How should we roll out Auckland’s rail expansion? How can we do it as cheaply as possible but ensure we get good quality and also maximum ridership?
Here is my proposal for expanding Auckland’s rail system, I’ve included diagrams of the lines that differ from the current plan, the expansion is in two phases, Phase 1:
- The CBD tunnel, it is absolutely crucial for any further expansion, the reasons for it have been covered extensively on this site as well as others.
Cost: $1.5 billion
Construction: 2013 – 2020 - Triple tracking of the Eastern Line and Southern Line (from Wiri to Onehunga).
Cost: $400 million
Construction: 2015 – 2020 - Airport rail, I propose double tracking and extending the Onehunga Branch to the Airport with a depot near the airport.
Cost: $900 million
Construction: 2015 – 2020 - South-Eastern Line, a new line from Glen Innes to Botany following the Te Irirangi Drive corridor toward Manukau (following the Saljen route) ending at a depot in Flat Bush, saving on an expensive tunnel under SH1 to Manukau.
Cost: $1.5 billion
Construction: 2020 – 2025 - The Avondale-Southdown Line, built on it’s current alignment to save on an expensive tunnel next to SH20.
Cost: $700 million
Construction: 2020 – 2025
All up the cost of Phase 1 is $5 billion dollars, this is roughly what we are spending on motorways till 2015. Costs do not include the expenditure on EMUs, maintenance or the ongoing running of the system.
Spread over 15 years, the rollout also protects the skills being developed by the staff currently working on Project DART by ensuring projects are paired and a consistent level of work is available. At some point some serious work is going to be needed at Quay Park Junction and Onehunga Junction.
The second phase after 2025 is very expensive and involves a second CBD tunnel and rail over the shore, I will cover this in a later post. By 2025 the system will look like this:
You may be thinking there are some silly things I’ve done here, such not connecting the Airport to Manukau and South-Eastern line to Manukau but when I explain how the system will operate it should make more sense.
Basically I propose we shamelessly copy how the RER system operates in Paris, which I believe is the most efficient commuter railway on the planet, using mainly an only double tracked system. The RER uses a few simple principals to maximise its effectiveness. Almost all services are through routed, the main station in Paris has 500,000 commuters disembark an hour in peak hour on 6 platforms, they can manage this as most services continue on through, as a contrast Penn Station in New York is a terminal station and uses 21 platforms for 300,000 passengers. Secondly the RER pairs tracks. Thirdly all lines pass through the CBD (although Paris doesn’t have a CBD per se the lines all pass through key employment areas). I propose we do the same and operate the tracks in the following sets:
- Airport Line with South Eastern
- Eastern Line with Western Line (Eastern Terminating at Manukau)
- Southern with Southern (around loop till future completion of North Shore Line)
- Circle Line
Each line should have it’s own branding and operate independently of the others (with the exception of signalling of course). The system will look like this:
It’s goal is to be thrifty while ensuring freight routes as passenger train use increases and as high ridership potential as possible with the motto, “Don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good”.
Processing...
A problem is that the Western will no longer serve Newmarket, why don’t link the Western line with the Southern line instead?
I mostly agree but would make a few slight changes for the initial plan.
1. Agree, although I would like to see the Tunnel designed to allow easy expansion to 4 tracks.
2. Agree
3. I agree with the airport line not joining to Manukau at this stage. The route along Puhinui Rd is just farm land so I think there is little value at this stage. The route should be desiginated though. To get through Onehunga I think a cut and cover tunnel along Princess St with the station on it before turning south to cross the harbour.
4. Agree with the Botany Line, get it close to Manukau and they can be joined in the future through a tunnel.
5. Start by building the SAL as a branch line off the Western Line. It could probably be built along SH20 to Hillsborough for less than $200 mil as the bridges have already been designed for it so it just needs the formations and tracks laid. That way gives us time for time to decide on the best option getting to Onehunga (I think it should follow SH20 and join in the cut and cover tunnel under Princess St). It also might be a good idea to have it using the Onehunga branch by giving it a southern link and a northern link to the Eastern.
As for the linked routes I don’t think the Southern should run in and out. It has a similar number of services to the Western so should run Western/Southern, Eastern from Manukau/Onehunga & Airport, Botany/SAL spur.
We would also likely need another $500 mil of new trains to go with these lines and don’t forget a new North Shore line is possible within that timeframe as part of a new harbour crossing.
I didn’t link the West with the Southern for two reasons:
1. I want all services to pass through K Rd, Wellesley and Britomart, this is a fundamental principal of the RER system.
2. In Phase 2 the Southern will link with the Northern.
Jeremy, I think Matt meant why not hook up the Wester and Southern via the tunnel and Britomart.
I have hovered between linking the western with either the eastern or the southern. I guess a pure north-south line in the future would be nice to go with an east-west line. Kinda like RER A and RER B.
Josh you are right, Western line would head in, down the tunnel then out to Newmarket and south. I think it would be good to keep the western line visiting Newmarket, even though it would take longer to get there, as a number of people from the west work there or in the area around Ellerslie (I used to be one of them)
I would prefer to see the Shore line line eventually link in with the Airport line, that way it is still fairly North/South. Just need to find a way to balance the Eastern line (North West line perhaps?)
Also there is a problem that doesn’t seem to have been discussed with the North shore line, current plan it is to join it at Britomart from the west which means the trains won’t head up the tunnel without changing directions. If the connection was made to the tunnel then trains would avoid Britomart. Neither option is ideal. The only way to really solve it would be to connect it with the east side of Britomart and perhaps have the tunnel go up through Devonport to Takapuna before following the busway route. It might even be a better option as it gives a bigger coverage area on the shore but it does cut out the option of having a station at Tank Farm (this could be served by the light rail plan)
Well that is the problem with a west south line, one out east is left hanging out…
I don’t see a railway needed in the NW, a busway should do fine and is more direct into the CBD… Trying to find a way to hook into the rail system around Kingsland would be too expensive…
I think it is most likely a North Shore line would bypass Britomart and link in at Aotea Station. Otherwise you are going to have big capacity problems at Britomart.
Personally I would avoid any sort of looping around the CBD at all costs, some people have a fascination with ‘city loops’ but they are an awkward waste of time. I doubt the RER has any one way termial loops.
I would link the western with the southern, and the airport with the Botany line. Add in a ithsmus loop line to connect them all up and service the outer ithsmus and you’re away laughing.
Personally I would extend the Airport line to terminate at Manukau, it is a short, cheap extension across mostly empty farmland that would create a high level of connectivity across the wider Manukau region, plus it would link Manukau CBD and the south east directly with the airport.
One thing about not connecting the Howick/Botany Line with Manukau City is that you may miss out on a lot of patronage that would go from Flat Bush/Botany to Manukau.
I haven’t seen the exact traffic patterns but I have heard that they’re not particularly CBD-focused in that part of Auckland.
Nick R: “Personally I would extend the Airport line to terminate at Manukau”
People tend to think of airport public transport users as being airline passengers. But airports are also big employers. I’m assuming that most people who work at the airport live locally, so the extension you propose would be useful to them.
@Nick, the in and out loop is a temporary thing, it changes in Phase 2…
@admin, a bit of chicken and the egg situation, would Botany become more CBD focused if less than 30 mins away by rail..? I think so…
Would the patronage to Manukau justify a tunnel under SH1 given the problems getting the Manukau spur to SH1..? Maybe…
I agree Jeremy, very chicken and egg. It would be interesting to see an engineering analysis of just how you would extend the Manukau Spur eastwards and then across SH1. Either a long tunnel or a very disruptive and ugly bridge I would suspect.
And further to that Obi, it is not just an ‘airport’ line, it also passes through employment regions at Mangere, Favona and Onehunga that persons living in Manukau might want to access (and vice versa for Mangere residents, etc).
Jeremy, why not then link the Southern and Outer-Eastern Lines, and leave the ‘Manukau via the Inner-Eastern’ as the orphan that is later connected to the Shore?
The Onehunga option for the airport rail is the superior choice for me as it gives not only an airport station but also at least 2 if not 3 other stations along the route.
You could do that Nick, it’ll be a pretty long time at the wheel with one driver though…
How about this (http://i356.photobucket.com/albums/oo7/kalelovil/airportline.jpg) as a alternative alignment for the northern part of the Airport Line? In its favour over extending the Onehunga Line are a far smaller number of level crossings, less and wider curves which should make travel time shorter and greater connectivity to areas south of Penrose (without bringing a Puhinui link into the equation).
Anyone know why there is a strip of land between the SH20/SH20a interchange and Bicknell Road which has boundaries to suggest a roading or railway project but which has since had some residential development take place? Has such a railway alignment been investigated before? Does the government plan to plonk a big expressway down there?
Kalelovil, my understanding is that there was a designation for a motorway link between SH20A and SH1 that passed through that area. It was one option for getting motorway access between SH1 and the airport.
However, in the 1990s – when the linkup between SH20 and SH20A was built, that land was flicked to Housing New Zealand and the designation uplifted. It would be pretty hard to ever build through that corridor again.
Jezza, Albany to Manukau would be only 45km with about 20 stops along the way, not especially lengthy. Maybe 60-70 minutes at the most.
Some of Melb’s suburban lines are almost 60km long with more than 30 stops (goes to show how sprawling Melbourne is to the south east, from the central city to the fringe at Pakenham is longer than the distance right across Auckland).
Oh and BTW, no steering wheel on a train 😉
Here is a higher resolution picture http://i43.tinypic.com/11htdsz.jpg . It looks to me that an Otahuhu alignment would have less housing and roads in the way than going through Mangere on the west of SH20.
Interesting idea Kaleovil, you might find the image half way down this link interesting:
http://www.bettertransport.org.nz/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=1965&start=30
As a comparison to this, Switzerland with a population of 8 million is starting a NZ$28 billion (yes twenty eight) upgrade of it’s rail system over the next 20 years entitled Rail 2030. This is in addition to the current spent, quite a contrast to NZ to be honest.
Kaleovil, your proposed route is discussed and evaluated in the ARTA report: “Planning for Rapid Transport Corridors in South West Auckland Metropolitan Region” available here:
http://www.arta.co.nz/assets/arta%20publications/2008/Planning%20for%20rapid%20transport%20corridors%20in%20sw%20auckland.pdf
Look for option 2B. Unfortunately only the exec summary is online so there isn’t much detail on the evaluation. Generally the conclusion was that this alignment was relatively cheap and would generate a good amount of patronage, and it was the best of the options invovlving a single line terminating at the airport.
However the overally conclusion was that a full airport rail loop from Onehunga to Manukau (and back to Avondale) would be the best possible option despite costing a lot more, as it would generate a lot more patronage. I would have to agree that a new series of lines covering the south-west (basically doubling the Auckland network) would be better than what is effectively just a long branch from the southern line to the airport via Mangere.
Using the Onehunga option would also increase the effectivness and viability of that branch line. I suspect that if we ever got into a period of cost cutting in the future that line would be the first to go.
“Either a long tunnel or a very disruptive and ugly bridge I would suspect.”
Why “a long tunnel”? I see the problem less with crossing SH1 (and why would a bridge have to be ugly?) but rather with getting enough property in that part of town to fit a heavy rail line. You’d pretty much have to take out Chapel Road or Te Irirangi Drive. Not to speak of the first section between the new Manukau Central Station and Te Irirangi in the first place. It would almost be easier to keep Manukau as a terminus, though with both the western and new Howick link feeding in from the west side. We could call it “Son of Britomart” 😉
Te Irirangi has a reserve down the middle of it…
Max, Te Irirangi Drive is the easiest section of the whole route. It has a 12m median earmarked for a public transport corridor, plus it was originally designed to have grade separated intersections.
It’s pretty straight forward, you run the rail line up the middle and build overbridges and ramps at Ormiston, Accent and Smales to remove the need for level crossings(thus also winning the favour of the road lobby). Stations could be built under those overpasses giving excellent bus transfer potential.
One option for the Manukau end would be to buy up the houses along the east side of Hollyford drive and the north side of part of Redoubt Rd, and to build the rail line in a partial trench. This would require only one overbridge between Boundary Rd and SH1, and from there it would only be 1km of trench and tunnel to get to Manukau Station, roughly along Wiri Station Road.
I count 61 properties required, so maybe say $40 millon for land when all is said and done. Maybe as cheap as $100 to$150 million to complete the Manukau to Te Irirangi section.
See here: Blue is the line alignment (in a combination of surface track, trench and cut-and-cover where appropriate), green are the properties required for the line, red is properties and a small reserve for a possible station/bus interchange/park n ride.
http://maps.google.com.au/maps/ms?ie=UTF8&hl=en&msa=0&ll=-36.98742,174.887474&spn=0.011878,0.027466&z=16&msid=101291069583876254503.00048281a855b1c5c6ed9
“12m median earmarked for a public transport corridor”
I thought that would be a wee bit tight for a double-track heavy rail alignment? Then again, narrow gauge…
“I count 61 properties required”
Stop right there. Forcibly buying land is only allowed for motorways in New Zealand!
Okay, I am kidding, but…
Also, you would be taking Westfield property west of SH1. They have well-paid lawyers.
It’d be underground at Westfield, I’m sure they would be very keen to have a whole lot of customer coming out of an adjacent train station…
Actually most of that is the carparking for the council building (i.e. council landbank), between Davies Ave and Putney Way. Only between Putney Way and Great South Rd would be Westfield land, then you are back into the state owned motorway corridor.
That section could be in trench or cut-and-cover tunnel, all of it could be actually. Trench would be a lot cheaper as you wouldn’t need all the emergency exits and fires safety systems of full tunnel. Plus people tend to prefer sunlight.
12m is fine in this case, even 10m is possible at pinch points on straight track. The main reason rail corridors tend to be wider is they need a viable accessway alongside the track for maintenance, repair and emergency egress, however in the case of Te Irirangi the adjacent road would provide that accessway. Somewhat ironically any section in trench or tunnel will therefore need to be wider, more like 15 or 16m.
Here is a good example from perth of what it might look like, note how the rail corridor is about the same width as three lanes of traffic (i.e. around 12m).
http://www.abc.net.au/reslib/200711/r198767_758392.jpg
Jeremy, unfortunately Westfield haven’t exactly been the biggest rail fans so far in Auckland. They seem more keen on ensuring that councils impose massive minimum parking requirements on them for some insane reason.