*This is a guest post by regular reader and occasional contributor, Warren Sanderson.

rail in the city

Book Review

RAIL AND THE CITY – Shrinking Our Carbon Footprint While Reimagining Urban Space

Roxanne Warren

Unlike Paul Mees‘ book ‘Transport for Suburbia’ which deals in depth, among other things, with what went so terribly wrong with Auckland’s transport planning in the second half of last century, Roxanne Warren does not mention New Zealand once. Her book is almost totally focused on the transport problems of the United States but she does refer frequently to Europe and Japan where transport policy has been handled so much better.

But don’t let the concentration on US problems put you off. This is a great read for anyone who is unhappy with what auto dependency does to the liveability of our cities and especially here in Auckland.

I like the organisation of this book. It has a preface in a tight precis form plan which sets out exactly what it is going to say and then chapter by chapter gets on with it, in a fluid and engaging style. And there are extensive references at the back of the book.

I enjoyed particularly her comment on the basic reasons for rail’s practicality and popularity, including the operational, aesthetic and permanence advantages for the city. This includes standard surface rail or light rail. Furthermore a public preference for rail has been revealed in surveys and generally attributed to a smoother and faster ride and to rail’s permanent presence – a preference that has been reflected in increased property values around stations.

The last chapter deals with the question of climate change and the desirability of shrinking the very large footprint that we are placing on the earth. While always keen to reduce a personal footprint, I find it hard to get worked up about the science of climate change. What astounded me however, was the idiocy of the US tax cum subsidy set–up as outlined. Fossil fuel have benefited from a full century of subsidies and the oil industry in particular receives generous tax breaks at every stage of the processes of exploration and extraction. Ditto for corn ethanol i.e. food for our cars rather than for people. These subsidies create market distortions that encourage wasteful consumption and undercut the position of clean energy, while effectively exacerbating climate change.

The author points out that regardless of general resistance to change, population increases and migratory trends toward cities, thus increasing congestion in cities, is making ever more obvious the need for a more rational use of urban space and for more compact and sustainable forms of mobility, namely, walking, cycling and transit. She reports that the common wisdom that has it, that only ‘progressives’ (read lefties) favour the support of public transport which denies the movement of prominent conservatives in support of passenger rail transport for the reasons she cites in Chapter 3.

I believe that MOT/NZTA/AT should not employ anybody who has not read this book by a deadline date of 30 April this year. Why? Books like this were not around when many of the older hands commenced work. We need big changes in our transport policies and the government and these three institutions are charged with operating in our best interest. Yes, change is needed……………and fast. This is an excellent read.

Finally, about the author. Roxanne Warren is an architect and principal partner in Roxanne Warren Architects in New York. Her prior experience included a period with I M Pei and Partners but since 1999 she has dedicated her time increasingly to advocacy of Vision 42 which is a proposal for ‘River to River’ low floor light rail in a landscaped auto-free 42nd Street, New York.

Rail chart
42nd St LRT route

Warren Sanderson 2015

Share this

8 comments

  1. Vision 42 you might say is a rather ‘Amsterdamish’ solution for ‘Nieuw Amsterdam’ but the book cover photograph is a low floor light rail tram operating in Milan in Italy.

    1. A rather ugly one too, to my eye, what do you think Warren? Glad that its likely that because of the existing relationship with CAF they’ll surely be front runners for supplying rolling stock to Auckland. I rode the Bilbao one last year but I particularly like the Zaragoza version of the Urbos model; low floor, with super capacitor for sections of catenary free running, elegant form:

      http://www.caf.es/en/productos-servicios/proyectos/proyecto-tranvia.php

      http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/urban/single-view/view/zaragoza-tram-enters-service.html

      Typical history of a trams returning to a city once built round them. Just like Auckland? Very common cycle all over the world now: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zaragoza_tram

      In 1885, the first animal traction tram line was established.[citation needed]

      In 1902, Zaragoza had five main lines and one secondary line. In the same year, one of the lines were electrified. The network was expanding quickly in a radial form across the city, with the present Spain square as the center.

      The 1950s was the heydey of the Zaragoza Tram.

      From the 1960s, the tram system declined, with little or no investment and was gradually converted to bus operation

      On 23 January 1976 the last Zaragoza tram line (Parque-San José) disappeared and the company changed its name to Transportes Urbanos de Zaragoza (Urban Transport Company of Zaragoza).

      10 June 2009 The Traza consortium of Tuzsa, CAF, FCC Construcción, Acciona, Ibercaja and Concessia selected to build new tramway.[1]

      19 April 2011 Phase 1 of Line 1 opened.[2] Phase 2 of the work of the new tram line 1 began for completion in mid-2013.[2]

      For 2015, two more lines are likely to be operational:

      1. Nice looking low floor alright, nice inside (like the plain formed wood seats – look better and more conformtable and better wearing than those crappy wooden jobs in the Sky City Convention Centre thats for sure).

        However that was 6 years ago, and technology has moved on a heap since then so I’d expect the “next generation” CAF offering to be truly world leading so that maybe even less catenary wires would be needed, as having those adds lot of CAPEX and OPEX.
        Really would like to hear more about the LRT plans from AT especially around how it will be financed though…

        Also wondering if there is a case for asking AT to future proof all of Remuera Road for LRT running, as the corridor management plan being worked on now.
        Even though the old trams stopped at Meadowbank, I am sure the road corridor could be extended beyond that to GI (or Panmure), especially given that the Manukau Road LRT plans would go through Newmarket already so Remuera Road would be a branch off that.

      2. Yes Patrick. If you are buying trams on looks alone, I agree that the Zaragoza version of the Urbo model wins – hands down! And the existing connection with CAF would hopefully be beneficial too. As an outsider observation, CAF would appear to have performed well up to expectation with the quality and timing of delivery of our new trains, so well done them.

        1. And CAF have the maintenance facility at Wiri with a contract for the 1st 10 years to maintain the EMUs and CAF stated up front when the EMU deal was signed that they wanted to get a presence in this part of the world

          So they have a lot of “skin in the game”, and on that basis I’d expect they’d be the first port of call for AT when shopping for the LRT network too. (In fact they probably came to AT with this idea as a marketing tool as well to showcase CAF technology “down under”).

          Wouldn’t surprise me, if the “novel finance arrangement” for the LRT is a CAF-lead PPP with 5 year “holiday period” to give AT the chance to get the LRT operational and then using the OPEX savings to pay for the rest of the finance that way.

          So far I think CAF have done an outstanding job on building and delivering the electric trains so I’m all for giving them a go for the LRT deal if possible too.

  2. I haven’t read these 2 books yet. They sound like compulsory reading. Actually you could probably say a lot about MOT and NZTA board etc about starting with Engineering 101 and getting qualified as a starting point and learning about other modes not just car. It’s not just dated learning but no NZCE or Bachelor of Engineering or IPENZ membership with a strong ethic code would all be useful. The current situation and level of professional expertise in transport explains why we are still backward and seem to be bullied by road lobbiests and the petroleum industry. But yes 2 books definately and looking at current demand levels and thinking about sustainability and what is best for people great to. I think AT Board has at least 1 or 2 qualified engineers. And being at the Pohutakawa meeting think ship turned, just needs max velocity now which I suggested under essential plan next 3 yr post. Could be done super fast to get whole network up to speed in right direction for a change.

  3. Sounds like a book I must read. Let us just get on with light rail, as the best, cleanest, quietest most comfortable way to get around our city. Does something towards addressing climate change too. Freeing up urban space from being covered in parked (or moving) cars is important, and often this goes unrecognised as to how much it would improve our quality of life.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *