April 9, 2008...6:06 am
Wellington region to choke on its traffic while public transport’s share of daily trips remains stagnant – new GWRC report
EXCLUSIVE
Wellington planners expect private car use to rise almost twice as fast as earlier forecast while public transport’s share of travel will stay the same as now, despite scores of millions of dollars being earmarked for public transport improvements.
Daily private car trips will jump by 270,000 or 15 per cent more than today by 2026, according to the latest modelling, well above the 9 per cent rise predicted earlier.
But public transport’s share of total travel in the region will remain at today’s level of 17 per cent of morning peak travel, and 6 per cent of inter-peak travel, says a report to be presented today to Greater Wellington Regional Council’s regional land transport committee.
While morning peak rail patronage is expected to grow by 4,400 passengers a day or 35 per cent by 2026, morning peak bus patronage is expected to rise by just 750 a day, or 4 per cent.
Traffic congestion is expected to increase remorselessly, caused not just by the strong predicted growth in private motoring, but also by an 85 per cent growth in truck movements in the region.
Morning peak travel times will particularly increase, with the Waikanae to Wellington CBD trip taking 35 per cent longer and Upper Hutt to Wellington taking 10 per cent longer, despite scores of millions of dollars also being spent on new roads.
This grim news for the region is from the recently completed update of the Wellington Transport Strategy Model, a computer model that takes into account such things as population growth, economic growth, the growth and location of households and jobs, and improvements to roads and the public transport network.
A transport model for the region was initially developed in the 1980s, and has been continually updated as better information has become available, typically after each census. The latest modelling follows the 2006 census plus new projections from Statistics NZ.
The latest report appears to take a defeatist attitude to public transport, accepting that private car use will continue to increase strongly, while not considering whether public transport’s share of trips could grow if greater measures were taken to make it more efficient.
For example, while the model assumes a strong rise in train travel to and from the Kapiti Coast following the present work to electrify and duplicate the line all the way to Waikanae, the 750-passenger rise in bus patronage represents almost complete stagnation.
Without the aggressive introduction of bus priority measures such as many more bus lanes and traffic light pre-emption for buses (used overseas for decades now but never in Wellington), buses will continue to be snarled in the predicted growing traffic congestion.
Further, the 750 extra bus passengers are only the number that could be carried on 12 three-axle buses in peak hour. Like the existing trains, many peak-hour buses are already packed to capacity. More bus lanes and more peak-hour buses would likely lead to higher bus patronage.
The new model only includes confirmed infrastructure improvements, chiefly the Dowse to Petone interchange; Kapiti Western Link Road (stages 1-3); Otaki roundabout; Paekakariki SH1 intersection; traffic demand management schemes; electrification of rail to Waikanae; and the new electric multiple units.
It does not include road schemes in the planning stage, such as Transmission Gully.
Greater Wellington has committed scores of millions of dollars to region-wide public transport improvements, including three new trains for the Wairarapa Line; improvements to eight stations on the Wairarapa Line; better bus services in the Wairarapa; 59 new trolley buses for the Go Wellington services; the new txtBUS service; 70 new electric commuter trains from 2010; double tracking of the railway line from MacKays Crossing to Waikanae and electrification of it from Paraparaumu to Waikanae; real-time information for bus and train passengers and network-wide rail station upgrades for the new electric trains.
It seems a tragic waste of public money to expect that all these improvements will result in public transport’s share of trips in the region only remaining the same as now.
However, it may not be as grim as it looks. As well as excluding Transmission Gully, the model does not take into account the Ngauranga to Airport planning currently under way. This envisiages a growth spine that would see high-density residential development along Adelaide Rd to Newtown, which would result in a significant increase in public transport use. It would be interesting to see the model run again taking into account Transmission Gully and N2A.
7 Comments
April 9, 2008 at 8:37 am
Time to introduce congestion charging such as Singapore has had for years. This should be fairly easy to do in Wellington, especially as new technology means that obtrusive gantries will not be needed, charging can be electronic and automatically .
This plus bus lanes and restricting some types of truck movements to outside peak hours for example, could yield significant benefits all round.
April 9, 2008 at 9:39 am
If it is a tragic waste of money, why do you want to pour even more money and resources into making their pipe dreams come true? It seems the planners keep getting it wrong so why give them more chances to fail?
April 9, 2008 at 11:24 am
If you want an insight into why planners get it wrong, and recently it’s been more along the lines of underestimating public transport demand, then this quote from the paper on the WTSM model shows why:
“Fuel/car prices, public transport fares and parking charges are assumed to remain at 2006 levels in real terms.”
And we all know how stable petrol prices are, don’t we?
Also, while I couldn’t see any explicit statement about it, other uses of that model have assumed that population growth will be evenly spread out across each TA, whereas Wellington City (where most of the growth is expected) is planning for most growth to occur along public transport corridors, where people would be much less reliant on cars than in new greenfield developments. Other studies (such as the N2A one) have tried to fudge for that after the fact, but this one doesn’t seem to, so predictions of growth in car ownership and use are very shaky.
[Poneke says: I wasn't concerned about them using 2006 prices for the evaluation, as one needs to have some kind of stable price like that. Yes, oil prices go up (and down) but at present levels they are not yet at their 1973 or 1979 prices in real terms -- and pump prices are much less than, eg, in Europe. I think you have hit very hard on a major reason for the 750 projected rise in bus patronage... the model does not include the Ngauranga to Airport plans which will clearly lead to a big increase in bus patronage in the Adelaide Rd - Newtown spine. But the report does say it only includes confirmed infrastructure plans... it doesn't include Transmission Gully either. I would like to see the model run with both N2A and TG included.]
April 9, 2008 at 1:58 pm
Poneke
I might be wrong, but it seems up here on the Kapiti Coast that the election of the new council has put the future of the Western Link Road in jeopardy. There is also a strong anti-development lobby.
Really enjoying your blog Poneke, and the absence of abuse in the comments is refreshing.
Cheers, Sean.
April 9, 2008 at 10:40 pm
The GWRC findings on both the stagnation of bus patronage and the ineffectiveness of rail to make any dint in the car usage are unsurprising. The former is, of course, directly related to the total lack on investment bu government & councils on bus infrastructure, especially in the busways and bus lanes that would get the buses out of the congestion also predicted by the same report.
The ineffectiveness in rail is also unsurprising as, just like Auckland, this very expensive mode of public transport is not close to where most Wellingtonians live or close to where most work. The only surprise is the continuation of the huge public investment being made in a passenger rail service that we can already see will not make a significant difference to car usage. BTW, in this Wellington is not alone, from Perth to LA, passenger rail investment has not lifted PT mode share.
The Wellington Regional Land Transport Strategy only allocates about $30M for bus corridor investment against $1,200M for rail. More recent changes have shifted tens of millions of Wellington Transport funds from roads to lift the government rail capital subsidy level from 60% to 90%.
The governments public transport strategy is a shambles. It seems more about being seen to be investing in “green” things and less about actually having an effective alternative public transport that moves people from where they live to where they want to go.
[Poneke says: I know you hate trains and love buses, but you should get out of your bus and onto a train one day. Wellington's trains are packed beyond any comfort level at peak hours, even on the Johnsonville line which you campaigned against. This is far from "ineffective," it shows a network screaming for extra capacity, which fortunately will be provided from 2010. So too are most buses packed to capacity. I agree with you about the need for bus lanes, just not converting the Johnsonville rail line to one. The electric trains in Perth, and the subway and light rail lines in LA, have been a great success and attracted huge numbers of passengers.]
April 11, 2008 at 5:26 am
Anybody who seriously believes that Wellington has a motor vehicle congestion problem definitely has not lived in any decent sized city anywhere else in the world.
Cheers
Wil
April 12, 2008 at 8:01 pm
[Poneke said: I know you hate trains and love buses, but you should get out of your bus and onto a train one day.]
I do not hate or love either trains or buses. As a public transport advocate, I want the best PT service for Wellington. I have looked over most PT proposals in considerable detail and remain unconvinced that spending 20 times more on trains than buses will do anything more than retain PT mode share (as outlined in the original posting). As a J’ville commuter, I use both trains and buses (the former is faster in the morning and the latter faster home in the evening . . . if you can get on to the bus
[Poneke said: Wellington's trains are packed beyond any comfort level at peak hours, even on the Johnsonville line which you campaigned against.]
Well, last week I travelled on the 8:01 from J’ville and it was standing room only from Ngaio . . . but at least no passengers were left behind.
[Poneke said: This is far from "ineffective," it shows a network screaming for extra capacity, which fortunately will be provided from 2010.]
This may be true for the main lines, but the GWRC has decided to not increase capacity on the Johnsonville Line.
[Poneke said: So too are most buses packed to capacity. I agree with you about the need for bus lanes, just not converting the Johnsonville rail line to one.]
You are, of course, entitled to your opinion.
[Poneke said: The electric trains in Perth, and the subway and light rail lines in LA, have been a great success and attracted huge numbers of passengers.
]
I am interested in your definition of success. For example, Perth has spent billions on increase passenger rail and more Western Australians to take the train. But their official “State of the Environment Report” (2007) includes the following:
“The total amount of public transport patronage in Perth has been increasing over the past 20 years, largely due to growth in population (Figure HS2.8). However, the mode shares of public transport, walking and cycling, have decreased over this period, while car mode share has increased (Data Analysis Australia, unpublished). Urban development in the northern suburbs is expanding faster than investment in rail infrastructure, leaving new suburbs without planned rail services. Without adequate rail services, residents tend to purchase additional motor vehicles, cementing in place long-term car dependence.”
Does this not sound familiar . . . oh yes, that’s right, isn’t this the same outcome as predicted by the Wellington Transport Model for our fair city ??!!
Leave a Reply