I went along to some of the Auckland Council meeting which took place today about the events of Friday. There are three reports which were produced and discussed at the meeting:
Auckland Council’s overall summary of events
Auckland Transport’s review of the transport issues
The Auckland Council report summarises the two significant problems that occurred, and therefore what the reports move onto discussing.
There were two significant lowlights from the Friday evening:
– around public transport performance, particularly the trains, and
– issues of crowd control down at the Waterfront, particularly on Quay Street between Queen’s Wharf and the Viaduct.
There is some interesting information in the ATEED report about the various estimates of the number of people attending the opening celebrations, and they provide quite a useful background in terms of answering the fairly obvious fundamental question: why did we plan for so few people (both in terms of transport and providing amenities/space on the waterfront) compared to how many people actually showed up?
This is what the ATEED report says:
The initial event footprint proposed included Queens Wharf, Quay Street (from Queens Wharf to Viaduct), Eastern Viaduct and Te Wero Island. This footprint could comfortably hold 50 – 60,000 in a relaxed atmosphere.
These estimates formed part of ATEEDs application to the Rugby World Cup Planning Authority which stated a conservative estimate of up to 80,000 people with the need to be able to immediately respond to cater for larger crowds if required.
So it seems that ATEED’s original plans were certainly to accommodate a crowd of 50,000-60,000, but that they felt comfortable if that number increased to 80,000 (just in case). Further to this, contingency plans were explored in case the crowd was bigger than expected. These are outlined below:
Contingency arrangements for site expansion to double the event footprint were developed as part of the planning process. The expansion of the site included:
• Extending further along Quay Street to the East to Commerce Street
• Extending across to the Wynyard Quarter Precinct
• Extending across to the Halsey Street Wharf and area outside the Viaduct Events Centre
• Extending further into adjoining streets e.g. Lower Albert Street
From my understanding, it would seem that ‘in the days and weeks’ (those were the words of ATEED CEO Michael Redman) before the event, it became obvious that the opening was going to be more popular than had originally been anticipated. So ATEED put their contingency plan into place – extending the ‘event footprint’ in the ways described above. Unfortunately no additional amenities (toilets, screens, visitor activities etc) were provided to match with the enlarged space, which from my experience tended to mean that people shifted around a lot – like wandering up and down Queen Street to entertain themselves.
ATEED’s report says they did take some steps during the days before the event to encourage people through the media to distribute a bit more widely, although I personally don’t remember that. Mention was made of the Queen’s Wharf’s capacity constraints in the media (which I do remember). Further to this, various options were explored for expanding the footprint, but this was made difficult by Auckland Transport’s need to park buses on Quay Street and also by the logistical difficulties of having the event ‘ticketed’ (even if those tickets were free).
Technical problems with a couple of the big screens further added to the problems experienced around Quay Street, which then impacted upon the ability of the wharf to operate effectively for ferry passengers. ATEED identify a number of areas where they can improve, and it seems that these steps are being taken. I’m really not sure how Murray McCully’s announcements yesterday fit into this, as they turned somewhat into the ‘elephant in the room’ at the meeting.
Turning to Auckland Transport’s report, what potentially seems to be the absolute key issue relates to the difference in the number of people they were expecting on public transport to what eventuated. This is particularly the case for the expected number of people heading into the city to enjoy the festivities (rather than those heading to the match itself) compared to what actually happened. This key issue is the very first thing in the AT report:
On 9 September approximately 370,000 people travelled on public transport (bus, rail and ferry) over a 20 hour period. This compares to approximately 240,000 on a normal weekday. This was substantially greater than the planning scenarios which had been agreed and peer reviewed.
I think it is fairly obvious that this was the case. A more pertinent question is why weren’t the planning scenarios higher, or at least have some contingency for being higher. And this is where a pretty key issue pops up – because below is what Auckland Transport were planning on:
Advice provided to Auckland Transport by the event organisers indicated that the anticipated numbers attending the CBD Waterfront public celebration event was 30,000 to 50,000 people.
Previous experience has been that for events in the Auckland CBD around 10% – 30% travel in by public transport. Given international experience and recent Eden Park usage, it was estimated that 30% – 50% of the crowd would come by public transport. Of the public transport passengers 20% would be by rail, 70% by bus and 10% by ferry.
Based on the event crowd estimates this would have meant 3,000 to 5,000 additional rail passengers. Veolia’s Operation Plan allowed for capacity of 8,000 rail passengers to the CBD to cater for this demand.
What stands out to me immediately is the difference between the numbers that ATEED were expecting and the numbers that Auckland Transport were expecting. If we jump back to earlier in this post, ATEED had originally planned on providing enough room for up to 80,000 people – but then ‘in the days and weeks’ before Friday had come to the realisation that this wasn’t going to be enough, so they doubled the space available. One could come to the conclusion that if this enlarged space had been managed better (ie no broken screens, more screens, more toilets and so forth) then it’s possible that the area ATEED set aside would have been sufficient. I know myself that standing in QEII square while the fireworks were going off was certainly busy, but certainly not crush capacity.
So if ATEED had shifted their plans to now provide enough space for up to 160,000 people (double the original plan), it is interesting to wonder why Auckland Transport were still working off providing transport capacity for 30,000-50,000 people. While it seems that Auckland Transport’s ability to significantly boost transport capacity was somewhat limited by it being a work and school day, one would imagine that if they had been given the chance to prepare for a crowd of 160,000, rather than 30,000-50,000, even with just a few days’ notice, things might have been different. It also obviously follows from this that Veolia Transport were delivered something of a hospital pass in deal with vastly greater numbers of attendees than they had planned for.
In terms of the rail network, what seems to have happened is a series of problems (although interestingly no infrastructure or major mechanical problems) operating a rail service because of the vast number of people that were trying to catch the train. This is briefly described below:
Disruption caused by incidents such as people walking on tracks, unruly behaviour on board (e.g. fighting and fire extinguishers being released) and emergency stop buttons being repeatedly pressed resulted in trains being forced to stop. All of these incidents are serious safety issues that cause significant delays because the operator is required to stop the train before investigating and clearance for the journey to continue. In some cases trains were held up for more than an hour before the issues were resolved.
It is clear from reports provided both by Veolia and KiwiRail that some of these incidents included passengers legitimately seeking help for people who needed medical or other assistance. The delays throughout the network, including time delays loading and unloading at Britomart, meant that passengers on some services were left in some stationary carriages for unacceptably long periods. In isolation, a single incident may have caused only minor delays, but the cumulative effect of numerous incidents impacted exponentially across the entire rail network.
A fairly extensive list of problems is then outlined in the report.
More than anything else, the list really highlights how crazy things got on the rail network and also explains why people got stuck in the trains to the game for so long. While some things like communication, better procedures for use of the emergency stop button and so forth could have clearly been improved, it seems fairly clear that the problems generally arose from overuse of the system earlier in the day – which caused delays and other issues. This was compounded by the inability to clear and load people from Britomart quickly due to the crowds. Interestingly there’s no discussion of whether the Strand Station should have been put into use earlier due to the Britomart crowds.
One aspect of the transport report that I strongly disagree with is outlined below:
By late morning contingency buses were redirected to Northern Busway operations. Between 11:30 and 20:00 a capacity was provided on average of approximately 190% of normal capacity, peaking mid-afternoon at 500% to 600% normal Friday capacity. Across the bus network, approximately +17% higher demand for commuter services was experienced with the commuter bus network performing well. This was in addition to Eden Park Special Event services. The bus commuter network beyond Eden Park Special Event services carried approximately 215,000 passengers as compared to a normal 185,000.
I think this is a vast oversimplification. While the commuter bus network ran well in some areas, other services were severely affected – particularly for people trying to get home from the city after the events. It would have been nice to see some more information on this – particularly as personally this was probably the least satisfactory part of the night for me.
Overall, the issues and responses proposed are outlined below:
I would also like to see the pedestrianisation of Queen Street on game days, at least between Aotea Square and Britomart. This would provide additional space and avoid the significant safety issues that occurred along Queen Street on Friday night.
Reading through all the documents, it seems to me that the key problem was that for some reason ATEED’s revised estimates of visitor numbers did not filter through to Auckland Transport and their transport plans. Another problem was that the enlarged fan zone was insufficiently serviced. While there were obviously additional problems on the transport network throughout the day, I think that if Auckland Transport had planned for much larger crowds then many of the issues could have been avoided. Inevitably we will end up with vast overkill for the rest of the tournament, but I suppose that’s better than being under-prepared.
Processing...
Finally we start to get some clarity. Veolia’s report could do with a bit more specifics. What was the longest period that one of the trains was stationary? Were trains allowed to depart stations knowing that the line ahead was not clear?
The response still seems a bit week. Why go continue with Eden Park trains going via Britomart? What is the plan for the Strand? Southern line trains direct to the stadium? Not allowing trains to depart until there is a clear run to the next station?
The commuter bus network performed well?!? How ridiculous.
At 1030pm we were waiting for a Mt Eden b-line bus on lower Symonds street (outside the music school) for over an hour. All three buses that came past went by full without stopping, so we gave up and got someone to come pick us up.
I can’t accept that the buses performed well – yes the wheels did not fall off completely, but in no way was it a satisfactory experience – for me and many other people I have spoken to.
I see two issues with the trains:
1. As I understand it, Southern Line passengers were being taken in to Britomart before being taken out to Eden Park. They should have have Southern Line trains changing directly on to the Western line missing Britomart. Maybe one train in three could have done this, while the other two carried on in to Britomart as normal. The problem of transferees at Britomart seems to have prevented others using the station, and I think this service pattern would have avoided much of the problem.
2. People wanting to move from the CBD to Eden Park should have been encouraged to walk. The Council should have pedestrianised a walking routes and laid on toilets and non-alcoholic drinks at intervals.
I think laying on a huge number of free buses shuttling between Newmarket and Eden Park might have helped. Newmarket makes a natural hub for an event south of the CBD.
Thank you for this summary of the meetings and reports. Nice work.
“17:45 Emergency brake buttons activated on multiple occasions whilst train stopped at Newmarket. Passengers disembark. All trains stopped in the vicinity for safety reasons. A second train is called to take passengers”
They say at Newmarket, but of course it was underneath the motorway. They say the passengers disembarked, but of course it was up an earth bank through a construction site, in the dark. Veolia have clearly sanitised their reports, which from past experience I know they are quite good at.
Something not mentioned in their report is that some Locomotive Engineers had to walk to Britomart to pick up their train, as whatever trains they were on to get to Britomart in the first place were stopped. This meant getting through the crowds on foot.
Also not mentioned are the thousands of people left at stations along the Eastern and Southern lines, due to all the citybound trains already being full. 2,000 may not have made it to Eden Park for the Rugby, but thousands more didn’t make it to downtown either.
@Obi. There were I think 4 or 5 trains running to Eden Park direct from Papakura and Pukekohe via Newmarket pre-match (none post match)
Without adequate knowledge or pre booked ticketing, Veolia and AT would have no idea how many need to get to Eden Park OR downtown so it is pure guess work.
So I guess any one wanting to get to Eden Park direct from South, they should “pre-book” so it can be determined how many seats and trains are needed to go to Eden Park.
Once that has been determined then a direct service could be run with LIMITED stops (Papakura, Papatoetoe, Otahuhu, Ellersile then Eden Park) for rugby ticket fans – with the rest on “normal” services to Britomart.
Post match, you could run the direct services again towards Papakura Limited Stops from Eden Park (the reverse of the above), but at Kingsland you would need a separate ‘pen’ for those (again) pre-booked passengers so they are separated from the main crowd. Once their direct service train is at the stop they can then be escorted to the train and away she goes.
I would seriously need to look at it but I suppose done right you could have 5,000 passengers avoid Britomart that are from Southern Auckland.
As for the Eastern Line, now that is a head scratcher unless we run them direct through the Strand (if there are no trains already parked there)
ben how about running a shuttle type service to Newmarket then getting people onto Southbound or city bound trains? Not enough tracks, need four at Newmarket? Too hard?
@Patrick. Could work.
Could have a massive park and ride at Otahuhu where people from South could park up and catch increase shuttle services allowing for faster trips and returning of trains back to an origin point.
Or – I don’t know, I would need to sit down with a map and work it out by pencil for a couple of days. But in any case efficiencies can be gained with a bit of work and planning.
It strikes me, from looking just at that incident list, that 90% of the issues and problems occurred with trains heading to the city, with people trying to attend the ‘celebrations in the CBD’ that had been over-hyped and over-marketed. It was these problems, and the halting of and subsequent delays to services that arose from them, that caused the so-called ‘travel chaos’ (the number of people registering for compo hasn’t gone over 500 yet has it?).
Therefore it seems obvious that, with no further games taking place at the same time/same day as a hugely advertised and ‘gotta be there’ type event in the city on a week day, the problems of people getting to the games should be easily avoided.
(Yes, I know 3/4 play off is a friday, and that there are ‘concerts’ in the CBD on game days, but none of them should come close to attracting the numbers seen last week, barring possibly the final.)
I wish more would have been made in the News Media about the two successfully handled games at North Harbour, which are surely firsts.
16:30 Emergency Services called to attend Mt Eden area (just east of the train station)as customers force train doors open and disembark onto tracks. All trains stopped until tracks cleared.
Really? The passengers just spontaneously decided to force open doors on a moving train and disembark? One assumes the train was stationary at the time (despite the fact that it was east of the station and the only previous report of a problem on the Western line involved one train at Henderson an hour and a half earlier). Why was it stationary? How long had it been stopped? As Geoff commented about the 17:45 report earlier, this smells of Veolia sanitising the report.