As I’m sure you can imagine with the transport announcement yesterday we will have heaps to talk about over the coming weeks. It is going to take us some time to fully go through everything so please bear with us as we do that however if there is a particular topic you would like to see on the blog please feel free to provide a guest post.
Today I’m not going to look at the additional projects announced yesterday but am just going to focus on the further details we received about the City Rail Link yesterday, in particular what is needed to bring the project forward from the governments proposed start date of 2020. In his speech yesterday John Key said:
So, as I indicated earlier this week, the Government is committing to a joint business plan for the City Rail Link with Auckland Council in 2017 and providing its share of funding for a construction start in 2020.
And we will be prepared to consider an earlier start date if it becomes clear that Auckland’s CBD employment and rail patronage growth hit thresholds faster than current rates of growth suggest.
Our current thinking is that an earlier business plan could be triggered if two conditions are met.
The first is if Auckland city centre employment increases by 25 per cent over current levels – that is half the increase predicted in the Future Access Study.
And the second is that annual rail patronage is on track to hit 20 million trips well before 2020.
But that is something we will discuss with Auckland Council.
Employment has to increase by 25% while patronage needs to increase to 20 million trips a year so let’s look at these a bit more closely.
Employment to increase by 25%
Of the two requirements I suspect that this would be the hardest of them. First of all it’s hard to know exactly which area we are talking about. As we have mentioned in the past the description of the CBD is effectively the area ringed by the motorways however many people consider the city centre to include the areas that border on this which includes areas like Ponsonby, Grafton, Newmarket and Parnell. For the purposes of this I am going to stick to the technical definition which is the area surrounded by the motorways. Statistics NZ break this up into three different area units, Auckland Harbourside, Auckland Central West and Auckland Central East. This is shown in the area highlighted below.
Stats NZ keep a close eye on employment across the country and have some fairly detailed data available. As of 2012 there were 89,650 people working in the Auckland CBD so assuming that as the base point, would suggest we need roughly an extra 22,400 jobs to meet the criteria set by the government. That seems like a lot so is it doable? Well here are the employment levels in the City Centre since the year 2000.
As you can see, CBD employment has continued to grow with the exception of a short downturn during the global financial crisis. In fact in the last two years we have seen employment in the area grow by around 10,000 jobs. It is also noticeable that the Auckland Harbourside area has seen the most growth as a lot of businesses have shifted down in this direction, especially in the area around Britomart. This trend is likely to continue as the Wynyard Quarter really starts to develop. The biggest constraint right now seems to be the lack office space with frequent reports that there is not a lot available. Employment growth over the last decade has been 25% while growth in the last 5 years has been 10%, obviously hampered by the GFC.
If we can maintain the growth of the last few years – about 5000 extra jobs per year – then we will see the growth target met in around 2017. To get there though we are likely going to need to see a lot of new building activity going on and a continuation of many of the recent trends of some of our large businesses like banks consolidating large proportions of their employment in the CBD. Personally I think that this target is doable but it won’t be easy.
Note: if you use the city centre definition that I mentioned earlier, employment in in the area increases to over 130,000 which is by far and away the largest employment zone in the region.
Rail Patronage to increase to 20 million per annum
We have talked a lot about rail patronage over the last few years so sorry if this covers old ground. Rail patronage in Auckland was abysmal for decades with it reaching its lowest point in the early 1990’s when the system carried just over 1 million people in a single year. To put it another way, more people were carried on trains last month than all of 1993. Things started to improve with the introduction of second hand trains from Perth and by the time Britomart opened just under a decade ago, patronage was around 2.5 million trips per year, an improvement but still very low. The opening of Britomart and the subsequent investment in improvements around the network saw patronage rise steadily to almost 11 million trips – albeit assisted by the RWC. Since that time patronage has come back down to around 10 million however it also appears that some of the earlier patronage gains might have come from AT and its predecessors over counting some trips. Some of the fall off is also likely to be due to the on-going disruption caused by electrification works and a similar trend was seen in Perth as they electrified their system.
To get the 20 million per annum target I suspect that the government has just taken the fact that patronage is currently about 10 million trips per year and just doubled that. So is that target achievable? I think so.
Over the next three years we are embarking on the biggest change to PT we have seen since ripping out the trams in the 1950s. We will have a brand new fleet of electric trains running with more capacity per train, higher frequencies on and off peak, delivering faster journeys which will all serve to make train travel more attractive. We will have a brand new bus network that among other things will help feed people into the rail network rather than competing with it and we will have integrated fares to ensure there is no financial penalty for transferring between services. These three things combined are likely to cause a massive increase in patronage in the coming years. It is due to these factors that I think it is entirely possible we will reach the 20 million trip target early.
I think that possibly another thing behind the 20m target is that the 2010 business case predicted that we would reach that figure in about 2021/2, about the time the council wanted the CRL to open – and this was without the changes that are being made to the bus network.
So what would patronage growth need to look like to reach this target? The graph below shows what growth would need to look like to reach 20 million trips by 2017, 2018, 2019 or 2020. Annual growth rates would need to be roughly:
- 2017 – 18.9%
- 2018 – 14.9%
- 2019 – 12.2%
- 2020 – 10.4%
As I mentioned earlier, I think it is entirely possible that we will reach the 20 million patronage mark early when you consider all of the changes that are happening but it will definitely require Auckland Transport to be on their game and working hard to maximise patronage from every angle.
So overall I think that both targets are reachable but will require a lot of work to reach. To be consistent though the government should really be setting similar targets for the various roading projects.
Processing...
We don’t have to play John Key’s stupid games.
Please mention that these are arbitrary numbers chosen by the prime minister to delay the project. He’s deliberately chicken and egg’d it. These numbers are likely to be achieved after the CRL and electrification are done and after rail goes to the airport. The response could really be like Perth’s where it went from low figures like Auckland to 50,000,000 pa and climbing. Work on the CRL should be done ASAP, and most of the RoNS projects and most of Friday’s announcements permanently mothballed. One there is a need for, the other is gold plated roads-wank.
Where are the mentions of triggers and targets for the road projects? There aren’t any. This is more of National’s bullshit, and because they’ve upped the billions of dollars even more the need to change government is all the more intense.
Matt we were always meant to reach 20m before the CRL was opened anyway, difference is the council wanted the CRL open just after we reach it but the govt don’t want it started till we get there. But yes I do agree that we need similar targets for the roading projects.
Good point. No target growth for existing SH1 north of Puhoi, but it is full steam ahead with a brand new toll road.
Agree, we don’t need to buy into this argument.
Actually they do have target growths forSH1, it’s just they they are already meet and they are planning for future growth. It’s not like the government has said they have to get post CRL volumes before building the CRL.
So NZTA has target growth for motorway traffic?
Does that mean that they aim to get a certain number of vehicles going along motorways, or that they say that when a certain number are going it needs to be upgraded?
Either way that seems pretty silly. The first one for obvious reasons. The second one seems silly because you can’t be sure for any project that widening the road is the best solution to the problem of extra traffic.
I don’t have an issue with the targets. Basically they highlight when CRL really becomes necessary so are pretty good trigger points.
The key is that council only needs to show it’s on track to meet them. Also a change of govt in 2014 or 2017 could easily see things sped up as designation, land purchase and detailed design will all continue I am sure.
Noodle, I cannot accept the line “when CRL really becomes necessary”.
Much of the data provided to us by the authors of this blog over the past months strongly suggests to me that the CRL is necessary right now. Indeed, I would assert that it is well overdue.
It is my belief that all these numbers and ‘some time or other’ start dates Key is presenting to us are no more than foundation laying for his or his successors future abandonment of the project. Depending on the outcome of the next couple of election cycles and when the current excitement has died down he will be able to ‘reluctantly’ put the plans on hold citing ‘changed economic circumstances’ or ‘unforeseen budgetary demands’.
You may be sure, however, that road building will continue unabated.
Cynical? Me? Perish the thought!
It was due in the ’70s when Robbie’s Rail was proposed. Even Muldoon said it was inevitable, and then quickly scuppered it in favout of Think Big. Imagine what a different city it would be if it had happened then.
Remember twoo, the Morningside Deviation as it was called then was first proposed in the 1920s.
The focus on CBD employment also reinforces the line that the CRL benefits only the inner-city. Hopefully that’s less relevant now that there are fewer trying to undermine the project. The local politicking will be interesting to watch. And whether the opposition put up a coherent counter-plan that is less infatuated with tarmac.
They need to emphasise that it will make it faster and therefore more feasible to travel by train ACROSS Auckland – West to South, West to East or wherever – without being forced to drive. And without a cost penalty for transfering between trains or modes. It is not just beneficial to CBD workers. And the coming new bus network will be using trains as their backbone.
“The focus on CBD employment also reinforces the line that the CRL benefits only the inner-city.”
That pretty much shows that John Key doesn’t understand either the economics or raison ‘d etre of the project.
It does nothing to change my long held view that he is an amateur.
20,000,000 trips a year.
20 trains an hour in the two hour peak full to capacity every working day is 60,000 trips a day, or 12,000,000 a year. If you think we can completely fill that and have 40% of trips not go to the CBD, or not at peak, or on weekends then you are dreaming unless AT make trains free and every 10 minutes all day every day this won’t happen.
But SailorBoy the CRL isn’t about the CBD – or haven’t you been following the party line?
No, the CRL is not just about the CBD, but the current system is awful for anything else.
Easy there Sailor Boy,
Don’t forget under PTOM for the buses which is rolling out over the next 3 years – easily 40,000 more trips a day will also be delivered (a) outside the peak hours and (b) as former “bus only” passengers are now using the train for at least some of their journey so upping the Rail mode share.
Together these two (your Peak AM/PM trips and PTOM rail journeys) will deliver 100,000 trips a day which is 20m a year over just the 200 working days a year you assume.
And while the 6 car EMUs you will need to get the 60,000 trips a day in the AM/PM peak will be full up with 750 per trip, you don’t need anywhere like that level of usage over the rest of the time to make up that 40,000 top up to enable the magic 20m figure to be reached.
I’m sure that AT will easily be able to massage their rail figures to get that 20m figure with the EMUs simply by ensuring (as they are doing) that people use the train for at least some of the journey.
Don’t forget, that the minimum 15 minute all day every day proposed frequency under PTOM will mean a lot of additional trips in the evenings and weekends are generated,
(at least once they stop shutting the damn trains down each night that is).
Of course, the issue is that even if we hit that 20M figure in 2016, its really too late to start the CRL, we need to start the build as soon as the NOR is done.
And on that point, how about this idea for AT now that the Government is on board.
And that is to up the trip numbers – why not build the Britomart to Aotea part of the CRL line early – as soon as the NOR is done (using cut and cover as planned – paid for the Auckland Council alone if need be as it can do as this is simply a big trench and doesn’t need a TBM) and then run a pair of EMU shuttles between Aotea and Britomart ((like the New York S train),to realise the benefits of the CRL early and to allow train/bus users to easily get right into the heart of the CBD where many of the PT users live and work.
I think if you had that built then you might be able to generate 20-40,000 (more) trips a day (4-8m a year) via the shuttle part alone with two 6 car EMU shuttles.
And thats do-able and does then allow the rest of the CRL tunnel to be bored once the Government gets with the programme.
And any trip that starts opf ends at Aotea under this could be counted as two trips even if the HOP card only showed it as one, as you have the normal trip into/out of Britomart and then the “shu8ttle” between Britomart and Aotea.
Well, let’s all look on the bright side. At least Key didn’t demand a change in the CRL route.
‘Bright side’
“John Key’s stupid games”. My thinking exactly Matt. I think there is still the same urgency to get rid of this duplicitous government as there was before the CRL U-turn was announced. The real damage they are doing is the $billions they are obsessively wanting to spend on wasteful roads.
Do traffic volumes on the Harbour Bridge have to double before we throw $4.6 billion at that with a city ruining solution?
Realistically the only thing that happened with that project was announcing that a 2009 designation will be looked at again.
Patrick, you are being too kind. It will also ruin parts of the lower North Shore. Mark me down as hugely pissed off. I will tell Maggie Barry that in no uncertain terms.
She has sent out a survey asking constituents to rank Nationals’ economic objectives. The RoNS are not on it, presumably because they serve no useful economic objective. (At least they weren’t on it -my form looks vastly different from the original).
For those who haven’t seen the form it seems to be pitched at five year olds, where you are asked to rank a set of loosely expressed concepts. Government using “paint by numbers”.
Can you guess that I am enormously pissed of about this second road harbour crossing? -you bet I am.
I don’t think National even reads the replies to those stupid local member surveys. The questions are for idiots for sure. It’s just junk mail propaganda. I find them pretty insulting.
If Veolia were to collect a fare from all the rail users then I’m sure the patronage figure would be higher
Hi Matt, I’d love to see your 20M reached ahead of 2020 but I don’t share your confidence especially as a lot of that growth has to come on the western line and with the Waterview Link and nine lanes of causeway opening in 2017 driving in from the west or west to south will get a whole lot easier especially after years of roadworks disruption. This could call people back to their cars so I JohnKey has a bob each way on this one and things are not clear cut.
There’ll be a lot of disruption in the next few years as a result of Waterview. Might push push a few people to try alternatives and some might stick with it. Just a shame we won’t be seeing EMUs out west still some time in 2015
I do wonder how the commute on the northwestern will be after waterview opens, might be more of a logjam with weaving and merges from nine lanes into six.
Mr P, there is also the simple problem of where all these cars might go when they hit the CMJ and the city…..? Over widening parts of the motorway network simply seems to serve the purpose of making the case of the next bit of expensive over widening, and so on ad infinitum, with out ever actually improving accessibility.
Hi Matt, thank you for researching all these numbers and details. I was wondering about all of that, and you have clarified things in my mind. Thanks heaps.
Love the double standards from the current central government. Why is an employment related KPI used anyway? Surely a huge number of tertiary students are expected in the future for example (civil engineering expansion), who will use rail once the Newmarket campus in operation in a few years, with the off peak revenue from that being quite important. CBD employment numbers might be met anyway given staff from Epsom and Tamaki campus closures, Fonterra and Council relocations etc. Large employers on the fringe like TV3 might also move given the route designation.
Pity a concept like Dusseldorf’s Media Harbour was not developed for tech/media companies at the Wynyard quarter, linked by the tram to Britomart. Anyway come on council – get cracking with the cut and cover section in 2015. Owners of the construction and consulting companies must be on champagne…!
I suspect the new bus system will make the patronage target will be very easy to meet with the new bus network. Just from implementing that we may get halfway there overnight just by the fact we are forcing some bus users to take the train as well.
It will be interesting to see what this does to the comfort factor as from memory years ago 2 or the trains during peak hour were at crush load already.
Yes the new bus network will make a huge difference which is why I think that this target will be met fairly easily.
As for the comfort factor, trains at peak are definitely busy but electrification makes them much longer. Most trains these days have four carriages and a single three carriage EMU has about the same capacity as a four car train today. Most of the trains that will be run will be two EMUs joined together so 6 cars all up and about double the capacity of what most trains are today.
And there is the all-day patronage to consider. Currently the off peak train and bus service is pretty rubbish, so we’re busy maybe four hours a day but bugger all any other time. But soon with the minimum all day frequency on trains and buses, plus integrated tickets we could see a lot of patronage growth across the other twelve or fourteen hours a day.
Of course the next question is, what difference would it make if we did meet this target. They are talking about starting to build it in 2020 so with a 5 year design and tender period we will need to hit that target in the next year or two to make a difference.
Exactly right. That’s what makes this challenge a farce, we have to keep working on it now in order to be in a position to bring the start back to the Council’s date anyway. If everyone down’s tools to wait a few years for a perfectly predictable pax figure to be confirmed then we won’t be able start any earlier anyway.
Having said that I think next year is still going to be a mess passenger numbers wise as getting the new trains in service regularly is going to take a lot of time. This is a whole new system at every level, new depot, new everything. And at first they’ll be running with the old machines too… arg. Also the New Bus network is three years away from being complete.
So I would say STARTING in 2015, getting going in 2016 and ramping up for the rest of the decade and desperately needing the CRL by 2020 is clearly what we are facing….
Can design not start now? All that National have said is that they won’t start building until 2020.
This is true, you would suspect quite a few people would be turned off by the prospect of waiting 15-20mins once they get to the bus/rail stop.
As opposed to what, 30 to 60 minutes waits now for train or buses?
And the 15 minute figure is a minimum, and the buses and train timetable will have to mesh so that you get off the bus and straight on a train [or v.v.].
So whats the problem you’re on about?
I believe the point is that if several full trains or buses go by, the minimum wait can easily turn into one long enough to be offputting.
My point was that things will be better under the new system for off peak trips.
I don’t know how you arrived at the conclusion I was complaining about the new system.
Anyone thought of getting 16 million dollars together and simply buying 10 million tickets over the next year?
That isn’t actually a bad Idea, wouldn’t even need to do that, could just get 10,000,000 and get a kid to do it….
Or just churn out some super gold tickets, then the govt pays for it too 😉
This sounds like a good plan!
If you had that kind of money for skulduggery you’d be better off buying a few elections…
If I had 50,000,000 led around I would be happy to do this for 5 years to get the damned thing done, fortunately it is harder to buy elections in NZ than elsewhere.