With studies into the CBD Rail Tunnel seemingly progressing well, and studies into protecting a route for rail to the airport kicking off, I couldn’t help but get my thinking cap on again just a little bit in terms of what I think Auckland’s long-term rail system could look like. Here’s the current Auckland train system:
Effectively there are two and a half lines (soon to be two lines, a half line and a bit of a line once Onehunga opens). As everything feeds into one Britomart station, via a two-track tunnel, once we have the Western, Eastern and Southern Lines operating at 10 minute frequencies, plus the Onehunge Line operating half-hourly, Britomart station will be at capacity. The only way to ease this capacity issue is to turn Britomart into a through station by constructing the CBD rail tunnel. Furthermore that tunnel will provide much better access to the CBD as there can be a Midtown Station, a K Road station and a Newton Station – as shown in the latest proposal for the project.
The other project that is likely to follow quite closely behind a CBD rail tunnel is an Airport Line. While the measurable benefits of the Airport Line may be somewhat more difficult to quantify than the CBD rail tunnel’s, this is a project that seems to capture the imagination of many – and would have big benefits in terms of “putting Auckland on the map” and also making life much easier for people arriving in the country – which is important for a country very dependent on tourism.
If we had both projects completed, the rail system could look something like this:
Effectively we would now have four lines: Western, Southern, Eastern and Airport. Both the Eastern Line and the Airport Line would have Manukau City as their southern terminus. To make life a bit simpler, and to allow people to travel through the CBD on the train and not just to it, I have linked up the lines: the Eastern with the Airport (in green, as it’s linked at both ends it becomes something of a giant loop) and the Western with the Southern (in red).
I’m hoping that the system above is what we will have in Auckland by 2025. That’s not a completely unrealistic target – as it will be essential to have the CBD Rail Tunnel constructed by 2021, and after that we will have the capacity in the system for it to be possible to have an airport line. In the map below, the colours are a bit different, but it gives an idea about how the CBD would work:
Helpfully, we’ve just managed to eliminate the “Newmarket reverse” too!
While these first two steps might last us a while, there are a couple of other railway lines that Auckland is going to need: one to the North Shore and one out to Botany/Flat Bush, to create a Southeast RTN that we so desperately need. But if we’re already running trains at 5 minute frequencies on our existing two main lines (which seems quite plausible by 2030ish), that means we’ll be having a train every 2 and a half minutes each way in the CBD tunnel already – so the capacity of that tunnel will be pretty maxed out. Which in my mind means that we should be considering building this new line with a separate tunnel across Auckland’s CBD. I know it’s a little long-term to be thinking about a second CBD rail tunnel when we are probably 10 years away from even getting the first tunnel – but the purpose of this post is to think long term! The resulting system could look something like this – with the blue line the one added:
A one seat ride from Manukau to Albany via Flat Bush and the CBD – wow that seems pretty cool! Through the CBD the alignment would differ from the original CBD tunnel – and would probably have three CBD stations: one at Gaunt Street in Tank Farm/Wynyard Quarter, the second an interchange with the first CBD tunnel at Midtown and the third being at the old Auckland train station where it had popped out of its tunnel. This would give good access to the northeastern part of the CBD. The map below shows how it could traverse the CBD:
But even that’s not necessarily the end of the story here. At some point in the future I do think that we will finally get around to using the designation for the Avondale-Southdown Line, probably primarily for freight so that it can bypass Newmarket. But once that line has been constructed, it will quite helpfully enable a full isthmus loop line to be created – which itself changes things quite dramatically.
So my final plan for Auckland’s rail system – perhaps something to be done by 2050, would look like the map below.
I’ll work through the lines one by one.
- RED LINE – as per previous maps involves combining the existing Western and Southern lines. Enters CBD tunnel from west and travels via Newton, K Road, Midtown, Britomart, Parnell, Newmarket and then south to Papakura/Pukekohe.
- ORANGE LINE – called the “Isthmus Loop” line or something similar. Combines the inner parts of the existing Western and Eastern lines. Enters CBD tunnel from the west and travels via Newton, K Road, Midtown, Britomart, Oraekei then follows existing Eastern Line to Westfield Junction before passing over/under RED LINE tracks and going via Onehunga, Hillsborough, Mt Roskill, Stoddard Road stations back to Mt Albert.
- GREEN LINE – goes from Albany to Manukau via Botany and Flat Bush. Travels through CBD via Wynyard Quarter, Midtown, Strand (old Auckland) and Orakei stations, then east to Glen Innes, then branches off from Orange Line to serve Highland Park, Botany, Dannemore, Flat Bush areas before linking up at Manukau City.
- AQUA LINE – goes from Albany to Manukau via the Airport. From the north, travels through CBD via Wynyard Quarter, Midtown (links in with existing CBD tunnel there), K Road, Newton, Grafton, Newmarket and then south to Penrose and then onto Onehunga line out to Airport, then hooks back to Manukau City.
There are possibly further lines, like a northwest one along SH18 or even one along SH16 (northwest motorway). But I think this’ll do for now.
Processing...
Nice work, a small quibble though you have just knocked out the route I most frequently use, or at least made it much longer: Kingsland to Newmarket. Incidentally its also how Carol Hirshfeld gets to Maori TV everyday…..
You may need to change trains at Newton I’m afraid.
At 2 minute frequencies and integrated ticketing I wouldn’t be too worried about transfers…
2 minute frequencies? That would be kinda good 😉
Looks fun, admin. However, we would need a full-fledged rail renaissance for all that, so let’s hope it’s feasible. I understand why you are doing this, but our emphasis needs to be on current projects. If we get them through, they will then boost the case for others in the future. So really, beyond starting on some designations, I see little need for work beyond the CBD tunnel now.
I would love to see a network like this however I would be really surprised to see it in my lifetime. We would need very strong support from the council and AT as well as a receptive government. I agree max, by getting the CBD Tunnel built and possibly the airport line as well it will drive up the case for further improvements as areas not served by rail call for the network to be extended.
If we are really in dream mode then I would like to see the light blue line from Albany to the Airport go through the tunnel and then down under Dominion Rd before heading down the SAL to Onehunga and the Airport. I would also like to eventually see a line along SH16, from Westgate it would follow the motorway till Western Springs, where it would travel in a tunnel to Ponsonby under the intersection with Franklin Rd. Following Franklin Rd down and under Vic Park and joining the North Shore line and heading to midtown then somewhere out east.
Another thing I would love to see is a realignment of the tracks between Parnell and Britomart on the Southern/Western line. Currently the tracks travel over Parnell Rise and The Strand before turning towards the old Auckland Station where it then does almost a full 180 to head into the Britomart Tunnel. Looking at images from Google it seems like it would be better if we could build a bridge to carry the tracks down the Strand to the old station. This might not have a high BCR but it would reduce a pretty slow section of track.
Can’t help notice the similarity with Sydney where the north shore also suffers from a single rail line which misses lots of people. Your design feels like it would benefit from splitting the line once it crosses the harbour, with one branch heading in a more north westerly direction.
Also, I would extend your green line from Manukau to meet the red line. No point forcing two changes for someone wanting to change from green to red, all for the sake of a single station. I might even be inclined to extend the green line to the airport since that is both a major destination for travelers and South Auckland workers.
The problem with the North Shore is that any other alignment would have to be totally underground, and even then would be tough given the topography.
For example, you could have a line going from Ponsonby under the harbour then following Glenfield Road, but actually getting the line up from under the harbour to have a station at Highbury would be near impoosible.
The whole thing would be an unbelievable expense.
Regarding Manukau, I would probably link together operations of the two North Shore lines so all trains continued through Manuau, making the point where the Botany Line turns into the Airport Line somewhat arbitrary.
If we are thinking long term perhaps one of those two north shore lines could branch off to give two routes on the shore. One thing with building a harbour rail tunnel is that is a very expensive piece of infrastructure with a lot of capacity (i.e. equal to the CBD tunnel in terms of the number of trains you can run), you don’t need a second harbour tunnel to run multiple shore lines.
The obvious/easy routes would be either a short branch line to the Takapuna CBD, or a route along the upper harbour corridor to Greenhithe and beyond. The first would need to be mostly in a (short) tunnel following the proposed busway link road across Barry’s point, but the second could follow the motorway corridor above ground.
Admin, would you really bother building through the Southdown section for the orange ithsmus loop line, instead of using the Onehunga branch which would be twin-tracked for the airport line but presumably have spare capacity? The Southdown section would add to the project cost and possibly affect operations at the freight terminal. Also most importantly it wouldn’t allow anywhere to transfer to the southern line, not much good having a loop line that doesn’t connect to the busiest line in the city. Running the ithsmus line via the Onehunga branch would require a slightly awkward dog leg through two junctions (including the need to build the missing sections of the junctions) but one could then transfer between the two lines at Penrose or Southdown stations.
On a similar note it might be a good idea to extend the Botany line along the Manukau Branch to meet the Southern Line (so you would have ‘double up’ on that short section). This means people could transfer from the Botany line to the Southern line directly, and not need to take a third line for one station’s distance in the middle. It might actually make more sense to terminate the airport line at the Airport and extend the Botany line to the Airport too, i.e. move the interchange point from Manukau to the Airport.
Nick, yeah good point about how to interchange between the Isthmus Loop Line and the Southern Line. Ideally the interchange would be grade separated and the kink would be avoided, but the lack of a good interchange point (you’d need to build a station, and that really is the middle of nowhere) plus the cost of that Onehunga-Westfield link might mean that your choice would be preferred.
In terms of connections between the Red Line and the others, perhaps the Airport would be a better point to terminate the Green and Aqua lines.
Yes Airport terminations make a great deal of sense, as would two stations there, one at domestic and the other international, right under the terminals a la Heathrow. Never underestimate the Airport Authority’s resistance to this though, they make a lot of money out of car parking and whatever positive noises they make in public they act very negatively at a legal and bureaucratic level against rail proposals. I’m sure if forced into a line they will have all sorts of practical reasons for any station to be a hopelessly long schelp from the terminals… Also something has to happen with Lincoln Rd, really the Northwestern does need a RTN and some link through Lincoln Rd to Hendo Station. If any of you have the misfortune to have a daughter playing netball at Te Pai courts, what a huge untapped demand. This is a spectacular planning fail; driving/parking frenzy every Saturday, no current possible PT option. The busway option proposed earlier would b a good start, especially if it linked to a Western Line station…?
Vincent, the long term plan for the airport is to relocate all domestic flights to their new northern runway. This will leave the existing domestic terminal on the wrong side of the site, so the plan is to extend the international terminal to the north as a new domestic wing and close the existing domestic terminal. The end result of this is only one terminal at the airport, and therefore they would need only one station. If they were really on the ball an airport station could be built right into the new terminal extension, either as a basement/tunnel or an elevated link on the first floor.
I didn’t even realise they were building a new runway, which is embarrassing since I’m a regular flyer. The best picture showing what they intend that I could find is here:
http://www.aucklandairport.co.nz/Corporate/NewsAndMedia/Publications/~/media/Files/Corporate/Project%20Profiles/Northern%20runway%20%20oct%2007.ashx
There is a public transport corridor marked on the key to the picture, but it isn’t clear to me where it actually is. I don’t think we need an expensive station under the terminal like at Schiphol or Heathrow. One outside the terminal (like at Brisbane) would be fine, I think, and might stand a chance of actually being built.
Just one correction:
“also making life much easier for people arriving in the country” could also read “also making life much easier for people arriving in the country and from around the country”
Heh, you’re right. Should probably read “arriving in the city”.
Jeez, have you folks seen the motorway-style interchanges they are showing in that airport brochure obi has linked to? Certainly doesn’t look like Geroge Bolt Memorial Drive to me anymore…
I think the key point will be to ensure that rail improvements get built at the same time as the motorway upgrades to SH20A and SH20B. Otherwise chances are the feeling will be that improving airport transport is “done” for the next few decades.
I agree about the option of terminating both aqua and green lines at the airport, it makes more sense. That does leave the position of having two lines from the shore terminate at the airport. It may be better to have the other northern line terminate somewhere else. Also would the aqua line be able to linked into the CBD tunnel. That could mean an additional 12 trains an hour using the tunnel.
Also I thought the northern runway extension had been stalled for some reason.
Updated version – both lines terminate at the airport, and the one that goes via Botany now only goes as far north as Takapuna. While that somewhat undermines my idea of having twice the frequency on the core North Shore Line as I do on the airport and botany lines, I think that Takapuna would be a huge patronage generator.
If we run out of capacity at Britomart before the CBD tunnel is built, there is actually an option – bring back the old Strand station into service. Here’s how it could be done, would invite comments.
In the Elder Days, trains were run from Otahuhu to Newmarket to the Strand (site of the old railway station) and then in a big loop back to Otahuhu and south; and vice versa. Now, given that Newmarket is the second-busiest station on the network, peak trains could be run Otahuhu-all stations to Newmarket-Newmarket-the Strand-perhaps onto Orakei to provide an interchange for Eastern Line services with passengers for Newmarket.
Peak passengers Newmarket-Britomart (probably not too many) would be served by Western Line trains; and other trains would be run Otahuhu-stations to Newmarket-*skip* Newmarket-Britomart.
This would separate out Newmarket passengers and make better use of the scarce Britomart capacity. At the sort of frequencies we are talking about, it could work. Views?
@Ross Clark I think Newmarket station could be a capacity constraint for this proposal.
I wonder if elsewhere on the shore is better served by a light-rail network.
Something like a line going down Onewa Road. Would split at Highbury with a line carrying on down Onewa Road to Birkdale and maybe Beachhaven. The other line would head down Glenfield Road to Glenfield, then maybe joining the main-line at Sunnynook. Of course this would take up another two lines of any harbour crossing which would make things expensive however this would then eliminate all cross-habour buses.
Those light-rail lines could always terminate at an Onewa Station where people transfer onto the train.
You have expressed some doubts about light rail on the shore (through the tunnel, and then the busway) before. I still don’t get it. High-class light rail can transport a lot of people in style and speed, and unlike heavy rail, it won’t be bound to the motorway alignment. You could run it through Takapuna for example, rather than off-siding that town centre once more.
Speed and capacity are my concerns Karl. While you could run light-rail over the harbour bridge, thereby saving yourself $1.5 billion for a tunnel – I don’t really see the huge gain that spending what would be a large amount of money on light-rail would provide you compared to the existing busway.
I guess in short, I don’t see the benefits of light-rail being that much more than the busway, though I do recognise it’s way cheaper than heavy rail and more flexible (though not as flexible as the busway). In terms of heavy rail, I do recognise that it would be hugely expensive and require people to transfer onto it from feeder buses. But, in the longer term, I think that there will be no alternative because of the capacity requirements for travel between the North Shore and the rest of the city.
I wouldn’t agree that light rail would be way cheaper than heavy rail. Sure it’s cheaper to run light rail up a street than dig out a metro tunnel, but in terms of an off line corridor like the northern busway the costs of constructing the guideway and buying the vehicles is about the same. While you might save the price of a heavy rail tunnel, there will never be light rail on the existing bridge unless an additional crossing is built, so the point is moot.
I agree with the sentiment, the benefits of light rail over the busway aren’t great enough to justify the significant expense of an upgrade, and if an upgrade were to be funded it makes sense to go for the speed and capacity of heavy rail.
If light rail was able to run along steeper gradients this could be an advantage. If this meant the line could be constructed cheaper with much less disruption to the busway during conversion it could well be worth it.
Running six car total light-rail sets would provide a large increase in capacity. With the corridor only being 15km long speed advantage from heavy rail 120kmh running would be limited. Light rail could also avoid some of the very expensive CBD tunnelling required for heavy rail.
Also gives more flexibility as it is possible to add routes to Takapuna, Highbury, Glenfield etc.
I think these points mean light rail should not be ruled out yet.
Can the type of light-rail train that would be able to run on the busway and Harbour Bridge without significant regrading really be able to travel at anywhere near 120 kph though? I severely doubt it.
Not convinced that 120 kmh would provide too many benefits in this corridor. With a 2-3km station spacing and only 15km long would probably only save a few minutes. 120 kmh would be beneficial is you wanted the line to go to Orewa.
Wouldnt expect the Harbour Bridge to take light rail, would still need a harbour tunnel, however you would not necessarily need to tunnel from Britomart to the Tank Farm.
Will have to do a bit of research too see if there are any systems worldwide that look like what I was thinking.
I’m sure theres some that combine inner-city street running with higher speed grade seperated corridors in the suburbs.
If you have a harbour tunnel you will also need a tunnel between the harbour and Britomart. You can’t just immediately jump from 30-40m below sea level to a few metres above sea level.
If your talking about six cat sets that can do more than about 80kmh, that not light rail in the sense it has been proposed in Auckland. That’s more like what they call ‘light metro’, and that can’t run be run on street so there are few benefits apart from greater flexibility with grade and curves. You’d still need a railway ground corridor, tunnels or elevated line to get out to takapuna or glenfield.
How about adding another leg from Ranui / Swanson across the upper harbour to Albany?
You could take the Avondale/Southdown line and extend it through Rosedale and then follow the motorway alignment to Albany. This would bring Te Atatu and Westgate into the mix as well. Not to mention putting the Rosedale industrial area on the best freight line in the city.
In USA & Canada, there are numerous rail (& road)links elevated above roads. Saves reclaimation & demolitions.
“Can the type of light-rail train that would be able to run on the busway and Harbour Bridge without significant regrading really be able to travel at anywhere near 120 kph though? I severely doubt it.”
I do not see this as a problem, Jarbury. Specs would need to be written correctly of course. But 120kph isn’t exactly the world. A light rail capable of good climbs also has a lot of power left over for speed on other sections. I still wonder why you are so against light rail on the North Shore when tram-trains can easily be incorporated into the heavy rail system.
Or you could have a classical light rail (not tram train) running, say, from Saint Heliers to Britomart and then to Albany on the Shore. Sure, the type of patronage on the eastern leg would be totally different that on the northern one, but that need not be an issue.
I see that Banks says he wants an express Britomart to Airport service, and perhaps this is a good idea as well as a comprehensive service to pick up both travellers and workers at stops along the way. It got me thinking about about how to achieve this and clearly the Onehunga line is not going to be express without a whole lot of tricky work, including buying apartments back, not to mention unpacking the route through Mangere that we failed to plan for. However there now is a new bridge over the MTL at Wiri which means there is only one road to cross and about 8km of surface track over level grade before a simple bridge next to Puhinui Rd and you’re at the airport. Important to get the station right into the terminals, or at least a short all weather walk with baggage away and this would be a little tricky as, again, there has been no planning for it, and for the need to not disrupted road business. Could be done, perhaps even elevated. However my point is is that this relatively simple connection could be in in time for electrification. Would make for a fastish express service via the eastern line and most importantly help build momentum for the Green Airport-Takapuna, or Howick/Botany line. It would be used and would greatly help to gather support for calls of ‘completion’ in Auckland to be increasingly about rail not the motorways. Still want the Mangere loop of course, its just that this could be done cheaper, quicker, and therefore with less resistance and sooner, and put more pressure on capacity at Britomart itself if Stevie has delayed the CBD loop again.
Great ideas!
let’s hope someone in the Super City is able to make a decision.
Was at Len Brown’s meeting in Papakura on Wednesday night & he sold your ideas as his own. At least he sounded as if he would actually implement them. We’ll see….
in USA & Canada they build railways over the motorways, no need to reclaim land, knock down buildings etc.
“he sold your ideas as his own.”
A politician need not come up with policy details or projects on his own. I have no problem with him adopting good ones and then saying they are “his”. If a politician makes a project become reality, it IS indeed his project, no matter who came up with it. So good on Brown.
These ideas aren’t exactly an secret Kerry, the general corridors referenced here have all been on the regional land transport strategy for over a decade!
Really all Admin is really doing is suggesting ways they could implement what has been talked about for years. If Len Brown is selling these ideas then good on him, they are council supported ideas from way back.
Hell if he gets it built no one is going to complain, least of all Admin!
Hey! I wasn’t knocking him, you guys are reading things into it! I said he sounded as if he would actually implement them – my scepticism is WILL HE? or anyone else – when did Auckland last have a Mayor/Council who actually DID anything? Probaly Robbie. (sewers)His council put the kybosh on his rapid rail plans. There have been many good rapid rail (& stadium) designs for Auckland but nothing has ever happened! it never does in this town.
I would vote for any of the last 4 Wellington mayors if they stood in Auckland – Absolutely, Positively, I would.
Sorry Kerry, the bit about “sold your ideas as his own” sounded like you weren’t too happy.
Anyway, it would be good to get a mayor who progresses these things. It’s a bit sad really that a candidate can win the hearts and minds of us simply by suggesting that he might acutallly undertake what the council has had on it’s plan for years!
This whole supercity thing is a double edged sword. I was very happy for a while thinking that we would finally have one body who can actually make a serious improvement to transport and urban design… but I’ve come to realise of course they could simply have even more power to build even more roads and parking buildings.
Excellent – more than excellent. Great job.
Hopefully they build the Airport to CBD line with a third line – for express services between the two as a bit of future-proofing. Who knows how many passengers an Airbus A390 or a Boeing 7117 (“seven-eleven-seven”) will hold, and how are you expected to get them away from the airport efficiently.
~ lcmortensen firstly your not going to have Boeing call a new airliner the 7 Eleven!
Admin I like your plans, just wondering why you have the Blue line terminating at Manukau instead of the airport. The whole idea of Albany to the airport seems topical.