Re: auckland, christchurch rail

[Bill <billguest@the.net.nz>]

Redesigning Auckland's public transport should be done on a blank sheet of paper,
ignoring the existing rail lines. The critical need is for a mass transit link to
the North Shore, going at least to Albany, and preferably to Whangaparoa. Of
course, the utter lack of political leadership in Auckland in the last 50-100
years or so will now make this an expensive proposition. In the other directions,
links will be needed to well out to the east say to Howick, and to Kumeu alongside
the motorway rather than meandering through Glen Eden. I think a good link to the
airport, with rolling stock that has room for luggage, would also be worth
thinking about.

In my view there is no chance whatsoever of making the existing rail routes on
their own become the backbone of a useful public transport system.

When I lived in Auckland (a bloody awful place, I might add) about 25 years ago,
there was a plethora of small-minded local authorities. That has improved, but
there are still 4 major cities, all pushing fairly narrow agendas. Auckland is the
absolute worst, still wedded to a single cbd concept based on Queen Street.
Auckland City wilfully disregarded the opportunities that opened up when railways
pulled out of the railway yards. I remember the late Buck McConnell (founder of
McConnell Dowell) pushing the idea of a submerged tunnel over the harbour bed,
with the southern portal being in the rail yards. He was ignored.

Despite the expense, the advantages of establishing a totally new network are
substantial:

1. Free of horrible Tranz Rail who have not helped a bit.
2. A design to meet customer needs, not existing outmoded infrastructure
3. The ability to set technical standards and operating standards that are up to
date, and not tied to Tranz Rail's antiquated ideas.
4. The ability to set up an infrastructure and operating contracts without the
baggage of the past.

Then, Tranz Rail (or their successor after they collapse which I think they will)
can decide whether they get into the business properly on their network, and there
can be interchange stations where the new system crosses the current Tranz Rail
network. If they don't, too bad. The new system can expand to meet the needs of
the region, and political pressure can be exerted to make Tranz Rail hand over -
free of charge - access to the citizen-owned current rail corridor

Anyone who thinks that buses are all that is needed for public transport is
insane. And anybody who thinks that the current transport network in Auckland is
satisfactory now and will continue to be for even 20 years is simply raving.

Of course, this won't come cheap!  But then, Auckland is clearly going to become
the principal "city-state" in New Zealand. It is almost that now. For the good of
the whole country, Auckland has to be an environmentally acceptable, economically
efficient region. I certainly isn't that now. And if it does not improve, then
Sydney will become the principal city-state of Australasia, and Auckland and New
Zealand will gracelessly decline into pollution, poverty, and anarchy......

Bill


David McLoughlin wrote:

> geoff dawson wrote:
> >
> > Re recent comments whose thread I have lost:
> >
> > 1. It would be simple to convert Auckland suburban rail to light rail style
> > operation. Restore the route to the old central city station, turn left into
> > Queen St, straight up to rejoin the Waitakere and Porirua lines somewhere
> > near Mt Eden & Newmarket respectively.
>
> Waitakere (west) and Papakura (south).
>
> The problem with this is none of Auckland's rail lines is particularly
> close to population centres. They run for kilometre after kilometre
> through overgrown, run-down, almost abandoned industrial areas.
>
> The best routes for light rail in Auckland (Dominion Road,
> Pakuranga-Botany Downs-Howick and the North Shore) do not even have rail
> lines.
>
> In any event conversion would not be simple. The lines are not electric.
> They are used 24/7 by freight trains. And the gauge is 3'6" which is too
> narrow for a decent light rail system.
>
> >
> > 2. Dare one ask why Christchurch rail station was moved out of town? For the
> > greater good of some worthwhile civic improvement? Or becaue someone figured
> > they could make most money from the site by selling it to McDonalds?
>
> There are no suburban trains in Christchurch (the last, the Lyttelton
> line, which was electric, closed in 1972). There are only perhaps six
> passenger movements a day, to and from Picton, to and from
> Dunedin/Invercargill and to and from Greymouth.  Not worth maintaining a
> huge (and it was huge) railway station for.
>
> Last time I went past, the station was either a cinema or a museum or
> both.
>
> David McLoughlin
> Auckland New Zealand