This week is rail safety week – the week people are once again reminded not to do stupid stuff like cross the tracks when a train is coming. Sadly the need for it was highlighted once again last week after a man died after being hit by train at Walters Rd in Takanini. I believe it is the fifth death on the rail network in Auckland this year alone with other incidents occurring at Morningside, Orakei, Papatoetoe and Puhinui.
Rail Safety will be in the spotlight in August during Rail Safety Week in the Australasian-wide initiative to raise awareness about rail safety and encourage safe behaviour around trains and tracks. KiwiRail and TrackSAFE NZ are proud to support the week which runs from 10-16 August.
Every year there are hundreds of near misses between vehicles and trains – and every one of those is, in reality, a ‘near hit’. If you’d like to get involved you can find out more at http://www.tracksafe.co.nz/media/rail-safety-week
Rail Safety Week is an annual Australasian campaign which aims to increase awareness of the need for people to take care around the rail network. This is the 9th year the campaign has been run in New Zealand. Each year a number of stakeholder organisations come together to promote the key messages to target audiences and ensure the event is a success.
It aims to improve awareness of the need to be safe around the rail network, and what safe behaviour is. While Rail Safety Week is held from 10-16 August 2015, the goal is ongoing safer behaviour around the rail network.
This year’s key message is ‘Expect trains’. It aims to address complacency and distraction which are known factors that contribute to unsafe behaviour around the rail corridor. It will encourage people to stay alert around the rail network, whether at a station or a level crossing.
The chart below shows the number of casualties at level crossings or other places where people are on the tracks across the entire country for the 10 years to the end of 2014.
While it will be difficult to prevent every single incident, the one area we can easily target for improvement is at level crossings. Looking just at Auckland, within the electrified area there are around 45 crossings in total, 31 road/pedestrian crossings and 14 pedestrian only crossings – although some of these have multiple legs, for example at Papatoetoe. As you can see on the map below the majority are on the Western line with the rest are primarily along the short Onehunga Line with another cluster around Takanini.
As well as being a safety issue, crossings cause disruption for road users including creating localised congestion and while trains have priority through crossings, the extra signals and procedures needed for safety can impact on train operations. What’s more, the number of trains operated on the network is only going to increase in the future, initially as a result of electrification and later from the City Rail Link. As such removing level crossings has the ability to improve a number of areas in the transport network. So what’s happening with level crossings?
Auckland Transport have developed an evaluation criteria based on the approach Melbourne is using and with input from the NZTA, Kiwirail, Transdev and the Council. The have used this to assess all level crossings within the electrified area to determine the priority for removal or grade separation. This criteria includes looking at aspects such as how long the barriers will be down and safety risks. The highest priority crossing is Sarawia St which is the crossing that has the highest number of train movements through it in the country – more on that below. AT say that a number of crossings close together will need to be dealt with as packages. As such the crossings with high priority are:
- Southern NIMT – Walters Road, Manuroa Road, Taka Street, Spartan Road
- Western Line – Normanby Road, Porters Ave (within CRL footprint)
- Western Line – Morningside Drive
- Western Line – Woodward Road
- Western Line – St Jude Street, Chalmers Street, St Georges Road
- Western Line – Glenview Road
- Western Line – Bruce McLaren
As far as I’m aware this isn’t in any particular order and AT say more work is needed on each of them such as traffic modelling, design and costing as well as business cases. They also won’t say just what option – removal or grade separation – they’ve selected for each crossing as some will require property purchases – the extent of which won’t be known until more design work is done.
As an example of the work that’s already happened the table below shows the impact on some of the crossings from the proposed train frequencies with electrification. The western line crossings obviously assume having 10 trains an hour however it’s not clear just when that will happen yet – if at all. As you can see many of the crossings will end up being closed for more than 20% of the time with Sarawia St up to 62% of the time. The reason some crossings on the same line have different figures is because this takes into account not just frequency but also the service pattern. That’s because at some crossings the timetable means the trains will pass through in each direction at about the same time which can reduce the amount of time the barriers are down while at other crossings this won’t happen.
The one crossing that is being working on right now is Sarawia St – or the Newmarket Level Crossing as AT call it. There AT plan to build a bridge to connect Laxon Terrace with Cowie St. In the last board report, it said staff are looking to get approval from the board this month to lodge a notice of requirement for the project. This is likely to be fiercely opposed by some of the Cowie St residents who don’t like the idea.
AT’s proposal is for a two lane bridge that is narrowed via chicanes to keep speeds low
Outside of Newmarket there is nothing in council or AT plans for at least the next three years. After that the council’s Long Term Plan does list $26 million to improve crossings in the seven years after 2018 – although with most grade separated crossings likely to cost $5-$20 million that budget won’t go very far.
Processing...
Not all the recent deaths have occurred at level crossing. At least two of them have occurred when people have illegally accessed the crossing. These deaths are unfortunate, especially for the families involved. But with limited budgets and many competing priorities for funding is grade seperation the issue that we should be focusing on?
Well it’s one area that we can focus on and potentially helps in reducing the number of places where people can access the network
Rail Crossing have been a pet project of Rockbind .We have concept photo shop images ready and have sent them out only to be ignored .our costing for each crossing would be around $15 k per crossing .. What is need is to high light the crossings in 2 colours one been blue and the other is red which high lights the danger area .. Kiwi rail (toll) did not want to know NZTA loved what we came up with .. ..
Not as bad idea but not surprising Kiwirail didn’t like it as they’re hopeless and only concerned about how they run their next freight train
Sounds like a great plan Mike,
Got a photo you can link to so we can see the concept you have?
Might be worth seeing if we can get AT’s buy in and trial it on a couple of those crossing as well – at $15K a pop, thats chicken feed and if it prevents even 1 level crossing accident (let alone fatality), it will be money very well spent. Better than doing nothing for 3 or more years.
Firstly for those who choose to kill themselves (there is really no other way to look at it – these are not accidents – trains can not swerve to avoid fools) at level crossing whether on foot, cycle or in a vehicle, there really is no sympathy. If they are that stupid they shouldn’t even be allowed to leave their homes.
As for the future of suburban level crossings and the impacts on traffic as trains become more frequent, that’s life, and I accept the inconvenience. Other than throwing millions of scarce dollars at overbridges there is really no easy way around it. Manuroa Rd however may need looking at creatively as that is an industrial area, and down trucking time just ends up costing us all, one way or the other..
As regards the Sarawia project, why would the council want to make it ‘narrowed via chicanes to reduce speeds’? This needs investigating as the goal of spending all that money is surely to increase FLOW thereby reducing bottlenecks? Also as the money is already being spent – make it as wide as possible for future use – whatever that may be. Easier to do it now than wring hands later on.
Go take a look at the end of sarawia st sometime and you’ll find your answer. It’s a narrow Victorian era, hilly winding lane with about a dozen cottages and a couple of flats off it. It’s also a dead end, little more than a glorified driveway. The project is purely about maintaining property access.
There is nothing to flow out, and you certainly wouldn’t want to speed any new traffic in.
Hi, more than just some old cottages and a few flats. 65 households on the Laxon Terrace/Youngs Lane side of the crossing. With more townhouses to be built at the 3 Youngs Lane site. And Laxon Terrace is a major pedestrian thoroughfare for Broadway Park.
Love how you repeatedly show why no one should take what you say seriously.
The goal of the Newmarket crossing is to provide access to Laxon Tce which has no other road access if the current crossing is closed. Flow isn’t an issue as it only has about 50-100 vehicles per day. The reason it needs to be done is it significantly affects train operations due to its proximity to the Newmarket junction
Love your insults Matt. They say more about you than they do me. My point is future proofing. Spend a little more now to save a lot later. Can you accurately predict what the changing face of that area will look like in years to come?.
That wasn’t an insult, just pointing out that your reliably wrong.
As for the future, yep pretty confident that in this case we’re not going to see substantial change. Perhaps a few extra apartments could go in (not sure on zoning) but that isn’t likely to lead to much of an increase in vehicle demand, certainly not above what they’re proposing could handle. Also Newmarket park can’t be developed (even if we wanted it to). It’s a former rubbish tip and has terrible soil conditions. The former council had to spent millions stabilising it.
Of course you’re right- we should six lane every residential cul-de-sac, cos who can accurately predict the changing face etc etc….
Future proof for Laxon? Have you been there? Good grief.
Excuse me. 400 movements a day way back in 2012 (see page 3 of https://at.govt.nz/media/imported/4964/furneaux-way-safety-review-sarawia.pdf) AND currently 600 Vehicle movements a day. GET YOUR FACTS RIGHT.
No sympathy for the seven year old boy who ‘chose’ to kill himself at GI a few years back? Clearly to stupid to be alive and deserved everything he got?
@IAL, the irony is GI has a subway on the northern side but some certifiable idiot thought it would be a great idea to put a pedestrian crossing there as well. It is very much high on the list in the near hit region, the vast majority of which drivers never report.
And on this theme most of those 4 LX’s at Takanini have trains crossing them at 100 km/hr+ so that alone shows how lethal they are and with the very quiet EMU’s and the publics apathy to alarms and lights expect far more death and destruction. I mean would you put LX’s on a motorway?
Hyuk hyuk, good old Trollcardo.
Saying something you disagree with does not make someone a troll. Saying something stupid does not make someone a troll. Saying something specifically to upset someone is being a troll, especially if it is something they dont actually believe and are only saying it to get a reaction. Ricardo is hardly trolling. He just has completely different values to you.
Calling someone a troll when they aren’t is hardly adding to the conversation here. I appreciate what Ricardo has to say, even though in this particular case (regarding this cul-de-sac being ‘future proofed’) its a pretty crazy thing to say.
Frodo! Don’t feed the troll
You obviously don’t live in the area. Leave us to manage SAFETY in our own neighbourhood mate.
I totally agree that Auckland needs to get rid of those level crossings if it wants to have a good, fast, safe train network. Starting with Sarawia St – but also places like Normanby Rd and Morningside are dying out for it.
But regarding deaths on the crossings – have you ever thought that these deaths may just be intentional suicides? If you were planning to top yourself, a train does a pretty definitive job. The nasty side effects are the traumatised train driver, and everyone getting delayed on the way to work…
Once the entire rail network was completely separate it would be possible to have driver-less trains would it not? Though we are heading for driver-less cars so couldn’t we have driver-less trains and trams and buses now?
Yes but powerful people don’t get excited about current technology- that requires budget and decisions, and other real things. Fantasy attaches itself much more easily to future vision…
I rode on a few of the driver-less metro networks in Europe – basically a lift/elevator that goes horizontal. Without the need for drivers it allows for continuous operation even during non-peak times.
Auckland is different from those metro networks in that it shares its tracks with freight trains, which have very different (and variable) operating characteristics. I don’t think that anyone anywhere has seriously proposed to automated a mixed network like this, and I very much doubt that Auckland would be a pioneer in this respect.
The budget is virtually non-existent. $26.5 million spread over the last 4 years of a 10 year plan – i.e. zero dollars in any of the first six years. My request to speak to AT was deferred so late that it came after the decision had been made but I was at least able to point out that this was a very short-sighted decision. Sarawia Street is much delayed but pretty much a fait accompli so I concentrate on the other 40 crossings – some of which will be closed (arms down) for over 30% of the time during the peak – several possibly over 40% – which will cause intolerable delays on some roads. I predict that it is public outcry over network delays that will eventually cause a shift to actual grade separation, rather than the odd unfortunate accident resulting in serious injury or death. The only good news is that CRL and the Light Rail project should lead to the grade separation of Normanby and closure of Porters Avenue and George Street when the Dominion Road flyover is replaced with a conventional intersection with New North Road.
Thanks Graeme, at least any outcry should lead to these being re-prioritised. It is, afte rall, primarily a road efficiency problem; while the trains are delayed what will get noticed are vehicles backing up.
Walters Road in particular I think is a problem. Shopping complex on either side of the tracks, and a roundabout just past the complexes at both ends. I can’t see how there’s a long enough “run up” to put in grade separation by rebuilding the road. and I can’t see how you can put in grade separation along the track without closing the track for an extended period.
Yes the track there should have been lowered during Project Dart, but as ever the cheapest option was taken. This is exactly the result of all the endless ‘spend no money ever on capital works’ from the wrongheaded but noisey.
“…should have been lowered during Project Dart, but as ever the cheapest option was taken.”
The issue isn’t with KR, but with their funding. As long as bone-headed governments demand that the company act like a commmercial entity, paying it’s own way and only investing when commercially viable – This is what you’ll have.
Also, KR is damned if they do and damned if they don’t. People will complain about them being cheap, people will complain if they spend enough “tax payer money” to get a good solution in place.
I think that we’re too hard on them sometimes.
Jon no one blamed KR, i blamed those who oppose capex funding, so yes the gov, but also those that always pop up to shout against rail capex investment.
Why the bridge at all. What’s stopping the access for laxon terrace via James Cook?
Two main reasons:
1) James Cook Cres doesn’t reach Laxon Tce, there’s a private road (Furneaux Way) plus a narrow walkway between them, and
2) James Cook Cres exits onto Middleton Rd which is about as far from the existing exit to the Broadway/Parnell Rd junction via Sarawia St as you could get.
The Newmarket Park option is not technically feasible as mentioned elsewhere, nor is an underpass from Laxon Tce to Railway St, whereas Cowie St simply replicates Sarawia St a block north and has existing grade separation, so is a no-brainer. Considering the minimal traffic flow from Laxon Tce and Youngs Ln it’s hard to understand the reason for any opposition from Cowie St residents.
Maybe it’d be cheaper for Auckland Transport to buy the driveway?
Presumably AT could invoke the PWA in respect of the private road and the townhouse adjoining the walkway, but as there’s a perfectly viable (and better) solution, ie Cowie St, I can’t see that process getting very far.
Ironically, that townhouse has access from both Furneaux Way and Laxon Tce (parallel to the walkway), which during its construction became a rat-run. The owner quickly installed an electric gate. https://goo.gl/maps/U7Axd
Jonno is completely correct. Cowie Street nimbys need to pull their heads in.
They’ve put up a life-sized loco-shaped billboard at the Wiltons Road level crossing between Masterton and Carterton. Scared the **** out of me passing it on the train the other day.
The map of Auckland area at-grade crossings doesn’t register a pedestrian crossing at the northern end of Avondale train station. Notwithstanding that it’s gated, it’s constantly abused by pedestrians – notably, but not exclusively, Avondale College students – who constantly risk being hit by trains. It was meant to have been replaced with an over bridge (ramp and stairs but no lift) when the station was redeveloped as part of Project Dart but this facility was dropped when the incoming National party administration reallocated capital expenditure from PT projects to RoNS. Still a couple of precast components for the over bridge lurking around the old Avondale goods yard. Mind you, the whole Avondale train station redevelopment exemplifies the short-termist thinking that characterises KiwiRail projects these days. Among other things, it should have encompassed grade separation of St Jude St at the relocated station’s southern end.
Really quick fix to keep people off the tracks would be to increase the height of the fence at Henderson – I’ve reported it to AT before but nothing has happened. I frequently see people jumping the fence all along the platform. This shouldn’t need a business case, and it will be cheaper in the long run than having 20 Ticket Inspectors milling about the platform all the time.
I hope the replacement bridge for the Newmarket crossing doesn’t turn into another Sky path type fight i.e.endless appeals etc. from the local community. Why would they be opposed to it anyway?
There now seems to be a small sub-group of narcissistic misanthropes who have been well rewarded for these character traits in our liberalised economy and feel entitled to shout and scream like spoiled babies about any change proposed in the public realm near them.
They consistently mistake public space and investment as entirely for them and as a play space to confirm their sociopathic worldviews. Thus they are impervious to reason and evidence, in fact are only encouraged by engagement to feel more special and therefore delight in the conflict and attention that more extreme positions elicit. Donald Trump is a good current example of this trope. Little wannabes turn up here.
That’s the short answer.
“There now seems to be a small sub-group of narcissistic misanthropes who have been well rewarded for these character traits in our liberalised economy” – these would be called locals – “and feel entitled to shout and scream like spoiled babies about any change proposed in the public realm near them.” – engaging in the deomcratic process and legally expressing viewpoints through consultation or on blogs about their local area..
“They consistently mistake public space and investment as entirely for them and as a play space to confirm their sociopathic worldviews. Thus they are impervious to reason and evidence, in fact are only encouraged by engagement” – far be it from the public to feel encouraged by engagement. I think most aucklanders now know that council consultation is bullshit so good on the ones that still feel encouraged -” to feel more special and therefore delight in the conflict and attention that more extreme positions elicit.” “Donald Trump is a good current example of this trope.” – if all reasonable argument fails refer to some extreme example in America – “Little wannabes turn up here. “- Wow this wil be my last visit to the site for sure.
*narcissistic, misanthropic locals engaging in the democratic process with no social conscience*
Fixed that for you.
Or this fix: Caring locals engaging in consultation about their own communities despite the predetermined outcomes determined by council planners brainwashed under years of socially engineered agenda 21 education deluded that their motivation is a greater social conscience and oblivious to the fact that communism didn’t create the best and most vibrant cities.
Agenda 21? I’ll disengage from this conversation then.
They believe the road crossing should go in a tunnel. I think the short answer would be to provide two options: accept the bridge, or retain the current crossing which remains down unless there is a car waiting to cross and train operations allow without impact.
I would encourage commenters to stick to the issues and go easy on the personal insults. For example, in Matt’s comment of 10 August 7.37am, the first line is unnecessary.
This blog is valuable, interesting and mostly polite. Let’s keep it that way. Obviously most blogs have a general angle, because people with similar views have clubbed together to create them, but interesting ones also discuss contrary views. If the majority squash the minority too vigorously, the minority walk away and the blog becomes an echo chamber, which is not so interesting.
John I appreciate this view, and it is one we largely agree with as we run a very open comments stream, but a very small number of commenters abuse their welcome here, and Richard Lauren is one of these (posting under various names including Ricardo). What Matt wrote and you object to is factually accurate: Richard runs his own extreme pro-Motordom blog that attracts minimal traffic or interest, and is not taken seriously by the sector. Furthermore he is just ‘talking up his book’ as his job is in motorway planning. He does not declare this interest. He also over-comments in any thread giving an impression of a debate, whereas he is out on an extreme edge. Additionally he rapidly escalates to playing victim when called out. This is troll behaviour and boring for everyone.
“Additionally he rapidly escalates to playing victim when called out.” This is typical behaviour of people who lack empathy. His lack of empathy is proven by his callous disregard for the life of a 7 year old child. People like this are impervious to the feelings of others but are hyper sensitive to any slight criticism directed their way.
As for John appealing for politeness, well it is something that is not deserved for those that choose to display none. This guy Ricardo is an obvious troll who comments on here with the intention to provoke; a child like behaviour. He adds nothing of any substance to anything.
I’ve often wondered whether he was an 11 year old but Patrick has now advised us all otherwise.
I thought you’d banned him some time ago in all guises?!?
We are indulgent; we do want a full range of views, but this can be abused.
Edited: I don’t think this is appropriate – Matt
Wow. I think that’s really uncool, and a breach of Riccardo’s privacy. If he wanted to use his name he would have. If you want full names you should make it a site wide policy. He has a right to express his opinion. Liking cars is a valid viewpoint on a transport discussion. I think you should remove that post.
Liking cars is a valid viewpoint, but doesn’t make your assertions about transport valid. Also, posting in a public forum you lose your right to privacy. It is well known amongst regular commentors that Ricardo is a disgruntled traffic engineer called richard as he used to post under his own name. Posting public knowledge is not a breach of anyone’s privacy.
that was an open to the public profile that I searched on google using the name the poster has been using on this blog for years. If a person cares about his own privacy, then that person shouldn’t use his own name on a website called hotornot.com… just saying
He banned himself I thought, started his rather unread and uncommented on blog, got tired of talking to himself and came back by the looks.
Glen Eden should be on the list. It never had it’s promised town transformation so maybe grade seperation could be part of that if someone is elected who will progress the project. But when the train comes no one can turn right at the lights and traffic along the mainstreet is backed up. My question is because the tracks are naturally raised on a little hill at Glen Eden anyways, would it be costly to put in a small underpass for the cars and people. . It’s a real mess at the moment. And it’s one of the busiest stations. Also instead of spending more money on education – they should be utilising free information that worked like the Melbourne Train Safety – Dumb ways to die video that went viral.
Want Glen Eden to take off? Close the crosding to motor vehicles and build a pedestrian underpass. Probably 90% of that traffic is passing through Glen Eden and not stopping to spend a cent. Closing that junction would improve the town no end.
I thought a trench was planned for Glen Eden but it was costed at around $100 million.
Ok Thanks for the Answer. Wow. Yikes. $100million. It looks so easy like you could just put a couple sticks of dynamite under there. It’s only a wee underpass needed. I guess there’s a bit more to it.
Yes not a small sum, and principally of benefit to vehicle users, so you can see how it doesn’t happen. For 100m-ish the line could be electrified to Puke, or many more stations could be upgraded, both of which would be much more useful for rail users, so why would those in charge of starved rail budgets prioritise spending on another mode when these are so many other things screaming for investment?
Which is not to say it isn’t necessary but that it is being costed in the wrong category, in my view. And one with little cash, and huge demands.
I disagree about being of principal benefit to vehicles.. It is needed for a number of reasons: the backed up traffic is a mess, It’s a mess for the functioning of Glen Eden as a community and as a township. It’s a mess for pedestrians. It’s not walkable, and it’s dangerous. Kids darting out between parked cars, unclear lanes as people get stuck and have to change lanes to go around. It has resulted in the shop owners creating another village behind the mainstreet because the mainstreet doesn’t work. So it’s all spread out and a poor design. And it encourages rat running of other streets. And it’s well past time. Glen Eden has had 2 town plan designs never implemented, a park and ride never implemented, and it sounds like the tunnel was planned and never implemented. It’s doing it’s best but it deserves a fair share of the investment. I think Devonport Takapuna have the same population and yet are getting both there villages substantially upgraded.
The backed up traffic is a direct result of the intersection. Close it, make it 1 lane each way through Glen Eden, add street trees and the place will be a million times better.
Agree 100%
Sarawia should be an easy fix. Simply run a bulldozer down the pedestrian way between Furneaux and Laxon, it only needs to be one lane wide, simply because the rest of Laxon, especially at the S bend isn’t much wider. No need for a bridge. That pedestrian way was probably a road at some time in the past, so the road reserve is probably wide enough, provided the council hasn’t stuffed up by allowing those flats to encroach on it.
Yes, seems sensible, eh? But this was opposed by local I think, and may be privately owned?
Yeah should be, but road is privately owned. And “owners” will only accept that option if AT then takes over the entire road network in that development, thus freeing the body corp. from having to pay any costs for fixing/maintaining, what will still be a dodgy, private, cul-de-sac road.
Sounds like a bum deal to the tax payer hence no dice.
Would be cheaper than a bridge though wouldn’t it?
Probably not in the long run. Also you’d lose the connection to and from the Newmarket Park area for pedestrians and cyclists, otherwise there is no crossing of the rail corridor between Ayr St and Remuera Rd. That would be an issue if they progress the concept of a Parnell cycleway.
A bridge for walking/cycling would be substantially cheaper than the proposed bridge.
Of course, but then you wouldn’t have vehicle access to Laxon Terrace.
Oops. Separate post above somewhere, it makes sense for AT to buy the shared driveway. Especially for that number of residences and the lack of land to further develop.
I’m pretty amazed by the amount of pedestrian/road crossings there are in Auckland, especially compared to the Hutt Line where most stations below Upper Hutt has Subways and road bridges crossing over/under the rails, and the tracks hidden behind the dense native shrubbery and fences, accidents still happen, though it sounds like it’s not as high as Auckland.
Although the subway and bridges looked like they were built in the 50’s, when Wellington had a decent network then anyway, so that probably made a difference. *shrugs*
Why do these safety projects involve rail capex ? The railway was there long before anything else and rightly has the priority. Level crossing safety is an issue of motorists or pedestrians failing to give way. Surely the budget for making any safety improvements should fall to petrol taxes or rates ?
And please don’t fence off all level crossings so that we all have to zig-zag up overbridges or dive through subways. By all means think about how we can visually draw attention better to the potential danger of a level crossing. Maybe the answer is to make it look more like a road. Surely we stand a much greater risk crossing a busy multi-lane arterial or a highway than a rail line, yet no-one suggests that we need to fence them off and force everyone to use a subway.
A very good point John. In my decrepitude I find the climb up and over and down quite a hurdle! Is it possible that some of these are suicides?
Rather than using death as the motivating criteria should we look at the crossing patronage (pedestrian and vehicle) along with the percentage of time the crossing will be closed as the criteria for grade separation.
Building bridges where rail traffic is high makes sense from an economic perspective, but from a safety perspective it is the crossing where trains are infrequent – and thus forgotten about – where the risks seem highest. Similarly on a busy road, chances are the person ahead of you will stop for the train so you have to as well. It seems perverse but it makes sense when you think about it.
I was delighted to see that the traffic lights in Waikanae are now linked to the rail signalling system so that we no longer have the absurd situation where the traffic lights signal a turn onto the crossing when the rail lights are flashing. When I suggested this concept some years back it was rejected as compromising the integrity of the rail safety system. Traffic lights could be used more extensively in locations where the rail crossing is on one leg of an intersection.
I note that one of the issues that continues to be identified with rail crossings is that motorists misjudge the speed and proximity of the train. I believe this is in part because the locomotive headlights are located high and close together – the lower and wider apart the lights are, the closer the engine would appear and the easier it is to judge its speed. Since I first raised this, the engineers have fitted ditch lights, which are low and separated, but they flash alternately, reducing their effectiveness as a way of helping motorists judge distance. Better to have plain ditch lights and an orange flashing light on the roof.
Latest in a very long line of moneybags delaying tactics is that the COWIE ST NIMBYS have hired a QC to appeal to the Environment Court. If those luddites have that much money to throw around on this then the answer is simple. Sell your draughty old villas and move somwhere. CLASSIC EXAMPLE of:- BUILD A BRIDGE AND GET OVER IT CRSA !!!