Bikes on boats

This is a good news story. The photo here was taken at 8:00am on Tuesday 8th December on the good Fullers Ferry Kea, just before she left Devonport for Auckland. I could've taken a similar photo any other weekday - at about this time. Note the absence of lycra, and the bikes handing from the rack in the background...

As you can see there was not much room for any more bikes. Pity really. Still. You can put boats on Fullers Ferries at other crossing times, and of course there's always the Bayswater Ferry - not that far away - and a quicker harbour crossing. Though you have to be a bit dextrous getting your bike from one end of the ferry to the other - so you are ready to get off.

Room for improvement. By the way - my bike's the white Avanti in the stand with the blue helmet on the handlebars...

Here's the Fullers media release they issued following the news they'd won the NZTA's Cycle-Friendly Award. Now there's a good initiative - makes me think of what we'd like NZTA to do - so we can award them a cycle friendly award....

Press Release – Fullers

Auckland, 23 November 2009 – Fullers ferries is delighted to announce its winning award from the New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA) for ‘Cycle-Friendly Commitment by Business’ at the recent Cycling Advocates’ Network (CAN) Cycle awards ceremony …Fullers Wins NZTA Cycle-Friendly Award

Auckland, 23 November 2009 – Fullers ferries is delighted to announce its winning award from the New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA) for ‘Cycle-Friendly Commitment by Business’ at the recent Cycling Advocates’ Network (CAN) Cycle awards ceremony and NZ Cycling Conference in New Plymouth.

Now in their seventh year, the Cycle-Friendly Awards are designed to acknowledge and celebrate some of the most notable achievements in the country that are helping to promote cycling and to create a cycle-friendly environment. The Awards are devised by the CAN, the national organisation promoting everyday cycling.

The award, as well as a uniquely designed “bicycle-bell” trophy and certificate, was presented to Jim Hannan, Waiheke Relationship Manager (on behalf of Fullers’ CEO Douglas Hudson) by the Associate Minister of Transport, the Hon Jonathan Young (on behalf of the Minister, Steven Joyce).

Fullers has been working on several different cycle friendly initiatives to support and encourage cycling which resulted in its nomination for an award by Cycle Action Auckland and Cycle Action Waiheke. Barbara Cuthbert, Deputy Chair, Cycle Action Auckland was thrilled that CAA nomination of Fullers was selected to win the award.

“We are so grateful for the profile and practical support that Fullers gives to cycling and integrated transport in every aspect of their ferry operations. We have endless stories of the wonderful attitude from the deck crew and office staff towards cyclists which makes using the Fullers services such a joy. They are without doubt leading the way in integrated transport in Auckland,” says Barbara.

”The crew’s can-do friendly attitude demonstrated towards cyclists on a daily basis goes unnoticed in a region where too little investment is made in cycling. Bikes travel for free and some ferries in the Fullers’ fleet have recently been upgraded with extra space for bikes. Ferry travel extends our reach throughout the whole region. Fullers is also gearing up to carry bikes on their buses, once the Transport Regulations are changed. They are real leaders in integrating cycling into the public transport system”, she explains.

Nice to have some good news cycle stories.

Smart Auckland Commuter Rail is about more than New Trains

I've already blogged about this a bit, but I need to share with you some Perth wisdom, because at ARC, especially at Chairman Lee level, there is a fixation that buying new electric trains will somehow, magically, be the silver bullet.

It's hard to find another apple to compare with Auckland. Perth comes close - because it has similar urban density (low), private car ownership (high), and a pre-existing railway system (both narrow gauge). A major difference though, is that Perth's old railway was already largely separated from the roading network. Perth's rail network partly arose from the need to drag tonnes of ore for refinement and shipment. These heavy, long trains needed to run so they did not affect road traffic. So they were built with underpassess, viaducts, bridges to run clear over road traffic. Not everywhere, but largely.

Auckland could not be more different. It's railway was always a bit hesitant and runs in a sort of co-habiting way with the roading network. You can see this most clearly at Onehunga and NewLynn where the at-grade road crossings cause more and more conflict between road traffic and train traffic.

Everybody is clear in Auckland about one thing when it comes to electrification and modernisation of Auckland's commuter rail network, and that is that it will carry between 30 and 60 million passenger trips annually. That is the sort of achievement of Perth Rail. So we might as well learn from what Perth did, what it cost, and where the money went.

A very useful power point summary of some of that experience can be seen at:
http://rtsa.com.au/assets/2008/12/the-expansion-of-the-urban-rail-system.pdf
Some useful thinking is in there about what needs to happen to get people to use modern rail in low density urban environments like Auckland. While it's not exactly apples and apples, this presentation also makes the point that the costs of the MetroRail expansion project were "19% for railcars and depots" and "70% for the Perth Mandurrah" section of railway. Then it itemises the elements of that project to include: underground stations & tunnels; freeway bridges and infrastructure; track, signalling and communications; suburban railway stations; train control system; other infrastructure.

A key idea that emerged was the need for integrated planning - where the transport planning of State highways and railways through Perth became integrated. These pics show some of that thinking on the ground.

Probably the most important point throughout that presentation - one which they really bang on about - is the need for comprehensive master-planning. The presentation ends with these concluding remarks about what is needed for success in applying rail to low density settlement:

• A proper understanding of the market
• Good preliminary planning
• The production of highly credible, persuasive Master
  Plans that define the demand and scope of work to
  sufficient detail to lock the scope in
• Followed by good project management and an
  understanding how that needs to be applied
  

In Auckland, with Chairman Lee fixated on buying trains, Ontrack rushing into rail, but land use authorities and state highway authorities prioritising cars and roads - we will certainly spend money, but risk missing the benefits from a modernised commuter rail network that more effective and long term planning can deliver. In particular we must get away from the present silo approach to rail planning. Integrated planning is about more than integrated land and transport planning - it's about integrating the planning functions and coordinating the relevant activities of all the main players.

Electrification: ARC needs to work with Government

Under present funding arrangements, it was never going to be possible for ARC to fund Auckland Region's share of modernising and electrifying Auckland's rail network. Even if all we talk about is the existing network. And we ignore how rail to the airport and the Britomart rail tunnel might be funded.

It is critical also, that integrated ticketing is implemented as a matter of priority - probably higher priority than electrification itself. The transport and economic benefits that acrue from rational integrated ticketing and fares would be vast even for the present network and rail, bus and ferry services.

The ARC has got itself up a bit of gum tree on this issue. There is a combination of "Little Red Hen" and "Little Engine that Could" about its behaviour. Which is unfortunate, and does not help the region go forward. In my view, effective implementation and modernisation of Auckland's rail will require the concerted effort of central, regional and local government.

As its funding power has dropped there is a growing desperation among some at the ARC, and a sort of vainglorious hope that it alone can still lift Auckland from its bed of motorways (Little Red Hen meets Little Engine that Could - aka Tweedledee in this blog). This is reflected in the desire to concentrate only on buying trains - as if shiney new trains are the be-all and end-all of a modern urban rail system.

I have been advised by Aussie rail experts that while there are similarities between Perth's rail project and Auckland's, is that Perth's rail was already largely separated from the roading network - before electrification, and that few intersections (where roads physically cross railway lines) needed to be grade separated (through viaducts, bridges, tunnels, road closures etc). This is not the case in Auckland. Locals living in Onehunga, West Auckland, and around Pukekohe will atest to the huge number of rail crossings - which would be almost permanently closed to roading traffic when electric trains run at 5 to 10 minute frequencies.

The ARC has notionally allocated about $20 million to this. Kick start funding in the hope that City and District councils would pick up this issue and deal with it. Fat chance. The New Lynn rail station project is a good example of what is in store. It's a good project. I like it. All sorts of objectives met: urban development, urban intensification, Transit Oriented Development, bus/rail interchange, economic development incentive, AND several road crossings separated from rail tracks. But at a cost of more than $100 million.

That's what it costs.... and that's the tip of the iceberg.

Trains need maintaining and garaging amd washing and cleaning. Those buildings and facilities need to be built and paid for. Modern stations need to be built which optimise local development opportunities - and encourage private development. At least. Each station is a major opportunity for urban renewal and economic transformation.

Buying a shiney set of trains - alone - does not cut it. It is no way to run an urban railroad.

The ARC needs to lift itself from its bunker on the hill, and build trusting and robust and enduring relationships with central government and city and district government, and walk the talk of building networks for tomorrow.

Auckland's Britomart Rail Tunnel Project - Ontrack Designation Process

One benefit of not being a chair this term of ARC is that I have had time between ARC meetings and workshops to take Masters in Planning Practice papers part-time at Auckland University. One paper I took in 2008 was Masters Infrastructure Planning. Its main assignment related to the strategic planning needed to support a Notice of Requirement (NOR) for the proposed Britomart Rail Tunnel project. The form of the assignment was a report to Ontrack.

Below I have pasted the Executive Summary of that assignment. If you are interested, I can send you the whole thing, plus appendicees. Remember - it is an assignment - but I wrote it as if it was objective and informed advice for Ontrack.

My key findings are set out in this Exec Summary.

Having done the research and analytical work needed for this assignment, I felt it would be useful to share my findings and recommendations with ARTA, and so provided a copy to a couple of ARTA Board Directors who tabled it at an ARTA Board meeting in October. At the time I wasn’t sure which organization (Ontrack or ARTA or both) would be carrying out the necessary NOR planning work.

I understand that at that meeting, the ARTA Board resolved to carry out a region wide network planning assessment. I also learned that Ontrack was to lead the NOR work, but in partnership with ARTA. I also provided a copy of the assignment to Ontrack staff who were working on Request for Tender (RFT) documentation in respect to the preparation of NOR documentation for the Britomart Rail Tunnel. You will recall that the previous Govt instructed Ontrack to protect that corridor – after the Downtown Westfield resource consent issue.

Just before Christmas Ontrack issued its RFT (request for tender) documentation. The due date for tenders is 5th Feb, $5 million has been set aside for the work, Ontrack is intending to lodge the completed NOR documentation with Auckland City Council within 12 months.....


Executive Summary - Joel Cayford's Ontrack report

Ontrack has been instructed by Government to protect and designate a preferred route for the Britomart Rail Tunnel in order to provide future passenger transport services. This report is a high level strategic analysis of work needed to support the related Notice of Requirement.
Electrification and expansion of Auckland’s suburban commuter rail network is now strongly supported at national, regional and local levels, both politically and in the transport and land use strategies set out in key planning documents.

Today, Britomart is the only railway station in the Auckland CBD. Its configuration constrains the Auckland rail network’s passenger carrying capacity. The Britomart Rail Tunnel project could release this constraint, and add one, two or three more stations, depending on which historical plan is considered. These plans were all prepared before the Auckland region decided to accept a Northern Rail connection to the North Shore through a harbour tunnel, as its preferred alignment and mode for the second harbour crossing.

The strategic planning issues this project poses are many and varied:

• A key objective for Ontrack is to increase rail freight, which in Auckland shares the network with commuter rail services. The implications of this conflict needs to be understood, and options for managing it considered to avoid rail freight services inhibiting the development of high capacity and high frequency passenger transport rail services.
• While the Britomart Rail Tunnel project has been around in some shape or form for almost 85 years, limited strategic planning for Auckland CBD Rail has been carried out recently that takes account of the provisions contained in Plan Change 6 to Auckland’s Regional Policy Statement, let alone a possible rail connection to the North Shore. ARTA (Auckland Regional Transport Authority), which now has the responsibility for planning Auckland’s passenger transport service network, has not conducted the necessary comprehensive strategic planning to support a NOR for the Britomart Rail Tunnel project.
• Auckland City Council will need to be involved in the planning for the size, location and functionality of railway stations within the CBD area, as well as bus/rail interchanges that might be required on the CBD periphery. ARTA, ARC and ACC will need to coordinate and sequence land use changes, the staging of transport infrastructure construction, and the roll out of new rail services – in order to optimise integration outcomes. There is a need to properly coordinate these planning processes in accordance with RLTS provisions, which suggest a duty to establish an appropriate "CBD Rail Steering Group" including ACC, ARC, ARTA and Ontrack.

This report explores these key issues, and asks several strategic questions, all of which need to be addressed thoroughly in an Integrated Transport Assessment process in accordance with RPS provisions, culminating in the development of a publicly agreed long term Auckland CBD rail network plan, before Ontrack can legitimately proceed to issue a Notice of Requirement for the Britomart Rail Tunnel project.

Ends

I can provide copies of the RFT, if you are interested. The NZ Herald ran a story about this which you can read at:

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10551410