Now that Auckland Council & Auckland Transport have made the decision to push ahead with protecting the route for the City Rail Link, a process that will probably take a year or two as the designation and all the necessary consents are acquired, it’s a good time to start thinking about some of the design details for the project and also some important ways in which we can be clever about its design while ensuring that it is well future-proofed for whatever further rail projects Auckland might need over the lifespan of the CRL, which will be around for a very very long time.
Many of the fundamentals of the CRL’s design have already been decided, most obviously its route and the location of the three stations. While it would have been nice to somehow get a station closer to the University precinct, in general I think the right decisions have been made about the route and the station locations. If the tunnel was any longer the cost would go up further, if the tunnel was any shorter then the grade would be even steeper – and already we’re pushing the limits for how steep a rail tunnel can be. Midtown and Karangahape Road are no-brainer locations for a station, while I’m a particular fan of the proposed Newton Station because of its urban revitalisation potential. So at the big picture level I think things are going great.
So really, what I think needs to be analysed now are details like where entrances and exits to the stations will go, what kind of footprints the stations will have and, perhaps most crucially, is there some future-proofing that we need to do? In particular, while a North Shore Railway Line may be many decades away from being constructed, we do need to think about how it will link in with the rest of the rail network when that day eventually arrives – to ensure that we don’t cut off options and to ensure that if any relatively cheap future-proofing options are available now we take them.
I have outlined in the past how I think North Shore Rail should connect up to the rest of the network, by forming an east-west tunnel across the city before linking with the Eastern Line (and hopefully an eventual Southeast Railway Line).
The stupidly over-priced North Shore Rail option outlined in NZTA’s Waitemata Harbour Crossing study took a different alignment in part – continuing on to Newmarket with underground stations beneath the University and the Hospital. But it too would have the same potential connection with the City Rail Link tunnel: at Aotea Station and at right-angles.
What this means is that we need to think about potential connections with a future North Shore Line when we design Aotea Station. I’m no engineering expert and I’m certainly not suggesting that we would necessarily build the cavern for future North Shore Line platforms beneath the station (that seems a bit too expensive for something that could be 30 years away), but I think there are surely steps we could take in the design of the station to reduce the future cost of platforms for a North Shore Line. Its design should be taking this into consideration.
A second matter that needs a lot of thought is the question of where the pedestrian entrances to the stations should be located. We got some clues about current thinking on this issue from the presentation to Auckland Council a couple of weeks ago.
The Newton and K Road entrances seem no-brainers, though with Aotea Station I wonder if the most obvious station entrance option has been missed: a level connection from Darby Street through Atrium on Elliott:
Having that big empty site on the corner of Victoria, Albert and Elliott streets might be quite useful actually and I imagine there might be some scope to amend the consented tower block that will one day be built on that site so that it links in with the station in a constructive way. This approach would give us a level walk from Queen Street right into Aotea Station – something that isn’t possible if the only station entrance is at the corner of Wellesley and Albert Street (like what seems to be proposed). Of course an entrance at Wellesley and Albert as well as what I propose above would be a good idea.
Overall, I must say I am looking forward to seeing the more detailed designs of the project over the next year or so. I hope that some artistic flair goes into the design of the stations – to ensure that they make a great contribution to the feel and experience of Auckland. We just need to be clever about things as we move forward: clever about ensuring that we future-proof where it makes sense, clever that we provide well located station entrances and clever that we get the little things right about the design details.
Processing...
The CBD Rail Link study took a conservative approach to placement of station entrances, as it was felt that it was important from a designation perspective to show that there was a plausible station design (if not the optiomum one) that did not rely on negotiations with private land owners, such as the bungee jump site by Aotea station. It was however recognised that in reality, discussions would probably take place with such land owners, as the project development progressed, to establish better links to stations, such as the one from Darby St, through private propoerty. It is also expected that as more certainity around the project being constructed is achieved, that property developers may wish to have connections to stations through their buildings, but this sould not be an Notice of Requirement assumption.
Good points – the Darby Street connection makes a lot of sense. Yes, the finer details of the station surrounds will make a real difference to the ultimate success of the project. Auckland Transport needs to be forward thinking on this so we don’t end up with less-than-optimal pedestrian connections as at Newmarket. As usual, the Dutch are expert (and playful) at this – http://popupcity.net/2011/07/slide-to-the-train/
Yes, we don’t want Newmarket to happen again anywhere, ever. Is it too late to bring the Convention Centre back to Aotea, or has the “bribe”/funding-promise kicked in yet?
Still concerned about the very tight corner on your map!
I’ve always thought that Aotea Station would look great with a big glass side wall, letting in natural light, and also allowing people outside to see the trains. Would have to cancel the office tower project though, so not a realistic idea I guess.
Regarding the future North Shore link, that would for certain be below the CRL, so it would be essential to dig out the lower cavern across the full width of the upper station. Unfortunately, all official thinking at present is that a North Shore link will come out of Britomart, with track-level junction and a diamond crossing – essentially a repeat of Quay Park Junction!
Geoff – The indications are that the thinking has shifted and this was even indicated in the harbour crossing study where they had the line going via Wellesley or Victoria St. A bit glass wall would prevent that development as you say and we will need all the development around the stations we can as that is part of the justification for it.
“I’m certainly not suggesting that we would necessarily build the cavern for future North Shore Line platforms beneath the station (that seems a bit too expensive for something that could be 30 years away)”
I would. Adding extra platforms later under an operating station would be very expensive. You’ve got to join up the escalators and lifts as well as all the services like electricity and water and you have to do it all with trains pulling in to the station every few minutes. You also have to make sure that you don’t make a mistake and have the operating tunnels drop in to your excavating tunnels after a cave in. I wouldn’t be surprised if it was so expensive that future people would find it easier to build a second station nearby, with foot transfers at street level.
I think this should be done properly with a view to expansion.
The required turn to the west of Britomart is very tight. Can trains actually do that? If so, are they going to be grinding with noise and excessive wheel wear? Look at a map of the current railway… no section has a turn radius anywhere close to the one required.
I wonder how much it would cost to build the cavern for North Shore rail beneath Aotea Station. I think the whole station has a cost of around $150 million.
I’d be interested too. The unused northern platforms can be pretty basic. No lighting. No platform furniture. No fire detection or suppression. No arrival displays. You don’t even need to line the tunnel sides… just leave them bare concrete.
For a good example of what a mess a station can be when you try and retrofit tunnels, look no further than Wynyard and Town Hall in Sydney. I use them regularly and they’re both beyond odd in the internal station navigation area.
I’d be surprised if the cost went up by more than a third to just hollow out a few more 10s of metres of depth. Sure it’s a whole lot more rock, but you’re already doing the really expensive part which is getting down there in the first place.
Don’t think there’s any rock down there, this is Auckland not Manhattan, it’s all clay, clay, clay, except where there’s the odd old volcano or lava flow…. and they’re not at this site.
No Auckland is mostly a form of sandstone. From Wikipedia “The main isthmus and North Shore are composed of Waitemata sandstone and mudstone”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geology_of_the_Auckland_Region
To future proof an east-west Aotea station would only require a 20-30m section built under north-south Aotea Station cavity – so maybe $15m. Add on admin/design costs & profit then probably $25m.
20 years later when the eastern side of the tunnel is built the TBM could be lifted out of the e-w station cavity. The western part of the tunnel could be bored by a roadheader from Vic park, probably when the current Vic park viaduct is replaced.
More important question: do you build a e-w station at Gaunt St before the re-development of this part of Wynyard, while it is a brown-field site ? or delay development in Gaunt St for 20+ years ?
Good points, I think Josh’s 30 years is too pessimistic for this line, assuming that the CRL and the South western will be open before this decade is out, and I believe they will, political pressure alone will mean the need to include the Shore earlier than later…. at least with a crossing to an interchange station at Onewa….. discuss
I think that the Darby St entrance is a no brainer if it can be negotiated with the owner of that currently empty site. Access into the Atrium on Elliot would also be possible and that would also give people a link into the Crowne Plaza which would be perfect when we also get an airport link.
Another thing, if the North Shore line is at least planned, they would only need to dig out the station box directly where they cross, the rest of the box for the platforms could be done when needed.
You could have the owners on Atrium on Elliot and the currently empty site pay for the link tunnels. Having all those people walk pass the retail areas every day will increase the rent they can charge so it would presumedly make economic sense for them.
Yes, getting them to pay for access is one way that we can hopefully raise some funds to help pay for the thing, also on the other side I imagine that Sky City would love a direct link straight into their sites.
Like the proposal for the North Shore Line. Just thought I’d point out that the Supper Club, located at the old toilet block where the K Rd station is proposed, is currently for sale according to someone I was speaking to the other day.
Clearly there will be entrances and exits at each end and the centre of Aotea Station. A variety of egress will be needed for safety, but also this is likely to become the busiest station and to shift the peak volumes of peoples comfortably [yes build for growth- future proof] and for convenience of travelers all heading in different directions there will have to be a number exists.
The vacant site will be ideal during construction and any new project will surely have retail floors and the owners would be mad not to want all those potential customers being delivered right to their tenants shops…
And yes the perpendicular station serving the North Shore will surely cross here too, will almost certainly be below this station as the line would gone on under Queen St [and Horotiu]. So station design should take into account this likelihood.
I think an entrance onto Queen would be really impt for students to cut down walking time up to uni… Also, wouldn’t it be cool (and surely not that expensive) to provide a covered walkway up through Albert Park to uni? All they would have to do is just build a roof on poles – would make a big difference on cold winter days I think.
A covered shelter along Wellesley Street would be pretty easy surely. Might be a useful part of my Wellesley Street bus corridor plan.
Wouldn’t an escalator up Albert Park be nice?
Lazy as, bro!
The best thing they could do would be to build a pedestrian extension of Derby Street all the way up to Albert Sreet and have the entrances to the station on the corners. This would enable easier access to Albert Street from Queen Street and provide a nice area for bars/restaurants/cafes. As an aside this entrance would definately see the most use being so close to Queen Street.
That Darby street entrance would be a great idea. And even better would be if that empty site can be secured by the council and turned into a Public Square (instead of a carpark), maybe add some features so it can run a weekend market (farmers market style thing) and have it directly connected to the station. May even encourage the owners of the current atrium on elliot street, to convert the side of the building facing it into something other than a bare concrete wall.
Imagine it with bars/cafes opening out onto the square, with second story balconies. All directly connected to proper shared spaces.
Ahh wishful thinking.
That site is where there were plans for a 60+ story tower, I would rather that on there than a square. By then it would probably be much easier to close Darby St and Elliot St to cars then those could become the public space with the tower attracting more people who would also use those streets.
No more public space please, let’s have more city, big tower needed on this site… just no car parks though…..
I think they need a tower here. However They need to make sure that leave some room so the public can go through the site without having to go around. We don’t want this to turn into wall that blocks Albert Street from Queen Street, like Vero and Lumley block Fort Street from Shortland Street.
Agree with the tower. This would be a sad little park in a ditch basically.
I suspect that any public space would be a series of terraced gardens. It could be quite nice although I think the expense to the public would be eye-watering. I would propose that Darby Street be extended as a pedestrian walkway along a series of terraces connected with stairs up to Albert Street to provide a direct link to Queen Street.
If you want to get from Queen St to Albert St you could use, Wellesley St, Victoria St or even use the escalators through the Atrium and whatever new tower is built there. As the station will be about 20m below Albert St, a mezanne level at what is Queen St ground level would be likely meaning somone could walk off Queen St, flat along Darby St and into the station then take an escaltor or stairs down to the platform to catch a train, seems perfect to me. Forcing everyone up the hill to Albert St only to go back down into the station doesn’t seem smart.
I would have a station entrance at the bottom of the stairs as well.
If I were the developer of that site I would be clamouring to ensure that what will be the country’s busiest transit station had it’s main entrance via my ground floor retailing precinct. Can you imagine the foot traffic and the rents you could charge as a result?
On the Shore line, I would be a little conceded if it only connected to midtown the headed out east. That would mean almost everyone using the shore line would have to use Wellesley St, be they exiting to the city or transferring to another line. Add in the traffic from the first tunnel and you have a very congested station in a very constrained site. It could end up like Sydney’s town hall station, Absolutely chokers with no chance of fixing it.
On another note, how about having the Tank Farm station in a north-south alignment, with one end opening to the water end precinct and the other to Fanshawe and Victoria Park.
Nick, I’m sure it would North/south, and I agree with your fears about the numbers coming through Aotea, it would be by far the busiest station.
I have an alternative route that doesn’t add another city stop unless an expensive and difficult University one was added but does have other advantages. Take the Southern Line west of Parnell at the current level over the highway and into Constitution Hill then onto to Aotea Station at right angles to the CRL one as Josh has it. This connects the North Shore Line to the Southern not the Eastern, forming a cross pattern: Western to Eastern, and Southern to Northern. Half the Southern services would go via Grafton into the city and back South again. One big advantage is speed. Southern and Shore services would be at the heart of town incredibly fast, the southern into town would avoid the slow swing into Britomart. Britomart would be more available for inter city services. The Shore is then directly connected to Airport services, and Manukau…..
Like with Josh’s scheme it does mean that Aotea is the hub and would have to be able to handle big volumes of people, although the Tank Farm area is about to become a big destination too.