Public Transport Spine Study

The route selection is poor, involving a Y shape with one leg going to Hataitai/Kilbirnie and one leg going to Newtown. The consequence is to impose an unnecessary $200M cost on light rail for a second Mt Victoria tunnel along a route that doesn't align well with high growth areas such as Te Aro, Newtown and Kilbirnie. As a consequence the modelling does not pick up higher patronage benefits from growth areas.

Tab(spineAssessment) shows we should not be surprised the [[Spine Study -> http://www.gw.govt.nz/ptspinestudy/]] found the light rail proposal was low benefit.

(:cell width=10%:)

(:cell width=65%:)

✗1 ✗

||Have widely spaced stops

✗

Chosen route layout does not achieve this

Assume modern multi-segment light rail vehicles with high passenger-carrying capacity

Golden Mile route implies frequent stops

Route shares the right-of-way with buses, so will be subject to unpredictable delays

✗` ✗

Missed destinations include the Airport, education and recreation centres, and higher-density residential areas

Too many passengers going to Wellington Hospital will have to transfer

Little attempt to increase system-wide trip speeds or create an integrated system with timed transfers offering fast trips anywhere-to-anywhere

A fast and reliable route linking interchanges at the Railway Station, Manners St, Wellington Hospital and Kilbirnie

Existing bus routes retained with bus numbers reduced  to well within existing capacity limits

Avoiding the Basin Reserve reduces demand for new roading

Modern multi-segment light rail vehicles with high passenger-carrying capacity

Average stop spacing about 700 metres, on a dedicated right-of-way for most of the route

Interchanges listed above, other important stops include Airport, Rita Angus home, Newtown and Mt Cook/Massey Campus

All bus routes running to or south of the Railway Station connect to light rail, with timed transfers at all primary interchanges

New and existing services integrated from Kilbirnie to Waikanae

||Require high-performance vehicles || ✓ ||Assume modern multi-segment light rail vehicles with high passenger-carrying capacity; but the route shares the right-of-way with buses, so will be subject to unpredictable delays ||
||Have widely spaced stops || ✗ ||Golden Mile route implies frequent stops; Hataitai route misses high demand points; Hospital route is too short to serve the high-density, mixed-use Newtown area ||

Tab(spineAssessment) shows we should not be surprised the [[Spine Study -> http://www.gw.govt.nz/ptspinestudy/]] found the light rail proposal was low benefit. The proposed route was also intrinsically and unnecessarily high cost. Given the light rail route chosen, the spine study's cost`-benefit analysis correctly found that the proposal did not stack up economically.

The {PTSS|{$Titlespaced}} considered the option of light rail for Wellington and found it was high cost, low benefit. To understand this conclusion, we can assess the proposed route against the requirements in the ArtOfLightRailInsertion. Tab(spineAssessment) compares how well the PTSS light rail proposal meets these requirements.

This analysis shows light rail needs another look.

||Require high-performance vehicles || ✓` ✓ ||Modern multi-segment light rail vehicles with high passenger-carrying capacity ||

||Require high-performance vehicles || ✓` ✓ ||Assume modern multi-segment light rail vehicles with high passenger-carrying capacity ||

||Tie the city together || ✗` ✗ ||Only marginal improvement of an overloaded route; no attempt to integrate services at quality interchanges, with integrated timetable design to minimise transfer times ||
||Require high-performance vehicles || ✗` ✗ ||Bendy-buses reportedly impractical on the golden mile, and double deckers too slow at stops without passing lanes; no attempt to separate express and stopping services {*is this light rail?*} ||
||Have widely spaced stops || ✗ ||No reliable information on stop spacing; the Hataitai route misses high demand points; the Hospital route is too short to serve the high-density, mixed-use Newtown area ||
||Reach major destinations || ✗ ||Missed destinations include education and recreation centres, and higher-density residential areas; too many passengers going to Wellington Hospital will have to transfer ||
||Form the core of an integrated network || ✗` ✗ ||No attempt to increase system-wide trip speeds or create an integrated system offering fast trips anywhere-to-anywhere ||

The {PTSS|{$Titlespaced}} considered the option of light rail for Wellington and found it was high cost, low benefit. To understand this conclusion, we can assess the proposed route against the requirements in the ArtOfLightRailInsertion. Tab(spineAssessment) compares how well the PTSS light rail proposal meets these requirements with the FIT proposals described in ANewPublicTransportApproach.

||border=1 id=spineAssessment"Fit to requirements"
||!Requirement ||!PTSS ||!Comment on PTSS ||!FIT ||
||Tie the city together || ✗` ✗ ||Only marginal improvement of an overloaded route; no attempt to integrate services at quality interchanges, with integrated timetable design to minimise transfer times ||✓ ||
||Require high-performance vehicles || ✗` ✗ ||Bendy-buses reportedly impractical on the golden mile, and double deckers too slow at stops without passing lanes; no attempt to separate express and stopping services {*is this light rail?*} ||✓` ✓ ||
||Have widely spaced stops || ✗ ||No reliable information on stop spacing; the Hataitai route misses high demand points; the Hospital route is too short to serve the high-density, mixed-use Newtown area ||✓` ✓ ||
||Reach major destinations || ✗ ||Missed destinations include education and recreation centres, and higher-density residential areas; too many passengers going to Wellington Hospital will have to transfer ||✓` ✓ ||
||Form the core of an integrated network || ✗` ✗ ||No attempt to increase system-wide trip speeds or create an integrated system offering fast trips anywhere-to-anywhere ||✓ ||

However, the route options proposed in ANewPublicTransportApproach meet or fully meet the requirements--delivering significantly higher benefits at lower cost.

The {$Titlespaced} considered the option of light rail for Wellington and found it was high cost, low benefit. To understand this conclusion, we can assess the proposed route against the requirements in the ArtOfLightRailInsertion.

||!Requirement ||!Fit ||!Comments ||
||Tie the city together || ✗` ✗ ||Only marginal improvement of an overloaded route; no attempt to integrate services at quality interchanges, with integrated timetable design to minimise transfer times ||
||Require high-performance vehicles || ✗` ✗ ||Bendy-buses reportedly impractical on the golden mile, and double deckers too slow at stops without passing lanes; no attempt to separate express and stopping services {*is this light rail?*} ||
||Have widely spaced stops || ✗ ||No reliable information on stop spacing; the Hataitai route misses high demand points; the Hospital route is too short to serve the high-density, mixed-use Newtown area ||
||Reach major destinations || ✗ ||Missed destinations include education and recreation centres, and higher-density residential areas; too many passengers going to Wellington Hospital will have to transfer ||
||Form the core of an integrated network || ✗` ✗ ||No attempt to increase system-wide trip speeds or create an integrated system offering fast trips anywhere-to-anywhere ||