Other FIT Wellington pages:
Hide minor edits - Show changes to markup
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.
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. The frequency of service south of the split is halved on each leg, making it less attractive than an unsplit route.
This table shows we should not be surprised the Spine Study found the light rail proposal was low benefit.
This table shows we should not be surprised the Spine Study found the light rail proposal was low benefit.
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.
Also, questionable assumptions in the modelling seriously understate the benefits of light rail. It assumes few people shift out of their cars on to light rail and it ignores international experience that introducing light rail can achieve an immediate growth in public transport patronage of up to 25% due to increased service standards, which result in reduced congestion for all road users with significant time saving benefit. The PTSS ignores land use benefits and value uplift from intensification around light rail transit nodes and corridors as experienced overseas. It ignores the greater capacity of light rail.
(:cell width=10%:)
(:cell width=8%:)
(:cell width=65%:)
(:cell width=67%:)
✗1 ✗
✗ ✗
(:cell:)✓ ✓
✓ ✓ (:cell:)
Have widely spaced stops
✗
✗1 ✗
Chosen route layout does not achieve this
Chosen route divided and incoherent with minimal interchanges
Slow trips because most routes are shared with buses
Assume modern multi-segment light rail vehicles with high passenger-carrying capacity
Modern modular-construction 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
Impractical on a route shared with buses
✗ ✗
✗
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
Missed destinations include the Airport, education and recreation centres and higher-density residential and mixed-use areas (Newtown, Mt Cook and Te Aro)
Little attempt to increase system-wide trip speeds or create an integrated system with timed transfers offering fast trips anywhere-to-anywhere
Little attempt to increase system-wide trip speeds or integrate with rail or bus services
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
Chosen route link interchanges at the Railway Station, Manners St, Wellington Hospital and Kilbirnie
Fast trips because high-capacity vehicles allow a high priority without delaying other traffic
Existing golden mile route retained for congestion-free local buses
Modern multi-segment light rail vehicles with high passenger-carrying capacity
Modern modular-construction 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
Average stop spacing about 700 metres for fast running, 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
Airport, Rita Angus home, Kilbirnie and Newtown shops, Mt Cook/Massey Campus, plus four interchanges
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
All bus routes running to or south of the Railway Station connect with light rail at one or more interchanges, with timetables aligned to minimise transfer times
| Requirement | PTSS | Comment on PTSS |
|---|---|---|
| Tie the city together | ✗ | Chosen route layout does not achieve this |
| Require high-performance vehicles | ✓ ✓ | Assume modern multi-segment light rail vehicles with high passenger-carrying capacity |
| Have widely spaced stops | ✗ ✗ | Golden Mile route implies frequent stops; route shares the right-of-way with buses, so will be subject to unpredictable delays |
| Reach major destinations | ✗ ✗ | 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 |
| Form the core of an integrated network | ✗ | Little attempt to increase system-wide trip speeds or create an integrated system with timed transfers offering fast trips anywhere-to-anywhere |
(:table border=1 id=spineAssessment"PTSS assessed against requirements":) (:cellnr width=25%:) Requirement (:cell width=10%:) PTSS (:cell width=65%:) Comment on PTSS (:cellnr:) Tie the city together (:cell:) ✗ (:cell:) Chosen route layout does not achieve this (:cellnr:) Require high-performance vehicles (:cell:)✓ ✓ (:cell:) Assume modern multi-segment light rail vehicles with high passenger-carrying capacity (:cellnr:) Have widely spaced stops (:cell:) ✗ ✗ (:cell:) Golden Mile route implies frequent stops
Route shares the right-of-way with buses, so will be subject to unpredictable delays (:cellnr:) Reach major destinations (:cell:) ✗ ✗ (:cell:) 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 (:cellnr:) Form the core of an integrated network (:cell:) ✗ (:cell:) Little attempt to increase system-wide trip speeds or create an integrated system with timed transfers offering fast trips anywhere-to-anywhere (:tableend:)
| Requirement | FIT | Comment on FIT |
|---|---|---|
| Tie the city together | ✓ ✓ | 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 |
| Require high-performance vehicles | ✓ ✓ | Modern multi-segment light rail vehicles with high passenger-carrying capacity |
| Have widely spaced stops | ✓ ✓ | Average stop spacing about 700 metres, on a dedicated right-of-way for most of the route |
| Reach major destinations | ✓ ✓ | Interchanges listed above, other important stops include Airport, Rita Angus home, Newtown & Mt Cook/Massey Campus |
| Form the core of an integrated network | ✓ ✓ | 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 |
(:table border=1 id=fitAssessment"FIT assessed against requirements":) (:cellnr width=25%:) Requirement (:cell width=10%:) FIT (:cell width=65%:) Comment on FIT (:cellnr:) Tie the city together (:cell:) ✓ ✓ (:cell:) 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 (:cellnr:) Require high-performance vehicles (:cell:) ✓ ✓ (:cell:) Modern multi-segment light rail vehicles with high passenger-carrying capacity (:cellnr:)
(:cell:) ✓ ✓ (:cell:) Average stop spacing about 700 metres, on a dedicated right-of-way for most of the route (:cellnr:) Reach major destinations (:cell:) ✓ ✓ (:cell:) Interchanges listed above, other important stops include Airport, Rita Angus home, Newtown and Mt Cook/Massey Campus (:cellnr:) Form the core of an integrated network (:cell:) ✓ ✓ (:cell:) 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 (:tableend:)
| Require high-performance vehicles | ✓ ✓ | Modern multi-segment light rail vehicles with high passenger-carrying capacity, on a dedicated right-of-way for most of the route |
| Have widely spaced stops | ✓ ✓ | Average stop spacing about 700 metres |
| Require high-performance vehicles | ✓ ✓ | Modern multi-segment light rail vehicles with high passenger-carrying capacity |
| Have widely spaced stops | ✓ ✓ | Average stop spacing about 700 metres, on a dedicated right-of-way for most of the route |
| 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 |
| Require high-performance vehicles | ✓ ✓ | Assume modern multi-segment light rail vehicles with high passenger-carrying capacity |
| Have widely spaced stops | ✗ ✗ | Golden Mile route implies frequent stops; route shares the right-of-way with buses, so will be subject to unpredictable delays |
The proposed route would operate on a dedicated right-of-way for most of the line, which may make driverless operation practical by the time light rail comes to fruition in Wellington.
The proposed route would operate on a dedicated right-of-way for most of the line, which may make driverless operation practical by the time light rail comes to fruition in Wellington, thereby significantly reducing the operating cost.
PTSS assessed against requirements shows we should not be surprised the Spine Study 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.
PTSS assessed against requirements shows we should not be surprised the Spine Study found the light rail proposal was low benefit.
The operating costs for light rail in the study were also inflated. They included maintenance of rail tracks which may be less than road maintenance costs created by the proposed double-decker buses now planned. These large heavy vehicles were not predicted in the study. Staffing costs were also cited to be more expensive for light rail where, in fact, costs will be lower: a single driver can operate a multi-segment light rail vehicle carrying high passenger loads which would otherwise require multiple buses, each with its driver. The proposed route was also intrinsically and unnecessarily high cost. All these factors combine to make the Spine Study’s costs for light rail unnecessarily expensive.
Given the light rail route chosen, the Spine Study’s cost–benefit analysis correctly found that the proposal did not stack up economically.
The proposed route would operate on a dedicated right-of-way for most of the line, which may make driverless operation practical by the time light rail comes to fruition in Wellington.
| 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 |
| 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 |
The PTSS 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 Art of Light Rail Insertion. PTSS assessed against requirements compares how well the PTSS light rail proposal meets these requirements.
The PTSS considered the option of light rail for Wellington and found it was high cost ($938m), low benefit (less than half that of the BRT proposal). To understand this conclusion, we can assess the proposed light rail route against the requirements in the Art of Light Rail Insertion. PTSS assessed against requirements compares how well the PTSS light rail proposal meets these requirements.
This analysis shows light rail needs another look.
This analysis shows light rail needs another look, based on a route that reflects current best practice.
| Require high-performance vehicles | ✓ ✓ | Modern multi-segment light rail vehicles with high passenger-carrying capacity |
| Require high-performance vehicles | ✓ ✓ | Modern multi-segment light rail vehicles with high passenger-carrying capacity, on a dedicated right-of-way for most of the route |
| Require high-performance vehicles | ✓ ✓ | Assume 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; but the route shares the right-of-way with buses, so will be subject to unpredictable delays |
| Reach major destinations | ✗ | 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 |
| Reach major destinations | ✗ ✗ | 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 |
| 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 |
| Tie the city together | ✗ | Chosen route layout does not achieve this |
| Require high-performance vehicles | ✓ ✓ | Assume modern multi-segment light rail vehicles with high passenger-carrying capacity |
| 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 |
| Reach major destinations | ✗ | 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 |
| Form the core of an integrated network | ✗ | Little attempt to increase system-wide trip speeds or create an integrated system with timed transfers offering fast trips anywhere-to-anywhere |
PTSS assessed against requirements shows we should not be surprised the Spine Study 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.
PTSS assessed against requirements shows we should not be surprised the Spine Study 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 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 Art of Light Rail Insertion. Fit to requirements compares how well the PTSS light rail proposal meets these requirements with the FIT proposals described in A New Public Transport Approach.
| 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 | ✓ |
The PTSS 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 Art of Light Rail Insertion. PTSS assessed against requirements compares how well the PTSS light rail proposal meets these requirements.
| Requirement | PTSS | Comment on PTSS |
|---|---|---|
| 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 A New Public Transport Approach meet or fully meet the requirements—delivering significantly higher benefits at lower cost.
However, the route options proposed in A New Public Transport Approach fully meet the requirements—delivering significantly higher benefits at lower cost. See FIT assessed against requirements.
| Requirement | FIT | Comment on FIT |
|---|---|---|
| Tie the city together | ✓ ✓ | 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 |
| Require high-performance vehicles | ✓ ✓ | Modern multi-segment light rail vehicles with high passenger-carrying capacity |
| Have widely spaced stops | ✓ ✓ | Average stop spacing about 700 metres |
| Reach major destinations | ✓ ✓ | Interchanges listed above, other important stops include Airport, Rita Angus home, Newtown & Mt Cook/Massey Campus |
| Form the core of an integrated network | ✓ ✓ | 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 |
The Public Transport Spine Study 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 Art of Light Rail Insertion.
The PTSS 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 Art of Light Rail Insertion. PTSS assessed against requirements compares how well the PTSS light rail proposal meets these requirements with the FIT proposals described in A New Public Transport Approach.
| 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 |
| 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 | ✓ |
The Public Transport Spine Study 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 Art of Light Rail Insertion.
| 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 |
Fit to requirements shows we should not be surprised the Spine Study 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.
However, the route options proposed in A New Public Transport Approach meet or fully meet the requirements—delivering significantly higher benefits at lower cost.
This analysis shows light rail needs another look.