a minute - maybe there are people in our community needing transport to work whose needs we could meet that we are failing to see? Are we overlooking concentrated residential areas or work locations - such as a hospital - where a well scheduled bus service could attract workers as well as casual visitors? Or (even better) is there a way we might piggyback a bus service offering work access for 9am-start office staff (often women, younger women without cars) from a reasonably populous outlying area or adjacent settlement and integrate it with existing school bus currently arriving at the local High School 8.35am? A case of weaving together a basic service by virtue of identifying and meeting needs of diverse user groups at every stop or in the pattern of the schedules.

A few weeks back professional transport planner, blogster and most recently published author Jarrett Walker described a similar but very different sort of list, what motivates or detracts people from using public transport.

Jarrett Walker's list is also roughly, generically, hierarchical .. the primary factors (in most cases) first with secondary factors last

Here is how Jarrett put it in the specific posting on his blog "Human Transit" (with my unnecessary bolding! )

In a recent blog In Chapter 2 of Human Transit, I argue that useful transit can be understood as involving seven dimensions or elements.

1. “It takes me where I want to go.”

2. “It takes me when I want to go.”

3. “It’s a good use of my time.”

4. “It’s a good use of my money.”

5. “It respects me.”

6. “I can trust it.”

7. “It gives me freedom to change my plans

What a marvellous system it would be if every route or schedule, or integration of schedules, or even bus stop location tried to meet these consumer goals!!!

I suggest read Jarrett's full posting

or buying or borrowing his book for more insight.

I personally experienced much of the meaning of Jarrett's comments in his blog posting, about "endearing transport" with the heritage trams in Christchurch....my heart wanted to use them, even bought an annual resident's pass allowing unlimited trips.

But for all the enchantment and good intention to use the trams as part of my regular transport around that area of the city, once was enough! It was impossibly slow, cumbersome, the commentary to a local (and especially to former sight seeing bus driver) was well known and predictable, the service filled no role as a short hop quick-trip transport. For all my intentions to come back and use it again, the system did not meet my needs in any dimension and no amount of "well wishing" was enough to use it again.

I can imagine that any Light Rail link from the university might get an opening boost, lots of new patrons, but driving to a car-park in Ilam, then waiting 5 or 10 minutes for a stop-start journey into central Christchurch along congested Riccarton Road - taking twice as long as a direct trip by car....it would soon lose its thrill to most people in nearby Avonhead, or Yaldhurst let alone be of any use to those living far away in Belfast, Cashmere Rolleston, Aranui or Parklands!

Habit is about honing life's short cuts, the easiest and fastest, the least stressful...farting around going out of one's way just to ride light rail to get to work is not likely to be widely adopted or is so only for so long.

To say "we need light rail" or "Buses don't work" etc is vague, amateurish sounding and ultimately absurd, a very unsophisticated call - we need public transport that directly addresses the complex needs of people.

Let's get our priorities right!

Christchurch - Sure to Rise? A hill here, an embankment there??

2011-12-20T08:29:00.002+13:00

A couple of months back I was walking the section of the Little River Rail Trail with a friend.

This former railway corridor skirts Lake Wairewa on an embankment. At times, I'd guess, this heavy shingle embankment built over 125 years ago is up to 6-8 metres high in places.

"Isn't it amazing," I said at one point, "that all this shingle had to brought by horse and cart. Such an incredible amount of work".

We walked another couple of metres before I exploded in laughter at my own stupidity.

"How ridiculous, " I corrected myself, "Of course they didn't bring it by horse and cart, they brought it by rail as the line advanced and tipped it off rail trucks."

It is a truly sad and tragic way to have gained this, but one asset Christchurch has gained since the year of horrendous earthquakes is an absolutely humungous pile of broken bricks and masonry rubble.

Most of this is at the Burwood landfill and may just stay there - I am not sure how "clean" this rubble is in terms of things that might leach into the ground, or say PVC cabling and all that sort of stuff. Or how much it can be cleaned if needed. But after World War II the bombed cities of Europe made some very attractive hills and parks by piling huge piles of rubble and covering these with earth and trees.

The photo, sourced from Wikimedia Commons, is one of these, a hill park called Olympiaberg made from rubble generated in the war-time bombing of Munich.

I have advocated building a freight and commuter rail configuration and includes a spur to planned new housing areas at Highfield and Prestons ....it would not take a great deal, while the land is still in farmland to extend a temporary rail line across the Burwood rubble dump.

This would allow massive amounts of in-fill masonry rubble to be carted long distances (if needed) and used to create new rolling land contours here and there around our mostly very flat or very steep city. In terms of building a new rail link between Redwood and Islington, through or past various existing or planned subdivisions and industrial areas, this would offer ample opportunity to create gentle rising parkland style embankments on approaches to over-bridges. Or to disguise or noise reduce airport facilities or, ditto,a shallow rail trench with a mixture of embankment, trees and shrubs and, if necessary, non-visible security fencing.

Of course this could also effect the view of the Southern Alps (which many people value) for those living too close but then again modest hillocks scientifically positioned could also be engineered to mitigate the effect of certain winds - the colder bite of nor-easters in Sumner for instance, greatly enhancing lifestyle and property values in that area.

The mountain of masonry re-sculpted elsewhere not least could ensure that any new railway line from Redwood to Islington via the airport would never need to have level crossings, greatly increasing speed and safety of rail operations.

A curse of the city's flatness is that grade separated crossings of the triple tracked Hornby-Lyttelton railway corridor tend to be huge,ugly and spiritually and visually divisive of the city. The over bridges at Waltham Road; Colombo Street; Durham Street; Blenheim Road extension; and Sockburn, do little for the felt quality of the city and may have contributed to the decline of Sydenham.

Yet as the city and its economic export engine, the Port in Lyttelton, will continue to grow in size and productivity there can not help but be an inevitable increase in rail traffic competing with cross motor traffic at level crossings such as Wrights Road; Whiteleigh Avenue/Clarence Road; and Lincoln Road. The lengthy coal trains are already slow to cross and further rail traffic is a guarantee of increased traffic delays or congestion OR MORE over-bridges. Indeed it could probably be argued that the biggest problem with creating commuter rail would be precisely this - add another four trains or more each way per hour - the absolute minimum - and there are going to be a huge number of traffic queues at level crossings, not least at peak hours!

The "just another brick out of the wall theory" may also have a part to play here too - could a half and half railway trench be built - perhaps dropping nine metres down after heading west from Durham Street with some crossings removed and others carried on over-bridges of much less height than those current? This would create a much less brutal assault on the visual environment, such as a four lane over-bridge, more a graded rise than a sharp ascent, across the railway lines at Lincoln Road one of the city's foremost (and busiest) arterial roads. Not only could the rubble play a minor packing and embankment role in such a scenario - it could also be used to pack the base of the trench - dug out to five metres, heavy concrete sides but filled with heavily compressed masonry fill to the first two metres or some such to maximise loading bearing and ground consolidation.

Every hour or two another lengthy coal train rumbles through Christchurch bound tofro the export wharf at the Port. How much greater capacity can rail grow - including around 16 coal trains a day, freight trains, local shunts - and then include commuter trains; and how much bigger can Christchurch population and motorist numbers grow - before a section of trenching and/or several more grade-separate over-bridges become a necessity?

Another possibility - complementing the easy access of the suggested rail corridors to the new premier sports ground planned for Addington (joining the existing race course and Events centre) - would be the creation of new contoured sports grounds of significant portions, with a doughnut of natural grassed embankments, to enjoy cricket or speedway or cycling whatever. The combination of rubble transport by rail from Burwood and a future railway station being built immediately close to such a major sporting venue (and able to deliver crowds from every corner of the suggested figure 8 and spurs circuit ) would allow peripheral areas such as Kaiapoi or Rolleston a chance to become host to national events of a sporting codes, just by virtue of the quality of access, size of host arena and attractive relaxed landscaped setting of venue.

Obviously I am not an engineer so some or all of this could be totally uneeded, or unsuitable or absolutely twaddle !! But it does suggest there could be much synergy in a commuter rail line to Prestons being temporarily linked to Burwood forest while rubble is remoulded to enhance multiple greater Christchurch areas!

Rebuilding Christchurch brick by broken brick? Northern suburbs to get park with a view?Christchurch Sure to Rise? There certainly seem some interesting possibilities here.

I hope so! I am sure the late Thomas Edmonds (cake products) would not like his famous slogan being used for half baked ideas!

Light Rail Backers Battle On

2011-12-16T06:37:00.002+13:00

Bus Rapid Transit is increasingly giving light rail a run for its money in the USA, delivering far more extensive services than light rail can for the same dollar.

Judging by this Detroit news article headlined Light rail backers battle on common sense is winning out in that city too.

There are some interesting parallels between Christchurch and Detroit here.

In the past the Christchurch City Council ignored the chance to put a very useful direct bus link between new growth areas in the South West (12,000 new houses are planned for Wigram, Awatea, Henderson and Halswell in the coming decades) and the University, Middketon industrial/office park area, Westfield and the Airport.

Likewise the chance to link Belfast with the central city in 15 minutes in peak hours by a busway across from Grimseys Road and down Rutland Street and Caledonia Road into the city never appears to have been seriously investigated, despite wide promotion of the concept to Mayor Garry Moore, city and Ecan councillors and local body election candidates in the middle of last decade.

An obsession with light rail in city hall appears to keep city vision blinkered against other forms of public transport technology. Notwithstanding the huge and continuing success and patronage growth of the Northern Busway in Auckland (over 2 million passengers a year and a bus departing every three minutes in peak hours) Christchurch City seems to operate in a cocoon without conscious knowledge or understanding of this concept (people often mix it up with conventional buses systems or bus lanes only).

So the parallel is not precise. No councilors are specifically pushing busways as an alternative to light rail. But it is clear in Detroit as elsewhere $500 million can deliver four busways serving variuous areas including the airport and employment zones, compared to the single light rail line proposed. (This said most US busways do not include much off road or faster segregated corridor running)

In Detroit there has beem debate pitching regional transport needs against light rail.

One big difference, the Detroit Mayor welcomed the busway proposals, ""A light-rail system 3.8 miles up Woodward doesn't speak to regional transportation, not when 60 percent of the employed of the city work outside the city," he said.

Quite so.

In Christchurch light rail as a concept suitable for Christchurch battles on too.

Responding to pressure the Central City Plan now incorporates conventional commuter rail, using the existing rail corridors but retains the dream of a light rail serving Riccarton Road and other suburban areas. The tram-train concept, which has been developed in a limited number of locations overseas (where trams use conventional railway lines for part of their route) is invoked in the new City plan.

However it is unclear whether this has been investigated even in preliminary way - it is hard to imagine that any rail vehicle without a full size body and chassis could safely operate amongst heavy freight trains, including 8 full and 8 empty coal trains a day, in a situation where curfews limiting freight movement hours would be virtually impossible.

For further info about Detroit's situation, see also "For less than $500M, a bus rapid transit system could cover nearly 110 miles also this report here, in even greater depth, which also addresses the Detroit economic situation (the biggest city in Michigan is expected to be broke in April next year!)

In Christchurch an unusual phenomena - a city de-constructing

2011-12-14T07:57:00.000+13:00

There can't be too many situations in the world where a modern city deliberately "de-constructs" . In Christchurch - never much of a towering "skyscraper city" anyway - a number of high rise buildings are being demolished.

In the very violent 6.2 Richter scale earthquake in Christchurch the extreme ground acceleration in a relatively small area made it one of the most violent earthquakes ever recorded (and also rare, an epicentre right under a city centre). Quite a few of the high rise buildings suffered significant structural damage beyond that which is economic, safe or insurable to restore. This occurred despite these being built to very high earthquake resistance standards since the mid 1970s (two earlier built high rises suffered catastrophic collapse with huge loss of life).

A big relief for all in the city will be the recent engineers report that most of the land in the CBD is stable to rebuild upon, the exception areas being mainly river-side where plans already exist to push development further back.

Everybody in Christchurch is well familiar with these huge cranes (the one in the photo above is dismantling a 28 storey building. I can't imagine its height) and the sight of modern buildings being de-constructed but I thought it worth sharing some of these unusual images with the many NZ in Tranzit readers living elsewhere in NZ overseas.

As you can see from the first photo - the very severely damaged Grand Chancellor Hotel, Christchurch's tallest building until very recently is bent and tilting, and now being taken down section by section after huge concrete blocks were used to stabilise one corner.

Closer to the camera some degree of normal life has begun to resume, though much of the business life is currently being conducted in temporary premises elsewhere, and some parts of the city remained cordoned off.

Fantastic the spaghetti that goes into making the multiple circuitry of a modern building!

Not even sure of the name of this smaller office high rise - opposite the Bridge of Remembrance - being ball and chained to a (very slow but persistent) extinction about two months ago.

The ten storey Copthorne Hotel on Durham Street on the way down in early November. In the foreground the Christchurch Casino, built like Fort Knox (of course!) survived well and is back at work

A few weeks later later the Durham Street Copthorne Hotel is a ball of scrap steel

Oh yes - I forgot the main focus of this blog is about public transport - below the Christchurch Bus Exchange, on a quiet Sunday morning a million years ago, back in early 2010 when we our city had not experienced a significant earthquake for decades!

The Bus Exchange was a joint private public sort of development, and much effort was made by the developer Philip Carter to retain the heritage facades as part of the site. The Bus Exchange was built as a complex linked to other exits and arcades etc and cost $40 million though not directly to the taxpayer. Whilst the original walls abutting the street, shown aboove, were held in place the older buildings themselves were demolished and the Bus Exchange and multi-level car-parks were built behind the facades.

Alas these buildings also suffered too much damage to repair as shown further below.

Despite all the internal concrete and steel that went into restoring and converting the Bus Exchange building it too suffered major structural damage. It is beyond repair and is now inn the he queue awaiting demolition The site had anyway become far too small and clumsy (even within just a decade) for fast discharging and fast pick up and quick departure in busy periods

New link services too little, too late and blatantly insulting to eastern bus users and ratepayers.

2011-12-09T11:24:00.004+13:00

Metro Christchurch has finally addressed the complete collapse of bus services to large areas of eastern Christchurch following last February's major earthquake.

Ecan has announced two new link bus services to the Dallington, Avonside, Aranui and Avondale areas.

Ecan have introduced a token service, two shuttle links with good route structures but so limited in service spread and frequency schedule they do not even offer peak hour services [see here]
This means high school students and workers will still have to walk 15-20 minutes to get to a city bus stop, despite the fact they or their parents are paying full transport rates to Ecan.

A second fact is if vehicles can negotiate roadworks on this shuttle routes four times a day, why not eight times a day, or sixteen times a day?? The north, west and southern suburbs have almost all city to suburb services running half hourly day/hourly evening, approx twenty five trips each way a day.

In contrast for these eastern residents, already under stress from quake damage, to access anywhere in the city they must make a transfer, in most cases at Eastgate or The Palms, and quite possibly another transfer at the city bus exchange to get to work, study or social locations elsewhere. Everyone who has lived through the last nine months of the Council/ Ecan appalling muck up - the disastrous twin bus exchange concept - knows that double transfer can take hours! One missed connection at The Palms and some one (including the elderly or those with mobility handicaps) could have to wait two hours to get to Dallington Bridge. Its not on.

The new Links are such a pathetic response, so late, so limited, so insulting to people who pay for an adequate bus service and in some cases depend upon it, one can only be suspicious that The Ecan junta, has got the word from higher up in the National Government that the Nats want to pull the plug on decent public transport and need to drive people away from using buses, downgrade the image and quality of bus services!

If so the earthquake recovery chaos offering an excellent disguise to do so - these are huge cuts - the biggest I can remember since all evening bus services were reduced 50% in about 1979. It would be extraordinary to think Ecan could cut bus services so severely - upto 50-70% reduction in some major route corridors NOT blocked by earthquake damage such as Gloucester Street; Tuam Street-Harrow Street; Wainoni Road, Linwood Avenue without huge outcry if politicians and community leaders were not so distracted with other big issues.

NZ in Tranzit says do the decent thing Metro!!

(a) double the service frequency, even an hourly service is pathetic but it would at least place eastside services on par with some of the other quieter city routes, not a totally inferior service. No body should have to wait two hours for a missed bus or connection!

(b) run services 7am - 8pm minimum. People have to get to work or school or can't visit friends crosstown or shop in the city etc under the curfew effect of this ridiculously limited time frame. A public authority elected in part to help the transport disadvantaged and public transport dependent have dignity and freedom of mobility does the opposite and places a tight middle of the day only curfew upon these people.

(c) restore a direct city link to North Linwood to Woodham Road area - perhaps an amalgam of the inner suburb parts of the 83-84 routes - why should an eastern route corridor not damaged by earthquakes have a 50% cut (66% if you add in 21,83,84 as previously all offering access to this higher density, North Linwood/Avonside area) while the people of Ilam, Avonhead, Papanui and Belfast etc etc still get four or more services an hour?? Why should North Linwood, Avonside and Dallington people near undamaged sections of route not have bus services, brought within easier walking range?

Christchurch people pay transport rates (directly or inherent in their rent to landlords) why should the bus user needs and services requirements of the east - the areas that taken the hardest blow from earthquake effects - already suffering financial stress be be treated with such contempt by people who are paid hundreds of dollars every time they attend a meeting?**

** The Chair of Ecan Dame Margaret Bazley receives $1400 per meeting; the members $900 per meeting. This of course is before tax, presumes they bring to their position superior management skills and spend a lot of time outside the meeting studying reports and analysing and creating effective solutions.

Nine months to organise two very part time vans ? Yeah right!

Canterbury regional strategy firm on not supporting country commuters

2011-12-08T00:45:00.005+13:00

Top quality coaches with wi-fi are becoming a world trend in city-to-city services, but commuter friendly bus services are unlikely to ever connect Timaru, Ashburton, Rolleston, Christchurch and Christchurch International Airport under present Canterbury transport strategies. (Photo: Two door Tour bus at Taihape 2010. NZ in Tranzit)

The Canterbury Regional Land Transport Strategy 2012- 2042 has been completed. This is a policy document whuch must be formulated by every Region every few years under the Land Transport Management Act 2003 to determine provincial transport patterns and priorities.

This strategy document put together with representation from all District authorities and other transport related stakeholders determines policy guidelines across all forms of transport and transport planning for the province. Amongst this is of course public transport and this is examined in the context of both regional needs, smaller urban centres and Christchurch City.

One submission by some one who clearly did NOT want public transport subsidised, in any way, opposed any rate payer subsidy for intercity public transport services.

The "Officer summary of submissions and hearing panel Recommendations to Regional Transport Committee" responded;

"That draft strategy envisages these services will continue to be provided on a commercial basis over the life of the strategy i.e. funded from fares and not subsidised by rates."

Phew that was a close shave!

For a minute it looked there might be an inter-city (and of course "country area to the city") strategy that could throw Ecan into responsibility of promoting more environmentally sustainable transport across the whole province.

A rich irony indeed that would have been! Environment Canterbury, in fact as well as in name!!

It is a great pity though that rabid "busism" (=buses are inferior way to travel; people who ride on buses are inferior; bus services cost more than they generate in downstream benefits) permeates the cow town mentality of the plains and infects even the urban vote in such matters.

Even viewed against other regions of New Zealand** it suggests Canterbury would be better raising ostriches than dairy cattle.

Lack of an intelligent network of commuter (local traveller) buses probably costs the province, its residents and commerce far far more than any minor saving from avoiding the relatively small annual subsidy likely to be needed (less than $10 per household?).

At present virtually all longer distant bus, shuttle, coach services radiate outwards from Christchurch in the morning and head in onwards the city at the end of the day. In contrast services from the smaller urban centres see buses heading towards Christchurch only after mid-morning.

This pattern means country commuters can not access early appointments, work or tertiary study start times in the city; it also means that independent travellers on schedules - 21 days in NZ etc - can not make an early start from these smaller centres (a 10 am-11.30 am start virtually loses half a day or even de facto loses a whole day) and travellers may tend to decide against visting them.

Lack of access to the metropolitan centre Christchurch by user friendly schedules and coach services will be a factor in losing or not gaining population and the income and spending this brings to the district. This is particularly so amongst key public transport user groups such as tertiary students, those with disabilities inhibiting mobility and the aging who become uncomfortable with driving on the busy state highway but want to access family or services in the city on a regular basis. Income from ESOL student boarders are helping pay mortgages in many Christchurch homes but only few will look at accommodation or study where there is not effective public transport support available.

Whether it is one less extra night's stay-over or choosing to retire for remaining life closer to the city, lack of public transport support takes money out of the country district and fails to bring some percentage of tourist dollar into the district. This includes local tourism - surprise, surprise - Ballantynes attract large numbers of (mainly) women shoppers to bus to Timaru after the quake; middle of the day discount return fares and other marketing devices could generate a whole "Girls Day out" revenue stream, Christchurch to Ashburton, or Ashburton to Timaru, as well as other school and interest group options (scholol holiday horse riding options etc). Good infrastructure generates commerce and social support and well being but the Canterbury transport strategy seems to consider a mish mash of mainly tourist and backpacker services, some merely vans, leaving from here and the around Christchurch, on schedules that are of little use to many locals (not least work or study regular commuters) is a sophisticated enough public transport for Canterbury

If oil goes up - and all indications are that once the predicted plateau of production moves into shortfall oil prices will escalate, those living in rural areas will start feeling the pinch most of all - a trip to pick up a new dairy unit worker; or to drop the rellies from Rotorua at Christchurch airport; to ferry the teenagers to a concert in Christchurch; or for a wife from Rakaia to work three days a week in the city will all start to become less viable. The few dollars a year per resident to subsidise a regional bus service will gurgle down the petrol tank in seconds.

It is those making the longest journeys that cause the most pollution [even if less visible], who waste the most time travelling and who will suffer the most from oil price rises.

I don't think anyone who has any familiarity with the Wairarapa can doubt for a minute, much of the small town revival of Martinborough, Featherston, Greytown and Carterton owes much to to the continuation and upgrading of commuter rail to Wellington 70-100km away. The rebirth in image as trendy or attractive places to live, the revitalisation of their commercial and hospitality sectors and other flow on benefits to local infrastructure, comes from attracting and holding young professionals who in turn share their skills and income streams in local activities.

Sadly when the Government of the day, Labour early this century, made available $31 million to upgrade the carriages and stations, park and ride facilities, schedules and feeder bus services to the Wairarapa commuter line, as well as supporting the Capital Connection from Palmerston North 160 km away, Environment Canterbury didn't have the awareness or nous to say

"Oi!! - Christchurch is as big as Wellington; and twice as many people live within our commuting range. Wot about a bit of dosh for us too? We could do a champion luxury commuter coach service for under $5 million set up! Even do it hourly if we played our cards right...[see this past posting]

Instead our taxes help fund that $31 million plus operating subsidies and many other city-tocity and rural area to town or city operated under the auspices of regional councils, all over NZ but Canterbury. And five years later the ostrich farmers are still at the wheel, I'm damn sure it won't be a bus though.

Rebuilt British carriages on Wairarapa line cost Canterbury Taxpayers about $4 million (pro-rata as 13% of population).

A contracted service requiring quality bus (coach) services offering the same or better levels of comfort across the flat fast Canterbury Plains could make commutes to Christchurch a relaxing time out or time to study and prepare business papers.

We have excellent levels of service in the greater Christchurch area, including Lincoln, Rolleston, Rangiora and Kaiapoi and Diamond Harbour - but almost no commuter friendly services beyond that immediate area, no network pattern, certain none with sufficient frequency, quality coaches and supportive infrastructure to offer sophisticated public transport access to Timaru, Ashburton, Rolleston or Christchurch workers, business people, students, airline passengers, the variously disabled, tourists and retired persons no longer keen to drive that high speed highway.

In the Hamilton Transport Centre, hub of the suburban bus system AND regional services, each long distance bus company is given its own rotating timetable pod - not so easy in Christchurch, where yet again a central city bus station has been designed with no provision for long distance bus services to load or discharge passengers.

To pretend to be addressing longer journeys for the greenhouse gases they generate (a significant factor in the world's catastrophic increase in weather volatility) and working to create an integrated bus service, or be committed to the social good of the transport diasdavantaged, or attracting people out of their cars is the task dumped upon Environment Canterbury but don't expect rocket science when our Regional Land Transport Strategy does not expect any public money to be used in creating an effective inter-city commuter network (except the money we send similar services elsewhere).

**A Regional Council that impresses NZ in Tranzit -
Bay of Plenty Regional Council and their Bay Bus spread of routes and services including the Twin City Express well timed for early start travel and to put country commuters in Tauranga before work, and home afterwards. Done well a longer distance system, which attracts tourists as well as locals, may not even need a subsidy after the first few years, as happened here.

Missing the boat

2011-12-04T16:45:00.001+13:00

Reprinted with permission of the artist Pete McLauchlan

Miss 1. Verb miss the boat or bus to lose an opportunity

A talented pen & ink man, artist and writer of great whimsy and quiet irony, Pete McLauchlan has captured many of the heartland stories, characters and buildings of Christchurch, spanning many years.

This included, some years back now, about a decade of weekly cartoons with anecdotal captions in The Press. It was one of those sections always checked in the weekend paper by myself and I imagine a great many other morning paper browsers too.

Pete is still going strong (house wrecked and about to take his talents to Dunedin) and has recently published a new set of cartoons, astutely grasping the true slogan of recovery for Christchurch is not Rise Up Christchurch but the wonderful mixture of phallic conceit, quality baking powder and Christchurch history inherent in the slogan "Sure to Rise" (Yeehah!!).

This was the iconic slogan and large roof top sign for many decades on the baking goods factory of Thomas Edmonds, a business which carried a little bit of Christchurch into every kitchen cupboard across New Zealand. Thomas Edmonds himself was a major donor to many city projects.

In this newly publised "Sure to Rise Canterbury Sketchbook" Pete includes an archival cartoon of the half finished concrete boat, for so long on the corner of Ferry Rd and Ensors Rd. He includes with it black skies and rain, and the a touch of Bob Dylan-ish old testament style prophecy as a caption "Waiting for the flood"

Anyone who has lived in Christchurch for more than a few months will know that that particular yacht never sailed anywhere and probably never would, even with a deluge of Biblical (or Queensland) proportions. In truth 50% of all chosen animals would have baulked at stepping aboard! The black hull has been in that yard beside Ensors Road towering above the fence for several decades without any significant alteration or futher rigging or superstructure, a common landmark and exclamation mark, apropos of nothing, for all by-passers.

Surprisingly for one as local affairs nosey as myself I have never discovered the actual story behind it - did the owner/home boat builder die without a will, run out of money, discover he had mis-read the plans, get into litiginous law suits or just give up?

In any event it was not a watery flood of Biblical proportions that carried this ark away but one of the larger shakes in the flood of earthquakes in 2011. It dropped the brick firewall of the old shop beside it, and tilted the boat on its crude cradle support beyond acceptable safety levels. At some point the giant mechanical hand of demolition has just carted away the boat and the ruined building, leaving nothing but bare land - as has been the case at scores of sites all over Christchurch.

So at last the boat has sailed, sailed away on its first first voyage, and probably its last, sailed into the mysterious realm of shared memory of soon to be long-gone landmarks, of Christchurch, in years to come ....remember that home made yacht in Ferry Road...of course I do".

In its wake it has left the city great opportunity. An empty site at a strategic location

Although in the glass towers of city hall "Light Rail" is treated with all the reverence of the second coming, beneath all this blinding light of deliverance, this city seems to be doing some great things with an existing public transport technology, the orbital bus route, named for unknown reasons The Orbiter.

This route basically loops around the city centre, via all the main mall complexes, and University and several high schools about 4-5km out from the city centre. At last count in my possession, before the ruptures of a 8000 plus earthquakes, and back in 2009, The Orbiter was carrying 12% of all bus trips in Christchurch, about 2.12 million passenger trips per year.

The Orbiter is also one of the fastest buses in Christchurch by virtue of frequency; the business day frequency of a bus every ten minutes, greatly reducing the waiting times for next service factor and improving chances of transfer connections, in all a quicker TOTAL journey time equation. Sometimes it is easier to catch an Orbiter on its outward curving trajectory, enjoy a circuitous route, sit a little longer, than muck around with more direct through routes and transfers.

This said in peak hours, after school onwards, Orbiter services can bog down with several million schoolkids. Or, even worse buses start running in feverish packs, nose to tail. Indeed on one occasion during during the worst of the earthquake period services implosion my ten minute wait became 36 minutes (as I timed at Eastgate a 5.13pm, heading towards The Palms) before, who would have guessed, all three buses - supposedly separated by ten minutes - arrive menage a trois.

Amazingly this high patronage it has been achieved despite the relatively unsophisticated timing structure and with very little infrastructure support from the City Council, responsible for the land and buildings side of things.

I believe businesses usually prosper, at least in getting established, by doing what they do well, even better. Build upon success.

Imagine the prestige, status, absolute patronage growth and support if The Orbiter was actually upgraded to have decent facilities, consistently meet transfer connections and run with predictable Germanic precision on time, every time!

Certain devices needed to achieve this are operational tricks, but much also relies upon built infrastructure, land use and signal technology. The primary infrastructure the Council needs to provide comes into two categories - proper transfer stations and speedy access through congested sticking points.

NZ in Tranzit has already raised transfer stations and some of the aspects needed (including a Council that actually commits to building a quality public transport system instead of chasing after the a "one route swallows all funding fairytale" of light rail!). Around the city there are at least a dozen major intersections - usually where an arterial road crosses one of the the four avenues OR the ring road - that need to have bus advantage infrastructure. Most of these are actually on the Orbiter route itself, up for a Bus priority review ostensibly in 2013.

In the meantime a number of opportunities created in part or whole by the earthquake's destruction have arisen. The earthquakes have given the city an unique chance few other cities so readily get - to purchase that relatively thin sliver (four metres?) of site frontage on strategic corners which can increase free flow of cars and priority of advantages or both together.

Without an active strategy now I suspect within two years most most of these sites will be gone, built out for next 50-100 years.

As for example the now gone boat site below.

The big useless-never-go-anywhere-iconic-yacht sailed away into the unknown (leaving only the billboards and empty site, centre right middle distance above). This could be a great opportunity to upgrade the The Orbiter run from St Martins to Eastgate, if the Council worked in with the existing landowner to widen Ensors Road as it approaches Ferry Road to include a left hand (normal traffic) and a permanent bus only "Queue jumper lane". The latter allows buses to get right up to the intersection on their own lane and then get a 10 second advantage signal phase to get ahead of of all other traffic.

Possibly in exchange for an elongated car yard to Ferry Road itself (traffic and bus lanes use up relatively little land) the dealer or owner of the land could allow shaving off part of the yard in the photo above, creating a longer tail to the bus only lane.

This is also about the future whereby linking Ensors to Tennyson and Colombo in a better flow may further increase traffic and offer a south Christchurch link; or where other bus routes might a few years hence run via a Ensors Road rail way and bus station. Going ... going ... gone?

The same pattern suggests itself between Linwood College and Eastgate, with very few people, businesses or households effected by loss of doorstep parking (there is ample in adjacent side-streets). In the photo above four parked cars (and about the same amount further back) block an entire lane, at least 800m, from Harrow Street to Linwood Avenue, a lane that could be used by by at least fourteen buses an hour that currently have to queue for up to three light changes. With such a lane they could get to Linwood Avenue and cross on a bus priority signal.

The photo below shows the empty site where a block of suburban shops on the same corner (behind the photographer in the photo above) suffered catastrophic collapse in February's megaquake. The opportunity to expand the intersection here for a queue jumper bus lane AND a left turning lane for cars can not be ignored - once shops are rebuilt in slab tilt concrete or similar to the existing boundary - this bus-strangling bottleneck will be further entrenched for decades to come!

Even if outward bound buses (The Orbiter, 40 Wainoni, 23 Bromley) heading up Aldwins turned right at Linwood Avenue to access an Eastgate Bus Interchange behind Eastgate - as they really need to do - the extra lane can still play a key role. There are still huge advantages in creating a roading system whereby buses have first bite (and it would be relatively small and fast) at a signal change.

Every corner site on a busy intersection where a building has been demolished - or has not yet been built - represents an opportunity for the Council to review the traffic management for that intersection.

Underlying this radical step is the second factor - the basic reality of public transport which has become emphatically clear over the last two or three decades as car ownership escalates world-wide.

Public transport competing with cars in heavy congested traffic is an obsolete technology, it's a dead duck in the water. It doesn't work! Or rather doesn't work effectively enough to offer a seriously attractive alternative to thousands of people sitting in traffic jams in a slow moving, toxic fuming, climate destroying, but comfortable padded metal box. As long as buses (or on-street trams/light rail) have to stop to load and discharge passengers AND to queue in traffic, public transport can only offer a VERY inferior version of an already INFERIOR stop-start, overlong and tedious car journey.

Unless the Council, responsible for public transport infrastructure (ECan oversees operations) has a conscious strategy of identifying sticking points, listing and analysing each and creating a priority list based on risk of loss of options, current bus traffic, potential bus use and degree of congestion and delay, a modern sophisticated (multi-directional transfer integrated) attractive bus system just aint going to happen!

Don't let us miss the boat yet again!

New Brighton super market access far from super service

2011-11-28T12:49:00.004+13:00

The other day I caught a Metrostar from New Brighton. I was pretty pissed off because a long queue in the supermarket meant by the time I was served I only had 2 minutes to get to the stop. It was a case of fast walking and huff and puffing and cursing under my breath because the Metrostar bus stops in this neck of the woods are about three quarters of a kilometre apart - around in Oram Ave or way up by the School on Hawke Street.

I can understand residential stops being broadly spaced to maintain pace across the suburbs but in a built up retail area?? Most of the action in New Brighton is towards the beach end - the beach itself of course, the very popular and busy library and spectacular pier, the supermarket and larger shops and the New Brighton Club. It makes little sense having buses drive past the place people most want to go.

However in the circumstances, this time, it didn't really matter. Either my clock was wrong or the bus was very late because no bus arrived for another 15 minutes or so. What did arrive was the elderly gentleman in the photo above. I saw him emerge down by the supermarket and try to hurry as best as he could. It took him several minutes. Old age, as they say, is no fun. It is no easy matter when the legs are painful or frail. However he certainly had his wits about him. When he finally got to the bus stop he cursed the bus system that that goes straight past the supermarket entrance without stopping yet made him walk almost 400 metres to catch the bus. He said to me, I have asked for a better bus stop but they don't do anything about it. I said I had complained about it too [and also wrote this previous blog]

My understanding is there are real complications with the land on the north side of the shops at New Brighton - what appears to be one big carpark is actually owned by multiple owners. It is very hard for the council to come up with a common scheme in these circumstances, I guess all the owners want to keep their options open in case they ever want to expand and build out. This said the motley area - which is a potential sun trap that could have shelter elements built against the nor-easter does New Brighton a disservice. And this multiple owners, multiple exits may make it difficult to create a better unified system of vehicle access for cars - one whereby a bus stop and road narrowing/crossing zone can be built at the rear of the club (not such a problem) and an outbound stop (and shelter!) immediately near the supermarket entrance.

My suggestion in the interim is all these car owners be asked to park in Hawke Street west of the Shaw Avenue roundabout, up by the school, where the bus stop in this photo is situated. This means that car owners only have to walk 400 metres to get back to the supermarket. It is a well known fact that when people go to the supermarket their first preference is to park almost half a kilometre away. Indeed, it was trying to make bus services as attractive as car use that led to the decision not to put a bus stop close to the supermarket and other high use facilities. Moving all car parking further west would leave the car park area or the road outside free for a bus stop for all those elderly people (and others) who don't have a car. These are those deemed "transport disadvantaged" people, alas not entitled to enjoy the longer walks of car owners.

Yeah right.

As long as the city administrators, elected representatives and bus operating authorities are prepared to treat bus passengers like second class citizens we will have a second class bus system.

Bus routes inadequately scheduled or not integrated in patterns with other bus services to the same area or which are poorly routed and have bus stops in places that are not optimized to serve patrons cost just as much to operate but attract less patrons and recover lower amounts in fares. What is the point of NOT getting it right?

A baseline standard of route planning should be location of bus stops on passing routes close to supermarkets, and the orientation of every general bus route to include at least one supermarket (with a convenient stop) within each 6 km or so length of route.

If this policy was applied consistently - a bus stop outside every supermarket on a route to the city (as well as any other services, such as cross town buses like the Metrostar) there is also a very useful synergy. Looking for a bus in an unfamiliar area? Spot the supermarket! Kids want a ride to town, drop them by the supermarket. Indeed it would do no harm for these to be identified on bus route maps.

As well as transporting commuters to work buses also play a secondary but just as important social role, helping those who are carless (for many different possible reasons) maintain their independent mobility and dignity of life.

Given current Ecan budget shortages perhaps Metro could ask a non-profit group working with aging or mobility handicap people to do an audit of every route and its stop location and bus stop facilities (with specific relationship to carry supermarket bags/ supermarket trolleys etc) as relates to independent access to supermarket facilities and work to remove the bugs.

I said to the bloke do you mind if I photograph your back getting on the bus ? He shrugged in a why not way. Perhaps more publicity will help this man and and many others find some relief from this unfortunate set up. At least the driver* recognised the fellow's struggle with his aging legs and slowed to a gentle stop right beside where he was standing, rather than being small minded (as the odd one or two drivers unfortunately are) and insisting on holding all passengers up just to meet the rules.

Despite his difficulties the gentleman still still had his legs to stand on; in my opinion a policy that allows this sort of unnecessary stress and humiliation of the old, infirm or disabled - or indeed any bus passenger - does not have a leg to stand upon.

Could Airport Gateway Overbridge cost Christchurch $150 million?

2011-11-25T15:37:00.003+13:00

NZ in Tranzit - opinion

The proposed over-bridge across Russley Road is designed as a landmark gateway to Christchurch.

Unfortunately, it's true cost could turn out to be as much as $150-200 million.

This could well prove to be the case if later in this decade, or the next, or one day some years ahead, population growth (half a million residents plus?) or the cost of oil, create the urgent need for an effective commuter rail system via the airport area.

The city leaders of tomorrow will be told a rail link via the airport will only be possible if the rail line is trenched under Orchard Road for a distance of about 800 metres to 1km. The consultant's report might say that the chance to protect the land then available for a rail corridor - then mainly bare - was thrown away about the time of the earthquakes, twenty years ago.

At todays (2011) costs this trenching would cost about $150-180 million. This based on a similar project the building of the New Lynn Station in Auckland in a trench of 800 metres costing $160 million, with a bus station above [a not very good photo of this trench being built appears here]

Oh dear. Oh dear. If only... if only...say the councillors of 2020, or 2031 etc; if only a corridor of land had been created to bring the rail down from Johns Road alongside the road, and the overbridge entrance way into Christchurch had been built not Russley over Memorial but the other way (as originally proposed) Memorial over Russley - and the bridge then passed over BOTH Memorial Avenue and the rail line!!

Sure not such a spectacular archway as in yesterdays Press but what a great view of the city and Port Hills, day or night (a twinkling sea of light) or heading for the airport as vehicles top the over-bridge the Southern Alps, often in crystalline snow cover. And only adding this corridor made a comprehensive rail network around Christchurch possible - the slight shifting of Russley Road a few metres sideways and building of the rail station and corridor past Spitfire Park, the shuttle bus platforms and Dakota Park probably costing less than $30 million. As this map shows Protecting the future not dumping on it!

What a pity the Urban Development Strategy was never created with an adequate public transport "mass rapid transit" strategy, said the councilors in tomorrow's scenario (timewarping a bit here!).

Says Mayor Gough-Carter-Manning-Hay (Jnr) "You think they would have learnt from the short-sighted thinking back in 2005 when they removed the possibility of trains from the north heading directly into the city, stopping them from veering left at Addington!"

Should the circus come to Lyttelton?

2011-11-25T06:56:00.017+13:00

Further to my last posting about Oamaru, this is a poster for the same show I found so brilliantly choreographed, timed, acted, performed etc at the Oamaru Opera house (I am sure The Loons won't mind me further promoting their promo poster, taken from their website). One of the few criticisms I would have had of the show was the name "Berlin Burlesque", lacked its own personality, a distinctive identity, a name to invite enquiry. Someone else obviously thought so too! This is a world class show, and I imagine could literally evolve into that, though where other countries would find a set of genuine twins as talented as the Twisty Twins, not only acrobats but with superb timing, balance and humour I am not sure.

I get the impression that a major aspect of this theatre company's first high standards of performance and high level of acrobatic skills is in part linked to the background of some performers who have attended or graduated from the CIRCO arts, the School of Performing Arts at CPIT (Christchurch Polytechnic Institute of Technology - a tertiary level multi-discipline education provider). There is no doubt - in any field at all - that institutes that focus research and learning and develop fields of skill - do an enormous amount to lift the standards of professional supply and practice in that indiutry (wouldn't a school of public transport do wonders for the woefully low standards of transit organisation, supply and information marketing in NZ!).

As you will see from the CPIT CIRCO arts web page, they have lost their home in the large auditorium of what used to be the High School hall of "Christchurch tech". It has been damaged by the earthquakes. Likewise The Loons Club theatre in Lyttelton has also been damaged, though reparable, alas unlike the iconic Harbour Light Theatre, now demolished as are quite a few other mainstreet (London Street) buildings in Lyttelton.

I lived in Lyttelton for four years in the 1990s, including running a small business and renting in London Street and one of the great things I thought about Lyttelton is on both the main cross streets, Norwich Quay and London Street, there were buildings totally out of proportion to all the others. One was the much criticised and condemned (artistically) little 1960's style high rise on Norwhich Quay - bizarrely still standing when so few others are (as in this photo of demolition crews removing the older shops and hotel buildings wrecked in the earthquake a few months ago)

The other building "way out of proportion" was the Harbour Light Theatre built as a cinema in 1916.

The size reflects the huge impact of movies and the huge amount of money to be made (especially in a port town with hundreds of seamen with a pocket full of money looking for entertainment) back at that era.

The Harbour Light was so much apart of the street scene in London Street I wonder how many other people ever stopped to think how much it absurdly overshadowed its neighbours little two storey colonial shops. And yet for me this disjuncture of sizes, on both streets, worked. In size and style these variations it was the slightly discordant note that helped give Lyttelton its element of quirky charm and stopped it from being merely colonial and cute.

A touch of Hollywood-before-talkies glamour and grandeur in a small colonial port

the 95 year old Harbourlight photographed just before it's final performance

[There are also some very evocative photos of Lyttelton as was - including the Harbour Light Theatre on the web site of one of the bands that played the Harbour Light, Liquid Blue)

I hope when they rebuild Lyttelton that this low profile with protrusions sort of image is retained. But of course such things can not be planned in the uncontrolled purchase and sale of properties or developers dreams. So far the Draft plans look OK but miss a bit of the quirky flair!

Unless.

Unless..... the Department of Education and the Christchurch City Council (Or CERA or whoever) realised that rebuilding a campus of CIRCO Arts in Lyttelton could have a powerful synergy, do heaps to foster the port town's revival, image and greater Christchurch's cultural diversity image....a flow on helping attracting tourists (in general) and foreign students, or students from other parts of NZ (in general). Lyttelton of the last thirty years has established an association with alternate culture and arts, and many people of kindred spirit are in turn attracted to its landscape of rugged towering peaks, steep streets and colonial cottages.

I imagine the potential capacity of this particular campus would need to be less than 100 students a year, it is a highly specialised and intensive field. But by rebuilding on Lyttelton's mainstreet (possibly on one of the landmark corner sites or indeed on the site of the Harbour Light Theatre itself, with some nod in style to this landmark passed) room would exist to create the big gymnasium style theatre space and permanent public performance spaces, a circus arena or smaller theatres, as well as lecture halls, offices etc. My guess is the physical performing arts is a relatively unique field, without many students also doing courses or papers in other fields, so such a campus could well stand alone, albeit plenty of opportunity would no doubt exist to interact with other CPIT students and faculties in town or at Sullivan Avenue. With a 15 minute bus service, a campus in Lyttelton would get the quicker trip benefits of lower loading back-flow in peak periods, whilst helping to boost patronage without the cost of added vehicles needed. A Harbourlight size building body would give ample room for trapeze and performance art that can be very vertical as well as feet on the ground.

Centring this campus in Lyttelton brings into the town, to live, or daily a lot of creative (healthy!) young people, a noticeable presence in the main street, and is sure to help re-generate a whole new group of associated cafes, clubs, music venues and other small theatres.

Just as shopping malls need a few large tenants, supermarkets or department stores etc, as anchor tenants, it seems to me the slightly quirky charm and alternative magic of Lyttelton needs a centre piece institution, a building of size that punches above its weight, helps define the (marketable) image of Lyttelton - what better than a (world famous to be) School of CIRCO arts?**

Lyttelton recovery by the loony fringe!! Probably looking at the world upside down. Again. You bet

Of course I know nothing about this field...but raise the possibility nonetheless. You'll never be a good clown if you are not prepared to make a fool of yourself!

Another iconic loss, an era gone - ainside the Harbourlight as Eric Bogle plays his last tour ("The band played Waltzing Matilda" of course) a bunch of mainly grey hairs in this case (like myself) listen. in the background the very evocative "faded" (sepia), slightly stilted and "caught in time" stylised scenes from famous movies painted so adeptly by Tanya Wolfkamp**, commissioned by owners Tom Jones and Helen Hobbs when they took over the former cinema in the early 1990s.

May the spirit of 70 years cinema and almost 20 years of live (and usually alternative and less mainstream or commercial) performance rise from the dirt where the Harbourlight once stood!!

** 20 years on more traditional (aint we all) but still with that magic touch of lightness

And in the meantime bit more promo for a great show....

Hanussen-The Palace of Burlesque

Jack Mann Auditorium at the University of Canterbury

January 4,5,6,7,11,12,13,14 2012

7th January show starts at 3 PM

All other shows start 8 PM

This posting was updated on 29 November 2011

Oamaru, old fashion and sensible transport planning

2011-11-22T07:13:00.014+13:00

I have been down in Oamaru, one of my favourite haunts, a town of about 13,000 with the character, energy and rich diversity of a much larger city. This time the draw-card was the Oamaru Heritage Festival, a sort of Waitaki District "Show Week" with an historic theme to match the town's fantastic array of Victorian and Edwardian lime-stone buildings. With the demise of much of Christchurch's Vic & Ed streetscape Oamaru's star can only rise further (in a long ago posting I suggested that the District and city councils of the east coast of Te Wai Pounamu, could unite to offer a heritage and walkway package, united by an iconic weekly steam train Christchurch to Dunedin (and one offering both tourist and budget class rail)

For the festival in Oamaru my partner and I hired Victorian costumes and joined several hundred other people similarly clothed - its a hoot, dress-up for adults, lots of fun and friendliness. It also gives one a so much deeper sense history being about living people. The grim black & white photos of Victoriana come alive in colour and the character of people does not change, in many ways appears more pronounced. That said, you can play at being whoever you like, such as this dandy couple.

The main theme of the week is Victorian Heritage but there are also sub-themes (so to speak) of history in general and Steampunk. There was a new exhibition of steampunk inventions and artworks - by everyone from local school children to the most sophisticated devices (some from Peter Jackson's WETA studio's) - all with marvelous captions of exotic Victorian time travel with explorer names as sterling as my alter ego, Montague Porch. This incredible exhibition at the magnificent Forrester Gallery indeed cements Oamaru's claim to being steampunk capital of the world!

Steampunk - tomorrow as it used to be!

We were also lucky enough to see the Loon's Theatre company from Lyttelton do Berlin Burlesque, a sort of update on similar themes to the movie/show "Cabaret" in Oamaru's magnificent and beautifully restored Opera House. The Loon's show is based on a leading German entertainer and night club owner murdered by the Nazis. and is fittingly done in cabaret form. The complexity and precision timing of this spectacular never boring mix of music, singing, lighting, acted history, costumes and acrobatics (all with burlesque spice) was a world class, a fantastic show.

Which makes me think, if the quake damaged circo arts school at CPIT can not be rebuilt, I believe the Government could do much to psyche up Lyttelton's recovery and future image and tourist trade by creating a CPIT campus of circus and performing arts, possibly on the London street site of the former Harbour Light Theatre. This would offer an anchor institute for the main-street revival, a school in a distinctive larger landmark building and one that also incorporates actual operative performance theatres and venues. This in turn will generate and stimulate associated commercial activity and two way bus traffic (yes, well it is a public transport blog!) and a lively creative core of young people in Lyttelton.

With no fanfare, with no "big noter" politicians to boast about it, Oamaru has something else I love and admire, something so simple but which has long eluded the ability (or is it underlying awareness and commitment) of much larger Christchurch to achieve. It is something so simple, like good plumbing, I suspect it barely consciously noticed anyone other than me - a common transport hub for long-distance and local transport services.

Immediately off the main street in the centre of Oamaru, on Eden Street, are the bus stops for ALL the long distance bus services tofro Dunedin and Invercargill, and tofro Christchurch. It is a common 30 minute rest or lunch stop for most of these services, with two well provisioned cafes immediately adjacent, as well as other food options with a minute or two walk. Between public toilets and those for cafe customers "every convenience" is offered the traveler. One cafe, The Lagonda, also offers a booking agency for travelers and equally useful, a range of hire internet machines. Immediately adjacent to the bus stops is the cab rank of Whitestone Taxis. There are no shelters as such - and as usual on the East Coast sharp sunny day easterly winds need better wind block devices, but adjacent shop verandas offer rain proofing or cafes a cup to linger over until buses arrive.

Simple but effective

A range of traveler services in one place beside departure and arrival zones

Whether all this has just fallen into place or is the result of a more conscious planning I have no idea - I do know the combined might of Ecan and Christchurch City Council's spanning 20 years have been completely unable to achieve anything remotely similar. Neither august body appears aware that many of those who use public transport within a city (including students, retired people, out of town visitors) also want and need a seamless switch to taxis or long distance buses, or waiting spaces with food, toilets, access to internet, left luggage or booking facilities. Nor do these governing bodies (or not) seem to value that long term tourist image and word of mouth promotion is directly linked to ease, reduced movement related stresses, user-friendly services and enjoyment when visiting a place.

Whilst the new "temporary" bus exchange seems to work well for free flow of cross-town buses and transfers, the normal thoughtlessness and minimal interest in doing public transport better does consign Christchurch yet more years without a genuinely integrated approach to public transport. Much smaller Oamaru with iys act together makes Christchurch's big city ego look sometimes rather foolish!

Lastly in this pot-pouri of promoting things I love and public transport, does anyone notice that getting early start long distance coach and shuttle services from towns and cities at the centre of either of the two main islands (Te Wai Pounamu. Te Ika a Maui) is virtually impossible. Buses leave Auckland and Wellington, or Dunedin and Christchurch, early morning and pass through the Taihapes and the Oamarus about mid day often creating a half day of limited tourist use (especially for those without a car). For most travelers getting the most out of every day is fundamental. I imagine when planning an itinerary (NZ in three weeks etc) from online bus operator timetables, many tourists just write off the thought of stopping overnight in Timaru or Oamaru (or Taihape, etc) purely on the lack of early departure times or convenient bus service times.

I wonder when some enterprising coachline or shuttle service operator is going to realise there is an untapped market in a service early morning from Oamaru to Invercargill, or Oamaru to Kaikoura (and reverse), giving the bus users of these smaller centres big city access at more useful times whilst allowing overseas tourists a more useful early start.

As suggested in previous articles about Timaru-Christchurch commuter services, that extra night (and evening out at events or wining and dining) spent by tourists or family visitors could be worth many many tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars to local accommodation and hospitality providers in these smaller centres. In other words long distance bussing times become more of a mosaic of departure times across the whole day, stimulating greater patronage over-all.

USA public transport systems under threat from too low a tax support and increasing climate change pressure

2011-11-20T17:21:00.004+13:00

In the United States public authorities are having to face the reality of climate change, even if politicians and those who associate freedom with escape from social responsibilities are happy to ignore it or dispute the cause.

Heavy carbon generated mostly by oil fired power stations and secondly by auto exhausts is credited with raising the over-all temperature of the planet. It can not be confused with carbon generated from other sources.

This is also highly unlikely to be part of a natural cycle (which typically occurs over centuries) for many reasons. One of the most spectacular - according to studies of tell-tale carbon dioxide levels found in ice core samples over a decade ago this is by far the fastest rise in global temperatures in 456,000 years!

The temperature is rising far faster than most natural and man-made systems are able to handle, with massive species death or forced invasion of new areas, upsetting natural eco-systems. It will also see huge cost burdens forced upon the human species who mostly inhabit coastal and fertile low land arable areas likely to be inundated beneath rising seas. In other areas predictions of massive droughts and forest fires are already coming true (530 killed in Australia's heatwave in Victoria 2009) whilst more recently predicted flooding in Pakistan has left almost 5 million homeless and many facing potential starvation.

In many cases it is the less developed world that is paying the highest price to support the western world's culture of mindless consumption and resource use, but even the USA is not invulnerable to increased numbers of hurricanes and violent weather events as seemingly minimal ocean temperature rises, increases the hotter areas of ocean that fuel hurricanes (or typhoons as known in the north Pacific). Whilst the planet is warming in most areas, temperatures are expected to drop in other areas. This includes the heavily populated north eastern triangle of USA and the Atlantic side of Canada.

Most recently the quality US publication "Transportation Nation" featured a very interesting article revealing that tropical storm Irene, which thrashed the north-eastern USA, came within 30 cms of flooding New York subways with sea-water, a potentially devastating event that could cripple one of the world's most powerful cities for months and months.

The Federal Transit Administration is now advising transit agencies to start adapting to climate change, which could cost many billions in a country already lagging well behind many other developed countries in maintaining its social and economic basic infrastructure
Reports the Transportation Nation article

"Climate change impacts are occurring now and will increase in the future,” reads the first line of an FTA report, Flooded Lines and Buckled Rails: Public Transportation and Climate Change Adaptation, released in August. “Aggressive action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions will lower the severity of climate change impacts. Yet the amount of long-lived emissions already in the atmosphere means that a significant level of climate change is inevitable.”

“We have seen significant extreme weather conditions,” says Deputy FTA Administrator Therese MacMillan in an interview in the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Washington, DC headquarters. “The patterns are pretty indisputable. The hundred-year floods are occurring every 20 to ten years. The hurricane intensities are repeating themselves and being very common. The extreme winter effects that we’re seeing in the Northeast are clearly in evidence. We need to deal with the fact that these extreme weather conditions are impacting our already stressed transit infrastructure.”

The ominous message from the FTA comes on top of studies by US engineers and public transport operator bodies which show years of low fuel taxes, amongst the lowest in the world, have provided insufficient income to keep roading and bridges and public transport infrastructure at functional, safe and effective levels.

Environment Canterbury Failing Eastern Suburbs

2011-11-19T06:06:00.005+13:00

Yeah Right.

I photographed this crudely attached poster on a Metro timetable stand at New Brighton Library.

I realise the promotion may be stimulated by Eastgate Mall management, which is giving away shopping vouchers to those who use a Metrocard or Supergold card in an effort to boost their re-opening.

This may have encouraged Metro's marketing to go beyond saying the decent thing -"a greatly reduced Metro service is now in place, however many eastern areas can now directly access Eastgate again".

Instead they have wandered in to the world of tasteless, offensive hype, duplicity and a degree of double-speak that would do Russia's Stalin proud.

The Government imposed Environment Canterbury junta lead by Dame Margaret Bazley (at an absurd $1400 payment per meeting, other members $900 per meeting) appears to be making the most drastic bus cuts in its history and hocking these off as "new and improved services".

I can find no trace of improved services in eastern areas nor of any new service other than a planned and grossly belated minimal service to compensate for massive reductions in earthquake areas.

I challenge anyone to prove otherwise !

The only sense the current services could be termed "improved" is in the sense of a used car salesman who has repaired a puncture on one of his cars trying to cream customers with his guarantee that "Yes this is an improved model!!"

In reality the eastern suburbs have suffered the biggest cut backs in service levels that I can recall in the last thirty years. Whole areas have had services removed, truncated or reduced in spread of hours and frequency of service.

Some of this is because three routes are suspended - 83, 84 and 51 because roading or sewerage is severely earthquake damaged, and in many cases resident numbers have dropped as thousands of houses have been rendered unliveable. Yet thousands - the majority in all except worst hit streets- remain.

Fair enough, in those cases a different strategy is needed - it turns the stomach to realise that the words "is needed" means Environment Canterbury has left the thousands of people who remain living along these routes with no alternative service for nine months!!

Indeed as was revealed in NZ in Tranzit in April the only bus service still operative through the Avondale-Wainoni-northside of Aranui block - route 40 had it's service frequency cut in half

The Ministry of Transport made restoration of transport in Christchurch one of its five key goals for the year, setting aside $400 million.

Clearly the bulk of this will go to roading and bridge restoration but with - at minimum - about 10% of the population solely dependent or highly dependent on public transport even Minister Joyce, no friend of public transport, could hardly argue this sector of taxpayers have no right to a few million towards avoiding transport poverty.

Despite this potential funding and the great surplus of buses, bus drivers and disrupted and under-employed cabbies (with no central city to work from) Environment Canterbury could do not even achieve the obvious thing of chartering taxi vans to provide a skeleton service from these areas - even from just key locations in these areas - to bus routes and hubs, for morning workers and mid day shoppers, many elderly widows and mothers with younger children included. Fitting a metrocard reader to these vans could have seen a reasonable farebox return at normal fares, plus a top up from Metro funding.

Would Leopard, Redbus, Go Bus have opposed this (which anyway delivered more passengers to the surviving routes) because it over-rode existing contracts? Hardly, and anyway CERA could have stepped in. For hell's teeth it is a disaster already without Metro adding to the stresses by inaction.

The complete collapse of bus services through certain areas have left hundreds of distressed residents without access to supermarkets other than by spending precious money from limited incomes.

In Lyttelton it was reported in The Mainland Press (september 14) former Sight Seeing operator Don Ross stepped in with his 14 seater bus and ran two trips a week with eight to ten mainly elderly passengers a time - all expenses out of his own pocket - from Lyttelton to Barrington Mall. Said The Mainland Press " Mr Ross started the service as soon as the Lyttelton Road Tunnel opened again after the quake and never expected it to keep going as long as it had. "Once the metro buses came back on I stopped the Lyttelton service but then I got a request to continue because the red busses were not going near shopping centres." [my accent]

Indeed this appears to be a major area of disaster mismanagement, worthy of study by other cities in NZ or overseas authorities wishing to learn how "not to do it" in the face of a major disaster. Metro and Environment Canterbury officers appear to have made no attempt to analyse which areas no longer had access to a supermarket and consequently no attempt to reconnect the dots as fast as possible to ensure that people already suffering huge losses and stresses, difficulties getting to work or school, were not also cut off from buyin| food and in some cases clean water.

Also in The Mainland Press, a few weeks previous (August 17th) the headline "Elderly take taxis to bus stops" drew attention to the older residents for whom a one to two kilometre walk to get to a bus stop [my note- with reduced frequency service] to wait for a bus to on of the few eastern supermarkets still open was virtually impossible.

According to this article, "Local resident Joan Marshall, 84, felt like she had lost her independence as now she had to pay $11 to take a taxi to her nearest bus stop in Wainoni Road." Mainland Press approached Avondale Resident's Association president Adrienne Lingard who said many elderly residents were totally reliant on public transport and she would like to see council action on the matter. "We've been coping for six months without buses. It just makes it so hard for older people to get out and about. Just going shopping is now a huge ordeal for them and not everyone can afford the taxi fares to get to other bus stops".

Is help at hand in the new improved services refferred to in the poster above? Certainly it was promised back in in October, according to Pegasus Post , the long standing eastern suburbs giveaway newspaper;

"Ecan is proposing routes which would run from Avonside through Dallington to the Palms shopping area and Avondale through Aranui to the Eastgate Shopping Centre. They are planned to run every for every two hours. The proposed small buses will have a limit of 12 passengers due to the damaged roads and Dallington Bridge, which has a weight restriction of 35000kg. "

However.....don't hold your breath, they have only had nine months.....continues the Pegasus Post "the plans are not yet finalised and services will depend upon patronage."

" But for some the good news comes a little too late. Dallington Resident's Association vice chairman Lionel Clarke could not understand why a bus service wasn't in place earlier. "This is what I pay my rates for. Everybody in Dallington is still paying their rates."

A summary of "improved" and "new" eastside services to Eastgate is listed below

5 Southshore Hornby

- back to normal high frequency (every 15 minutes or more) except for Southshore leg where road damage may be disguising plans to sneakin a future permanent reduction to evety 30 minutes only

40 Wainoni (- Middleton)

15 minute service applies only in peak hours, with 30 minutes at other times. Removal of 84, 51 and (prior to the earthquake) 49 route from large sections of the 40 route mean services cut by over 50% on this corridor, despite a threefoold increase in catchment area served by this solitary service.

35 Heathcote (to Lytelton via Eastgate ) route - this link to city for Bromley and Woolston area residents cut completely; evening services removed; frequency of day services cut 50%; no connection to Diamond Ferry despite ratio of population 3000 in Lyttelton; 1500 in Diamond Harbour - neither area with supermarkets. Repackaged as 535 "new route".

21 Mount Pleasant via Eastgate and 23 Bromley appear to be restored to normal levels

Service reductions of 66% in North Linwood - Amergh -Gloucester area (loss of 84 and 83) and The Tuam Street - Harrow Street corridor of Philipstown of about 30% (reduced 40 Wainoni day services, deletion of 35 route section)

NO CURRENT SERVICE (2 hourly shoppers shuttle to Eastgate only proposed!! ) No peak hour connections appear to work commute buses appear to be included). No evening services appear proposed. 100% work/school services cut ;100 % evening services cut - Avonside, Dallington Avondale; Aranui, and South Breezes Bexley area (no previous service ever implemented!). 75% cut in in week day service levels to most of these areas to Eastgate, 100% cut in direct access to city area

Absolutely pathetic Environment Canterbury - do the decent thing and refund eastside transport rates!! Or - funny idea this one - do the job the city pays you to do, run an effective bus service

Despite the large apron of wharf area for buses, enough for several to manoevre at once as shown here, no attempt is made to link up 535 route with its direct link to supermarkets to the Diamond Harbour Ferry - another waste of resources from the supposed "Environment" Canterbury; throwing away a chance to foster freater ferry use; another exposure of all the grand bullshit offered year after year about building an "integrated" transport system from an organisation that can't even tie its own shoelaces properly!

NZ passenger rail projects struggle for traction

2011-11-14T18:11:00.004+13:00

The last month or two has certainly been a bit of a roller coaster ride for those who support implementing new light rail and commuter rail projects around New Zealand.

Columnist Chris Hutching in the The National Business Review on 20th October said that the CERA (Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority) submission to the Central City Draft Plan made it clear they did not buy a lot of the Council agenda, including height restrictions on new buildings. Based on his analysis of the submission process Hutching noted "light rail is also highly unlikely" in Christchurch and its recovery scenario

Despite the word "submission", CERA is very much the chief driver in this situation and the City Council the junior player in this scenario with light rail funding unlikely unless CERA is in the cab and Gerry Brownlee is pushing from behind (with a fat wallet ready to split open).

Meanwhile in Auckland, on October 28th Mayor Len Brown put forward a possible funding scenario for the proposed central city rail link, to built mostly underground linking Britomart to Mount Eden station, at a cost of $2.4 billion. According to Brown this project could be funded 16.6 per cent by ratepayers, 2.5% by developers, 30.9% by "alternate transport funding" [presumably he means congestion fees or motorway tolls or similar ] with taxpayers footing the other 50% of the cost. This cost split was immediately rubbished by Minister of Transport Stephen Joyce's office, which has consistently disputed the business case for the rail tunnel.

According to a report in the NZ Herald, "Brown has previously floated congestion and network fees as an alternative way to fund transport projects while keeping rates low. The fees were all but rejected by Joyce who said motorists already contribute enough to public transport through fuel taxes. "

However response in the same fortnight from the other major political parties has been much more positive . The Greens announced they would meet 60% of the cost out of Government coffers; Labour announced it would fund the 50% and meet the costs by dropping Joyce's Puhoi to Wellsford "Holiday Highway" our-lane Auckland as far as Puhoi at a cost of $1.2 , part of the Roads of National Significance strategy. To pay for the rail link, the party would scrap National's plans for the new highway north of Auckland, which would cost nearly $1.7 billion and has little identified cost-benefit return.

Labour favours a $320 million alternative that includes a Warkworth bypass and improvements to the existing road. he alternative road and the rail link would be less than what National budgeted for the highway.

Labour also announced it will investigate establishing a Hamilton-to-Auckland commuter rail service, extra funding to promote coastal shipping, and re-evaluating National's roads of national significance program.

The recent revival of interest in establishing commuter rail between Hamilton-Auckland followed a petition in 2009 signed by over 11,000 Waikato residents. A logistical problem is that there would be no room for a peak hour trains to travel into Britomart. An alternate proposal to use the platforms (with a basic but expensive make-over) of the former Auckland railway station at The Strand taking some of the shine off the proposal.. As always with rail projects relying on significant local funding it is hard to win wide support for a narrow corridor of line where the alignment of which or the purpose can only serve a small portion of the population.
Transport Auckland has said the project does not deliver enough benefit to Aucklander's to be considered within their areas of governance and was not prepared to help fund a two year trial, which anyway offered only two trips a day [just one of the several long distance coach service providers between Auckland and Hamilton, InterCity Coachlines, claims it offers 23 services a day to choose from] .

The rail plan that was proposed calculated as many as (or should that be, as little as?) 130 regular commuters a day using this Waikato to Auckland rail. This said, even this might be unduly optimistic.When the previous passenger rail service was withdrawn in 2001 it was reported in the Waikato Times (June 21 2001) only 12 people were commuting every day between the two cities.

In the Waikato itself, constituent district council Waipa said they could not support the costs for so limited benefit, Waikato Regional Council made its position clear by making no budgetary allowance for the project in the current 2012-2022 ten year plan, saying it was no go unless funding partners came forward. A few days later Hamilton City Council gave it the thumbs down as well.

Also struggling for its existence is the Capital Connection which is part of the KiwiRail long distance rail system, but has acted essentially as a commuter train between Palmerston North and Wellington. As with many long distance commuter services the costs of the early stages of the longer run, where fewer passengers typically board, are in large part met by the greater number of shorter trip passengers boarding as the train gets within easier commuting distance of the metropolitan hub. In this case it has been the passengers boarding in the Waikanae area, until recently beyond easy access to the terminus of Wellington's electrified commuter rail, that have boosted the Capital Connections operating income. Since the extension of the commuter rail to Waikanae, Capital Connection patronage has slumped below viable margins.

According to a recent report in the Dominion Post " While the northbound service from Wellington to Palmerston North had remained largely unaffected, southbound passenger numbers had continued to drop. About 630 people now catch the Capital Connection every day, down from 708 a year ago. KiwiRail is monitoring the service and if patronage does not pick up options such as subsidising or closing it would be considered. ....[and this is real down to the wire reality!].... The service needs an extra 38 passengers per day for the service to break even".

In general despite a huge investment into the hundreds of millions Wellington commuter rail has yet to start growing a bigger patronage. In August the Dominion-Post reported Wellington City Council's submission to the regional transport plan saying;

"Wellingtonians are high users of public transport relative to other cities in New Zealand, but patronage has not been growing in recent years, partly as a result of reliability issues and fare increases," the submission says. Though the regional land transport strategy (RLTS) aimed to increase annual passenger trips from 36 million in 2009-10 to at least 50 million trips in 2020, the region's public transport patronage had only grown slightly since 2005.

"Achieving the RLTS goals for public transport will require major improvements in how public transport services are delivered. While major improvements are now being made to rail infrastructure and services, two-thirds of Wellington's passenger transport trips are made by bus, and improvements in how bus services operate are also critical."

It also noted how the need to increase fares to cover this big expansion had reduced the accessible pricing image of public transport "However, figures from a quality of life survey show the proportion of Wellingtonians who believe public transport is affordable has plunged from 72 per cent in 2003 to 46 per cent last year".

At the last Census, in 2006, 17% of greater Wellington residents indicated they used public transport to travel to work, a figure only about 12% greater than the percentage in 1996. However the 2006 This compares with just 7% in Auckland and 4% in Canterbury. Whether it is the constant breakdowns and delays caused by the run down older infrastructure or the interruptions caused by the introduction of the new system, there would rarely be a week where Wellington doesn't have service problems or suspensions. The new Matangi trains in particular offer (appropriate expression!) new light at the end of this upgraded tunnel but it can not be entirely discounted that Wellington public transport use is close to its likely ceiling, other than the effects of very large oil price rises. At 17% Wellington punches far above its size in public transport patronage, far above the 120 other or so cities under 800,000 in CANZUS. Even amongst much larger cities over the million mark only the largest (usually with subways) achieve above 20% of peak commuter patronage, the only exception being Ottawa with 22% and its extensive network of off-road busways and associated bus lanes.

Busways have turned up trumps in Brisbane too, this year celebrating the 10th anniversary of the opening of the first full busway corridor in 2001. Bus usage has since increased 65% since FR 2003/4 to 71 million trips a year, outstripping a more modest 20% increase in rail patronage to 57 million per year.

Meanwhile in Auckland a survey of 1,822 members by the Automobile Association found that 52% of members considered a bus their most likely alternative to car use, only 32% a train. This possibly reflects the limited ease of access to fixed rail corridors, or lack of direct connection between home areas and work areas, problems inherent in any fixed rail system. The survey results make for interesting reading and appear to echo trends overseas in many larger cities, where traffic congestion now costs so much in lost time waste and creates such lifestyle deterioration that even motorists are becoming big supporters of improved and increased public transport.

Says this article posted on Voxy News "The AA has acknowledged the Council's balanced list of public transport and roading projects. However, given the lack of available funding, we have expressed concern about the Council's failure to prioritise regional projects in a transparent manner which focuses on the principles of benefit-cost efficiency, geographic distribution and customer preference," says Mr Lambourne. AA believes Council should prioritise bus improvements.

"The AA believes the Council's public transport priority should be upgrading the existing bus and rail networks, infrastructure and services across the region. Only once this is done should the Council consider expanding them."

Quite so!

The AA is also concerned about the generic nature of the Auckland Draft Plan and lack of specific detail.

Hmmm that's a big problem everywhere I suspect! Just this morning the NZ Herald carries a story that Standard & Poor have threatened to reduce Auckland City Council's credit rating (from AA to AA - ) because projected rail projects will put the city too far in debt. This could increase cost of borrowing money for all council projects.

NZ in Tranzit has put forward a scenario for a commuter rail in Christchurch, not least to build a solid foundation for the future and build in resilience against future oil shocks but please let us not pretend doing rail anywhere is an easy or an instant ticket to success.

.

Hot-spot exposes a city falling far short of quality public transport

2011-11-08T08:52:00.064+13:00

POOR ROAD USE

A couple of weeks ago, one rainy day, I was on a bus traveling up Papanui Road to Northlands. It was about about 3.30 pm. and already traffic was queueing.

The most impressive part of the bus journey was north of St Andrews College/Normans Road intersection -the bus fair flew along the bus lane, up the inside of a traffic queue until it got into the congestion at "the roundabout" (junction of Papanui Road and Harewood Road).

Then it got bogged in a queue and crawled up to the stop just past the Mobil Service Station on Main North Road. Understandably perhaps local retailers resisted bus lanes through this shopping area, and I respect there are places where roadside businesses need the image and illusion of of easy front door parking to survive. However after leaving the stop by the convenience store [opposite The Rose and Thistle pub] it probably took another two to three minutes, with a red light at Langdons Road, and in a stop-start queue [photo above] to travel the next 700 metres to the major bus stop outside Northlands.

This wasted time is instead of the 20 seconds this distance would take in a clear run situation if lights were designed to favour buses and buses had their own exclusive lane. It is hard to see the point of bus laning parts of Papanui Road if the three most congested areas -Victoria Street, Merivale and Papanui/Northlands - offer so little assistance to giving buses clear advantage.

The lack of commitment in Christchurch to public transport is fairly self evident if one notes the large unused footpath and ornamental border space in the photo above. Here is another photo of it, taken further back towards Langdons Road, immediately rear of position of top photo (ignore artistic condensation patterns on bus window!)

This suggests an added bus and bike lane could be accommodated and still leave room for a more than adequate pedestrian footpath. There is a wall of Westpac protruding onto the footpath, presumably they have figured there was more land than they needed. In an extreme case, negotiations by a Council committed to public transport could see this frontage area purchased and returned to public land, with a concrete arch over the footpath replacing the structural role of this protruding wall. Noted; Auckland is spending millions of dollars (including those sourced from Canterbury taxpayers) to enhance roading and public transport corridors, buying up over 500 private properties just on the AMETI scheme and Waterview Tunnel project alone - our city won't even negotiate a minor frontage purchase widening a road to give a better bus run! However there appears anyway, more than enough space for pedestrian, cycle and bus lane.

Where ever bus lanes are built close to the footpath it does no harm to build a bedstead fence and this situation it would also render the passage safe for sight handicapped people. Further purchases would need to be made of the meaningless ornamental box and frontage of Cash Converters - council might offer owners a far more attractive, thinner, ornamental box hedging, and build a slightly less wide footpath. Ditto along the frontage of the Northlands Mall car park where currently buses slide into the (ahem) Northlands Metro Suburban Transfer Station.

Not. Ok a rainy day makes it look worse. No propaganda photos please blogster!

Of course on a fine day it might look like the photo below taken in 2010 (noted - before the buses arrived several people including an elderly lady and a mother and small child had to walk onto the road to get past this thronged footpath).

This classy looking set-up is presumably one of the nine suburban bus stations promised by ECan and Council back in 2006. Yeah right.

The transport authorities in Christchurch had only four years before the earthquake to address the issue. Understandably only one such station, a fairly modest set-up at at Hornby, has ever been created.

At a rate of one suburban transfer station per four years (if Council can maintain the pace, phew!) expect completion of all nine by 2043.

But let us go back in "space" rather than forward in time and check out Main North Road as it approaches Langdons Road. As usual the dwatted wabbit (yes he still lurks somewhere in these pages) was carrying his camera. a couple of weeks after the top two photos, and noticed the following scenario -

This is outside PostShop and KiwiBank (combined) in front of an area permeated with multiple car parks in lanes and back areas. It is looking in the opposite direction to the bus photos above and just by the blue car in the middle distance are the markings on the road for the bus stop by the convenience store.

The yellow line in front of the car parking bay for two or three cars leads right up to Langdons Road. Arguably if on road parking is needed at all it would be better as 5 minute parking in front of the convenience store and this lane have (a) a bus stop in front of Postbank then (b) a Bus Lane (bus only straight ahead, turning lane for cars) with intelligent signals to take buses straight through this congestion point onto a full time exclusive bus lane towards Northlands and a proper suburban exchange station.

My guess is be create an adequate transfer station the Council will need to work with Northlands Mall, perhaps insetting an enclosed waiting area into a small part of the Northlands carpark and narrowing the waist of the road to create safe passage across the road to a narrower bus shelter stop on the opposite side, copious use of bedstead fencing needed to channel pedestrian movements safely. The footpath area will needed to pass under the over arching veranda or around the back. As with Ottawa or Calgary in Canada CCTV will need to be clear and linked to a monitored centre which can focus to faces, move and track movements, and if need be security or police alerted. I believe vulnerable bus stations needing to be "safer than houses" - precisely the places that bad eggs avoid - rather than as often happens overseas, places that "normal" people avoid because they become hang-out spots for street people or idle but noisy youth to annoy others or worse, locations for drug dealing, panhandling, bullying and abusive behaviour.

Facilities such as toilets, baby change station, cycle rack at rear will also be necessary. Electronic touch maps city wide will probably be available - touch present location, touch desired destination and a ticket size information document spews out showing the next three options, by whatever transfer pattern pattern and travel time, between the two locations.

Entrances and exits to the Mall carpark may need to shifted slightly and work in with traffic lights for the buses. Real time signage for buses travelling in both directions will be needed, so it is possible for passsengers to evaluate all options.

POOR SCHEDULING

Bus services would need to be scheduled in a co-ordinated interactive way by professional bus planners not the current mish mash which would make a child blush with embarrassment at ineptitude and stupidity. Also for an organisation called Environment Canterbury - a hypocritical and gross waste of limited resources, all over town running rare evening and weekend services through key points and along shared corridors simultaneously - and then anything up to an hour gap.

Take these sample departure times below, from the "new look" post-quake timetables (mostly the same-old same-old recycled!), route numbers in brackets. This lists all services that run along the a shared 6km stretch of road, including that in the photograph above, a road which is probably one the busiest in northern Christchurch.

Effective resource use? You can judge for yourself.

City Central to Northlands via Papanui Road Saturday night (mins past hour)

04 (8) 07 (12) 24 (11) 58 (22) .....four buses an hour and still a 34 minute gap in services!!

City Central to Northlands via Papanui Road Sundays (mins past hour)

01 (12) 09 (8) 29 (11) 50 (22) 58 (22) daytime three services grouped between 50 and 09 and then nothing for 20 minutes, then nothing for a further 21 mins.

What a dogs breakfast - like something out of fifty years ago (or do I insult the past?)

Incidentally - if we add in the 10 route bus service and walk ten minutes from Papanui to Northlands it changes nothing all services in both the above periods run at 05 past the hour city to Papanui - how flakey does it get!!)

What is so impossible about a core departure time pattern 10 25 40 55 - every 15 minutes during EVERY operating hour from 7pm Saturday morning to Sunday 9pm?

It would use no more buses than present or at most marginally so, just to cover swapping drivers.

Is this really so far beyond the abilities of ECan to work out? Any extra services such as 10 route or Saturday middle of the day services woven in at rational spacing, but the core pattern would remain rock solid and reliable.

What on earth is the point of our public transport system spending over $60 million a year (half from the public purse) to create a product that is not user friendly, fails to minimise and make predictable maximum wait time and offers patterns so fragmented, asymetrical and absurdly spaced as to be impossible to retain in the mind easily?

How many thousands more people would catch all day Saturday and all day Sunday bus services along this 6 km shared corridor (city via Victoria St, Papanui Rd and Main North Road to QEII Drive) - the busiest northern arterial in the city - if they knew this simple fact; that buses on this shared route corridor always run to a predictable pattern, every quarter of an hour from 7am Saturday morning to 12am Saturday night; and from 9 am to 9pm Sunday, additional services also on Saturday in middle of the day.

What idiotic system throws away the marketing appeal of this simple reliable concept, operating all the buses needed to supply it in a higgedly-piggedly mess?

Until Environment Canterbury can get its act together not only is it screwing the rate/tax and farepayers paying for this system, delivering half the service quality it could be for the same money and driving potential customers away, it also makes any possibility of (reliable) transfer stations slightly ludicrous. Why would anyone trust transferring between routes that run only two or three minutes apart? Or that can leave one standing at a transfer point for 34 minutes (or longer) between buses. .

SOME MORE FIGURES

This piece of Main North Road is a stretch of road that sees about 25 or more buses in each direction per hour, The Orbiter every ten minutes and about seven or eight others to multiple northern areas including the "express" Northern Star buses to Rangiora and The Comet to the Airport.

In the period 3pm -6pm, even allowing that many buses are still running very low in patronage following the earthquake dusruptions and the closure of much of the CBD, this probably amounts to at least a 1000 passengers spread across 75 northbound buses.

Let us say enhancing bus lanes and traffic signal patterns at this area (notably the intersection with Langdons Road) could save, say, on average 1.5 minutes, or 1500 minutes of passenger time lost per business evening (= 25 hours per night, or 175 hours per working week or roughly 8750 hours per year. I am not including the, say, 20% of the time outside the 3pm - 6pm period, such as Saturday mornings where time could also be saved so this probably a very conservartive figure.

Of course, making buses not only faster, but felt as faster, does much to spur patronage. As well the city's steady revival will significantly spur patronage and it might be more realistic to say delays at this intersection cost bus commuters an expected 10,000 hours per year increasing to 30,000 hours per year in the next ten years as bus services fill up again.

The delay in queues can also tilt the balance in favour of car usage instead for those that have or choose this option. Let's say the Papanui/Main North Road chokepoints contributes to the loss of the potential weekly patronage (average 11 trips per week per 45 week year - allowing annual holidays, statuary holidays and sickness) of a futher 300 regular or potentially commuters patrons who decide against bus use because of perceived slowness, with the Papanui are chiokepoint the image that springs most to their mind, and buy a car instead (loss of potential 3300 trips per week times 45 weeks a year = 158,400 passenger trips per year or (Metrocard) revenue of $138,000, one zone users only counted).

These figures are purely hypothetical but you can probably get the ghist!!

The battle to move buses from the back of the queue into the fastest and smartest way to get around the city is fought and won in seconds and minutes. Not least because if route gets to point A on time every working night, then passengers can transfer to bus B at the same location 10 minutes later. Which means predictability, reliability, easy to memorise travel patterns, journey options expanding exponentially.

When buses employ modern technology and are supported by local authorities and good scheduling they can cut the perception that buses only travel in one direction A to B, or K to S, rather than every service inherently takes you in every direction.

Although we often hear about how buses are subsidised we never hear about the real cost or costs that can be estimated of parking or Council's inaction or merely making token gestures towards public transport.

Why should ratepayers, taxpayers and bus users spend a whopping $68 million per year on a bus service that can't even deliver quality services on time, not least because Council will not create the necessary infrastructure. Is the real cost in lost status and effectiveness and patronage of buses into the tens of thousands.

If indeed we lose $138,000 of bus income, from this congestion point (one of about 20 around Christchurch) what is the real cost of subsidising those two or three car parks that make a clear run between two stops impossible, as shown by the placement of the carparks in the photo above? $10-20,000 per year?

Heritage trams - out of place in the new Christchurch?

2011-11-06T08:59:00.008+13:00

Temporary shop built in containers - stylistic harbinger of a very different city?

I was in that part of the central city of Christchurch now re-opened to the public the other evening. The temporary Cashel Mall shopping centre built in containers was fantastic, really worked. Hopefully when new building's are built they can capture that same mix of open space and intimate lane feel as well. It is also possible to walk around much of the Central city west of Colombo Street in this area - not least because so much of the land is vacant, cleared, gravelled or even tar sealed into car park.

In this area there are perhaps a third to a half of the buildings still standing, mostly nondescript and/or modern. What comes home to any Christchurch citizen must surely be this, that there will be virtually no buildings of historic character left in the central city east of the Avon River. One or two 1930s buildings, nice enough but probably barely noticed in the past, and the cute little wooden shop Shand's Emporium, in wood, build 1853 are all that seems to remain in the area around which I walked with a friend. Far from from being a "heritage city" we will have fewer older buildings in the business area than most other small to medium cities.

On the other hand the area west of the Avon, with the Arts Centre, Museum, Christ's College etc and many fine old wooden houses remains more or less intact, with its overall integrity and needs "nothing more" than a few tens of millions and several years to restore. There seems to me to be a much more distinct dividing line now, between new city and old city and the importance of maintaining the integrity of the whole Arts Centre zone can only become more important.

Less important I suspect are the graceful old heritage trams that have operated in Christchurch for the last 16 years. These had a natural synergy with the older character of Christchurch, they created an iconic image and a binding of the old and new together. The contrast between old and new - such as the photo in the sidebar of this blog, a tram heading towards high rise buildings, had its own energy. But now - New Regent Street aside - in an entirely new city I suspect such ornate old trams will appear oddly out of place. Without older buildings they will appear slightly pathetic, sad, like some poor old soul with dementia wandering, looking for a past that no longer exists.

The earthquakes and their devastation have changed many things and one of them may be the relevance of heritage trams in the city centre.

One of the problems for locals long before any earthquake was that trams played no useful role for residents. Although the tramway operations added value to the tourists, stopping and starting and sight seeing commentary provided, they were so slow as to be utterly useless as a form of public transport, even with a resident annual pass. I bought an annual ticket one year, mistakenly thinking I could add this to my transport options, traveling Cathedral Square to Arts Centre or Hagley Park (etc) instead of walking, but it was so painfully slow I never used it again. Information in the commentary was old hat to locals, the long stops and intrusive voice (for me) just tedious. And I could walk the distance twice as fast.

I have always suspected that the continuous expansion of the Heritage Tramway in Christchurch, with all its likelihood of reducing returns to the operating company ( it all takes wages and resources to go the extra distance when the added route section unlikely to attract significantly more tourists than the existing one) was also an attempt to build a future light rail circuit - before the city had actually agreed to build light rail! And it was being done cheaper than might otherwise be the case because the line building budgets were slipped into other upgrades, such as the resurfacing of High Street and Cashel Mall.

This said, how modern trams/streetcars could be inserted into that scenario was for me the curious question. With so few passing loops, and such ponderously slow tourist trams in the way, how could a brisker schedule of modern circuit trams running simultaneously be created ? Also how could a free tram or minimal cost tram designed to circulate local shoppers operate without significantly cutting into the profits of the heritage trams? Most travelers are keen to pick up hints from other travelers, especially those on a mum, dad and the kids budgets. I can imagine talk in Picton motor camp or an Auckland bed and breakfast along the lines "Oh when you're in Christchurch just catch a normal tram, it's fraction of the cost and you see all the same things as the old ones, you just don't get to ride on a vintage tram or a commentary".

In the new circumstances it would seem to me somewhat irrelevant to operate Heritage Trams through a consistently non-heritage central city, east of the Avon. On the other hand much of the work for a light rail (street car type) has been done.

If Christchurch wants to score above its weight - hugely above its weight in transport sophistication - I suggest reversing the estimated expenditure pattern for public transport put forward in the Central City Draft plan. This was $40 million for the whole city wide 250 km (?) bus network [offering next to nothing in support infrastructure !] and $406 million for light rail - for one length of 7.5km light rail !

I suggest Christchurch gets its own light rail variant - the modern streetcar - by putting the $40 million into finishing a revised central city tram circuit and buying three or four lightweight, low floor, wide door, modern light rail vehicles for a central city circulator system. These will cost about $5 million each leaving about $20 million for track extension. And then, sensibly, put the $406 million side of the equation into a region wide commuter rail and busway corridor system and - not least - into the dozens of bus infrastructure projects that need doing (intersection widening at key congestion points for added straight through bus lanes, intelligent road signals that read bus needs etc).

The Heritage trams might continue to operate across the wider route network, but just say four trips a day, a sort of advertising circuit, with most Heritage tram rides on the existing circuit which covers new Regent Street and the Arts Centre with other added value thrown in, as specifically tourist trams focused on our remaining "heritage zone", Hagley Park and the Botanic Gardens. It could even travel in some part into the gardens or Hagley Park. In these circumstances it does not seem to me to be so incongruous, not a defining image of the city, just an occasional visitor to the new city, a reminder of the heritage area west of the CBD for tourists

The rest of the city tramway could be recreated in a shorter faster circuit - Cashel Mall then up Oxford Terrace to Victoria Square, then back onto existing tram tracks or a new circuit across Tuam Street to the bus station or (if commuter rail became a fact) direct to Sydenham. Or possibly a line from New Regent Street to Manchester Street (rebuilt as a wider boulevard?) down towards High Street.

The effect - the new Christchurch would have a modern light rail system and morale boosting image; the old Christchurch would retain a presence and link to the city centre. Both systems would logically be operated by the one tramway company, as now under a single contracted agreement, without or without subsidies as determined etc.

As with commuter rail I am now advocating a rail based solution, this time for central city!!

This is highly ironic because I believe - know - buses can do every form of public transport much faster, frequently and more effectively, in multiple directions, if given the sort of financial support enjoyed by rail, and at half the cost and twice the quality of service. Certainly there are parts outside this loop that could be as well or better handled by our existing shuttle buses, with an upgrade.

This said, I accept people get a buzz off rail systems and will use it more. This suggestion, light rail in city centre only, seems like a win-win situation, offers something to all parties. It is a solution that would allow the city to get on with the REAL TASK so long sidelined by repeated administrations, the task of moving our public transport system as much as possible off [congested ] road and moving this system into the 21st century.

\

Getting around the one track mindset of city hall

2011-10-30T07:42:00.013+13:00

Diesel railcar in suburban service in Adelaide Photo Wikimedia Commons

I have just made an updated version of the submission I made to the Central City Draft Plan to the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority (CERA) Draft Recovery Plan calling on CERA to pressure the City Council to include Busways and commuter rail in the $4 million study of light rail.

To me it seems absurd that city councilors with no obvious background depth in public transport principles, accounting or technology have already ditched by far the most established forms of public transport - systems used by over 95% of all public transport systems/users in the world* - in favour of one far more expensive and far less common, particular in CANZUS and in cities under a million population, light rail.

Most of the ideas included in that submission to CERA have already appeared in my blogs over the last few weeks, but I expand here why I believe that for commuter rail to have viability in Christchurch it needs an expanded route system. (ps I have also updated the previous route map to make the suggested link to Woodend/Pegasus more sensible and easily accessible to residents from both these settlements and north Kaiapoi)

Essentially the populations of the out rigger towns - the ones where longer distances from the city are likely to encourage rail commutes is too small. Combining Rolleston, Rangiora and Kaiapoi and other bits and pieces only comes to about 35, 000... and that is an exceedingly generous figure! This is only one sixth the "out rigger" population of the Greater Wellington region where approximately 90,000 live up the Kapiti Coast and 115,000 live up the Hutt Valley. Yes our own peripheral towns will grow (and commuter rail will foster growth) but still remain relatively small. In themselves I believe far too small to sufficiently support a rail system only serving limited facilities.

On the other hand between Papanui and the city; Hornby and the city, Hillsborough and the city the number of people using rail to get into the city is not likely to great just because the ratios of distance and wait and walk to time saved would just be too cumbersome for most and in no way time competitive with car or suburb-to-city bus use. Of course some of the commuters from these same stops will go to workplaces other than the city centre, such as Chapmans Road or Middleton. Nonethless unless the line passes through sufficient suburbs and settlements of dense population and easy access to rail further out from their destination this number will remain too small. Middle distant catchment areas such as Belfast or Islington, Templeton are so thin, or still too thin yet, such relatively small settlements they would not provide a big user group to boost or to help carry services/spread costs either.

As for Lyttelton, once the busiest commuter route in the former suburban rail network there is nothing to warrant commuter rail now. The daily population no longer consists of 700- 1000 waterside workers, 750 ferry passengers twice a day, 500-1000 seamen in port on 20 or so heavily crewed ships for three weeks while ships were unloaded by crane and slings, or barrowed bags, nor close to 4000 residents with no road tunnel before 1964! Why would anyone nowadays want to catch a train to Lyttelton and then have to walk a kilometre up a steep street in all weathers just to get to the shops, let alone houses, when a bus (two routes) is just as fast and takes them much further up the hill? This is quite apart from the huge amount of coal trains, log trains and container traffic that already has to be managed through the rail tunnel choke-point.

Ostensibly "light rail" might be able to use the road tunnel, but what a huge disruption trying to build that at night, what a huge cost to implement, what heap of dead running, and for what? A population at last census of 3062 in an area of constrained land growth and in Diamond Harbour (via Ferry) and an area that gets many visitors (or did) but usually linked to car use, campervan tourists, evening social trips or Sunday drivers etc.

When I saw the City Council in its Central City Draft plan including Lyttelton in the multi-billion "light rail future network" it just made me laugh. Extraopolating the distance from the Riccarton Road proposal to a light rail roughly Waltham-Opawa-Heathcote-Lyttelton it would cost three quarters of a billion dollars to serve less than 5% of the city's population. It makes as much or as little sense to run light rail to Beckenham or Parklands.

So my thinking is commuter rail can only really be warranted, worthwhile and successful if it links lots of residential areas (including those planned to build in direct relationship to rail access), if it is a system that particularly addresses longer journeys and the if the rail itself also serves lots of traffic generator points.

In this scenario at almost every station people are getting off AND getting on.That can only happen if rail services multiple points and multiple functions and does so intensely, not just carrying commuters from the outskits to city centre and back again patterns, even if this would still be the single most common trip pattern. The system will need continuous patronage in all directions, and short hop trips within longer journeys and the fare structure to foster this, people going tofro a major employment zone or shopping or sports facility and/or tofro a relatively dense residential area, all facilities within easy rail station access or linked to co-ordinated frequent bus services via the station.

A comparison might be made with The Orbiter, the city's most successful bus route which even when it only has a handful of people on board at any one point may be picking up the equivalent of a full bus load of passengers every circuit. Public transport transport typically operates around a quarter to a third full, that is its nature by virtue of tidal commuter flow at peak hours and maintaining sufficient spread of services to attract commuter traffic and meet social goals.  Even a full load on a typical peak-hour city-suburban train, tram or bus route doesn't achieve full loading until after it is half-way to its destination; or is reduced to half a load before it gets halfway out from the city towards its terminii.

Ideally a pattern of land use and employment zone and recreational facility and residential development that fosters an even flow of passengers getting on and off is the key, the same seat is sold more than once. A half filled bus or train operates each trip at a patronage level beyond at its actual seating number capacity yet is rarely over-full, or crowded because all the passengers are not on at the same moment. I do not believe this latter goal can be achieved successfully enough with the current inverted "T" railway lines from North and South that meet at Addington. There would not be enough locations, a rich enough network of connections served or journey options, to feed this constant process. So many Christchurch residents would have to walk, drive, bus or bike so far to access a station on the current route pattern, they may as well travel direct to work by the same mode - and the they would! Joining the three spurs to a loop and adding another tp Restons, through purpose build new subdivisions with concentrated hubs near stations, ticks vastly more boxes, including sports stadium/event centre direct access and a link to the airport as both an airport and major employment zone.

This said, including the option of rail to the airport is certainly no instant panacea, it has not done so well in other CANZUS cities, it does not automatically attract a huge percentage of travellers. Sensitivity to luggage portage, shuttle bus or trolley connection, and other issues (friends coming to say goodbye or greet etc) needs to be well factored into any design and fare structure.

A thoughtful article in the NZ Herald last year by Michael Barnett -questioning Auckland's push for rail to airport - noted "Unchallenged evidence tabled at the Auckland Regional Council some years ago projected the passenger mode share for a CBD-Airport rail service would be, at best, about 6 per cent. This is similar to airports in Australia and the United States and makes no difference to the numbers of cars going to the airport.". It is my understanding that regular commuters, working at airports, often form the backbone of such services.

However Christchurch does have one advantage, the city's airport is not out on a limb, not out 25km or more from the city centre, but sits neatly on the edge of town where it can be integrated into a passing train service. We can take advantage of that. The airport averages 115,000 passengers a week, 5000 people work on the airport campus. Probably almost as many work in Sheffield Crescent only a 5 minute bus trip away. According to a New Zealand Transport Agency pamphlet on the Western Corridor Road 37,000 vehicles a (working) day head into Christchurch from the north through Belfast. Building the western corridor around the back of Belfast to link up with Johns Road will reduced that amount by 17,000 vehicles. Only 10% of these travel beyond Hornby, so adding in the classic 1.2 passengers per car that source delivers about 18,000 commuters to try to woo to rail.

There will be an over lap in all these figures but let's assume rail can win 5% of the traffic from these sources, averaged daily. Rounded up that's 850 air passengers and perhaps another 100 friends etc going to say Goodbye or meet and greet; 250 of the 5000 workers in the area; 900 of those commuters traveling in from the North into (currently) Johns Road. In all about 2000 commuters a day, with two trips (there and back) applying for the majority....let's say 3,500 passengers trips a day utilising the new link Redwood to airport. That is, before we count in new population in the Upper Styx area where subdivisions can be built to foster rail usage, if only to shop at the airport shopping complex, The Spitfire Centre;  or factor in the rail patronage of those travelling from Papanui, Rolleston or Heathcote etc to work industrial areas close to the airport such as Sheffield Crescent; or those using the park-and-ride at Russley to access the CBD or Woolston/Opawa industrial area; or those traveling tofro Islington Park industrial area; or full trains to a Saturday test match at Addington City Stadium; or Broomfield kids traveling to Hornby High School et etc

It would seem about a 5000 trips a day could be generated from this link on a relatively conservative base of 5% of likely traffic using rail. Of course the idea is to grow far more, and ideally start getting 10-15% using rail, from existing facilities or new ones. However there is nothing more short-sighted to me than "talking up" public transport figures and then wasting too much money on a single system that could have been more effectively spent elsewhere. The same services not based on reality are then liable to get cut back or canned completely at the next big recession. Few things can waste public money faster than an ineffective public transport system, pumping out excessive losses unrelentingly day after day,

Allowing for quieter weekends (apart from later Sunday air passengers and big events) that might allow us to estimate a bottom-line of 30,000 trips a week, or 1.5 million passenger trips a year, generated by including that section of track. If oil was to go through the roof - doubling or tripling as has been predicted once the current plateau [ceiling?] of production of 75 billion barrels per day starts to decline - this is likely to rise, exponentially. Anyone building rail in this era is well advised to build long platforms! This increased patronage allows/demands increased frequency and in turn stimulates further patronage gains.

But even assuming all these oil price rise predictions are bosh, 1.5 million trips per year seems like it might be a feasible start point to build a 10 kilometre link which I would guess would probably cost (with various overbridges apart from the Memorial Avenue one already included in roading budget) under $200 million to build, Redwood to Islington. (And probably the same amount again to upgrade the existing corridors, add a spur to Prestons and build a central rail/bus centre in Sydenham or Addington).

If patronage never grew much beyond 1.5 million trips per year, this link would still generate about 40 million passenger trips across 25 years, as well as generating freight benefits, tourist support and city imagery benefits, and regional rail benefits. This gives an immediate cost benefit ratio which might give us a spread fixed cost per passenger trip of under $4 per loading plus operating costs plus a lot of added intangibles nonetheless worth millions of dollars. This seems fairly similar to rail elsewhere, and probably comparable to car use in real costs to society (though who can count the millions of lives damaged by global warming in which heavy carbon generated by cars plays such a significant part).

I also imagine some of that amount will also be regained by the classic non-resident (non-Metro Card) cash fare from the airport being higher for tourists, as operates in most cities.  Even at its lowest (as on current bus services to the Christchurch airport at $7 non-resident) typically fares are two to three times the standard fare for the same distance.

Of course all this calculating is just wild guestimate!! I could be miles out. But it is good to try to get some fix on how realistic things may or may not be. Everybody also knows big projects can skyrocket in costs from earlier estimates. But I do know good public transport is very much about getting it right in the various details, careful conservative estimates [albeit with room to grow exponentially] not just fanciful images and wishful thinking.

Obviously the whole "loop and spurs" commuter rail for Christchurch concept would need to be looked at by professional consultants from one of the big international transport engineering firms that has a long history in such matters - just a pity that our city council has already committed ** $4 million to studying light rail instead!

* I am basing this on the fact that the world's top public transport federation (to which most major NZ public transport bodies also belong) the UITP says over 80% of the world's public passenger traffic is carried by bus PLUS the enormous size of patronage and number of rail and subway systems in the world's 200 largest cities, contrasted to the comparatively few light rail systems and even fewer large passenger carriers (over 100 million passengers per year).

** Carried by a comparatively thin margin 6-4 with three more votes absent, the decision also dropped the predetermination of a light rail route, city to the University, proposed in the Central City Draft plan. Historically the great expense of light rail versus proportion of residents served has made light rail a particularly hot potato in the low density CANZUS countries, with debates and studies etc spanning years and unseating or installing Mayors and Councils as tides change - eg Honolulu, Winnipeg, Kitchener-Waterloo [Canada]. Cities in oil or mineral rich areas Edmonton, Calgary, Gold Coast City, Perth etc often had substantial grants (gifts) from Provincial or State Governments towards light rail and other expensive public transport infrastructure and appear to have not encountered the same degree of local tax payer resistance.

A train of thought on several tracks.

2011-10-24T16:05:00.070+13:00

From Sockburn overbridge looking towards city centre

There is a strong push for the potential of commuter rail to be investigated more thoroughly in Christchurch.

The various groups and individuals promoting it (NZ in Tranzit included) see it as a far more sensible option than the hugely expensive per kilometre on-street "light rail network" being mooted.

A major factor often mentioned is that there an existing current rail infrastructure to build upon.

I do not have any great deal of learning in rail systems, but enough enough background reading to know this would certainly not be as simple as it sounds. Ideally peak hour services would need to be not less than every 20 minutes from Rolleston and Rangiora/Kaiapoi running to the city and to Ferrymead (near Heathcote). Adding up the commuter trains in both directions, during this peak period it appears to tie up a lot of rail line for about or six or seven hours a day, and would be be complicated at any time.

A major factor is West Coast coal trains and those heading for the Picton ferry will have their own timetable requirements, tied to passing loops and ferry sailings freeing up and filling up yards and locomotives. The coal trains will also have their own scheduling needs, closely tied I suspect to getting through multiple tunnels - including the Lyttelton tunnel and the Staircase tunnels and 8.5 km Otira tunnel through the Southern Alps. The latter tunnel needs banking with three extra locomotives to haul the hefty coal trains up the steep tunnel incline [NZ Railfan magazine had an exceptionally brilliant photo essay on this process a few issues back] . Just running this particular operation alone would take quite a lot of organised timing. Ideally, I presume, it works to a rythmnic pattern of arrivals and departures night and day. Delays and interruptions of freight movements at Lyttelton can also cost thousands, with ships only in port for brief spells and containers etc needing to be stacked to patterns, if not for that ship for the next, or some other sequence. etc....in other words even though I don't know any specific details, all of these systems will be linked to timing, and maintaining workable margins of time to cover contingency.

There will be much more involved than just commuter train schedules.

Sydney is spending multi-millions building a new South Sydney Freight corridor and is looking at upgrading the Northern Sydney line for the same reason - to free up trains delayed by commuter rail. Time is money! As small as Christchurch is, we have a tight corner in our Port which has to be accessed through central city lines.

I have proposed in past postings Christchurch should be pushing for an added line (or indeed double track corridor) between Redwood and Islington via the Airport.

Built before housing and along the airports noise zone boundary it is possible this could be gently trenched, with security fencing hidden from view and embankments either side (made from a tiny portion of the millions of tons of bricks and masonry rubble of our earthquake devastated city!). Presumably the same embankments could be covered in top soil and be planted in native bush and sound absorbing plants.

This would offer reduction of immediate noise from both 24 hour a day freight trains and from late night flights landing/very early flights taking off for houses in the middle distance. Christchurch airport income partly relies upon arriving in the small hours budget flights, these being tail-ended on services to Melbourne or Australia from Europe or Asia, when aircraft would otherwise being sitting idle overnight at these major Australian airports.

In additional double-track line, Redwood to Islington, also gives Christchurch three active lines from the north. It is also possible judging from areas photographed for this page, that three or four through lines between Hornby could also be achieved , allowing parallel freight and commuter rail operations in most areas.

There certainly seems some capacity for extra lines from the photos above and below. Some of the sidings no longer connect to anything or have rubbish stacked on them. This suggests capacity for a third or fourth track or at least building lengthy passing loops capable of bearing full weight at reasonable speed.

The legit photo above is from the bridge itself - looking eastwards - shows a light weight siding/loop on the right, a disused siding/loop on the left. Just discernible in the distance is the Alloy Street footbridge. This runs off a poorly marked and hard to find alleyway near Sockburn roundabout offering access to over top the rail pedestrian access to Parkhouse Road industrial area and Halswell.

Below the "illegal" view - definite no-no being on railway tracks nowadays, as I discovered thanks to being apprehended and removed by two policemen one sunny Saturday morning back in 2010.Nonetheless they did not stomp on my camera or rip out the card, so I did get to keep the photo I wanted, showing that each of these side tracks has its own bay for passing under Sockburn overbridge

Sockburn Overbridge from below - hard to believe this sliver of concrete carries some the heaviest traffic in the whole city!

The overbridge also has a one way road (on the Hei Hei bus route years ago). Grade separated - potential for buses to run both ways under congestion to a small industrial area platform station also linked to the Parkhouse industrial area, and Wigram and Halswell side of the track

This is the city end of the Sockburn overbridge, which also has a one-way underpass for cars and trucks to access the industrial areas around Waterloo Road and Buchanans Road and Hei Hei residential area. This suggests potential to create a limited access (with traffic signals for buses to travel in the opposite direction) to a Sockburn station, with footbridge to the Parkhouse industrial enclave as well, or a Wigram side - drop off point for rail passengers the close proximity of all elements is obvious from the photo below.

With appropriate bus routes and an overhead walkways large areas could easily access the suggested rail loop covering much of the city from a simple station here

I am skipping past the railway yards and through Addington here (not having photos on hand) to the former railway goods shed (all 10,000 square metres) between Durham St and Colombo Street overbridges. This building appears to have withstood the earthquakes and probably still has internal platforms. I believe this would make a fantastic Christchurch Central Bus and Rail centre. Added reinforced concrete columns, mezzanine floors, long cathedral windows cut in the sunny side and refacing in the stone removed from all the collapsed churches, as well as many other saved materials and artifacts, and hanging gardens, indoor trees etc could make this a magificent memorial as well as hugely functional buildings, with electric shuttle buses every 5 minutes to the city centre driving right through the middle!! This could be the city exchange for through route bus transfers, albeit most routes will go through the central city, as well as a long distance coach centre, and railway station with a direct line to the airport and Addington City sports and events centre. The external view makes it has heaps of land for added through routes or external platforms, with ample room for freight to pass without needing to interact with passenger rail.

Further east - on the other side of the central city - the line passing through Waltham and across Ensors Road also seems to have room for additional lines or passing loops

In the event creating a terminus at Ferrymead was not seen as viable another option might be to terminate (and mid day park up) some services at Ensors Road, at a station beside the railway workshops opposite the Sullivan Avenue campus of CPIT. With added bus lanes and priority measures fast access to rail from Colombo Street via Tennyson and St Martins Road, and from eastern suburbs and Eastgate via Aldwins could be offered.

On the other hand creating a Park-and-Ride station at Ferrymead, and opposite the site I believe of the National Railway Museum has a beautiful synergy. This would link the approximate 20,000 people living on the Sumner Peninsula (so to speak) and around the Harbour with easy access to city, sports complex and airport as well as jobs elsewhere such as Birmingham Drive or Izone in Rolleston whilst bringing workers into the growing industrial zone around Radley, Woolston, Hillsborough and Ferrymead Bridge.

I am not a 100% sure but I think the National Railway Museum is to be sited at the spot marked X, opposite the current historic railway station and yards at Ferrymead Historic Park. The actual liners beyond here are part of Ferrymead's Heritage tram and rail network.

The City Council is investigating playing poker with a $400 million gamble on light rail. I believe conventional commuter rail is a better hand all up.

Indeed three track through line access, north and south may represent three Aces, giving Christchurch a very grunty infrastructure, for industrial freight or for passenger movements.

Note again; this is purely speculation, floating some ideas. There may be factors in rail I misunderstand that render these suggestions meaningless....I feel more at home with bus issues

Light rail comparisons "duplicitous" - are we talking serious porkies?

2011-10-23T04:10:00.004+13:00

Tranzwatching in Hobart, Tasmania, a peek at Christchurch too.

A Tasmanian academic has described comparing light rail in Hobart with Perth and Gold Coast City as "duplicitous" a word implying dishonesty, if not an outright lie, at least self serving in bending the truth.

Bob Cotgrove, a regular voice on Tasmanian infrastructure issues is an honorary research associate at the University of Tasmania. He has special interests in urban geography, human development and environmental economics.

Last month in an article in The Mercury Cotgrove drew attention to the campaign for light rail in Hobart (population 202,000) continuing to seek an $80 million upgrade of a northern rail line to carry light rail whilst ignoring a professional study which canned the idea.

"Proponents of the NSLRS base their arguments on comparisons with similar light rail systems planned for Perth and the Gold Coast.

The Perth system, due for completion in 2031 when Perth is expected to have a population of 2.2 million, is planned to connect Curtin in the southeast to Mirrabooka in the north and Stirling in the northwest, passing through the dense inner core of the city.

The Gold Coast system will connect Broadbeach through to Griffith University in the southern suburbs of Brisbane, passing through a dense corridor containing more than a million people within the rapidly developing megalopolis from the Gold Coast to the Sunshine Coast.

To compare these schemes with Hobart's NSLRS is duplicitous. The NSLRS is planned to go as far as Claremont and service a population counted only in the tens of thousands."

One wonders what Mr Cotgrove might make of Christchurch !!

Here sloppy research and failure to understand how world-wide public transport is funded or draws patronage from metropolitan areas, rather the single city hubs, mars almost every comparison rail and light rail advocates put forward.

Sloppy or duplicitous? No comment.

Here are some gems from the files

"New light rail systems were working well in the French city of Grenoble, which was similar to Christchurch."

- Former City Councilor Denis O'Rouke in The Press September 8 1999.

Grenoble is a city of over 600,000 in a land area half the geographic area of Christchurch in the French department of Isere (a third the size of Waimakariri District) with a population of 1.1 million . Presumably the size disparity between Christchurch and Grenoble is not new, approximately 3 times the population; one third the land area

For example, in Zurich, Switzerland, which has a similar population to Christchurch residents make an average of 417 public transport trips every year, which is more than one trip every day" - Ecan - Metro document 2010

The Zurich metropolitan area is an urbanised area of international importance constituted by a population of nearly 2 million inhabitants. See past NZ in Tranzit posting for greater details

Tram-Trains are now in service in Kassel in Germany as well as Mulhouse in France, both of which are smaller than Christchurch, connecting these to surrounding towns

- Richard Worrall in "Right form of Transport Vital, "The Press" October 10th 2011

Wikipedia notes Kassel is the administrative seat of a district of 1.2 million, itself part of Hesse an area the size of Waimakariri District with 6 million inhabitants. It also pays to recognise that German public transport infrastructure costs are met 50% by Federal Government, 40% by region and only 10% by actual city

... Also re Mulhouse Tram-Train in Wikipedia "Mulhouse Tramway".. re the actual section of line itself shared by both trams and diesel railcars a rather telling phrase "Freight trains also run at night". (Mulhouse immediate region 742,000 in an area half the size of Waimakariri District, Mulhouse itself population density six times that of urban Christchurch)

In other words typical tram and light rail routes in Europe probably cover less than half the width of Christchurch, cost only about 20% or less in direct property taxes, have the equivalent of about four times more passengers per stop just on population (let alone the added frequency greater patronage allows), and serve a surrounding regional population area 3-15 times larger with all the added internal passenger traffic within the hub city this generates. Where's the comparison here? Should we look at North America....

Early Studies

As part of the Draft Central City Plan's development, early outline investigations have been taken city-wide into the system form and function, constructional and system operational implications,and economic viability of introducing a next generation light rail system at the nucleus of the city's new public transport network.

Appropriate comparisons have been sought with cities around the world of a similar size to Christchurch, including some with broadly shared objectives to stimulate economic growth and regeneration, as well as introduce fully integrated transportation systems in central cities for a host of wider social benefits."

Draft Christchurch City Council Central City Plan section on Transport p90

Helloooo? Does the fluffy phrasing here send up some very large warning flares? Bullshit detectors ringing? Mine certainly were. Getting correct facts is endlessly time consuming and difficult but at least public advocates and professional organisations should be trying! For a start there are NO cities comparable in size, density, shape or funding base to Christchurch that are building light rail - the only thing vaguely similar being in the elongated footprint Kitchener-Waterloo in the Province of Ontario (where 14.5% of fuel tax is committed to funding public transport) - "KW growth" suggests it will hit 750,000 about the same time Christchurch reaches 450,000. This, next best-match, the most relevant city appears nowhere in any city document I have seen.Also noted; Noted; Public passenger patronage figures in Canada are twice per capita than those in USA, whose smaller city transit systems typically also lag far behind NZ in frequency, spread of routes and hours of service and farebox recovery [typically only around 20%]

Secondly, I have followed public transport issues in Christchurch for years and regularly scan and read council agendas and reports. Never in recent times have I seen any reference to a studies involving "appropriate comparisons ..with cities of a similar size to Christchurch".regarding light rail.

I am sure if studies of a similar size had been studied they would have been widely reported - as widely reported as the trip by Mayor Parker, CEO Marryat and senior planner Thelan to San Francisco, Seattle, Portland and Vancouver in 2009!!

Commuter rail versus light rail, some costs examined

2011-10-21T08:12:00.011+13:00

NZ in Tranzit goes riding the rails with an eye for the costs

Creating commuter rail, as part of the earthquake recovery in Christchurch, has been suggested in several recent newspaper articles and submissions to local hearings. It has been seen as a better alternative to light rail proposed down congested Riccarton Road.

NZ in Tranzit believes the existing lines in themselves do not offer sufficient advantage for commuter rail and has suggested creating a proper network by adding links to new residential areas and other key passenger traffic generators.

This posting is about trying to get an approximate compass fix on the cost of building new rail corridors around Christchurch.

While there is no way of knowing exact costs it is good to get a close approximation if only to discover all the secret snags or other realities that can upend a good idea. I get sick of the absurd claims that various cities are the same size as Christchurch or talk of tram-trains that completely ignore the heavy freight factor in Christchurch (up to 16 full & empty coal trains a day) missing on these other lines, such as Mulhouse in France.

The light rail proposal being put forward for Christchurch at about $55 per kilometre appears fairly similar to the set up cost per kilometre of the light rail currently being built in Gold Coast City. That is after the $A180 million needed to purchase about 173 roadside properties and part of a further 111 properties to a build a mainly separate lane structure for the trams is deducted from the total cost of stage one, $A980 million dollars for 13 kilometres. Much of the success of light rail (as with any transit mode!) is based on clear run and having totally segregated corridors or lanes (80% of of all French light rail is "off road, about the same proportion of Gold Coast light rail will be) - the lower cost in Christchurch will not deliver much punch if running merely on streets in congested traffic.

Conventional rail appears to be considerably cheaper, not least I imagine because it does not have to dig up and replace, rebuild or strengthen multiple underground service conduits every few metres along the way, and can use the spread weight of shingle embankments to absorb weight and vibration.

I have identified five conventional or "heavy" rail projects in New Zealand and Australia that have been completed in the last five years that may offer some perspective on comparative costs.

These are some broad figures deduced from (1) Perth's new commuter line to Mandurah; and slightly more precise figures gleaned from various sources regarding (2) the upgrading of the Wellington region commuter rail line between Pukerua Bay and Paekakariki; (3) electrification and double tracking for 13 km north Paekakariki to extend commuter rail to Waikanae. In greater Auckland recent projects include the reopening of (4) a commuter rail service to Onehunga and (5) the building of a short, commuter rail only, spur line from the main line to Manakau City.

All projects include site specific factors but I believe some general parameters of cost can be established for amateur trainspotters.

(1) The Mandurah line which opened in 2007 is a 70 km long suburban becomes regional rail corridor heading south of Perth which cost $1.6 billion to build, albeit this cost is particularly tilted by having 700 metres built underground in central Perth.

However an article on the well researched Melbourne Passenger Transport Users (PTUA) website comparing the costs of motorways to rail gives us an approximate fix for the basic line costs (albeit with overhead wiring).

We cannot rely on Melbourne experience for accurate costings of rail lines, since the last major urban rail extension completed in Melbourne was the Glen Waverley line in 1930. However, Perth is currently undergoing a renaissance in urban rail, and we can use their costings as a benchmark.... Perth's new southern railway to Mandurah was built for $12 million per kilometre, including the cost of freeway realignment and tunnels under Perth CBD. Excluding the latter, the cost of earthworks, track, overhead, stations and road overpasses for the 70km surface railway was $422 million, or just $6 million per kilometre.

(2) Wellington region's Kapiti Coast line snakes through several tunnels north of Pukerua Bay. In 2007 Finance Minister Cullen announced "About $80 million will be spent adding a second track to parts of the 3.4-kilometre section of the main trunk line between Pukerua Bay and Paekakariki". As far as can be deduced this included day-lighting one tunnel (replacing it by a deep cutting) and dropping the floor level of three others, work carried out in 2010, so this doesn't give much of a fix except to say you get a lot of heavy engineering extras for around $NZ20 million per kilometre heavy rail as compared to light rail.

(3) Also on the Kapiti/North Island Main Trunk Line has been the extension of electric commuter rail north of Paekakariki to Waikanae. Ths involved double tracking an existing rail corridor and adding overhead wiring and rebuilding two stations, Paraparaumu and Waikanae (a station at Raumati originally mooted was never built). The distance was 13 kilometres and the cost was $92 million for the line and $6 million each for the two stations upgraded (including underground access etc). This is about $7 million per kilometre. Interestingly, I heard this described for some years as bringing regular commuter rail to Waikanae a fast growing area of 38,000 people - only recently working through census maps did I discover this population figure is for the whole district called Waikanae and includes areas that were already served by the existing line. Over a $100 million it appears was spent bringing new electrified commuter rail connection to less than 15,000 people, a residential population growing fast - but so too are many areas elsewhere around NZ including Christchurch.

Another curious fact is Wikipedia Kapiti Rail Line states; "The project involved 50 workers and 20 machines installing 600 traction poles in eight or nine metre deep holes, and laying 30 km of rail and 30,000 sleepers. This suggests the existing line was also replaced. I am unable to trace this quote nor find any other reference to 30 km of track, but if this is so costs would be closer to $3 million per kilometre.

(4) Upgrading the 3.6 kilometre rail line from Penrose to Onehunga to take commuter rail for the first time in 38 years, ostensibly was done at a cost of $13.6 million. This consisted of $10 million for general line upgrade by KiwiRail and $3.6 million by Auckland Regional Transport Authority on new stations at Penrose, Te Papapa and Onehunga. However I notice in research this does not seem to include an earlier expenditure in 2007 by the then Auckland Regional Council of $8 million. This was to purchase two hardware warehouses, demolished to make possible a site for a future Onehunga railway station. This line doesn't appear to have any major additional infrastructure and comes in at $6 million per kilometre upgrade cost (not known whether the tracks themselves were replaced but it sounds very like it)

(5) The latest addition to New Zealand's rail system - the first new rail corridor in Auckland for 80 years - is only 2 km long but expected to be extremely busy. This is line linking the centre of Manakau City [as it was until amalgamation into the Auckland "supercity"] to the Auckland commuter rail network and to central Auckland through a junction point off the North Island Main Trunk line at Puhinui. This project costs $98 million but includes a 7 metre deep 300 metre long trench bringing the train in under roading in the central Manakau business area. A campus of the Manakau Institute of Technology will be built immediately above the line and station, starting with 1500 students in 2012, but planned to grow to 25,000 by 2040.

In Christchurch it would not be realistic to build a commuter rail network - adding dozens of trains a day to the already busy freight and coal train corridor - without creating some form of grade separation between Middleton yards and the existing overhead bridge at Durham Street. Traffic around rail crossings at Lincoln Road and Whiteleigh Avenue is already hugely congested without constant commuter train interruptions! Increasing mainline through tracks to three and/or trenching the rail lines is one option. Arguably Christchurch already has as strong a case for grade separation in this area, as strong a case I suspect as did Manakau, as did New Lynn ($160 million for 800 metres trenched, albeit with a bus/rail station infrastructure included).

The figures and calculations here, for these five projects, can only be a rough and ready indication. Every over-bridge of the rail in suburban areas such as at Waterloo Road or at Buchanans Road on the Western Rail Corridor NZ in Tranzit proposes will probably add $15-20 million and ideally at least 6-8 should be built as well as a northern motorway underpass, and of course buying land will add a few million dollars more as well to project costs.

Even so it is fairly clear from the rough scan of figures above that a basic new rail corridor - just track with level crossings - could probably be built at generous estimate for less than $10 million per kilometre - about one fifth of the cost per kilometre of the proposed light rail along Riccarton Road. Adding in attractive station designs, overbridges etc might lift this to $15-20 per kilometre - or about $260 million for the city links proposed (Redwood-Islington, 10 km; Northwood (Styx Centre) to Prestions 3.5 km). I have not added the suggested eventual Rangiora-Woodend-Pegasus-Kaiapoi loop as per this map but that is virtually all open country and no major river crossings.

Upgrading or adding additional mainline quality track on to the Hornby - Ferrymead section (suggested terminus at National Rail Museum) could add an unknown extra amount, but would enhance all rail operations and options. This might include about 2 km trenched or cut and cover section of the rail corridor, from Durham Street to Middleton - or an overhead rail viaduct - which could double or even triple this total cost, but may need to be considered anyway. Or alternately several new road over-bridges such as at Lincoln Road ( perhaps half and half, the rail partially trenched, the road partially raised to get less ugly and divisive bridging than the current Colombo and Durham Street over-bridges).

It is hard not to think these huge amounts would be more wisely spent on upgrading and extending our existing rail infrastructure to enhance freight movements, road traffic movements and not least create a commuter rail network for Christchurch, rather than a far far more expensive per kilometre light rail system, delivering very little in comparable economic, social and environmental benefits.

Christchurch commuter rail potential; One map = ten thousand words

2011-10-17T22:42:00.014+13:00

Map updated 31 Oct 2011, alterations made for clarity and to bring in rail system between Woodend and Pegasus

Posting updated 7 November 7 2011 to clarify and expand some points.

CERA ( Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority) has released a document today, about 30 pages long with lovely coloured maps, defining the areas either previously planned or proposed and now adopted under "martial law" upon which new housing in greater Christchurch can been built. The city has to relocate tens of thousands of residents away from some eastern areas followed massive damage caused by a series of over 8,000 eathquakes.

The main area map CERA has put out is too good to ignore and I have immediately seized upon it to illustrate the rail proposals that I have raised in NZ in Tranzit over the last year or two. I don't think these concepts are so odd, indeed appear to have far greater social, environmental and economic potential (city-wide) than the light rail concept. I have had a few supportive responses privately, yet two years down the track (to borrow an appropriate expression) I am still waiting to hear a single person or organisation publicly say they think these concepts should be investigated, particularly before or concurrent with the planned light rail study.

In this map above dark green represents (mainly) open farmland which is to be converted to housing subdivisions; medium green represents proposed or planned industrial or office park areas; the light green land near the airport represents land re-opened for (I believe) commercial and industrial development. The dark lines represent existing railway lines - with several links added.

Christchurch people will easily identify the existing rail corridors (a) running horizontally across the bottom of the map from Rolleston to Port Lyttelton (b) running vertically from an inverted "T intersection at Addington northwards on tracks up across the Waimakariri River to Kaiapoi then Rangiora (star at top left of map).

Rather than waste $400 million on a fanciful light rail, along an already congested road, a line that goes a mere 7.5 km and is only vaguely related to the key tasks of public transport, NZ in Tranzit advocates that the city should work towards establishing a commuter rail network supported by a vastly improved bus system. Based on similar projects elsewhere it seems much of the basics of this could be established for under $500 million (consistent with spending on rail in Wellington in the last decade) with as much again, spent across the subsequent decade, building on this foundation. The Government/KiwiRail would presumably fund a substantial portion as they have done elsewhere in NZ.

The map above illustrates three new conventional "heavy" railway lines (to be developed over 20 years) that NZ in Tranzit advocates a link between Islington and Redwood via the Airport; a spur across from Northwood/Styx Centre to Prestons; and (one day) a northern added loop across from Rangiora to Woodend and Pegasus back to Kaiapoi. A park and ride/shuttle bus terminus for commuter rail services could also be built at Heathcote or Ferrymead as a terminus serving the Sumner peninsula and some Lyttelton Harbour settlements.

Building on the success of the The Orbiter bus route and the city's ring road expressway, these proposals address the need for people to move across the city and outer areas, as well directly in to its centre, in a fast but relaxed manner. Even before the earthquake only 50,000 people - about a quarter of the work-force - worked in the central area, and there is an unmet need to effectively service work zones elsewhere by public transport.

This simple but all embracing patterns ties the larger part of Christchurch and indeed much of Canterbury directly into the city centre and almost every major employment zone in greater Christchurch. With adequate peripheral park and ride stations and linked shuttle buses and segregated busway corridors, this pattern allows for maximum work-force mobility and flexibility (Live anywhere; Work anywhere; Socialise anywhere!). At the same time it protects the city's productivity and quality of life better as oil begins its predicted climb and climate change impacts more and more upon the world economy.

Added value is offered in direct rail connections city (and province) to the Airport - rare even in many larger cities - for air passengers, airport workers and bulk freight movement.

Another aspect with great potential is the direct link this pattern offers to "Addington City" - the combining of the Metropolitan Race Course and Whatsit's Latest Name Event Centre with a new "Lancaster Park" build on the currently partly derelict Council owned Rugby League grounds. Promoters of this concept have raised the vision of a giant complex, well away from housing, which not only hosts major events at the threre aforementioned centres, but in essence is a village of associated sports and entertainment and hospitality venues going all the time. Apart from television coverage, complications of accessing large sports venues because of intense congerstion and long delays are recognised as a major deterrent to attendance overseas art big stadiums leading to reduced crowds and revenue (as mentioned for example in this article from Adelaide a couple of years back). A rail system that can plug into such big crowd events - racing, rugby, cricket, concerts - as well as the Airport and the Central City life - seems well set to punch above its weight on weekend and evening patronage, boosting averages considerably.

A major City Central station complex, with higher density housing areas nearby, could be built in Sydenham, between Durham Street and Colombo Street overbridges. This may only involve the site itself but possibly this could recycle and strengthen and enhance the vast disused Goods Shed on site, a building that appears to have withstood the massive earthquakes well. This might be converted into a spectacular multi-level complex of cafes and franchises, with hanging gardens or full size indoor trees and native bush, and offer a Bus Exchange (transfer station role); a long distance shuttle bus and coach service point, and a regional and intercity and suburban rail hub, all in one place. Features such as stone walls and arches etc from historic buildings such as churches, to far damaged to ever be rebuild could be integrated into parts of the design or used to resurface the mundane concrete walls, in effect a living multi-dimensional architectural memorial to parts of the cityscape lost forever.

As is obvious from the photo below (looking West of Colombo overbridge) the curvature of the main line from South to Lyttelton at this point preserves a very important free run for freight and coal trains, whilst leaving ample room for suburban and even long distance passenger platforms to built on the apron of land, if the internal platforms - presumably still existing - are unsuitable. Living in Sydenham or Centrtal and rail to work at the Airport, in Belfast, Rolleston or Rangiora?

Carrying high levels of passenger traffic in both directions at peak hours is another big factor in making rail viable.

The potential is inherent for very intelligent, environmentally sound, land use to be developed hand-in-glove with station sites and roading patterns in new subdivisions and industrial areas. A spectacular feature could be the creation of a network of broad sealed off road cycle tracks radiating out from suburban stations - if every train had some carriages with wheel on access to bicycle racks in the front area of some carriages - it would be possible to bike and rail and bike easily (no lycra needed!!) to almost every corner of Christchurch. Perhaps Christchurch could become the southern hemisphere's more sprawling and generously spaced out version of a low density green city, a "Copenhagen of the plains". An added factor - if oil prices shoots through the roof - what enormous protection this offers for maintaining a quality life-style, avoiding transport poverty or potential workers too poor to get to work sites.

Commuter rail is rare in low density cities under a million, and Wellington apart, in CANZUS is entirely linked to (mainly peak hour) services to larger cities - Newcastle or Wollongong to Sydney; Bridgeport, Connecticut to New York etc. For a city of our size and geographic footprint to undertake such an expensive option needs the most astute and balanced use of resources. The present rail network lacks enough destinations, depth of residential areas in the right places or traffic generators to be a realistic base, but adding the links proposed above can change this. The strengths of this design are passengers are likely to hopping on and off at every station, going to and from multiple destinations, in a design that not only brings the outermost areas into the city centre but also incorporates almost every major employment zone in greater Christchurch. It allows people to get around the city - indeed around the whole metropolitan area - as well as get to and fro the city. Secondary strengths such as access to the airport (an impossible dream for many cities) and doorstep rail access to "Addington City" events and sports complex for the whole province will ensure a broader range of off-peak usage, test match access etc significantly lifting the off-peak averages . The via airport link future proofs the city for future freight movements including potential for a top class grade separated line. The city centre a very easily accessible hub even for those living in outer areas. but just as important - outer areas will be very accessible to a more densely populated inner city area. This to me is truly building for the future - a little project perhaps a little too big for our size city, yet not so big the city can not grow into the framework it offers. It is a freight and passenger transport system that will foster growth in every way.

Commuter rail will be accessible to such a large chunk of residents and could become major wellspring of Christchurch's central city reborn vitality and continued "liveability". Christchurch could still be a city punching well above its weight and size despite all the incredible devastation and tragedy the city and its residents have come through.

Auckland rail - diesel unit at Onehunga Photo Wikimedia.Com

As well as new rail cars for core services seven days a week opportunity may arise for Christchurch to purchase a large amount of redundant diesel rolling stock when Auckland's $600 million rail electrification nears completion. These could be used in peak hours, as stand by units and for conveying crowds to large events from across the city and province.

"Early Studies"

2011-10-15T14:31:00.000+13:00

NZ in Tranzit on comparing apples and bananas

"Early Studies"

As part of the Draft Central City Plan's development, early outline investigations have been taken city-wide into the system form and function, constructional and system operational implications,and economic viability of introducing a next generation light rail system at the nucleus of the city's new public transport network.

Appropriate comparisons have been sought with cties around the world of a similar size to Christchurch, including some with broadly shared objectives to stimulate economic growth and regeneration, as well as introduce fully integrated transportation systems in central cities for a host of wider social benefits."

Draft Christchurch City Council Central City Plan section on Transport p90

This sounds very fluffy to me!!

What is an "early outline investigation" pray tell? What city does not seek "to stimulate economic growth and regeneration" ? Most of all, for me, why is the city investigating "introducing new generation light rail " rather than investigating the public transport needs of the city as a whole as is surely the required task of council?

If this latter investigation - fair to all residents - was the case surely it would reveal a spectrum of needs and this would be expressed in a raft of policies rather than singling out one mode that covers a mere 7.5km of the city's approximate 250km of public transport routes.

"Appropriate comparisons have been sought"

Why is this being done in secret and what criteria are being used? In a project that is expected to cost $406 million surely ratepayers have a right to know, now at an early stage, not least when public feedback is being invited, what these appropriate comparisons are.

Comparing one city and another is extremely difficult to do with any great precision. The best one could do, I would imagine to achieve "appropriate comparisons" would be to work to a set a few benchmarks of comparison, to try to bring things back to a shared currency.

By this I mean some standard factors that typically effect public transport planning and patronage might be evaluated for each city studied in turn, in most cases probably on the basis that the factor analysed is not greater than 100% more than the same factor in Christchurch.

These would include the metropolitan population of any city studied was not more than 100% that of greater Christchurch (= not more than 800,000); the population density was not more than roughly 100% that of urban greater Christchurch (= not more than 1,800 per hectare); the tourist-visitor numbers per capita were not greater than 100% than those in Christchurch each year (not mote than 18 million p.a.); the immediate funding base of ratepayer/local taxpayers was not more than 100% bigger than Christchurch; that car ownership was within range of that in New Zealand (not less than 500 cars per capita as obviously dramatically increases daily patronage from non-car owning commuters); the parking costs will be within range of those applying in Christchurch - the higher cost of central city parking has been identified as a stimulant to public transport in cities as diverse as Wellington, Melbourne and Ottawa; the income sources beyond fares provided by Governments are proportional to those in NZ and/or are met from a similar size national or regional/national tax base -in USA and France for instance fares are only expected to meet 20% of the full service operating cost and nothing of the spread fixed costs. Traditionally NZ cities have been much higher and in the three largest centres the current National Government policy seeks a minimum 50% farebox recovery on operating costs.

As far as I know the only cities with light rail that have referenced by any Christchurch city official, elected or in paid employment, were San Francisco, Seattle, Portland and Vancouver. Council CEO Marryat prepared a sort of journalistic overview of some urban renewal and light rail projects after the Mayor, Marryat and a city planner spent a few days in each. This was presented to the City Council meeting on June 24 2010. [search "Portland, Oregon" on the Christchurch City Council website, Meetings, agendas and Minutes - unfortunately the appendix - a full colored report of about 20 pages itself may not open on all computers] As interesting as it is - especially the appendix - it had almost no cross referencing and certainly no comparative figures to Christchurch in areas concerned with public transport.

All of these four cities has a metropolitan population in excess of 2 million or - roughly 5-10 times more potential light rail users per kilometre. Also as transit is funded by sales tax or fuel tax or payroll taxes across whole urban areas, as well as by grants from the State Government and national level this would suggest light rail will be provided at a hugely smaller cost per capita per kilometre. Population density (in public transport terms "how many people per bus/tram stop") in broad terms ranges from almost twice that of Christchurch (Portland) to eight times that of Christchurch (Vancouver).

This suggests light rail in our small low density city will get far less than half the patronage of these larger centres per kilometre; receive considerably less Government funding per kilometre; and cost the taxpayer and local property taxpayer (in NZ jargon "ratepayer") several dollars more per capita per kilometre to build and operate.

Obviously where the council talks about "appropriate comparisons" they have some other study up their sleeve!

Defining the Strategic Goals of Public Transport

2011-10-14T06:57:00.005+13:00

NZ in Tranzit advocates moving forward with clear purpose

The debate in Christchurch about rail and light rail (buses which are always likely to be the primary mode are usually taken for granted or disparaged!) obscures the real core issue - what sort of public transport strategy is needed.

NZ in Tranzit blog sees seven key strategic goals of public transport in Christchurch, as follows;

1) To ensure ease of access to workplaces and educational centres for residents from all parts of the city, fostering a mobile, flexible and educated workforce - the economic motor without which little else can be achieved.

2) To protect resident mobility options and outer area property values in the face of coming oil price rises and increased living costs and in general to maintain and improve social equality, prosperity and quality of life in a less favourable economic climate.

3) To directly target longer journeys to and from the city and its centre and across the city, the journeys that both cause and suffer the most congestion, time waste, greenhouse gases, and roading costs and which will be more severely impacted upon by fuel price increases.

4) To ensure a base level of mobility for all residents and not least those with limited or no access to cars, including independent children, teenagers, the mentally and physically handicapped, retired persons on limited income and the mobile elderly - notably access to neighbourhood supermarkets, smaller shopping centres, medical and recreational facilities within a bus journey of less than 3km.

5) To offer added frequency of services to higher density inner suburb and university adjacent areas where demand is naturally higher and easier to service and ownership or use of cars is likely to be less or more easily reduced further by an effective alternative

6) To ensure ease of access of residents, visitors and tourists to major attractions, social and sporting venues and hospitality areas, including reducing congestion at large events

7) To create systems that allow ease of use, simplicity and ease in understanding and support transfers from one route to another and where services operate in an integrated, alternating pattern

Noted; A good public transport system also inherently addresses congestion and environmental issues.

A satisfying half-truth

2011-10-08T13:06:00.005+13:00

Hamilton Transport Centre - Waikato's well integrated public transport system

surveys 1000 existing customers and finds great satisfaction. Photos NZ in Tranzit 2010

NZ in Tranzit on bus passenger surveys

No provincial area seems to be doing public transport with greater commitment than the Waikato. Over the last few years they have levered bus up bus patronage, by several millions, particularly in Hamilton, pop 160,000.

Some years ago taking a leaf from the then successful Christchurch's bus system Environment Waikato introduced their own version of The Orbiter and also a central city circulator. "On Board"

Learnt from Christchurch and elsewhere

Leaving Canterbury behind in its wake Environment Waikato ensured there was provision not only for bus services tofro towns in its immediate metropolitan commuter reach (Te Awamutu, Huntly Raglan etc) but also took responsibility that at least some level of public transport within - and across - the whole region was provided - Pukekohe, Morrinsville, Coromandel, Taupo and Tokaroa included.

Likewise Hamilton took all the steps Christchurch had failed to take when Christchurch set up its own Bus Exchange - The Hamilton Transport Centre offers immediate access to an adjacent cab rank; left luggage lockers; full cafeteria facilities ; and combines regional, nationwide and local bus services in one easy catch hub - including, timetable info on display and ticketing.

Great synergy between cabs and buses in Hamilton!

Environment Waikato continues to offer service improvements, albeit having to work with a Government less sympathetic to funding or promoting public transport.

It is not surprising perhaps that for the second year in a row that a survey of passengers has revealed 98% satisfaction with services. It is the same sort of satisfying half truth that Environment Canterbury and probably the Christchurch City Council used to glow smugly with - I doubt that they would even dare to undertake such a survey in the current situation!

I support such surveys, indeed have responded a couple of times to being surveyed on a bus in Christchurch. I recognise they can play a valuable role, to a degree.

For example in the Waikato survey;
"The survey results indicate that 53 per cent of passengers are aged under 24 and our largest market segment is tertiary and secondary students at 40 per cent. So it is no surprise, then, that 47 per cent of passengers said they use buses because they have no other choice.''

But they are a half-truth or indeed much less - a 5 or 10% truth. Because they are all about testing the existing customer, the one on the bus...not the one who used the bus three times but found the timing useless, or the one whose custom remains only potential, never using the bus from one year to the next.

Obviously if customers like those in the Waikato are highly satisfied that means other potential customers are more likely to find the service attractive. But doesn't tell us too much in. Without a cross population survey - probably by phone - of the how often do you catch a bus type, that also links respondents to home and work /study/shopping areas and also places them in age, education, marital status and income brackets, a more precise profile is impossible.

To foster public transport usage it is necessary to know who catches buses and who doesn't and in what areas and for what reasons. Is it public transport image, lack of access to an en route supermarket, failure to depart an industrial area at a useful and accessible time for those working nearby, that rates highest for those over 25 single or between 40-60 married? Thanks to versatility of commuters it is is easy to start seeing patterns if multiple responses are run through multiple filters and service levels, schedule patterns, support systems, advertising and info can be more precisely targeted.

My experience as bus driver and full-time passenger, 14 years each approximately, is this is an industry that spends tens of millions per year on running services with very little attempt to develop a scientific understanding of what factors predispose bus use or not.

An equal spread of minimum service levels is necessary, but does not prohibit attracting the next most winnable customers as a patronage building strategy.

So yeah, good on ya Waikato for offering a good bus service, but I believe the public transport industry EVERYWHERE needs to be doing far better research than merely checking satisfaction levels of customers already on the bus.

Electric Car-Sharing in Paris, Zonkas in Christchurch

2011-10-06T07:08:00.002+13:00

Tranzwatching Autolib in Paris, France; dreaming of Zonkas in Christchurch

Public transport is often defined relatively narrowly in people's minds, buses, trams or trains. But for people to live effectively without a car there needs to be a much broader raft of systems. Indeed this is really a major strength of combining active modes and public transport usage - one is not confined to using one type of vehicle, however inappropriate, for all trips which is pretty much the effect that occurs once one has invested heavily in owning a car. If one lives car free but can join a car-share system, especially one as overseas with a range of vehicle options then one can hire a rough as guts (appearance) land rover for a day fishing trip; pick up mum frm the airport in a beamer, use a bicycle lane to visit friends a couple of suburbs away; take up only one seat in a bus or train in rush-hour; and get a cab home at midnight after one drink too many. A well organised and integrated public transport system will have all these options clearly accessible, on phone in or internet etc.

Curiously in a world that is always pushing consumer options, the idea of choosing transport modes by the moment, for best fit or best economy or mix of both has yet to enter public planning or thinking, so addictive is the hold of the privately owned car upon consciousness.

Recently I have been promoting a commuter rail network for Christchurch - slightly absurd for such a small city but one way of protecting corridors for now and the future. I am also aware modern busways could probably do the job better, faster and more frequently but most people can not get this in their mind and only some form of rail will woo them away from cars. My theory is if we create a basic commuter rail network, to some extent a peripheral ring with longer distant spurs, then direct fast bus services from the city can also terminate or run past suburban rail stations, This essentially would foster much greater bus use with several en route hubs eg central city - mall - suburban rail station - outer suburb.

I am also a fan of Zonkas - well that is what I have come to call them - short for Zone Cabs.

These might be based at every major bus transfer point or suburban rail station and would be set fare cabs operating only within a declared radius (under 2.5km? - map provided). Perhaps they would be a separate stream of the taxi industry. Or perhaps they would be conventional cabs with a roof light showing Zonka Avonhead or Zonka 12 or whatever the local radial area is called. Or maybe the passenger just asks for a Zonka fare. Basis of fares could be per adult, say $6 with a Metrocard (and Metro subsidy to the cabby of a further $1). The basis of hire is cab driver has right to pick up multiple fares, if these are available, subject to a separate row of seats per fare group. Ideally if only working within a 2.5 radius, Zonka drivers would get a very astute idea of getting around their patch very fast and expect to make 4-5 hub-destination trips per hour, some multiples (especially if using a van). Much of the work would be linked to picking up people who have come off buses or trains and done their supermarket shopping for the week, and now want a door to door service.

This short trip, multiple passenger, pay per adult head system would be structured to create an costs/income ratio equivalent to conventional cabs whilst at the same time bringing down the cost of cabs as an intermediate step between bus use and conventional cabs for local uses and bus and train connections.

The theory behind the Metrocard is (a) allows ridership patterns to be monitored and responded to
(b) it essentially keeps the cheaper fare a local advantage (c) a dollar subsidy per trip - transferred in monthly aggregates to the cab owner - would increase income whilst recognising Zonkas are in part public transport and add flexibility which increases overall use of buses and trains (and to what extent can be monitored via Metrocard computerised records too!)

There may be (or not) structural reasons why this would work but I definitely think it should be on the table for investigation if we wish to create a full and sophisticated public transport system.

Actually this posting was really meant to about plug-in electric share cars in Paris but it got hi-jacked by the catchiness of the name Zonka for a concept that has long interested me!

(I believe in the marketing magic of the right name or word!)

"Quickly, jettison the lifeboats"

2011-10-02T22:50:00.003+13:00

NZ in Tranzit spotting bus cuts in state of Washington and USA

It seems almost certain we - the world - have now passed peak oil, the point where it is impossible to extract more oil, or oil faster or cheaper than previously. Production of oil, it has been predicted, will plateau for an unknown length of time before irreversibly declining and prices escalating rapidly. This plateau seems to be the case now, as shown in the graph below. The head of the world's foremost oil monitoring body, the International Energy Agency, an organisation long considered to be a rosy picture painter of oil's future, has recently stated the peak point seems to have been passed in 2005.

It is probable capitalism will prove as big a failure as communism did, though for very different reasons. Basically it is a system that relies on borrowing to build sufficient growth to make a profit to pay back the loan. When cheap energy cuts out and products get too expensive to make or sell, that loan doesn't get repaid. System collapse.

Although the USA is printing money to fake that it's boat is still afloat, in reality the amounts of money borrowed (publicly and privately) in USA and elsewhere to maintain lifestyles no longer sustainable have now climbed to unprecedented and absurd heights. Inevitably if the boat starts sinking the rich and powerful will use their advantages to dump on the poorer first.

This includes car user addicts who can be expected to try chop back public transport expenditure. It is an easy target in the internal resource wars, but perhaps one of the most ironic. At this plateau stage oil price rises are expected to remain relatively modest, a great time to be building added resilence into the transport system. If one reads US reports on a regular basis (I receive about 20 US transit linked items a day), there is quite the opposite happening, huge moves to "jettison the lifeboats" reduce spending on public transport, (in most of the USA, this was never spectacular anyway).

I include here as a sample, a link (includes You Tube) to news of the service cuts in the State of Washington. These are particularly poignant as the North-Western USA has does "transit" better than most US areas. Creating good public transport is bloody difficult in any car-dominated country, it is sad to see such efforts going backwards.

The city of Seattle - metropop 3.4 million - was visited by Christchurch Mayor Bob Parker and two excutives in hope of finding some connection to Christchurch, one eigth Seattle's size. Tacoma is also home to the only city in North America below a million residents (metropolitan area) operating a light rail system. This tram system serves Tacoma (290,000) and surrounding Pierce County (approximate another 500,000 residents) and delivers just under a million passenger trips a year.

Seattle has significant investment in transit infrastructure -here University Bus Tunnel

Law backs flash messaging to motorists passing school buses

2011-09-30T16:57:00.001+13:00

Tranzwatching in New Zealand

Amendments to sveral NZ laws come in to force this weekend. One of these expands the situation under which motorists have to slow down to 20 kmh when passing school buses stopped to load or discharge students. The official details are as follows;

There is an existing requirement for drivers to reduce their speed to 20km/h when passing a stationary school bus, displaying a school bus sign that is stopped to pick up or drop off school children.

From 1 October 2011, drivers passing a stationary school bus displaying an optional ‘school bus’ sign with flashing lights, will need to reduce their speed to 20km/h. The bus driver will also be required to only operate the flashing lights for up to 20 seconds before and after the school bus has stopped. This will help to warn motorists that they need to take care and slow down as they are approaching an area where children are likely to be crossing the road.

Green Party document puts Christchurch light rail proposal in wider perspective

2011-09-27T14:13:00.009+13:00

Saturday morning traffic on Hagley Avenue queues at Moorhouse Avenue, - the Green Party campaigns to have continuous bus lanes set aside and access way for public transport protected (see case study below)

NZ in Tranzit - opinion, mine and others

I recently received a copy of the submission the Aoraki branch of the Green Party made to the Draft Christchurch Central City plan. The submission paints a very much fuller picture than the casual comments I made about the Greens last week.

These comments suggested that the Green Party (which has announced it will support 60% Government funding for light rail in both Wellington and Christchurch) was jumping on the band wagon, so to speak, backing light rail on knee-jerk and mythology, rather than careful research.

This submission to the Central City earth-quake recovery plan makes it very clear the Aoraki Green Party is by no means blindly supporting light rail. Rather the party is very keen to see this option much more carefully and professionally investigated, wants to see all processes in this decision making being very much more transparent, and wants more effective support for bus systems, including full length bus lanes and separate busways, to be identified in the central city plan.

The Green Party also raises a big question mark (one I very much share) over having four bus stations in central city rather than one "The reasons why street stations are favoured over a central bus interchange are not clear" It is very unclear to me what modelling in overseas cities exists to show that this is added complexity is more effective, and if so, how well the overseas factors translate to Christchurch.

Having a single interchange point has always been one of Christchurch's great strengths and one of the factors that for several decades gave the city the reputation of having the best bus system in New Zealand.

In contrast the current "two exchange" policy. originally implemented as an emergency measure but still operative many months later, has been a profound disaster for many Christchurch bus users, greatly wasting time and helping drop patronage post-quake by an astounding 55%. This is a drastic impact far beyond any immediate earthquake effect (after all 95% of people still have to travel to work, study etc somewhere) that seems to be nowhere evaluated, modified or addressed month after month, raising very serious questions about the city's commitment to bus users and indeed, actual competence to operate public transport infrastructure.

This certainly does not bode well for multiple city exchange points!

It could prove very silly to abandon what works well, particularly as the proposed "Katmandu" site of the single exchange planned between Lichfield Street and Tuam Street by virtue of its location will allow buses to serve the central city with far less intrusive routing than has previously been the case.

Unlike many other political statements about public transport, which talk in generalities, the Green party submission identifies very specific needs and trends. Although I am not a member and consider myself independent on public transport matters, I reprint the section on public transport here in full (with the party permission).....

Green Party Submission to Draft Central City recovery plan
- transport sections dealing with public transport and cycling reprinted in full

P89 People on public transport

Light rail Any feasibility study for light rail should examine how any new lines can best be integrated with the existing heavy rail infrastructure with its links to Rolleston, Rangiora and Lyttelton.

Greater transparency is needed around the “early outline investigations” and other light rail studies which the CCC has commissioned. These should be publicly available to encourage informed public debate. More information is needed on the costs and feasibility of light rail, its economic benefits, how it compares with other options such as improved bus services, and possible rail routes. Feasibility studies and investigation work should be done now.

Cities with light rail are fed by a bus network. In Christchurch they could also be fed by a cycle network. Given Christchurch’s suitability for cycling, Stage One in improving the connection between the central city, university and airport should be creating an off road cycleway, before any capital expenditure on a light rail link.

Change requested: Undertake feasibility and other investigations for light rail between 2011 and 2015. Over the next four to five years capital expenditure should give priority to improving facilities for active transport and bus infrastructure and services.

P91 Buses and street stations

A more strategic and energetic approach to public transport provision across the city is needed which identifies, designates and protects public transport corridors for busways and light rail in the Plan and in CERA’s Recovery Strategy. Land use planning should follow public transport corridors.

The City Plan and Recovery Strategy should identify public transport corridors for busways and potentially future light rail and control development in these corridors which would compromise their function, and ensure new development is close to these corridors. The Plan rules in Volume 2 do not appear to do this for the central city.

Bus patronage in Christchurch has slumped. Improving bus patronage is an immediate priority and needs greater attention than it receives in the draft Plan. Bus systems are flexible and the rolling stock already exists. Increased investment in bus infrastructure now can enhance a future light rail network by providing well patronised and operated feeder services.

The current bus lanes on Colombo St and Papanui Road are not continuous which reduces their effectiveness. Continuous busways are an immediate priority. Creating more dedicated busways will reduce travel times and is likely to increase bus patronage.

The reasons why street stations are favoured over a central bus interchange are not clear.

Improved bus services require stronger co-ordination between the CCC, Environment Canterbury and district councils and additional travel demand management studies and planning.

Changes requested: Commit to establishing more dedicated busways.

Establish a joint working group of council and ECan and NZTA under CERA’s oversight tasked with preparing a transport recovery plan as part of the Recovery Strategy with public input by June 2012.

P93-96 Streets for people and streets for cycling

The Green Party seeks a city where it’s easy and safe to walk and ride. Getting out of our cars and walking and cycling more keeps us healthy by increasing levels of physical activity. It encourages social interaction. It reduces our reliance on imported oil and benefits the planet by reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

The lack of strong commitment to cycling is opposed. At present less than 1% of the City Council’s transport expenditure goes on active transport. The estimated spending noted for plan projects suggests there will be no significant increase. The City Plan and the LTCCP should be amended to redirect at least 10% of roading expenditure in greater Christchurch into facilities for active transport if plan targets and vision statements are to be achieved.

The City Council, ECan, CERA and NZ Transport Agency need to prioritise investment in off road cycleways and walkways through and around the central city and suburbs. These routes can connect public spaces and existing community facilities and existing and new public spaces.

The redevelopment of main streets to provide separated cycle lanes is supported. Infrastructure Design Standards across the city need to be amended to ensure continuous, off road or kerbside cycleways are part of all new roading and reconstruction projects for collector, arterial and local roads.

New outdoor lighting should be “smart lighting” which adapts to natural lighting conditions, reduces glare, avoids light spill and saves energy.

Change requested: Amend Policy 7.93 (Vol 2) to read:

“Actively encourage cycling as a transport mode including by:

a) providing a safe cycle network of continuous, connected cycle lanes separated from traffic in the Central City including on all distributor streets, the full length of the Avon River Park and on streets identified as “ways”.

b) providing conveniently located cycle parking facilities.”

Allocate capital expenditure to achieve this from 2012.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Protecting our public transport corridors - not!

NZ in Tranzit offers a sample case of how talk is rarely matched with actions when it comes to creating quality bus services, unimpeded and able to maintain schedule

Years of prattling on about protecting public transport corridors by public authority has borne remarkably small fruit in Christchurch. Despite the momentary hiatus of Saturday traffic in this photo, this is the approach to one of the most congested areas of Christchurch - Moorhouse-Addington (where four office park developments alone expect to create workspace for 6000 more jobs and massive future redevelopment of this rapidly regenerating area is clearly on the cards). This is already a busy intersection and obviously it will become more so. Clearly bus lanes can not built here without taking up the main straight through lane for all traffic.

Photo shows two of the three older houses on the eastside of Hagley Avenue which have been purchased by a company that has applied to build a five storey office block with ground level car parking at its rear on this site. Clearly now and increasingly more so with every decade as Christchurch grows, traffic is likely to increase in this area and along this corridor and by virtue of this demand for public transport. Indeed there is every potential for a very effective bus lane to be built from Tuam Street, giving buses a virtually non-stop run from the city to the start of Lincoln Road, including a sympathetic intelligent traffic adjustable signal phasing at Moorhouse Avenue.

Logic would suggest Council negotiate with the company to purchase an extra 3 or 4 metres of frontage of this building site at the approaches to this congested intersection. This would allow an added straight through "queue jumper" bus and cycle lane, with a left turning lane for cars on the inside of this. Car parking at the rear could be altered, or might even go to a second level, possibly even with Council funding support- cars can park anywhere but bus or light rail must have specific land corridors.

This is just one of many instances that safe, fast, reliable lanes are NOT being identified and protected. It goes without saying, that once large buildings or new buildings compromise public transport and cycle advantage options they will be extremely difficult and expensive to try to reclaim later.

Is this future corridor being protected? It does not appear so to me.

When I hear phrases "a high quality, efficient, reliable and affordable public passenger transport system" (this one from the Draft Central City Plan page 91) I know this is just another great load of bunkum. It is the same nonsense that was talked repeatedly in past reports ten and fifteen years ago, in 2006 and more recently by Ecan's Transport appointee Rex Williams setting a goal of 30 million passengers per year by 2020!!

These sort of achievements take strategy, committment, funding, grunt and attitude not fatuous fine words.

Spelling it out is simple (if ironic) - if you want quality bus services you spell BUS without a Q in front!

Is a bird? A Tram? A train? A bus?

2011-09-23T18:38:00.001+12:00

Tranzwatching new public transport technology in Germany

I've always found combination tools fairly bloody useless. I mean things such as a garden handle with a hoe at one and a rake rake at the other of the single handle; or Swiss army knives with a dozen different functions - ok in emergency but no substitute for the real screwdriver, corkscrew etc.

I'd be surprised indeed if a vehicle combining tram-train and bus managed to really deliver the unique benefits of each transport mode well. But a group of German inventors associated with the Fraunhofer Institute have developed an interesting a hybrid zero emission [at delivery point] light-train-bus they have named the AutoTram aimed to give bus flexibility with light rail features.

Rather than running on a single charge like an electric car, or a system reliant upon multiple expensive lithium batteries to last hours the AutoTram only goes about 1.5 kilometres before requiring another 30-second jolts of energy fed into supercapacitors. The designer's thinking, it appears, is that in the urban passenger service context, reloading the sparks at the same time they load passengers, will not impair the progress of the vehicle.

Not so sure in our NZ context where not every stop has passengers waiting or indeed takes 30 seconds to load. Also where making four or five times a 30 second stop to reload energy, during the course of say a 12km suburban route could get rather irksome!

Nonetheless in a world looking for answers to combat some extremely black clouds, peak oil and climate change, on the horizon no new technolgogy can be dismissed out of hand.

Says the head of the Institute team that developed the AutoTram, Ulrich Potthoff,
"The system could, though, be attractive to European cities that want to prettify certain historic areas. Even if AutoTram system is more expensive than buses, cities like Milan and Dresden might be prepared to pay a premium to do away with ugly overhead lines and screechy tram lines, in favor of a quiet, clean, and wireless alternative."

Speed of cars passing school buses bigger issue than seatbelts - MP

2011-09-21T06:54:00.000+12:00

Tranzwatching school buses in NZ

Waitaki Member of Parliament Jacqui Dean says that cars failing to reduce speed to the required 20 km an hour when passing school buses loading or discharging school children is a bigger issue than whether seat belts are installed in school buses. The problem is caused by local drivers and not just tourists.

A report in The Timaru Herald notes that 20km signs are being painted on the back of some buses and buses shelters to try to create greater awareness, and some rural womens' groups are calling for flashing signs on the buses to be used when dropping passengers.

When magic didn't work so well in Paris?

2011-09-18T08:19:00.002+12:00

Light rail - Paris. Wikimedia Commons

There are many magic incantations abroad at the moment!!

"We need light rail"

"light rail is faster"

"rail has much greater capacity"

"rail only needs one driver to pull hundreds of passengers so is much cheaper"

"rail is more environmentally friendly"

"buses don't have the capacity to handle large numbers"

"light rail attracts people who won't use buses"

All these statements are essentially half truths or outright gobbledy gook. They are lazy thinking - statements having some elements of truth or being partly true, but always only in certain specific situations. Or they ignore context and downstream effects.

The magic incantations above can not be assumed, wishful thinking doesn't work for major infrastructure. Light rail (or commuter rail) is not like tinkerbell's dust spread over a magic castle, "when you wish upon a star" etc - build it and it is guaranteed success.

Loud opinions can be loosely put but city planning needs precise and accurate forecasting and cost-benefit studies.

Let us not forget the original forecast for the Heritage Tram, back in 1995, was 1.3 million passenger trips a year - in fact it has never exceeded 300,000 passenger trips a year to the best of my knowledge. Council subsidies had to be rearranged!

I like that tram system - its elegant old trams - and I think it did a huge amount for tourist images of Christchurch, it has significant added cost benefit factors. As do the iconic cartoon friendly shuttle buses. Something unique and distinctive. In contrast a modernistic light rail is so common place to most European and Asian tourists that it will just be wallpaper, as meaningless as a picture of a bus, not an attraction in itself.

The idea that building a light rail through congested Riccarton will be faster, or address the need to get people making longer journeys (across the whole city) on to public transport is illogical; another idea that is highly suspect is that light rail will get people out of cars in a way buses will not.

There have been many successful rail and light rail lines (especially if you do not factor in the fixed costs) but there have also been plenty that bombed or failed to attract significant patronage or created unforseen side effects.

Here is an interesting recent item about a new tram line in Paris from Human Transit blog.

The comments bring home the complexity of evaluating such projects, of public transport in general

All that glitters is not gold; all that is green is not green. (How sad the Green Party, running on mythology and knee jerk rather than careful research, backed light rail in Christchurch!)

Fixed rail systems in particular in countries lacking density of population need to make sure they join a lot of dots and join them well, cleverly, astutely, they need to do this even to achieve minimum viability (ie not cost the taxpayer $10 per for every passenger boarding).

Doing public transport well is bloody difficult and needs utmost commitment to getting multiple factors right.

It is not a fool's game but attracts politicians nonetheless.

(cheeky bugger!)

Three more busway projects for Auckland

2011-09-16T19:04:00.005+12:00

Encouraged by the great success of the Central Connector and Northern busways, three more busway projects look to be on the books for Auckland

Akoranga station on the Northern Busway. The covered walkway extends across the Motorway to the campus on the opposite side. In Christchurch a far more modest programme of suburban bus transfer stations, announced in 2006, has made no progress in five years of Parker led governance, despite all the usual Council rhetoric. [click on image to enlarge] per Wikimedia Commons

Although the exact parameters of the terms busway and bus rapid transit have never been officially defined (if that is indeed possible) a general consensus seems to be emerging in public transport circles that four major components need to exist;

(a) bus lanes segregated in part or whole and/or fully separated from conventional road transport

(b) priority signals or grade separated intersections

(c) bus level platform stations with pre-pay boarding systems

(d) real time signage

Auckland's Northern busway meets all these criteria

The main elements of the busway are an 8.5 kilometre bus only roading, over 6 km of this on an entirely segregated road beside the northern motorway, five main stations air conditioned with platform loading and large car parks, and bus laned roads in the North Shore Takapuna areas on roads feeding buses onto the busway.

The Northern busway reduced public transport traveling time from Albany to the city down from 57 minutes to 25 minutes. The system is even competitive with cars - according to a report in the NZ Herald travel times on the Northern Express from Albany station to Fanshawe St at peak can be almost half those of cars, 24 minutes as compared to 45 in a car. Buses depart for the city every 2-3 minutes in peak hours.

The busway opened in 2005 (fully in 2008) and patronage rose at 77% in the second year, and five million passengers trips were taken within five years. Patronage is still increasing in double digit figures, 19% in the year to June 2011.

The Central connector in Auckland's downtown area sees buses accessing the Central city by bus lanes and Grafton Bridge which has been converted to a bus only corridor during daylight hours.

The New Zealand Transport Agency were so impressed with the success of the northern busway in 2007 they began researching extending a mostly grade segregated busway a futher 16 kilometres north to Orewa. In November 2008 the NZ Herald reported

"Auckland's booming Northern Busway is being eyed up for a $700 million to $1.2 billion extension to Orewa. The Transport Agency is considering extending a two-lane highway for buses from Constellation Drive to at least Silverdale, superseding a previous plan to rely on motorway shoulders for trips north of Albany. Its new proposal would involve building five tunnels and seven bridges, including a flyover of the Northern Motorway, leaving North Shore City and Rodney District to construct bus stations along the way - at Rosedale, Redvale and Silverdale."

After a hiatus of a year or two, it seems, this investigation resumed early this year with NZTA hiring international engineering giant BECA to scope out the needs of the project, which may be some years away but needs land corridors that will be needed to be identified and protected before they are compromised by new developments.

Although National is not as committed to growing public transport as the Labour Government was, (to say the least) it has made it clear it may support busway projects where seen as more cost effective than rail and wants busways investigated as an option to a central underground rail loop.

This potential Government funding of busways is good news for the AMETI project - the Auckland Manakau East Tamaki Inititiative, a $1.6 billion (plus) redevelopment of rail, road, busway and cycleway patterns for south east Auckland areas. Government funding of $429 million has been allocated to the total project to date.

Part of the AMETI project (which requires the acqusition of 329 properties and removal or demolition of most buildings upon these) is the proposed building of a central median lane busway between Panmure, Pakauraunga and Botany.

As international public transport planner Jarret Walker says, although median lane busways can sometimes make turning movements more complicated for other traffic " a median BRT solution looks and feels like a separated busway, and its dedicated median station infrastructure makes the service look both prominent and permanent."

Whether centre lane or curbside lane, there appears little doubt this project will go ahead, in line with the overall strategic goals of the whole project (best described in the AKT blog here).

Now more Auckland citizens, living in the west but out reach of easy access to the western rail line who are pushing for a western busway of their own, running from Te Atatu to central Auckland. According to a report in The Western Leader "A proposal to build a dedicated busway alongside the north-western busway motorway has won support from the Henderson-Massey Local Board. It has included the idea in its draft annual plan. Labour MP Phil Twyford put forward the proposal and says the could be built, including new bus stations, for about $350 million. It would run from Westgate to either Pt Chevalier or the Auckland CBD and include stations at Te Atatu, Lincoln Rd and Massey."

Given comments by Minister of Transport Stephen Joyce about Aucklanders using bus corridors this project could well get wheels on it [literally!] before too many years have passed (or maybe as soon as Phil Twyford's party regains the seats of Governance).

The spread of busways - and the desire to built these corridors, often cheaper than rail and delivering greater service frequency, speed and accessibility across wider spectrum of suburbs (without need for time losing transfers) when "open" available to use by multiple bus routes - is not confined to Auckland.

Busways (more commonly called bus rapid transit in North America, and Quality Bus Corridors in the UK) are part of an international phenomena that has fostered significant growth in bus patronage where implemented. This is particularly so in South America, where many of the busways concepts were first developed (notably in Curitba and Bogota) but many busway systems have been built around the world in the last decades, the largest such as those in Jakarta, Istanbul, Mexico City, Lagos moving hundreds of thousands of passengers per day. Ottawa in Canada, with a population of only a million, carries more passengers per capita per year on its public transport system than every North American city other than the metropolitan giants, New York, Toronto and Montreal. An unusual achievement for a smaller city - Ottawa patronage figures are almost entirely based on its extensive off-road segregated bus network, though plans are now to also include a light rail extension along one corridor.

Closer to home, earlier this year the Queensland Minister of Transport announced Southeast Queensland bus patronage has surged by a huge 65 per cent over the past six years, to 71 million trips per year. This was more than triple the growth in commuter rail usage. Most of this growth is accredited to the very sophisticated segregated busway system in Brisbane, which allows dozens of bus routes to feed into non-stop busway corridors and trenches straight into the heart of the city without need for time consuming transfers.

In Christchurch no study has ever been done of busways, indeed the key words "busway" and "bus rapid transit" bring up no matches on the city council website.

That such a huge and significant growth phenomena of the last decade as busways/bus rapid transit can be ignored by the Christchurch City Council might suggest to many that those who are paid high salaries to manage efficiently have an abysmal ignorance of modern transit trends (and failure to research properly).

Or perhaps that certain factions may be pushing light rail and their own fantasies rather than investigating the actual resident transport needs and wisest choices for public transport for all of Christchurch in the broad and professional manner they are hired or elected to carry out.

Lets get back to professional standards in Christchurch city management!!

2011-09-14T11:01:00.002+12:00

I have followed public transport issues for over 40 years and I am appalled that this field of social engineering, with as many complexities as any other field of engineering, is being treated as some sort of “anyone can do it right” system.

We do not choose to purchase expensive medical equipment or wharf cranes on the basis of public or politician whim – why build and run far more expensive public transport on such a ridiculous basis?

Proposals to undertake studies on "light rail" and to create a business case for Government appeared designed to choose light rail without first examining other options, when clearly many other technologies exist to create more effective public transport. Obviously funding is finite and $400 million into one light rail project, a single short line, will seriously compromise other transport options for years to come.

Not least the future vitality of the central city will largely depend on easy direct access from all corners of the city, including public transport. Successful public transport needs to look at access to and from all areas, not just the CBD and Riccarton Road, or even the very limited future light rail network indicated.

I believe the city should set aside (or obtain from NZ Transport Agency) $5 million or sufficient funds to develop a public transport strategy more sophisticated than currently being applied or suggested.

Amongst other things part of developing this strategy would see international consultants, from firms with decades of experience and properly qualified public transport planners and financial assessors examining ALL major forms of city transport options and land use in Christchurch.

This would include conventional bus systems, integrated network bus systems, bus rapid transit, commuter rail and light rail as modes, and off road cycle ways (specifically built to address travel needs) and on-road bus and light lanes, and segregated or off road bus or light rail corridors, and commuter rail (including relationship to freight needs).

Any project involving substantial public funds needs to be determined on professional information and offer appropriate comparative cost-benefit studies to international standards.

All proposed choices or projects involving substantial funding imput (whether from taxes or rates or other sources) should be taken to a local body election before being fully implemented.

Commuter rail link would serve all of Christchurch

2011-09-06T08:40:00.011+12:00

Photo Diesel Unit at Onehunga Station, Auckland 2010 Wikimedia Commons

In a recent post I advocated building a rail link between Redwood area, just south of the Styx rail overbridge heading west to Johns Road, then past the airport down to Islington, creating what is in effect a circular rail network with lengthy spurs, able to be operated in all sorts of inter-active commuter patterns (see map below).

Click on images to enlarge (this map superceded in November 2011 by the one below)

For a much larger version go to HERE

As well as adjoining many existing residential areas, industrial and office park areas and major shopping hubs, this network would also serve the airport and the proposed/existing Addington City sports and events zone, and the central city. The network as proposed here would also serve (and no doubt foster) many new developments, such as Upper Styx or Islington Park. Or for instance it might add a big boost to redevelopment in the older areas such as those around Charleston, Roimata, Philipstown, if by boarding a train at Ensors Road residents could easily access almost every major industrial-office park zone and several huge retail employers stretching from Rangiora to Rolleston.

Obviously a very effective interlinked bus service will also play a key role, including a five minute free shuttle service from the city's premier rail and bus and long distance coach centre (and shopping/entertainment centre) built on the land of the former railway good sheds between Colombo Street and Durham Street overbridge (the area in photos below).

Given that this vast, if solid concrete, building appears to have survived some vicious erathquakes, and still have internal platforms (to the best of my knowledge) it may even be possible to modify, strengthen, and reface in attractive glass and stone desiogns etc the building itself

Although it lacks the direct rail to Cathedral Square quality of the proposed light rail route, the circular route pattern in the map above links well over 200,000 of our residents (and 100,000 more across the whole province) into easy access to the central city by conventional and sturdy commuter rail. This would have a huge impact far in excess of the minimal cost-benefits of a singular line to Ilam. The commuter rail benefits include a reverse pattern flow - comfortable inner city apartment life-styles fostered in central areas because it is possible to get to work by rail to almost every major employment zone- as far afield as Rolleston or Rangiora.

This suggested line - double tracked with grade separation (no inter-action with cars etc) in my vision would be built mainly as part of the Auckland-Christchurch freight corridor but offer opportunity to structure in commuter rail, presumably mainly financed by Government and KiwiRail, as has happened in Auckland and Wellington. Indeed it would be silly to build such a freight corridor and not factor in passenger transport facilities and land use in adjoining areas, even if some commuter rail links might still be years away.

I believe this link rail project could be built for under the $400 million figure esrtmated for creating a light rail down Riccarton Road.

I also believe this western rail corridor delivers far more economic, environmental, and social punch for the money.

The rail loop corridor protects the long term mobility and potential quality of life of ALL city residents (in a way the Riccarton tram line does not) if oil prices rise dramatically and permanently, as they may well do now that oil production appears to reached peak production. Apart from much shorter drives to car parks at stations at the periphery of the city (eg Russley, Chapmans Road) trains and bikes can work exceedingly well together and some carriages could be designed especially for cyclists, with a network of quality cycleways tofro stations.

A great advantage of this rail corridor is that most of the infrastructure can be built in advance of extensive new housing, commercial and industrial areas - at East and West Belfast, The Styx Centre (Northwood), Styx Mill, Johns Road, Spitfire Centre, Dakaota Park, Russley, Masham, Broomfield, Islington Park, the Izone at Rolleston, Rolleston itself, Wigram, Addington and Sydenham and (in peak hours anyway) the expansion of the Woolston industrial area. Potentially other areas, also to be linked in - Highfield and Prestons. This premature design removes conflict between trains, residents and cars (using over passes, underpasses or trenches and subways and also allows access to the rail to be maximized whether for bike and skateboard or for park and ride and kiss and ride. Glassed off platforms could allow direct access into malls and shopping complexes.

I suggested in my previous posting that the line via the airport could be built in a cut and cover trench (as at New Lynn, Auckland) with a station under Orchard Road, adding perhaps $150-200 million to costs). However any station in this area would anyway need to be served by a people mover or a five minute shuttle bus service to airport terminals and work places in the general area.

Moving the line westwards, towards Russley Road on the surface seems a much more cost-effective option. This would work if the overbridge being planned instead carried Memorial Avenue across the four laned Russley Road [rather than the reverse as currently proposed] and Memorial Avenue bridge continued across (above) the railway lines, with the station concourse entering straight into the atrium or open mall space of the Spitfire Shopping complex planned for this area. With also of coursel platforms linked to Shuttle buses for the area, which currently sees 50,000 movements a day - and growing.

Moving Russley Road itself a few 10? metres eastwards (creating a gentle curve until past Avonhead Road) would create more room to run train double-tracks under the overbridge and on a corridor of land immediately west of Russley Road, in front of the existing industrial buildings (Check SB Global Logistics, Jamieson Place, on Google maps to get a better understanding of the immediate area being described).

On my (potted) reading the basic line costs of double tracking and necessary signal cabling etc would be under $7 million per kilometre, including currently rural land purchase; the overbridges (such as Buchananans Road, Yaldhurst Road etc) about $15-20 million each, the smaller stations about $5-10 million each. (These figures are only extrapolated from Australia and NZ projects without all factors known and may be widely astray- welcome more accurate guesses!)

Unlike the "light rail network" which is expected to to cost $1.9 billion and would take years to develop in sequence, line by line after the proposed City-Riccarton tram line, the Western Rail Corridor and associated commuter system, in one move brings a huge chunk of greater Christchurch into one linked system for (probably) less than $500 million while simultaneously hugely upgrading our rail freight base and its potential doorstop link to industry. Commuter rail of course also has much greater elasticity and room for expansion than either buses or light rail - in the event of a new "Lancaster Park" at Addington and big Test matches and similar, adding carriages and locomotives to the DMU unit system means rail could deliver tens of thousands directly into the area, from all of Canterbury - and directly.

I have suggested in my last posting on this issue a bus subway under the railway line at Clarence Street with access to Addington station above. Elements like this would add greatly to the cost but to some extent the rail network with its many component parts could be built in stages. For instance land for a railway corridor spur to West Belfast, (and a tunnel under the new Motorway), the top of the proposed Highfield subdivision and the middle of the proposed Prestons subdivision could all be set aside, or even developed as a segregated busway link to the Styx Centre station, in the years it takes to build up a population base sufficient to add rail services. On the other hand the designated rail corridor might suggest more concentration of housing towards this corridor, apartments (with a nice rural, mountain view) to three or four storeys etc.

I imagine some chagrin from Lyttelton and eastern suburb residents might be felt towards this particular design proposal, but Christchurch is very in size small to carry viable commuter rail and I think that would be pushing the envelope beyond common sense. The made here suggestion relies on tacking commuter rail onto the Government's Auckland-Christchurch freight corridor upgrade; the probable increased use in public transport post peak oil; onto an effective system based on multiple traffic generator points and multiple use patterns. Not least it also recognises the greater stability of stony north and west land, which suggests a greater rebuild of thousands of lost houses (from the earthquake) in these areas rather than in the east. With its many swamps and large green spaces (QEII, golf courses, estuary etc) the eastside always was always more of a challenge in terms of sufficient population and geography, to service with a frequent multi-directional public transport network. This challenge seems likely to greatly increase with the reversion of many unstable areas, formerly housing, back to park or paddock. Lyttelton (even adding Heathcote and Diamond Harbour populations ) falls too far short in of any minimum viability for commuter rail, quite apart from the long walk up the hill better mitigated by the bus routes.

The conditions that once supported commuter rail to port are long gone, and instead there is a serious bottleneck with great vulnerability for freight. On the other hand a park and ride (and bus drop off/pick up zone) area at Chapmans Road might attract residents working in the north and west from all of the Sumner/Lyttelton/Harbour area.

Wellington aside - it is unusual to build rail (light rail or commuter rail) in cities as small as Christchurch, in low density countries such as Canada, USA or Australia. There are over 120 cities between 300,00 and a million in these four countries and Wellington is the only city with its own proper (7 day a week, multiple routes) commuter rail system (one or two cities have commuter links to bigger cities - eg Newcastle to Sydney).

However a very effective route structure with multiple overlapping functions, and timing (after earthquakes, before oil shocks, as part of rail freight expansion) could just put Christchurch ahead of the class, creating a very resilient infrastructure to support the city's growth and economic survival in the years ahead.

I believe it would be criminal to investigate the current light rail proposal without a wider study of all options!!

Read More about this concept and associated busways and transfers stations ;

Christchurch Light Rail link could cost city commuter rail

T.Boone Pickens Texas Oil billionaire spells out peak oil disaster our government ignores

2011-09-03T07:44:00.000+12:00

Tranzwatching in |Dallas, Texas, USA

Sometimes it pays to hear the message from the horse's mouth and with a Texas style drawl.

T.Boone Pickens, Texas oil billionaire, conservative, financial backer of George Bush, is investing in USA's biggest wind farm project.

Pickens doesn't mince his words on the crisis facing the USA (and world) over oil production shortfalls, world demand now exceeding ability of oli wells to produce, in this YouTube from US News channel CNBC

Wikipedia quotes The Washington Post which has said that "perhaps the strangest role" Pickens "has fashioned for himself is his current one: the billionaire speculator as energy wise man, an oil-and-gas magnate as champion of wind power, and a lifetime Republican who has become a fellow traveler among environmentally minded Democrats ..." .

In an editorial, the New York Times reports Pickens "has decided that drilling for more oil is not the whole answer to the nation's energy problems.

Christchurch Light Rail Link could cost the city commuter rail

2011-08-29T09:12:00.030+12:00

click on images to enlarge

If the city is going to build rail infra-structure into the hundreds of millions, blogster David Welch argues that money would be better spent on creating a Western Rail Corridor creating a circular route with several spurs.

Building a rail link between Styx and Islington via the Airport would create a commuter rail loop, by linking up the existing single track northern line [blue above] with an added grade separated (no level crossings) double track from Styx [red above] across to the Airport industrial zone continuing south and rejoining the main trunk line with a similar three way junction at Islington.

This adds circa 10 km to those services, feight or passenger entering the city (from either direction, north or south) using the "Via Airport" route but would save much shunting time and complications, link many industrial areas, and put tens of thousands of people within relatively fast rail access of thousands of jobs, even far from home, such as at Rangiora or Rolleston. The lack of level crossings (the rail always passes over or under roads) on this new link would allow both freight and commuter trains relatively fast access, despite the added city access distance, whilst offering an important and valuable chance to keep passenger and freight (which move at different speeds and in different movement patterns) running separately even in peak hours.

Much of the cost of the cost of this extra 10 km track - if found viable by profesional investigation - would presumably be met by Government/KiwiRail as part of the planned "Auckland-Christchurch rail freight corridor", not for the most part out of local rates. This would bring Christchurch into line with Government investment in Wellington and Auckland.

The map above - the grey areas are still fields, undeveloped yet designated future housing zones; the boxed in bold area to the left already a partly developed industrial zone, make it clear UNLESS THE FOCUS OF THIS CITY is on planning and setting aside land for this corridor NOW whilst the Government is developing and funding the Auckland-Christchurch rail corridor, opportunity will be lost or built out. Many advantages of the present situation could be very difficult to retrospectively regain. Indeed even in the scenario above, land best for a rail corridor beside or near Johns Road industrial area may be already partly foreclosed by large new factories and warehouses etc.

Anyone with a good familiarity with Christchurch will recognise the design below as hugely resilient (system itself can not close due to derailment on any one line etc) and one that can advance various spurs (or not) according to future growth (or not) as long as land corridors are identified early and protected.

This pattern below is hugely multi-faceted in its value and service potential not least it could cushion and protect many of the city and metropolitan area's outer growth zones, existing or planned, against loss in property values/greatly increased travel costs in the event of expected future oil price increases. Having a work force that can easily and rapidly access (in relative comfort) diverse work places, from Rangiora to Rolleston to City and Woolston and everywhere between, maintains quality of life; it also allows businesses to access appropriate personnel, and suitably skilled or experienced staff more easily, a core foundation of prosperity.

Click on image to enlarge

\With spurs to Rolleston (and Ashburton/Timaru); a spur to Ensors Road (peak hours to Woolston industrial area); and the existing main line to Kaiapoi, Rangiora this would create a hugely versatile circular route that could be grown and expanded over time. This includes possibly a spur across from Belfast through East Belfast the top of a major new subdivision proposed, Highfield, then into the heart of Prestons. Or and perhaps one day a loop from Sefton incorporating Woodend/Pegasus and back to Kaiapoi; or a spur to Halswell. Perhaps even 50 years hence - commuter services tofro a busy town of Darfield grown to Ashburton size. The "ring of steel rail" at the centre, acts as "round-about" to which growth can be attached and services can run in multiple patterns; equally it echoes Christchurch's most successful bus route (albeit further west) The Orbiter.

I believe hundreds of millions of long term potential cost-benefit returns in freight and passenger services could be lost if the city continues to live in the vague and fluffy rail dreams typical of the last decade and does not do the hard miles of research and strategic planning.

Presumably regardless of what happens Christchurch will grow and this includes rail freight - eventually leading to the inescapable need to double track the current (and only) single main line from Belfast through Bryndwr and Fendalton to Christchurch station. Without added options such as the western rail corridor this may become a necessity, even if still years away. Then again rapid growth in bulk wine exports, milk or milk products, timber etc or other yet unforseen factors could force this need ahead of natural incremental growth. The current line, as is, offers no future proofing of rapid unimpeded freight (or passenger) movements.

Double tracking and increased freight on the Belfast-Addington line is likely to will be hugely disruptive and politically costly, provoking great resident resistence (not least possible decline in property values as the line gets busier). It will also destroy a much used marvellous bike and pedestrian "highway", Addington to Northcote. In contrast, in conjunction with building a double track western link, this line becomes one of three lines accessing Christchurch or Canterbury beyond, maximum flexibility and security. And the line least likely to be used for heavy night freight!

The suggested Islington Junction, indicative only [it is impossible for me to calculate rail curvatures needed] incorporating access to new housing areas around Hei Hei and Masham and the huge new Islington Park industrial area (which could benefit from or compromise the possibility of future rail). In this map - Hornby (in green) reflects how large this area is, how effective rail could be in offering city residents easy access to this workzone.

Further west - to the left off the map above - Rolleston's IZone, the largest industrial estate in NZ is being created. Also of course Rolleston town building towards circa 15,000 residents.

In general rail services running direct to the city centre and Woolston, with others looping around through Airport and Northern industrial areas, would ensure wide coverage tofro multiple employment zones in a city, where even pre-quake (PQ) less than a third of the work force was employed in the CBD. One of the great modern criticisms levelled at public transport; it is still too tied to the central city commuter and not versatile enough to serve multiple dispersed workzones (including commercial hubs and suburban malls) - hugely answered in the strategy employed in this proposa.

AIRPORT STATION "UNDERGROUND" AND BUS SUBWAY AT ADDINGTON?

Other major associated infrastructure possible includes building an Airport station in an underground trench (Under Orchard Road) as with the $160 million New Lynne Rail/Bus centre in Auckland [photo of trench being built below]. In this case twin tunnels would ensure freight segregation (during commuter rail operation) and and a 10 minute shuttle bus service linked to each commuter train arrival would link tofro Dakota Park, the airport terminal entrances, the Antarctic Centre, Orchard Road and Sheffield Park industrial areas.

Building the New Lynne rail trench in 2010 Photo NZ in Tranzit

Further infrastructure might include a sensible cut and cover tunnel under the present rail station in Addington with escalators and lifts to rail platforms. This would involve redeveloping Clarence Street in Addington (Woods Mill) to increase width perhaps with three or four storey live work type apartment buildings. Buses, taxis, cyclists, pedestrians only would be able to travel under the railway line, completely bypassing the congestion associated with Whiteleigh Avenue and the rail crossing. Segregated lanes through the Tower Junction area (as below) and priority bus signsls for northbound buses exiting this scentre would guarantee continuous flow and reliable journey times.

Green = exclusive bus lanes with signal priority (including Orbiter route and services from city to Riccarton and University) on bus subway near current station. Pink = station platforms possible.

This would not only serve the booming office parks (and likely intensified housing) around Addington and the Woods Mill site, particularly the huge triangle of land, empty sites or with derelict buildings or older single unit housing now in L3 zone and ripe for redevelopment between the railway, Whiteleigh Avenue and Lincoln Road.

The railway link could also serve a sports and events centre - a virtual recreational city as suggested by Architectural designer Ken Taylor in The Press this morning, on the other side of Whiteleigh Avenue. This concept builds on an established tradition including sports venues already well established on the site of the former showgrounds. This area includes the CCC owned rugby league grounds, race course and the CBS Events stadium. Huge crowds from across the whole province could be brought in and out of this area by rail - with all the carparks in the outer suburbs. Possibly a "new Lancaster Park" could be created here - it would be an excellent synthesis of infrastructure - the more or less continuous events at the race course, sports ground and events centre (indoor sports, concerts and expos etc) and would boost weekend and evening rail use considerably, lifting the patronage closer to that needed to support rail.

A further useful move would be widening Lincoln Road opposite Clarence Road, creating traffic signals and a suitable centre lane turning bay for buses (including articulated buses) from the city while allowing cars and bike lanes up the inside. The opportunity for this post quake is huge due to earthquake demolitions [see photo below] - in a years time the few extra metres needed to achieve such a widening may be taken by a four storey office/shop complex built to the existing boundary! Transport corridors must be identified and secured, even years ahead of project implementation - effective linear corridors only need one or two blocks to be rendered useless.

Upgrading Addington Station with a bus (etc) subway could also allow it to be used a temporary station in an embryonic commuter rail for the city until a larger more adequate rail centre is built in the city area proper.

BUS MALL IN RICCARTON

This Addington station could also be linked to a "bus mall" utilising roading on Maxwell Street near Rotheram street behind Westfield - a vastly superior bus station/corridor to bus laning/or light railing central Riccarton. With current wide ornamental berms and wide streets open to redesign this has huge potential for for a high density bus through-road and interchange, closely linked to Malls and future high density housing areas.

This "bus mall" or might not include purchasing properties to run a continuous bus link from Mandeville Street to Rattray Street, in both cases with better street management and bus priority measures (segegated lanes or lights) exiting and re-entering Riccarton Road, having avoided much of the worst current traffic bottleneck.

Click on images to enlarge

Permanent bus lanes shown in green (road widening to allow added queue jumper bus lanes at Moorhouse Avenue and Hagley Avenue [proposed five storey building set back five metres]; again at Barrington St (and Lincoln Road) and again at Whiteleigh Ave (and Blenheim Road). When will politicians in Christchurch begin to realise there is little point in spending almost $60 million a year running buses and then plonking them in traffic jams or easily invaded lanes, so they are twice as slow as private car travel!

Maxwell Street, Riccarton - with adequate protection for houses from noise and pollution (houses anyway situated opposite a busy car-park) huge potential to create an attractive bus station and free flow bus services through Riccarton at all times rather than have buses sitting in slow moving congested traffic queues on Riccarton Road, only a block north.

Rotheram Street, Riccarton viewed from close to the best site for a Riccarton bus interchange, 100 metres from a Westfield Mall entrance, adjacent to a popular bar and cafe zone and only 300 metres (2-3 minutes walk) from Riccarton Road (note bus in distance). Why congest Riccarton Rd further ?

In the bottom left hand corner of the map above another long term bus infrastructure project, previously mooted by this blog, a direct southwest area (SWAP area) link, by-passing much congestion, via a busway utilising Annex Road and travelling under the motorway and rail yards to the University, Burnside, Sheffield Park and Airport

However the MAIN commuter rail and long distance rail and bus centre for Christchurch might be better built near the heart of the city utilising the land (and possibly retrofitting) of the former goods sheds between Durham Street and Colombo Street

Photos shown there is ample area here to create (if needed) multiple platforms for commuter and regional and intercity rail whilst keeping separate and clear-run the very important through rail to Lyttelton (12 coaltrains return each day, quite apart from any other freight). Suggestions of running commuter rail to Lyttelton I see as ridiculous, the tiny populations falling so far outside any known cost-benefit ratio, as well as tying up expensive vehicles for 50 minutes per return trip and adding to the current rail tunnel bottleneck problems. However some peak hour trips might run to a station in the Woolston industrial area or terminate (and park up) at Ensors Road rail yards opposite CPIT Sullivan Avenue Campus.

Potential for higher density housing (to four or five stories) or purpose built subdivisions (including walkway access to stations) in various adjacent areas to the rail loop and the suggested spur lines would allow residents easy rail access to workplaces as diverse as Woolston; Middleton, Hornby, Islington, Rolleston, Belfast and Papanui-Belfast or even Rangiora and Kaiapoi.

Heavy freight tofro Picton-Rolleston-Ashburton etc or from northern timber and dairy industries to Lyttelton, can, respectively, completely by-pass the city OR enter the city and head straight into Lyttelton without need for switching locomotives. Not least the Western rail Corridor in association with the current North line offers three lines and two different ways of accessing the city and links multiple residential areas (built or possible) to almost all major industrial areas - a huge protection of mobility whatever the oil price and solid support system for our future economic growth and prosperity.

In Summary

The current light rail proposal appears to lack any great depth of analysis, overlaps many existing functions already well served (in most cases better served) by current through bus routes. I don't believe it offers even a small portion of the huge environmental, social and economic levels of return of spending the same amount of focus, human energy and finance on the projects above, where much of the infrastructure (land use, zoning, roading) is not built yet and can be pre-planned to maximum effectiveness in advance.

There is is only so much money in the public kitty - even under a very generous Labour Government public transport policy and in more prosperous times Wellington has received "only" about $500 million towards public tranport. Auckland, sizewise, a roughly equivalent amount $2 billion (including rail and busways).

It is unlikely Christchurch can extract more than $500 million in funding from the Government. Even in the better small city systems in comparable countries (Cananda, Australia, NZ and USA) it is rare for public transport to win more tham 15% of all journeys, including kids and seniors, which means limited "poltical clout".

Any funding that can be obtained from Government, ratepayers or earthquake recovery sources and fares needs to be most judiciously allocated to create real and significant economic benefits for years ahead. And politically and democratically needs to benefit ALL of the city in reducing or holding level car usage in peak hour whilst offering direct access benefits to a significant portion of residents and businesses

This blogster believes it would be EXTREMELY foolish to pour $400 million in to a 7.5 km light rail corridor benefitting probably less than 15% of the city population. In contrast commuter rail as suggested here - though shooting high for such a small city - could benefit a huge portion of greater Christchurch, stretching from Rangiora to Rolleston and much of the northwestern suburbs.

It follows if light rail as planned goes ahead it will in all likehood to cost the city hundreds of millions of dollars more than $406 million estimated in lost opportunity. Light rail will absorb most of the likely funding or ratepayer contribution into one sparse line, and much of the energy focus of the city, while not even addressing the wider transport needs of greater Christchurch .

These needs specifically include reducing longer car journeys (the ones that cause - and suffer - the greatest time waste, add the most to congestion (at multiple intersections) and generate the most pollution, and keeping the central facilities easily accessible by public transport from all corners of the city.

Nor can a single light weight rail system along congested Riccarton Road tie together the city together in an effective city wide public transport network, a system built on the primary and dynamic world-wide trend of modern public transport, uncontested road or rail space and priority signal systems for public transport vehicles.

Ecan - Metro announces service changes in Christchurch

2011-08-28T04:29:00.001+12:00

Tranzwatching in Christchurch, Te Wai Pounamu, New Zealand

Long suffering bus passengers around Christchurch have been waiting to see what Metro will do to restore mobility lost since the February 22nd earthquake which devastated many parts of the city, most notably the central city and eastern and coastal areas.

Environment Canterbury web-site has published the following notice

All three main bus contractors (GoBus, Leopard and Red Bus) have had input to the process to date. Consultation has also included Black Cat Ferries, Ritchies Bus Services and the NZ Transport Agency.

“We have to make changes so we can restore confidence in the Metro service and to ensure it remains financially viable. It’s essential agencies and companies involved in public transport work together constructively to boost public transport as the city rebuilds.” says David Stenhouse, Environment Canterbury’s acting manager passenger services.

Metro services are being changed to provide a better service to the new centres of employment created by the disruption caused to central Christchurch by the 22 February earthquake. These improvements are part of wider changes to the way public transport services are contracted.

“The changes will enable us to service the newly emerged employment hubs, restore public transport services to levels similar to those before the February 22 earthquake, and give us the flexibility to make changes to contracts and routes as parts of the central city open up in coming years,” says Mr Stenhouse.

The new routes will include the Sheffield Crescent business hub in Burnside and the Nazareth Ave/Wrights Rd commercial area in Addington/Middleton.*

Since the 22 February earthquake public transport use in Greater Christchurch has dropped by around 50 per cent on the same time last year. This has put huge pressure on Environment Canterbury’s public transport reserve funds and reduced the share paid by bus users to the cost of running the bus network.

Mr Stenhouse said the contracting changes provide more certainty to operators in what was a very uncertain environment. “Longer term contracts will result in efficient pricing, greater stability, and reduced subsidy over time. The contracts will also be more flexible to drive greater service improvement across the city.”

* For a full list of route changes see council agenda, Annex A, August 25.

Pressure to degrade Northern Busway

2011-08-27T08:01:00.004+12:00

NZ in Tranzit - Respecting the importance of empty space

I see there is renewed pressure to degrade the bus only segregated busway on Auckland's Northshore by allowing HOV (High Occupancy Vehicles) to use these lanes.

Most people seem chronically incapable of understanding empty space is as much a part of public transport as it is most businesses or public enterprises. Shop counters or aisles are empty much of the time with often only 10% of the floor space in occupation; school rooms sit empty night after night; people only drive their cars on average 70 minutes a day but to maintain that we have to spend billions on roading and "free" (somebody pays!) parking space. Most the dump trucks and some of the general freight trucks we see on the road run are actual running empty at least half of the time, after dropping off their load. An even more ridiculous waste is having country roads - goodness sake they are being used by ten cars an hour!!

Perhaps the most gross waste in New Zealand is on the railways, tracks sitting empty for hours at a time and - this is an appalling waste of money and I intend to organise a campaign about it - every day 12 empty trains, not a single kilogram of freight, not a single passenger, travel from Lyttelton to the West Coast.

All this is so taken for grated no body gives a moments thought to it. BUT. See an empty bus or half empty bus or see a bus lane without a bus in it!!! Phew what an outcry. So few people ever seem to stop and think that the economy and effectiveness of buses or trains - as with stores, country roads, trucking firms or coal trains, etc and ad infinitum, is not based filling every space, every moment.

Indeed public transport has a huge tidal component - in towards the major central areas and business facilities mornings, return evenings. A second factor is the simple logic that even a full bus or train discharges passengers as it goes along and typically averaged out across its journey length travels at half capacity. A third factor is "ghost riders" - a person who doesn't own a car may only use three or four times a week outside working hours, evenings and weekends, but catches a bus tofro work each day - circa 500 trips a year. The fact a bus service is available across all waking hours is the reason he or she does not buy a car or a family a second car and maintains that annual patronage figure 500 plus trips patronage. Even when he or she is not on the bus in the evening for example, in another sense they are on the bus.

In similar vein most routes get special events or have certain facilities in their area which cause full buses, or at least heavier loading, if only for two or three trips a year, or bolster certain trips every week. A bus that goes past with five passengers on may seem hardly worth running but add a couple of ghosts and spread patronage spikes across the service period and it may be seven or eight. Actually even empty buses carry much more....

In Christchurch every bus carries [or did pre-earthquake] around 15 passengers a trip**, regardless of whether empty or full....because that is the average across all trips. And that is how public transport - or the local freight carrying firm or corner dairy also figures out their relative success - by averages. This sort of average seems to fairly common, or better than many, in public transport outside central areas of very large cities. Moving it up to 16 per trip would be a huge achievement - but when talking in millions of trips moving any average is a big task. In general, an half fill or even nearly empty bus is not necessarily and unsuccessful bus. It is just part of the nature of the system. All transport modes including private cars operate with unused capacity much of the time.

Many naive people talk about using smaller buses, but this will usually mean buses too small in the peak hours or unable to accommodate a sudden rush of passengers, even in off peak hours because of some big event in the city or on the route itself. These events or public response are not always predictable; operating smaller buses is less cost effective - it will mean leaving behind passengers at busy moments (and lowering the average across the year) and it also means two sets of buses and complicated and costly switching off vehicles three times a day, shifting between peak hours and off peak. As most of the cost of operating buses or trains is in labour (direct or indirect), fuel, capital costs and loan repayments, administration and marketing of information it will be seen a small bus will probably save only 5-10% of total costs, but could lose 10% of patronage measured across a year.
The average modern diesel bus I believe has an engine about three times the size and fuel consumption of a car, having lots of empty seats off peak looks weird and can be - but is not necessarily - some indicator of a failed bus system. Indeed for passengers it is more pleasant to not sit on crowded buses, especially in leisure time, but rather choose a seat and location within the bus that is comfortable - a certain amount of spatial option costs nothing extra (in one sense) but adds immensely to the quality of journey.

Many people also talk of the "higher capacity" of light rail - of course a $5 million 64 seater tram carries exactly the same amount of seated people as a $500,000 64 seater bus. By higher capacity is meant the greater strength of trams allows a bigger standing load - though the supposed greater capacity is debatable - 200 and 300 passenger capacity buses (designed for standing mostly) are in operation around the world. I am silly enough to think quality transport should NOT be based on standing passengers if that can possibly be avoided; and the easiest way to avoid that in a small city like Christchurch is to buy several top quality buses (even double decker or articulated) rather than a single tram/light rail vehicle.

The much vaunted lower labour costs for multiple unit trams/light rail is only relevant if heavy loadings operate across all hours, unlikely in all but very busy or dense cities. When adding the spread capital costs (such as the $406 million in Christchurch) and dividing by standard 25 years infrastructure cost evaluation, and add labour costs, and operating costs etc it is very doubtful the saving in labour costs in a small sparsely used system [by Eurpoean or Asian standards] will recover enough to counterbalance the real capital cost per trip. Extra bus drivers are usually only employed (on split shifts) at high demand periods and most bus companies keep the over-all capital cost recovery ratio lower by doing a high portion of school trips to manual centres, sports events etc between the peak hours, something that can not be achieved by a fixed route system.

The relative success or not of public transport in any mode can not be determined by empty space but by averaged uses and effectiveness of delivery times. And if those lines or lanes are compromised by other uses, in any way, this will push down the average. The Auckland Transport authorities have spent hundreds of millions of dollars (mostly taxpayers) to speed up access to the Auckland CBD for the maximum number of people possible. The only way to to continue to increase these averages is to have no delays and this is largely contingent on no other traffic using these lanes. Ditto for bus lanes in Christchurch.

It takes an unimpeded bus traveling at 50k-70km an hour probably less than 15 seconds to appear in view, whizz pass and disappear from view.

An empty bus lane is in many ways a successful bus lane!

** This a ballpark figure only, based on a submission by the Bus and Coach Association of NZ to a Christchurch hearing in 2003 - it has probably risen and declined again since!

This week the Bus and Coach Association (BCA) told the council's sustainable transport and utilities (STU) committee that introducing dedicated bus lanes on Riccarton Road would shave 15 minutes off bus journey times during peak hours. Riccarton Road carries 630 buses -- about 9700 passengers -- daily. "The Press" June 14 2003 pg A4

Sydney's lower North Shore moves towards Bus rapid Transit option

2011-08-26T15:08:00.001+12:00

Tranzwatching in Sydney's northern suburbs

Sydney's lower North Shore, close to the city is served by commuter rail but this does not reach all corners of the area, home to about 200,000 people or about half the population of greater Christchurch.

Local authorities are now discussing bus rapid transit as an effective solution for commuters to access downtown Sydney.

SHOROC, the regional body representing Mosman, Manly, Pittwater and Warringah councils, last year created a strategic plan for the northern region entitled Shaping Our Future. The state government endorsed this year a feasibility study into the bus rapid transit system.

“The bus rapid transit system is ... a practical solution that can be built and fully operational at a realistic cost and in a short-term time frame,” SHOROC president and Pittwater Mayor Harvey Rose said.

According to a report in the Mosman Daily the plan outlines an idea to create both a north-south and east-west bus rapid transit system, linking the Northern Beaches to the city via Mosman and from Dee Why to Chatswood. A system sometimes used in light rail is proposed, running buses along a central median busway of multi-laned roads until entering existing bus lanes crossing the Harbour Bridge.

As is the case with Auckland's Northern busway the bus rapid transit system will offer departures as every three minutes apart in peak hours and use the advantage offered by segregated lanes to reduce the journey time to city by half.

All Day Service Nightly

2011-08-25T00:28:00.000+12:00

NZ in Tranzit - looking at wee small hours mobility

The headline in the Edmonton Journal is "All Day Service Proposed"; it must be a subtle difference in language twixt kiwis and Canadians. I know technically a "day" is 24 hours, still I can't imagine that newspapers here would refer to proposals to run buses right through the night as an "all day" service.

That minor and totally relevant observation aside, this article makes for interesting reading, comparing the round the clock services or close down time offered in other cities in Canada, all far larger than Christchurch.

But the shift work argument is still true. According to the NZ census 23% of workers are part-time (less than 29 hours a week) and this means most will start or finish outside normal peak hours (eg 9am-1pm). What percentage work or start or finish outside normal work hours (eg evenings or weekends) I have not found recorded anywhere. But I imagine it is fairly high, especially amongst high school or tertiary students in after school and weekend mall jobs, and amongst those working in the hospitality trade, the hospital and retirement home sector and in cleaning.

It also seems that these people are more likely than most to be be on a restricted budget - either supplementing a benefit, or unable to get a full time job or choosing a reduced income lifestyle (for instance just before retirement). Or perhaps with a spouse working but one partner (most often the woman)working around kid raising to gain extra money, therefore more open than most to catching buses to save money.

There doesn't seem too much strategy in ECan or any other transit authority to try to develop marketing and services (as far as possible) to meet these sector groups, more likely to catch buses than most.

A few years ago I ran all the Saturday and Sunday services heading into Northlands Mall from the North through a filter-chart and found of about 5 routes only one arrived at Northlands at an [almost] reasonable work-start time before "the hour" [the usual start time] - at 0.38 minutes past the hour. The return journeys after the hour were not much better.

Obviously you can't please every one scheduling but it seemed to me rather foolish not to create as far as possible good arrive/depart times at busy weekend shopping hubs employing hundreds if not a thousand or more. A higher proportion of part-time workers are also, I imagine, more likely to work closer to home than full-time - few people want to bus an hour each way for a three hour shift!

The Edmonton Journal article also notes that services sometimes operate in some cities only directly between suburban transit stations, not attempting to thread deeply into neighbourhoods. This allows people to get across town into their general home area and then catch a much less expensive cab ride or stride it out for a brisk (or weary) ten or twenty minutes walk.

I can relate to this totally. For many years, a night owl, I often got back into the city from Lyttelton or other night spots after the last outward buses had departed. Luckily I could walk home up a busy road that never sleeps - even at 5am continuous cabs - in less than half an hour. The sort of people working shifts or out on the town after midnight tend to be younger, fitter and even if they are not, let's face it there is a huge difference between paying $6-10 for a last leg home cab and having to pay $20-40 for a taxi the whole way across town.

The implication for me is that whilst it is unlikely Christchurch is big enough to support much in the way of "all day" services, once suburban stations are brought into existence, some sort of pattern based on research could see the Orbiter operating to 1 am, with one or two main routes reaching furtherest areas (but designed to link with the Orbiter pattern) also running to 1 am....the idea to drop people into their immediate area, with well-lit camera monitored safe zone stop, cab rank, or kiss and ride (ride home) park there too.

Overall my general theory of public transport planning is to particularly foster services for "the marginals", sectors of people most likely not to own a car, or not to use a car, slowly widening and extending public transport use by these groups. I am thinking secondary and tertiary students, those retired or approaching retirement; out of town visitors; the aged and disabled etc It might also include a focus on working couples finding it expensive to run two cars or wishing to save for a house. I believe there is a huge amount NOT done to support or foster these "car less" lifestyles.

Along with bus stations and transfers nodes, as part of these stops or separate, one or two drop zones (identified spots where you can get off a bus, feel reasonably safe - say near an all night service station - and parents, spouses, taxis know that is where to pick you up and even have the late night arrival times on a card in their car etc). These might apply in outer areas served by major routes in selected spots - say not close to a rowdy bar, for a starter.

And seeing its after midnight, with work tomorrow, time for my drop zone! zzzzzzzzzzz