A reader emails:
After reading your blog for several months now, I have seen it steadily transforming into a voice of alternative opinion in many ways, and celebrate that.
I had been working for some time on this piece about Auckland transport, when I read your article yesterday, which sang my song.
Just wondered whether this may have any appeal for your site.
Best regards and keep up the good work
As a recent returnee to Auckland after over 40 years working and establishing businesses in regional New Zealand, I have recently paid considerably more attention to local body plans and actions in this region.
Joining the local area ratepayers committee on arrival, I soon hear, and discover first hand that generalised wastage/inefficiency seemed to characterise virtually all dealings of the new super city. Examples: 1. a near 200 page document of detailed technical drawings and specifications to place some traffic quietening speed bumps on a street in our area, 2. Two Council staff visit in a Council car, for a half day, to consult re spending well less than $1000 on plants in the area. When it is suggested that the most in-need areas require some soil first, we are told that this is beyond their brief and would require a completely separate department to be involved.
Accordingly, I began to pay closer attention to Len Brown‚Äôs call for underground rail for the city, which seems to be preparing to strip all available capital and then some from the City‚Äôs coffers for the foreseeable future ‚Äď and beyond ‚Äď at the behest of one man with a dream.
The idea of a trainset for Auckland gained great credibility under Mayor Robbie in the late 60‚Äôs, and had it been implemented then, it would probably remain a good idea today. Most people in Auckland ‚Äėknow‚Äô this so there remains a soft spot in Auckland for the notion of ‚Äėrapid rail‚Äô and relatively little opposition to Len Brown‚Äôs plan.
But is it a still good idea if we start now?
There are many new ways and new technologies in the wings, some of which I have observed first hand on our travels, which may soon render an underground trainset for Auckland, a costly white elephant.
Additionally, in a volcanic city and a ‚Äėshaky‚Äô nation, underground makes less sense. Imagine the chaos if a Christchurch-type earthquake broke the underground rail links, after all other public transport had been seriously weakened by rail‚Äôs availability.
With these concerns in mind, I decided to look more closely at overseas systems on our recent 4 month trip to the Middle East, UK, Turkey, Spain, Portugal, France, Monaco and Italy and the following observations also factor in some of the previous experiences I have had of undergrounds and public transport in Frankfurt, Amsterdam, Paris, Seoul, Hong Kong, Singapore, Kuala Lumpur, Bangkok, Australia and so on.
On this trip, I visited many cities of not too dissimilar size, one way or another, to Auckland i.e in area or in population. There are few that have both the area and the population of Auckland. In each city, I paid particular attention to their public transport options and in particular their trainsets. These included Abu Dhabi, Dubai, London, Istanbul, Madrid, Porto, Valencia, Granada, Barcelona, Nice, Monaco and Milan as well as many other less well known cities.
What I observed made me wonder whether this whole underground rail for Auckland proposal has been properly thought through.
Underground rail worked well, it seemed, in the sorts of high rise, high density cities that have relatively small footprints for their populations, like Madrid. Accordingly Granada, for example, is in the throes of beginning one, and I can see the point there. It is a compact city with many tourists.
Trainsets also seemed to work well in more widespread cities covering land areas like Auckland‚Äôs, even with intervening waterways, so long as they had one of the following conditions:
- High population (eg Istanbul, Sydney) or
- A long ribbon of development, as in a strip style city running along a shoreline (eg Dubai or Perth).