Tomorrow the Auckland Transport board meet once again. I’ve already covered the new network consultations for West Auckland and Pukekohe as well as the patronage results so here are the highlights from the rest of the reports available.

First to the items in the closed session that caught my attention

  • Parking strategy – this follows the consultation on it last year.
  • Rail operator EOI shortlisting – it will be interesting to see how this compares to the shortlist from Wellington.
  • Deep Dive – NZ Transport Agency – presumably a detailed description of just what role the NZTA plays.

At the start of the open session Councillor Dick Quax is going to present on the Reeves Rd Flyover. I’m aware he and the local MPs (Maurice Williamson and Jamie Lee-Ross) have been very unhappy that the flyover was delayed and have been lobbying for it to be re-instated. That includes complaining about it to the Minister of Transport and pushing for it to become a State Highway and therefore funded by the NZTA.

reeves-rd-flyover

The business report which gives updates on a whole range of items.

Otahuhu Bus-Train Interchange

There is to be some more enabling works to deal with settlement issues due to the peat under the site and another round of works over Queens Birthday weekend to move the old signal box off the platform and install foundations for two more canopies. The main works are due to start in July on the interchange.

Electric Trains

By now there should be 47 electric trains in Auckland and the final one is due to leave Spain in June. At the time the report was written 35 had been provisionally accepted. They note that routine testing has been impacted by driver shortages which is what I understand is partially why it’s taking so long to get electric trains rolled out on the Southern Line.

In addition it’s noted that Siemens Spain has spent two weeks investigating the new signalling system in a bid to improve reliability. A software update is/was due late March for this.

One thing worth noting is that AT seem to now be referring to rail services as Rapid Rail Services which perhaps suggests a bit of a re-branding of them is happening.

Pukekohe Bus Rail Interchange

The design work is almost complete on an upgrade to Pukekohe to enable bus and train transfers. Physical works are due to be completed by the end of June.

Integrated Fare System

AT is working through to transition the ownership and support of the Integrated Fare System to the NZTA subsidiary that will manage the back-end system nationally (this has long been the plan). Of note AT say that the work has identified implications for some of the plans that they have for future development of the system including parking integration and mobile top ups. I understand that AT have a number of updates planned like those mentioned that will improve the HOP system and get it in the hands of more people so it is critical that they make sure the system being managed nationally doesn’t hinder this.

AT also say that they are planning on updating the Regional Public Transport Plan to accommodate the proposed zonal integrated fares. System development by Thales for Integrated fares is under way and they are negotiating with the operators as to how fare revenue will be allocated between them

The New Network

The update suggests the New Network roll out in South Auckland has once again been delayed with the report stating it will now happen in April 2016 compared to previous reports which had suggested February 16.

AT are hoping to get final sign-off from the NZTA for their PTOM contracts soon so they can go out to the market to tender for South Auckland services in May/June. The first official parts of the New Network implemented are likely to be on the Hibiscus Coast though and will be done by negotiating directly with existing operators. That is likely to be implemented later this year or early next year.

The next consultation to happen is meant to be the North Shore which they say will happen in June this year.

Capacity

As readers will know, there’s been a lot of capacity issues on the network over the last month and a half. In the report they note that patronage on buses is up 12% (I wonder if this is just at the peak). They note that a few corridors have seen exceptional growth and need “corrective action” to address capacity constraints. These corridors include

Onewa Rd where 776 services across the week were added recently as part of the timetable changes.

The Northern Express which has had two additional buses added to the fleet and has more capacity on the way in the form of two double deckers of which one each are due in April and May. Talks are under way with Ritchies to get even more.

Mt Eden/Dominion/Remuera Roads where 11 extra buses have been used to deliver 45 extra services (a day?). The services are used as a contingency capacity that AT say can be moved to where demand is greatest. Some of the common routes they are used on are the Northern Busway (881), Hibiscus Coast (897), Remuera Road (625), Mt Eden Road (274), Dominion Road (258), and New North Road (220). The extra capacity is only meant to be till this Thursday however they say the results will be reviewed and highly patronised services are likely to be retained at least until June.

Double Decker
More Double Deckers needed

There are a number of projects which seem to have had a similar status to what they had in February or for which we had an update during March. This includes:

  • AMETI
  • Manukau Bus Interchange
  • Newmarket Crossing (Sarawia St Level Crossing)
  • Half Moon Bay Ferry Upgrade
  • Puhinui Station Upgrade (The upgrade should be started in April)
Share this

52 comments

  1. ‘Rapid rail services’; I can only presume this is an elaborate joke on the part of AT given that most services seem to have difficulties travelling faster than 45km/hr, notably on the Western Line. I fear AT’s spin department, or whatever it’s called these days, may have overreached itself in this instance.

    1. My view is that AT using that name is a good thing in that it shows an intent to improve the speed, frequency, reliability and quality of the services, and is something we can all hold them to account to achieve. Christopher I know you’re a Western Line user and therefore doing it tough now as you have for years, but major improvement is clearly in sight with the new trains, and, surely 10min frequencies….? That will be something close to Rapid Transit, no?

      1. The electrics will still be lumbered with the Western’s curves and numerous level crossings though. I think the speed difference will be negligible, with the EMUs only being able to improve in the area of acceleration and handling of inclines. The CRL is the only thing that can really shorten travel times, and that’ll only be because it’ll chop out a section entirely.

        1. But higher frequency does improve ‘speed’ for the user, not i know the speed of the machine, but the length of the whole trip in practice is shortened through the reduction in waiting time. And moving to turn-up-and-go frequencies does another thing again, removing the need to plan ahead and stick to an unchanging programme isn unwanted burden for most, hence Jarrett’s great expression: ‘frequency is freedom’.

          If that is accompanied by longer hours and greater reliability too then the improvement for the customer and potential customers will be enormous.

        2. I wish I could share your optimism, Patrick! Increased frequency isn’t going to happen out West until such time as they start removing multiple at grade crossings and there is neither the money nor any developed plans that I’m aware of for this to happen. Try telling an AT traffic engineer that his beloved vehicle flow at the St Jude Street crossing is going to be interrupted up to 12+ times an hour (at peak) for up to a couple of minutes each time and you’ll see why.

        3. Patrick, you have a point of sorts but at the moment the network is not really coping with the last time table upgrade that has seen a rise in late running services and hold ups at Britomart and Newmarket. Therefore how is it going to deal with anymore trains?

      1. Under the AT Metro brand, all vehicles which feature yellow-trimmed livery are designated as “rapid” services. The NEX has them, and so do the EMUs. I think that’s where it’s come from.

        1. Yeah that’s the taxonomy. The yellow is regrettably clumsy however the distinction is bang on.

          People are showing everyday that Rapid standard services are what they want. 20% growth uptake is a very strong market response. Especially considering that very few of our more rapid services are really that rapid by international standards. Either in speed, frequency, quality of ROW, hours of service, quality of stations or machine…. improving but not there yet.

  2. “By now there should be 47 electric trains in Auckland and the final one is due to leave Spain in June” ..any hint of a follow-on order? If a new contract was signed tomorrow, delivery would be months away.. so what plans are there to manage peak time over-crowding meantime? Keep running the old trains on the Western Line?!

    1. Well they’ve already nerfed the plans to order more for CRL operations, so I don’t think we’ll be seeing any new orders soon.

    2. If a new contract was signed tomorrow, delivery would be months away
      Probably actually years,
      Wellington Signed the Matangi 2 contract in June 2013, the first trainset is due to ship next month,

      1. There’s no funding. Anyway wouldn’t it be better to get the first tranche all in operation and review the whole situation first? Network, demand, configuration of new trains, future plans… Next year would do for such a review.

    1. clearway when? monday – friday only? because the Churches along Onew Rd are limited with parking spaces and need Onewa Rd for the church goers. Unless someone is willing to donate to have a carpark built for the churches

      1. Would it be too checky to suggest they catch the bus. 😉

        But yes – initially a clear way from 6am to 7pm Monday to Friday. Or maybe 6am-10am eastbound M-F and 3-7pm westbound M-F.

        Remember if they can add over 700 extra services in February and there is still overcrowding, then expect them to be adding 100’s of extra services each year for the next few years. To ensure they move effectively, and cars traffic continues to move efficiently, a clearway is needed.

        1. I’m not really up with the rules but doesn’t one of those bibles ban working on the Sabbath, driving == work, therefore you must catch public transport.

  3. Any word or further thoughts on ordering extra centre EMU carriages? These are the non-motorised ones that are a lot cheaper and quicker to build. All 3 car EMU sets could have these added quickly to make them 4 car EMU. Gives a 25% increase in capacity (actually slightly more as the centre carriages hold more people that the end units) at minimal cost and barely any extra operating costs (still just one driver). As the CRL isn’t built and won’t be for a few years at least there is not problem with gradient either.

    1. The problem with this is that it prevents those trains from being able to run as double sets as most stations are only designed to handle up to 6 car trains. So unless you could double frequency you’d end up with less capacity overall as all the trains would be smaller.

      1. Good point. Them not being able to run on the Onehunga Line would also mean there’d be less sets available to be doubled up.

    2. My understanding is that there are enough EMU sets to run most as 6 car units during peak and some as 3,

      I’;d expect that additional cars would only be added to a small number of units to assist with the lower capacity elements (my guess is this than 10), with this being the first stage and the second stage being additional traction/panograph carriages to allow the EMU to eventually upgrade to self contained 6 car units, able to operate within the CRL. As a model of incremental improvement, it allows the upgrade of the fleet, without the staggering cost of additional full EMU’s. Granted it most likely more expensive longer term, but it’s more like the argument of one more road/bus, than fleet replacement.

      If what I’m reading is the truth, the resurgence in PT in Auckland will very soon hit capacity constraints that will undo all of the fabulous work done by everyone to get it to where it is.There is a risk that unconstrained spending will make PT like roads, where it becomes over invested and the returns for dollars invested (BCR) become ludicrously low, but I don’t think Auckland has that problem with PT yet.

      The big question is will additional carriages/investment help and as Patrick has pointed out earlier in this thread, until the entire EMU fleet has been introduced into service and the initial issues get resolved, this is all conjecture. Once introduced and settled, it will be time to review the options for further investment, if as most readers of this blog expect that Rail will continue to grow.

      The thing I’d like to see is some general communication about the potential options for infrastructure growth, both in terms of Tranist lines and of the vehicles that operate on them.

      When I do planning I like to estimate 2, 5 & 10 year projections that allow for investment/disinvestment options to be generated for the most likely and most dangerous scenarios envisaged. You could use best, worst, middle growth projections instead. These projections should be updated on an annual basis to form part of the long term planning process.

      I’m not saying that the planning isn’t occurring within AT, but it’s hard to understand how the estimates have been generated, although I probably haven’t looked particularly hard at finding the workings.

  4. It would be great to see the extra services provided in March to run past Easter to June.

    May patronage is still very strong and having the extra services on key corridors will improve the retention of more March customers. Improving on a 10-15% drop in patronage in 2 months is an opportunity to good to miss.

    If AT could improve retention by 2% that would be an extra 1 million patronage in 2015.

  5. On AMETI; strange times we live in; suburban politicians fighting to get for their area one of the great blights of the 20C inner city that their constituents are said to have fled; motorway flyovers!

    Nuts. And if ever there was evidence of the Mullet City; completely antithetical world views between the centre and inner suburbs and the inhabitants of Sprawlurbia [or at least their elected reps].

  6. Am I right in thinking that the Pukekohe station upgrade are minor in nature – i.e. basic stuff to move buses and create some type of park & ride, but not the full station upgrade that is desperately needed?
    The station is getting busier & busier and linking the buses is really good news – but there are some serious limitations in the current situation.
    If AT are wanting to reduce the number of people blocking up the motorway between Drurry & Papakura this station upgrade is really important – may not be as important as Otuhuhu but is not far behind and much more important than a new station between Newmarket & Britomart.

    1. A station at Parnell will add thousands of trips perday increasing cost recovery. An upgrade at pukekohe will possibly add a few hundred.

      I know which I would prioritise

      1. The key with Pukekohe is the fact is the it is the centre of a very large area with people coming in from Waiuku, Tuakau, Port Waikato, Pokeno, Patumahoe and so on. With such large numbers coming in from other centres – a good bus / train interchange is really important. The large growth at Mt Wellington / Pamure could easily be duplicated out at Pukekohe Statino.
        So it is not hundreds but actually a potential target of thousands of people – plus it’s not just the large number of people coming in from surrounding areas but Pukekohe itself is expected to grow by 30,000 according the Unitary Plan.

        1. All journeys require at least two points; departure and destination. Both projects add to the system for all users, there is clearly value in an upgrade at Puke, but a new destination is valuable too.

        2. And, Adam, of the five towns you mention, four of them lie on existing rail lines that, as far as I know, are still usable and go directly to Pukekohe. They also once had their own stations.

          Pokeno alone is expanding across the surrounding countryside at a rate of knots.

          I wish AT, or someone, anyone, could get in ahead of the game and provide a rail service before the Southern Motorway and SH22 grind to a standstill.

        3. Pukekohe-Tuakau already has 28,400 people according to StatsNZ – it shares the title of New Zealand’s 18th largest urban area with Timaru.

        4. Wow, Pukekohe-Tuakau already has 28,400 – that is far more than I thought and does not include Waiuku with Clarks Beach and so on.
          This really proves my point – Pukekohe is similar to Otahuhu and can become a major transport hub for an area with a high population already without the expected growth.
          As such the train station should be a higher priority than it currently it.
          It can be frustrating how the central city and things like trams gets attention but simple important obvious areas are just being ignored for what is not really a lot of money in the scheme of things.

  7. The over crowding on the northern express is getting beyond a joke. How hard is it for AT to demand that ritchies run eight buses an hour all day? !

  8. Regarding state highways and NZTA involvement in the Reeves Road flyover, and interesting issue. I will discuss it leaving aside the merits of the flyover in question.

    The roads around the flyover get more traffic than many state highways around the country do. The main basis of selection of roads for state highway status is connecting different towns and cities, not traffic volumes. On these roads it makes sense for the central government to run and fund these roads. Interurban routes is another issue. However if Auckland ratepayers were to fund every major road project in Auckland themselves their rates would by sky high.

    I think serious consideration should go to the idea of removing state highway designation from state highways 16, 18, 20 and 22 and the parts of state highway 1 inside Auckland City boundaries, and have all roads inside Auckland run and managed by the Auckland Council. And give to the Auckland Council all petrol tax money collected inside its borders, with the power to set whatever rates pf petrol tax it wanted. Effectively taking central government out of Auckland transport issues and making them purely a local issue

    1. Yes that’s a good option, bulk funding. Of course Rapid Transit network in Urban areas is the equivalent of State highways, so cities may choose to fund these more instead… The current government has shown little interest in devolving decision making to regions, quite the reverse in fact.

  9. #Christopher on level crossings limiting train frequency: This shouldn’t be a problem if crossings are properly managed. Many Melbourne crossings have over 20 closures per hour in the peak hour. It’s not ideal, but it’s perfectly possible.

    An automatic crossing should need no more than 45 seconds per closure, normally (this is achieved in many places in Australia). At 20 closures per hour, that would make 15 minutes closed per hour. Compare any major arterial road intersection with a 2-minute, three or four part traffic light cycle: the lights will be closed to each direction for 30-45 minutes per hour. So the bottleneck created by a level crossing will usually be much less than that created by the next set of traffics lights down the road.

  10. More on level crossings: closed time is higher (say 90-100 seconds) if there is a platform immediately upstream, since, after the crossing is tripped, the time lost stopping adds to the closure. A workaround to reduce this extra delay is: all trains must stop at the platform, and the train detection device is repositioned appropriately so that the train only trips the crossing just before it comes to a stand. Then the dwell time coincides with the boom falling, so there is little extra delay.

    Another possible workaround is to move the platform to the downstream side, if it’s a side platform.

    1. “the train only trips the crossing just before it comes to a stand”

      I’ve seen a similar system on a visit to Chichester in the south of England. The level crossing barriers on the road beside the station are linked to the railway signals and close just before the train is given the green light to go. It can’t be hard to do and I doubt if it even requires computer software. A simple arrangement of contactors and relays would do the job.

    2. You can also have the opposite problem e.g. Onehunga bound trains stopping at Penrose station trip the adjacent barriers and bells at O’Rorke Road, so traffic is held up for the full station dwell time plus time travelling through the crossing (but I haven’t ridden the O Line for a while, so hopefully they have fixed it).

    3. That is one of the problems at the St Jude Street crossing as the Avondale up line platform immediately precedes the crossing. At present, i.e. before the EMUs are introduced on the line, trains are of variable length so the trip mechanism for the crossing gates activates on the arrival of the train. Likewise, as Avondale tends to be where up and down line trains coincide the gate remains down for extended periods of time. The present timetable does not appear to have been developed to take account of level crossing closures but this may change when EMUs are finally introduced although I rather suspect that this is a sophistication too complex for AT. You can be sure though that AT roading engineers will veto any increase in train frequencies until such time as timings of the closures can be reduced. I should point out that the New Lynn trench, double tracking and new signalling hasn’t really improved timings out west. In fact the new work failed to address one level crossing – at Portage Road which should have been included in the adjacent trench or abolished. It wasn’t included because the engineering challenges involved, caused by the proximity of the Whau Bridge were evidently too great. Only 1 person has died at the Portage Road crossing since 2010.

  11. More on level crossings ( sorry, but my device only permits short comments):

    A remaining problem is the occasional very long closures when a train comes the other way too soon for the crossing to open after the first train. This admittedly has implications for the length of the maximum queue possibly fouling nearby intersections etc. The shorter the normal closure is, the less often this will happen.

  12. My wife & kids rode the train Avondale to Britomart the other day at rush hour. Train was packed. Nobody to issue tickets thou.
    The west was originally getting the EMUs first. When are we going to have bigger more frequent trains?

    1. Once there are enough people to drive them.

      And yes, you pay before you get on board. If you got off at Britomart you should have been asked to present your ticket upon exit.

    2. You can’t buy tickets on board anymore I don’t think. Need to either tag on with HOP or buy a ticket on the platform at the ticket machine.

  13. It’s great to see Mt Eden Road, Dominion Road etc. have such high patronage numbers – it is the obvious way to get into and out of the city at peak times, no doubt about that.
    As a regular user of the 299 running along St Andrews Rd and Gillies Ave I think that its timetable is a bit of a joke – you have a ‘peak’ citybound period of about 30 minutes in the morning when 3 buses come together, all packed, and then after that it’s just back to half hourly buses. Even the 15 minute frequency buses that arrive before the ‘peak’ time are full standing before they get half way through the route.
    I suspect the 299 will be more popular with those working in the CBD as opposed to those studying (for whom the 274/7 is more of an option). But 299 has definitely been neglected by AT for many years.
    Rant over..

  14. Couple of comments to make,
    the most important station that shud be built is Drury with a large park and ride.
    This will clear waiuku and pokeno residents. Going to have major probs between drury and takanini for next 3-5 years due congestion and roadworks.

    the other point I wud like to make is Newmkt used to be a major station for west line, but when gated all of a sudden Grafton became busier, now they are building parnell station, un-gated I believe, It is going to be a VERY busy station, COST RECOVERY what a joke.

    1. Drury is probably not so likely to be the sucess you suggest util the line is electrified as until then it’s one stop then a train change….

      Not so convinced that Grafton’s boom is entirely due to it lack of gates, it just works out as a quicker point to disembark for a lot of city destinations because of how slow and indirect the line is from there, and how Bitomart is only on one edge of the city.

      But agree both it and Parnell need gating, Grafton is surely the easier of the two to do this to.

  15. You might be surprised Patrick even with train change at Papakura. Drury to takanini 0630 til 0900 on mway most congested road in NZ. (and I know there are lots of others)

  16. it will be marvelous that when Northern Express has more of the double decker buses on that highway, having 1 of them, that double decker bus is a bit lonely

Leave a Reply

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