Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Doc # 204933249332
Final Recommendation Report of the Rail Working Party
on
Hamilton to Auckland Passenger Rail
Service
August 2011
Doc # 2049332 Page 2
Table of Contents 1 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 3
2 Background .................................................................................................................. 3
2.1 Previous studies ................................................................................................... 3
2.2 The Rail Working Party ........................................................................................ 6
2.3 Community survey 2010 ...................................................................................... 6
3 Strategic fit of the proposed service ............................................................................ 7
4 Feasibility Assessment .............................................................................................. 14
4.1 Service Options Assessed ................................................................................. 14
4.2 Preferred Service Option.................................................................................... 16
5 Financial Analysis for the Proposed Service ............................................................ 21
5.1 Patronage Assessments .................................................................................... 21
5.2 Costs .................................................................................................................. 22
5.3 Revenue ............................................................................................................. 23
5.4 Preliminary Economic Analysis .......................................................................... 23
6 Funding ...................................................................................................................... 24
6.1 Funding principles .............................................................................................. 25
6.2 Distribution of benefits ........................................................................................ 25
6.3 Period of benefits ............................................................................................... 26
6.4 Rating mechanisms ............................................................................................ 26
6.5 Funding requirements ........................................................................................ 27
6.6 Rating Option ..................................................................................................... 28
6.7 Capital funding ................................................................................................... 29
7 Implementation .......................................................................................................... 29
8 Risks .......................................................................................................................... 29
9 Recommendations ..................................................................................................... 30
Appendix 1: Investigation reports from Auckland Transport ............................................ 32
Appendix 2: Comparison of Shortlisted Options .............................................................. 53
Appendix 3: Station survey report from KiwiRail .............................................................. 55
Appendix 4: Updated financial and economic analysis of the proposed rail service ....... 60
Appendix 5: NZTA Letter Regarding Funding .................................................................. 73
Doc # 2049332 Page 3
1 Introduction This report has been prepared by the Hamilton to Auckland Passenger Rail Working Party (RWP). The RWP comprises representatives from Waikato Regional Council, Hamilton City Council, Waikato and Waipa District Councils, Kiwirail, Auckland Transport, Auckland Council, NZTA and the Campaign for Better Transport. As such, this report is not from any one organization including Waikato Regional Council. It is a collective report that may or may not reflect the views of the full partner organizations. Technical details to the report have been provided by Auckland Transport and KiwiRail and Richard Paling Consulting carried out the preliminary economic analysis for the proposal. The purpose of the report is to bring together the investigations and findings of the RWP for the proposed passenger rail service between Hamilton and Auckland. This report contains recommendations from the RWP on the proposed service, for the partner councils to consider. This report is not intended to be used as a formal funding application to NZTA, though it should serve as a good foundation for the business case supporting the funding application.
2 Background
2.1 Previous studies Waikato Regional Council and Hamilton City Council have separately and jointly been investigating the possibility of a passenger rail service between Hamilton and Auckland for some time, particularly in response to the strong interest shown by the public. Public have made requests to Waikato Regional Council and Hamilton City Council through different processes like the 2009-19 Long Term Plan and the 2010/11 Annual Plan for the establishment of a Hamilton to Auckland passenger rail service. In addition to these a petition of 11,500 signatures and 500 postcards was presented at the Waikato Regional Council meeting on 29th April 2010 urging for the service to be introduced in 2010. A petition from Tuakau & Districts Development Assn of 3,500 signatures was presented as part of the 2011/12 Annual Plan process of the Waikato Regional Council, the Waikato District Council and the Hamilton City Council. This petition was further taken to Parliament by MP Paul Hutchison, calling for Government support of Kiwirail in re-establishing the Tuakau Railway Station and a regular passenger rail commuter service between Auckland and Hamilton servicing Tuakau within the 2010-2012 financial period.
Doc # 2049332 Page 4
2.1.1 The Paling report - 2006 In July 2006 Richard Paling and Ross Rutherford developed the “Hamilton – Auckland Commuter Rail Feasibility Study” (the “Paling Report”), for Waikato Regional Council and the Hamilton City Council. The report identified that a daily commuter service was potentially operationally feasible. It envisaged a locomotive-hauled train departing Hamilton in the early morning and returning in the evening peak, in a similar manner to the Capital Connection between Palmerston North and Wellington. It would serve 8 intermediate stations en route to Britomart, via Newmarket. Half of these were to be within the Auckland region. Tuakau and Pokeno were not included, although their potential was noted. The proposed train used locomotive hauled stock. The report proposed a two-locomotive train, one at either end, to allow for service to locations which did not permit one locomotive to change ends. It proposed the train be provided for both Auckland and Waikato passengers, and that the costs be shared between these bodies. The overall proposal was estimated to cost $10.4m in capital, $4.4m for rolling stock and $6.0m for stations. Operating costs were estimated at $1.4m per year. Demand from within the Waikato region was estimated at 58-105 people (one way), with the central estimate at 89. Further patronage was likely from within Franklin District. The funding gap for the proposal was $11.7m in NPV terms, and the proposal had a BCR of 1.0. Using only existing stations substantially reduced the costs, taking the funding gap down to $7-8m, and improving the BCR to 1.3. This study identified the need for further detailed investigation on the operational aspects and agreement and collaboration between all parties that would be involved in the establishment of this service. It also concluded that a case should be made to Land Transport New Zealand (now New Zealand Transport Autority) and funding sought for further stages of work.
2.1.2 Preliminary Business Case 2009 In 2009 a study by Paling et al set out to produce a preliminary business case (2009 business case). The proposal was to use refurbished Silver Fern railcars and the central passenger forecast was 64 one-way, which is similar to the ridership between Wellington and Palmerston North on the Capital Connection. Paling et al assumed an average fare of $24 one-way. It was estimated that patronage would drop by 15% if it was not possible to go through Newmarket (i.e. the train was routed through Glen Innes). The prospect of not being able to get a path into Britomart was raised. Possible off-peak weekday services were also discussed. The report pointed out that scheme is not in current NLTP which is a necessary condition for NZTA funding. The 2009 business case was peer reviewed by John Bolland Consulting. The review found that in terms of the economics, the approach used is fully consistent with EEM and that none of the possible downside risks to the economic case caused the BCR to fall below about 1.2. The patronage forecasts were considered to be as robust as can be expected given the lack of precedent. The review pointed out that: “finding a path into
Doc # 2049332 Page 5
Britomart in the morning peak is a potential stumbling block but if this cannot be achieved then no real costs will have been incurred”. The report pointed out that there are a few parallels of similar long-distance passenger rail services in NZ. For both the Wairarapa (3 /peak) and Capital Connection (1 /peak) weekday services to Wellington, patronage is reported to be stable or growing. However a substantial proportion of patronage on the Capital Connection only travels from or to Waikanae. The report outlined that further work would need to be carried out if the proposal was to be implemented. Negotiations would need to be carried out between relevant agencies to be involved. Further operating details would also need to be worked through. And mainly, that funding for the service through NZTA (in terms of government subsidy) and the relevant local authorities needs to be worked through and agreed upon.
2.1.3 Past and present trains A number of train services have been operating on the route between Hamilton and Auckland at various times in the past. These are presented in table below. Table 1: Past and present trains
Years Provider Between Service details 1991-2001 NZ Rail Ltd / Tranz Rail Auckland –
Rotorua and Tauranga
In the morning to Auckland back in the afternoon (not commuter times). Changed to service commencing from Auckland returning in the evening.
Till 2004 Tranz Rail Auckland – Wellington
Overnight train (not at commuter times)
Currently KiwiRail Auckland – Wellington
Overlander; morning and evening. Daily service in summer and Friday to Sunday in winter.
June 2000 to October 2001
Tranz Rail Hamilton to Auckland (Waikato Connection)
Morning and return in evening (08:11, 17:19). Operated as a commercial service. Carried up to 50 passengers (daily average of 31) but the demand mostly came from Pukekohe and Papakura.
Doc # 2049332 Page 6
2.2 The Rail Working Party In view of the considerable public interest shown in the establishment of a Hamilton to Auckland rail service, Waikato Regional Council resolved (in June 2010) that a Rail Working Party of key stakeholders be formed to work through the technical and operational feasibility of establishing such a service. The Hamilton to Auckland Passenger Rail Working Party (RWP) was formed and held its first meeting on October 4th 2010. It comprises members from Waikato Regional Council, Hamilton City Council, Waikato and Waipa District Councils, Kiwirail, Auckland Transport (AT), Auckland Council, NZTA and the Campaign for Better Transport. The agreed purpose of the RWP is to:
o Identify options for a future passenger rail service between Hamilton and Auckland including timings and costings
o Determine the willingness of parties to contribute to funding such a service o Provide a recommendation to Waikato Regional Council and all member
organisations for establishing a passenger rail service between Hamilton and Auckland. The recommendation will be based on appropriate technical considerations and approvals from the ARTA /AT Board
o Discuss any matters of relevance to the project. The Terms of reference for the Working Party are available on http://www.ew.govt.nz/PageFiles/18093/1769744-TermsofReference.pdf For the past 10 months the RWP has been working through the technical feasibility of establishing a rail service. The broad level investigations have been completed and are presented in this report. Further details in terms of ticketing and the like will need to be worked through after the proposal has been accepted for implementation through the Long Term Plans consultation process.
2.3 Community survey 2010 Waikato Regional Council commissioned Versus Research to undertake a survey of residents to investigate attitudes to public transport, including the proposed rail service, and a telephone survey was undertaken of 1,155 residents during October – November 2010. The main purpose of the survey was to gauge the attitudes of the general public to the proposed service and their willingness to pay for it. Four main aspects covered in the survey were:
o attitudes to PT o travel patterns to Auckland o attitudes to the proposed rail service o willingness to pay for the service.
The survey provides useful insights into the market for travel from Hamilton to Auckland, including trip purpose, arrival times into Auckland, likely destinations and appropriate
Doc # 2049332 Page 7
fare levels. However in relation to possible patronage for the service it suffers from the usual limitations of so-called “Stated Intention”, in that when offered a new service or product, respondents usually say yes without necessarily thinking through the consequences. The result is that reported usage can be over stated than the amount which actually eventuates. As with all similar surveys there is also a margin of error for the results, which needs to be borne in mind while considering the results. In relation to travel to Auckland, 11% of respondents stated they have travelled weekly or more frequently and a further 32% travelled either fortnightly or monthly. The main purposes for travel were: 48% visiting friends or family, 21% for work or business and 19% to go to the Airport. As would be expected, those using the service for work purposes wanted to arrive before 08:30 and depart between 17:00 and 18:00. For social use of the proposed service the preferred arrival time in Auckland was between 08:30 and 11:00 and the preferred departure time was between 16:00 and 18:00. For entertainment purposes, however, the best time to leave was considered to be after 21:30. The most favoured destination (for all trip purposes) was Auckland CBD (82%). The average acceptable return fare was found to be $36; for comparison, previous studies have assumed fare values in the range $20 - $25 one way, consistent with the Wellington long-distance services. However they also assumed that there would be discounts for products such as ten-trip tickets. Of those interviewed 81% supported the proposed service (i.e. scored 6 or more on a scale of 1 to 10). The primary reasons for support were traffic congestion, the use of the service by others and using it oneself. In terms of general funding of PT through rates, 77% of Hamilton residents said that the current average rate of $127 is acceptable. 66% of residents generally support the continuing use of rates to fund PT. Regarding the implications for funding, the survey found that 85% of respondents said a rates increase of $15 - $20 annually was acceptable to fund the service. 68% said $20 - $24 per annum increase was acceptable but the proportion that was prepared to pay greater amounts fell to the point where only 10% were willing to pay more than $35.
3 Strategic fit of the proposed service Land Transport Management Act 2003 The current vision for land transport is in the purpose statement of the Land Transport Management Act 2003 (LTMA), section 3, namely “to contribute to an affordable, integrated, safe, responsive, and sustainable land transport system”. Section 69 expands these to include criteria of assisting economic development, assisting safety and personal security, improving access and mobility, protecting and promoting public health and ensuring environmental sustainability.
Doc # 2049332 Page 8
This is the law as it stands, and current proposals must be measured against it. However, the government has announced its intention to amend the LTMA to simplify the planning process, reduce compliance costs, and drive better decision making. The intended new purpose is “to contribute to an effective, efficient, and safe land transport system to support New Zealand’s economic, social, cultural, and environmental wellbeing.” With this change likely in 2012, it is wise to consider the strategic position of the proposed train against both perspectives. In reality, there is much common ground; with the primary thrust being an emphasis on the government’s priorities of economic growth and productivity. The 2008 New Zealand Transport Strategy is no longer a useful statement of government policy, as it has been largely superseded by subsequent policy decisions. “The primary document for land transport decision-makers is the Government Policy Statement which … provides a ten year policy view. In August the Minister released a document that summarises the government’s policy direction for the overall transport sector for the benefit of stakeholders.”1 This document, “Connecting New Zealand”, is available on the MED website. Government Policy Statement 2012/13 – 2021/22 The most recent statement of the Government’s goal for transport is thus in the Government Policy Statement on Land Transport Funding 2012/13 -2021/22 (“GPS 2012”). This adds further dimensions to the LTMA and proposed LTMA purposes. The government’s overarching goal for transport, according to GPS 2012,2 is:
an effective, safe, secure, accessible, and resilient transport system that supports the growth of our country’s economy in order to deliver greater prosperity, security, and opportunities for all New Zealanders.
In addition, GPS 2012 refers to the National Infrastructure Plan, the New Zealand Energy Strategy 2011-2016 and the New Zealand Energy efficiency and Conservation Strategy 2011-2016. These documents add further strategic goals for transport. To the extent that they are relevant to the proposed train service, they are set out below. There is an emphasis on Auckland public transport in GPS 2012. “Getting Auckland’s transport working well is crucial to improving the contribution the city can make to national economic growth”.3 A” comprehensive approach to land transport in Auckland” is required.4 More widely, There are opportunities in the main centres for public transport to make a stronger
contribution to economic growth and productivity, primarily by relieving congestion and improving access to economic opportunities.5
1 Q & A on GPS 2102, www.transport.govt.nz 2 GPS 2012, para 11, p 6. 3 GPS 2010 para 32, p9 4 GPS 2012 para 33, p 9 5 GPS 2012, para 36, p 9
Doc # 2049332 Page 9
Value for money is a key part of the government’s policy of focus on economic growth and productivity. Ways of achieving this include making better use of the land transport network, and encouraging innovation and new ways of delivery.6 National Infrastructure Plan The relevant National Infrastructure Plan goals are:7
- a long term strategic approach to transport, maximising synergies between regional plans and central government strategies
- A flexible and resilient transport system that offers greater accessibility and can respond to changing patterns of demand by maintaining and developing the capacity of the network.
- A network of priority roads to improve journey time and reliability, and ease severe congestion, and so improve transport efficiency, road safety and access to markets.
- A continued reduction in deaths and serious injuries - A public transport system that is robust and effective and offers a range of
user options that will attract a greater percentage of long term users. According to the National Infrastructure Plan, success will include
- Reduced incidents of severe urban congestion - A reduction in deaths and serious injuries - Better use of existing transport capacity - Resilient and secure transport network - More transport mode choices.8
The National Infrastructure Plan also emphasises the need for enhanced infrastructure in Auckland as it is the main economic hub in the country. New Zealand Energy Strategy The New Zealand Energy Strategy identifies efficient use of energy is one of four priorities and transport is one of three focus areas within that, within the overall goal of “making the most of our energy potential”.9 In the context of an energy efficient transport system, the plan promotes public transport:10
The government will continue to invest in: Reliable and more cost effective public transport systems that offer benefits to attract a greater percentage of long-term initiatives.
And in the context of energy efficiency:11 6 GPS 2102, para 47. p 11 7 Summarised from National Infrastructure Plan 2011 (”NIP”)p26, GPS 2012 para 12 8 NIP p 28 9 NZES, p4 10 NZES, p10
Doc # 2049332 Page 10
Quality roads and public transport services are essential to maximise the efficiency of the transport network. Local authorities, through their transport and urban planning roles, are encouraged to continue to improve the energy efficiency of transport networks and the layout of urban areas so that people and freight can move about easily and more energy efficiently.
The New Zealand Energy Efficiency and Conservation Strategy, co-published with the Energy Strategy, notes that an integrated mix of policies is required to achieve energy policy gains in transport. Greater use of public transport reduces road congestion, and ensuring the integration of modes in urban planning is an important role for local government. Improving the efficiency and reliability of metro passenger networks is a priority for government, which will continue to support improvements in public transport, and help people make energy efficient transport choices, including encouraging the use of public transport. Safer Journeys Transport safety, especially road safety, is a key strategic priority for the government. Taking traffic off the roads contributes directly to this, although it is not in the 4 elements of the system referred to in the Safer Journeys strategy12 (roads, speeds, vehicle and road use). In the short term, GPS 2012 translates these overall strategies to early priorities. These serve as a summary of the key policies that the proposed train might impact. They meet the requirements of the LTMA as it stands, and as it is proposed to be amended. The priorities are:13
- enhancing transport efficiency and lowering transport costs by improving journey time reliability, easing of severe congestion, more efficient freight supply chains, and better use of existing capacity.
- reductions in road deaths and serious injuries - more transport choices, particularly for those with limited access to a car - A secure and more resilient transport network - Reductions in adverse environmental effects from land transport - Contributions to positive health outcomes
As well, there are Waikato policy objectives that are relevant. The Future Proof and Hamilton Urban Growth strategies aim at growth around centres, rather than a generalised sprawl. Rail services help achieve this more readily than road.14 GPS 2012 also supports inter-regional integrated planning;15 the proposed train is being jointly planned by Auckland Transport and the Waikato Regional Council
11 NZEECS p 19 12 New Zealand’s Road Safety Strategy 2010 -2020, Ministry of Transport, 2010 13 GPS 2012 para 18, p7 14 Boulter Consulting and Transport Futures Ltd, Hamilton-Auckland Passenger Rail service: Strategic Assessment and
Detailed Evaluation Scoping, no date, p10 15 GPS 2012 para 44, p 10
Doc # 2049332 Page 11
Looking to the future, GPS 2012 notes the possibility of introducing more sophisticated road pricing.16 Such a scheme in the Auckland CBD would significantly enhance the demand for the train, and would be likely to reduce the subsidy required. The train would be a natural complement to such a scheme, as it impacts travel from the Waikato. How the proposed train meets policy goals The train takes passengers who would otherwise travel by road. About 20% of the road journey avoided is in Auckland north of Drury, and 80% largely rural areas south of Drury. All its patronage would otherwise add to traffic in Auckland, and many of the policy goals addressed are addressed through the Auckland part of the journey. Upper North Island Strategic Alliance (UNISA) The Upper North Island Strategic Alliance (UNISA) is a recent development which has come about due to the recognition of the importance of inter-regional linkages between the regions and metropolitan areas of the Upper North Island. Its members include Auckland Council, Waikato Regional Council, Bay of Plenty Regional Council, Northland Regional Council, Hamilton City Council, Tauranga City Council and Whangarei District Council. The overall objective of UNISA is to maximise sustainable development opportunities for all of the upper North Island and its contribution to New Zealand. UNISA has identified transport, including rail, roads and freight as one of the first order issues for collaboration under the purpose of the Alliance. An efficient, safe and effective transport network is critical for the upper North Island to support economic growth and development and to enable New Zealand to compete internationally. High population and business growth is predicted for the upper North Island linked to increase in freight volumes which are predicted to increase by 100% by 2040 (Upper North Island Freight Study). This projected growth in freight and businesses will increase transport activity and enhance the need for efficient linkages within the upper North Island. There is significant residential growth, growing inter-regional movements for employment and residential living and therefore an increased need to provide public transport options and manage travel demand, particularly in the Auckland region. Transport networks within the upper North Island are under pressure and funding for new transport infrastructure is a key issue which reinforces the need to optimise investment via a whole-of-network approach (including land use and transport). Given this premise, determining and supporting a long-term role for rail in the upper North Island is important. Providing for access and mobility needs of communities through provision of public transport and passenger rail initiatives linking the main centres in the upper North Island will be critical to supporting overall economic development. There is opportunity for the upper North Island regions to engage in more strategic and integrated planning. This approach would optimise efficiencies in transport planning and ensure value for money. Joint planning and collaboration on inter-regional public transport initiatives can contribute to maximising the potential of each region and drive economic activity and growth. A key example of this collaborative approach could be the proposed Hamilton to Auckland passenger rail service.
16 GPS 2012, para 83, p17.
Doc # 2049332 Page 12
Efficiency The train improves efficiency and lowers costs by helping avoid congestion in Auckland, on the state highways and local roads, especially in the CBD. 70% of the quantified benefits of the scheme arise from reducing congestion. This speeds travel for the remaining motorists and lowers their time and running costs. Road freight and supply chains also benefit by reduced car traffic. In principle, that means business in Auckland is facilitated and made more efficient. It will also add to the pool of people available to work in Auckland, as journeys to work there will become more attractive. This will in turn add agglomeration benefits for the CBD and potentially increase employment there. In the past, increases in numbers working in the CBD have been closely linked to improvements in public transport services. As well as road space, each car replaced by the train service also saves parking space, mostly in the Auckland CBD, releasing capacity for other road users, or ultimately for other, more productive, land uses.17 Furthermore, there will be benefits to Auckland from additional trips for shopping, leisure, and business, and to some extent for Hamilton, from the off-peak services proposed, and the station at The Base. The train’s journey time is likely to be more predictable and reliable than a car subject to congestion. It makes use of existing rail track capacity and also rail vehicle capacity, at the same time as freeing up road capacity. It also adds to productivity more directly, in that people who might otherwise drive will now able to work en route, use laptops, take calls and so on, without adding to safety risk through distraction. The users of the long distance (outer suburban) trains into Wellington make productive use of their time in this way. From Waikato’s perspective, the train service will make living in the Waikato and working in Auckland more feasible, thus potentially adding to the population and economic development of the region. Rail commuters in these cases are likely to have higher-than average incomes.18 As well, businesses can be based in Waikato and conveniently serve Auckland. Feedback at a public meeting and informal feedback has revealed there are such businesses like the WISE Group and Fonterra, whose interaction with Auckland would be enhanced by a train service. The existence of the service could well result in more such businesses being based in the Waikato region. This could in turn promote development around the Waikato rail stations, supporting the regional strategies. Road Safety The train will remove about 60 cars per day (in the early years) from the road network in the Waikato and Auckland. This will in itself be likely to reduce deaths and injuries, especially as much of the displaced road journey is in a high speed, heavy traffic environment. As well, the nature of the journey is that it typically takes place before and after a full working day, when the drivers are more likely to be tired and distracted.
17 Boulter Consulting pp 3, 10 18 Boulter Consulting p 24.
Doc # 2049332 Page 13
Reducing car crashes also adds to economic efficiency, in that fewer resources are devoted to repairing the physical damage, and to investigation and prosecution. Safer Journeys expressly addresses the risks of young drivers and old drivers.19 Having the train offers these drivers a safe alternative to the car for journeys to Auckland. More choices Adding trains to the route give choice that is not there at present. At present the only option is by road, and mainly by car. This benefits those with limited access to a car, as the policy states, but also creates an option for those with a car, which is in itself valuable, for use when the car is unavailable, or simply by being there, effectively as insurance. Most people experience temporary periods of inability to drive, through accident, physical disability, vehicle failure, financial constraints, or disasters.20 A train adds a level of choice not offered by a car or bus, the opportunity to work or confer on the train without significant disturbance.21 Security and resilience The train gives an alternative route for when road travel is disrupted, e.g. by crashes or road works. This makes the overall network more resilient. Public transport options are likely to be more fuel efficient than cars, and so public transport use adds a level of resilience in terms of long term fuel supply. Using a rail service is likely to enhance that. Public transport is directly supported by the energy policies and GPS 2012. A more diverse and flexible transport system will be more resilient, a system that can …accommodate variable and unexpected changes such as energy supply disruptions and fuel price increases, poverty, and transport system stresses such as disasters, major sport and cultural events, and infrastructure construction projects.22 Environment and health These benefits flow from the reduction in road traffic, reducing local air pollution, greenhouse gases, noise, water pollution and other environmental problems. The health benefits are related to the pollution reduction, and as well the removal of stress from driving, and the active transport modes associated with train use (walking or cycling at one end of the journey or both), add a direct health benefit. Reducing road crash trauma is also a health benefit. Accessibility and mobility This criterion from LTMA 2003 is also enhanced by the proposed train service. It offers an alternative way of accessing Auckland, by all, but especially by those unable to drive. However, the Silver Fern railcars do not have easy access for those with movement difficulties.
19 Safer Journeys, p 12 20 T Litman with E Docherty, Transportation Cost and Benefit Analysis: Techniques, Estimates, and Implications, Victoria
Transport Policy Institute, Victoria, BC, 2ed (2009) p 5.9-3. See www.vtpi.org. 21 Boulter Consulting p 3 22 Litman and Docherty, above, p 5.9-2
Doc # 2049332 Page 14
4 Feasibility Assessment The key elements that have been worked through by the RWP in reaching the recommendations included in this report are:
The operational options for the proposed service in terms of route, terminating station, stops en route and start and end times for the service
Station upgrades required Start up costs both for infrastructure (stations) and operations Estimates of patronage and fare revenue
In working through these details the RWP took into consideration the following information:
Results and findings of the community survey for the proposed service undertaken in October-November 2010
Success factors for the Wairarapa passenger rail service and the Capital Connection which runs between Palmerston North and Wellington and
Developments (both current and proposed) and constraints on the Auckland rail network
4.1 Service Options Assessed The different options worked through by the RWP which were investigated by Auckland Transport in association with Veolia Transport and KiwiRail are:
1. Terminating Hamilton services at Britomart Station and availability of berthing during the morning and afternoon peak periods
2. Terminating Hamilton services at Newmarket Station and the availability of berthing at Newmarket Station during morning and afternoon peak periods
3. Extending an existing MAXX Pukekohe - Auckland services to depart from Hamilton Station
4. Terminating Hamilton Services at The Strand and providing bus service connections to the CBD
5. Terminating Hamilton Services at Pukekohe and connecting with existing MAXX services
6. Terminating Hamilton Services at Papakura and connecting with existing MAXX services
7. Coupling a Silver Fern railcar at Pukekohe to an existing MAXX locomotive hauled carriage service for travel in to Britomart.
The table below summarises the strengths and weaknesses of the options. A full report of the review of options carried out by Auckland Transport is included in Appendix A.
Doc # 2049332 Page 15
Table 2: Summary of Options Hamilton Service Options
Strengths Weaknesses
Silver Fern (SF) through service to Britomart
o No changing; fast, comfortable trip
o Least number of stops o Likely to maximise patronage o Costs limited to SF
refurbishment
o Not currently feasible due to capacity issues at Britomart
o Would require a proposed MAXX service (e.g. from Manukau) to be foregone
o Higher risk of unreliability on MAXX network
SF through service to Newmarket
o Allows an almost uninterrupted trip
o Option to change to bus/rail services at Newmarket
o Short available dwell times necessary at Newmarket
o Higher risk of unreliability o Might not be feasible after
new Manukau & west line services are introduced.
o Current available time slots might not be suitable for passengers (08:38 & 14:35).
o Poor connections with CBD & Westline services with available morning slot
Terminating Hamilton services at The Strand
o Might be next best option to terminus at CBD
o Almost uninterrupted trip to central destination
o Costs limited to SF refurbishment
o Britomart capacity could be enhanced in the future at which point it might be easier to shift the terminus for the train which already went to the Strand.
o Will require provision of new bus services to/from CBD and infrastructure (bus stops)
o Requires a service transfer o Might not be attractive to
customers due to location
Connecting SF railcar to MAXX carriage at Pukekohe
o No changing; comfortable trip o Likely to max patronage o Costs limited to SF
refurbishment o No additional path needed into
Britomart o Allows better timing of an off-
peak SF service
o Discounted due to operational difficulties - Shortage of suitable
motive power - Too heavy for current
locos to operate within the existing timetables.
- Platforms will have to accommodate 8 car trains
- Risks associated with reliability on MAXX network
Extend existing MAXX service from Pukekohe by adding “special” carriages
o No additional path needed into Britomart
o Next best option for a through service after SF
o Allows better timing of an interpeak SF service
o Extra capital cost of carriages o Need to agree with AT and
Kiwirail re who pays o May be higher operating cost o Operational complexities, e.g.
reserving carriages o Contract/ operations issues o Will need detailed
assessment and evaluation by AT
Doc # 2049332 Page 16
Train stops at Pukekohe or Papakura
o Minimal impact on MAXX services
o Reduced operating cost for Hamilton
o A second service could leave Hamilton around 08:30 to serve the leisure market and go directly to Britomart
o Earlier start to service than other feasible options possible
o Almost all passengers will have to change
o Possible overcrowding closer to Auckland and need for additional carriages on MAXX network
o Reduced level of service (e.g. no toilets) for later part of trip
o More stops
4.2 Preferred Service Option Two options were shortlisted by the RWP for final assessment – Option 1: Terminating Hamilton Services at The Strand and providing bus service
connections to the CBD
Option 2: Extending an existing MAXX Pukekohe - Auckland service to depart from Hamilton
Appendix 2 contains the comparison between the two shortlisted options. Considering the operational viability of the various options and taking account of customer preference and other information available, the RWP decided upon Option 1 as being the preferred option for operating the service, subject to a visit to the Strand station to assess its viability as a terminating station from a user’s perspective. A train trip on the Silver Fern railcar and a visit to the Strand station was conducted by the RWP, Councillors from partner Councils, MP’s and other interested parties, including members of the Campaign for Better Transport (CBT). RWP members also walked from the Strand to Britomart to assess the distance and the suitability of the walk. The walk from the Strand station to Britomart, was assessed as being ‘meandering’ and unsuitable in rainy/bad weather from a user convenience point of view. Following this, the RWP modified the preferred option to be: Preferred Option: Hamilton to Auckland service via the Waterfront route (through Sylvia Park/ Glen Innes) onto the Strand station and carrying on to Newmarket as the termination point for the peak service. It should be noted that dwell time at Newmarket will need to be a reasonable time to offload passengers. This will need to be confirmed by Auckland Transport and ultimately approved subject to the final timetable. The service proposal includes
Two peak and two off-peak trips every weekday Services five days a week excluding public holidays
Doc # 2049332 Page 17
The service will be operated by one Silver Fern (SF) railcar with a seating capacity of 96 passengers to start with. Once the implementation is confirmed, the viability/potential of providing a connecting bus at the Strand station to link up with the proposed train service will be investigated. Further details of the preferred option are provided in the following sections.
4.2.1 Timetable It is proposed that the peak service will start around 0600 in the morning from Frankton station and around 0610 from The Base. The maximum expected travel time is 2 hours and 20 minutes approximately. However, indications are that travel time could be closer to 2 hours. Further investigation on this will be carried out once implementation is confirmed. The travel time is expected to be the same as travelling via Newmarket to get to the Strand due to lesser congestion on the Waterfront line. The expected departure and arrival times as shown below Peak services (2 peak services or 1 peak return service)– Depart Hamilton 06:00 Arrive Strand, Auckland 08:20 Arrive Newmarket, Auckland 08:27 Depart Strand, Auckland 17:30 Arrive Hamilton 19:45 Off peak services (2 off peak services; one departing Auckland and one departing Hamilton) – Depart Auckland (Britomart) 09:30 Arrive Hamilton 11:45 Depart Hamilton 14:30 Arrive Auckland (Britomart) 16:45 Depart Auckland (Strand) 17:30 (return peak service noted above) It needs to be noted that the final timetable will need to be worked out with Auckland Transport and KiwiRail closer to the time of implementation of the service. This will depend on time slot availability and network capacity at the time of implementation. Once the implementation is confirmed, a further survey or focus groups could be conducted to gauge the timetable preference especially for the off-peak service.
4.2.2 Stations The proposal is for the service to run between Frankton station in Hamilton and Newmarket in Auckland (via the Strand station) at peak times. The off peak service could operate between Frankton in Hamilton and Britomart station in Auckland. The proposed service includes stops at the following stations: Frankton, Hamilton
Doc # 2049332 Page 18
The Base, Hamilton Huntly, Waikato District Te Kauwhata, Waikato District Tuakau, Waikato District Papatoetoe, Auckland The Strand, Auckland Newmarket, Auckland Map 1 below shows the route and stops for the proposed Hamilton to Auckland service Map1: Route and stops for proposed service
Doc # 2049332 Page 19
Map 2: Route of service in Auckland
Doc # 2049332 Page 20
4.2.3 Rolling Stock As stated earlier, one Silver Fern railcar (96 seats capacity) will be used for the start up service. The railcar has been refurbished to a high standard including, new interiors, larger windows and power points for laptop use. Catering services will also be provided onboard. Refurbishment cost will be included in the annual operating cost.
4.2.4 Infrastructure Requirements Site visits were made by a KiwiRail engineer to assess the infrastructure requirements at the different stations in July 2011. In summary, the assessment shows:
No work will be required at Frankton and Huntly stations for the start up Te Kauwhata and Tuakau require tidying up and amenity work and Ngaruawahia and The Base need more extensive work in terms of a platform,
pedestrian crossing and the like. The key assumptions/points in the report are:
Some of the existing stations are lower than the standard height requirements but the existing low level platforms are suitable for the start up service and that a portable step, if necessary, will be provided on the train.
It has been assumed that there will be no disability access at the stations for the start up service (like ramps for wheelchairs), which would otherwise be additional cost for the start-up.
Costings do not include costs for secured parking facilities Station upgrade costs will be met by the territorial authority in which the station is
located. Alternative cost information has also been provided by Hamilton City Council based on their preliminary assessment of station development costs for a station at The Base. Summary of startup stations upgrade costs (within the Waikato region) are provided in table below: Table 3: Station upgrade costs
Stations Startup upgrade costs (million)
Frankton, Hamilton $0.0The Base, Hamilton $0.65Huntly $0.0Te Kauwhata $0.11 Tuakau $0.16
Total $0.92 The full assessment report is included as Appendix 3.
Doc # 2049332 Page 21
4.2.5 Fares In the proposal put forward by KiwiRail, the “out of pocket cost” of motoring has been considered to be the most appropriate approach to fares, which has been successfully used on the Capital Connection rail service between Palmerston North and Wellington. This service is similar to that proposed for Hamilton – Auckland. In order to improve the commercial performance of the proposed service and reduce the subsidy requirements, KiwiRail have suggested limited discounts. Single tickets will be available with 10 trip tickets at a 20% discount. There will be no additional discounts for children or other concession groups, including no SuperGold concessions. The proposed fares are – Base fare: $24 one way (including GST). Average Fare: $19.95 across all passenger trips (including GST) Average Fare: $17.35 excluding GST Fares have been considered constant throughout the contract period assumed. It needs to be noted that the actual fare structure will need to be set once the implementation is confirmed.
5 Financial Analysis for the Proposed Service
5.1 Patronage Assessments This analysis updates the financial and economic financial evaluation of the proposed service undertaken in 2009. The basic passenger forecasts have been revised to incorporate the effects of adding stations at Tuakau, Te Kauwhata and The Base in Hamilton and the shift of the Auckland Terminus away from Britomart to The Strand. The original growth assumption of 4 per cent per year has been left unchanged. As emphasised in earlier work, forecasting the demand for a completely new service of the type proposed for Hamilton-Auckland is subject to very wide margins of error. In particular, the success of the venture depends critically on the extent to which the package provided by the rail services (including the stations themselves as well as the on-train experience) is able to capture the enthusiasm and meet the aspirations of the travelling public and to provide the service required at an appropriate time of day. The patronage forecasts are set out in Table 4 below
Doc # 2049332 Page 22
Table 4: Patronage forecast Table 4.1
Daily Peak Period Patronage Forecasts (Flows in each direction)
Station Central
Forecast Low
Forecast High
Forecast
Hamilton, Frankton 30 16 54
Hamilton, The Base 40 25 36
Huntly 7 5 10
Te Kauwhata 5 3 7
Tuakau 27 16 35
Total all stations 109 65 142
Total excluding Tuakau 82 48 106
It is also planned that the service would stop at Papatoetoe to provide more convenient access to parts of the Auckland urban area. The effects of this have not been investigated in detail at this stage. It is proposed to be done as part of the Business Case development.
5.2 Costs Costs projected below are based on operating costs provided by KiwiRail in their updated proposal in December 2010. Table 5: Total costs for the proposed service
Costs $Million
Operating Cost $1.97
Rolling Stock
(Purchase and refurbishment)
$0
Infrastructure Cost
Station Upgrade $0.92
Contingency (5%) (includes marketing) $0.10
Total Cost (during trial period) $2.99
Note: No estimation has been made of management or other administrative costs on Waikato Regional Council for managing this service. These will have to be calculated and added in once the implementation is agreed upon Assumptions:
Operating Costs are per annum. Cost is assumed to be indexed though not included in the calculations. Trial contract period of 2 years
Doc # 2049332 Page 23
Infrastructure costs to be met by the territorial authority in which the station is located.
All costs exclude GST
5.3 Revenue Revenue projections in table 6 below are presented as a range. The range is based on two estimates being: low and central forecast from section 5.1 above. For estimating the funding gap a mid point value has been taken. Table 6: Estimated revenue
Estimated Revenue ($millions)
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3
Farebox Estimated $0.64 – $0.85 $0.66 – $0.85 $0.69 – $0.85
Estimated Subsidy (for 1 railcar operation only)
$1.23 $1.21 $1.20
5.4 Preliminary Economic Analysis The economic evaluation for the proposed service calling at all stations (Hamilton Central, The Base, Huntly, Te Kauwhata and Tuakau) but with a single Silver Fern unit is the base case and is summarised in Tables 7 and 8 below. This assumes that services will start in 2012 and because the train will be at capacity from the outset revenues and benefits will remain constant over the evaluation period, taken to cover 15 years of operations. As discussed in section 5.1, the Central passenger forecasts give a demand for the service stopping at all stations that is slightly above the capacity of a single Silver Fern unit but very substantially below the capacity of two units. The low forecasts would give a demand that is within the capacity of the train for the period of initial operation. Given the degree of uncertainty associated with the forecasts, for the initial trial service it is proposed to run just a single Silver Fern unit to explore how the demand for the service develops in practice. The economic evaluation has been carried out with this assumption. The detailed preliminary economic evaluation report is contained as Appendix 4. It needs to be noted that at this stage there is an assumption that, if the demand from Tuakau leads to more capacity requirement for the proposed service (as per estimates shown in section 5.1) then, Waikato District Council will hold separate discussions with Auckland Transport around servicing this community.
Doc # 2049332 Page 24
Table 7: Financial Evaluation Financial Evaluation of Base Case
Central Forecast : Single Silver Fern unit calling at all stations NPVs ($m discounted to 2011 at
12 per cent) Annual equivalent for funding
gap ($m)
Net revenues 5.8
Operating Costs 14.1
Operating deficit (8.3)
Annual Funding Gap 1.2
For the Central Base Case with the services stopping at all stations using a single Silver Fern unit, the revenues from passengers would cover about 40 per cent of the costs of operation, leaving an average funding gap of $1.2 million per year over the 15 year period. The revenue shortfall in the initial 2 years of operation 2012 and 2103 would amount to a total of $2.4 million. Table 8: Economic Evaluation
Economic Evaluation of Base Case Central Forecast : Single Silver Fern unit calling at all stations
NPVs $m discounted to 2011 at 8 per cent)
Funding Gap 10.4
Capital Costs 1.7
Total Costs 12.1
PT User Benefits 4.1
Road user Benefits 10.8
Total Benefits 14.9
BCR 1.4
Overall, the project would achieve a Benefit Cost Ratio (BCR) of about 1.4, a figure which reflects the high utilisation of the train throughout its operating period. As noted earlier, the actual demand for the service will be dependent on various factors which is true of any new service or product. Given this, the forecasts produced could have a wide margin of error. Therefore a sensitivity test using the low patronage forecast has also been carried out which indicates that the BCR would drop to 1.2 over the 15 year evaluation period (Sensitivity Test 5, Table 9.7 and 9.8 in Appendix 4).
6 Funding The Funding Working Group (FWG), comprised of finance managers from Waikato Regional Council, Hamilton City Council, Waikato District Council and Waipa District Council, was convened in May 2011 to investigate funding principles and recommend
Doc # 2049332 Page 25
funding options for the proposed rail service. The following sections are based on the key findings and recommendations of the FWG.
6.1 Funding principles In determining how councils fund an activity, they must consider the following factors:
The community outcomes to which the activity primarily contributes; and The distribution of benefits between the community as a whole, identifiable parts
of the community, and to individuals; and The period over which the benefits are expected to occur; and Consideration of those who benefit from the activity or contribute to the need for
the activity to be undertaken; and Costs and benefits of funding the activity separately
Only the distribution of benefits (and the resulting incidence of liability for rating) and the period over which benefits are likely to accrue have been considered by the FWG. It is assumed that consideration of the community outcomes to which the proposal contributes have been or will be separately considered by the Rail Working Party.
6.2 Distribution of benefits Given the nature of the proposed services, the FWG has determined that the area of benefit accrues directly to ratepayers within the Hamilton City, Waikato District Council and Auckland Council areas. There is some indirect benefit to the rest of the region including the Waipa District Council, in terms of availability of the service for use both to and from Auckland, increased tourism access to a destination within the region, increased access to jobs and economic opportunities, which has flow on effects to the entire region and growth of businesses. In economic terms these are also called induced effects.
6.2.1 Hamilton City Council The Frankton railway station and a station at the Base in Hamilton are proposed as the two stations from which the service will run. As such, the service is seen as being accessible to all Hamilton City ratepayers.
6.2.2 Waikato District Council The service will travel the main trunk railway through the heart of the Waikato District. A 10 km buffer on either side along the railway line has been assessed as having reasonable access to the service and as such is assessed as the area of direct benefit for the service within the Waikato District23.
23 Calculation of flows is generally carried out on an access distance of less than 15 km to and from stations
Doc # 2049332 Page 26
6.2.3 Auckland Council The service will facilitate the flow of people between the Waikato and Auckland regions. The strategic fit of the service in (Section 3 of this report) identifies a number of benefits expected to accrue:
Improved efficiency and reduced costs by helping avoid congestions in Auckland, on state highways and local roads, especially in the CBD
The option of living in the Waikato and working in Auckland becomes more feasible, thus potentially adding to the population and economic development of the region
Improved road safety through the removal of approximately 50 cars (in the early years) from the road network in the Waikato and Auckland
Provision of more transport choices Improved security and resilience – the train gives an alternative route for when
road travel is disrupted Improved environmental and health outcomes from the reduction in road traffic,
reduced local air pollution, greenhouse gases, noise, water pollution and other environmental problems
This is seen as resulting in some degree of benefit needing to be attributed to the Auckland Council. However, the quantum of the benefits accruing has not been assessed by the FWP and it is assumed that this will be carried out by the RWP separately.
6.3 Period of benefits Provision of the service will require both operational and capital expenditure. Operational costs should be met on an annual basis. Capital investments, by their nature, have a longer period of benefit assigned to them and funding sources should be selected that match this. The service proposal includes the need for additional capital expenditure in relation to upgrades to stations and platforms. There might also be requirements for park and ride availability at the stations on route. As mentioned previously, infrastructure provision is the responsibility of the relevant territorial authority and therefore funding for this has not been considered in the work carried out by the FWG. Maintenance of this infrastructure is also currently addressed by the relevant territorial authority. It is assumed that this position would continue in relation the any station and platform upgrades required to support the service.
6.4 Rating mechanisms Councils may charge rates based on:
Land Value Capital Value Annual Value (data is not currently available to support this rating mechanism) Per property
Doc # 2049332 Page 27
Rates may be charged by the territorial authorities, the regional council, or by both. Other passenger transport services in the region are currently funded as follows:
All services within Hamilton City are rated by Waikato Regional Council All other regional services are rated by the local territorial authority on the basis
of 50% origin / 50% destination. Waikato Regional Council then invoices the territorial authorities for their share of the costs incurred in the service provision.
If the current funding model was applied, the territorial authorities would rate for the service, with Waikato Regional Council invoicing them to recover the revenue. This model would be consistent for Waikato District Council, however given the current rating for passenger transport, within Hamilton City it would either lead to Waikato Regional Council rating for the service, or Hamilton City Council striking a new rate for passenger rail services only. It is recommended that, in order for ratepayers to be clear about the cost of the service, the rating mechanism is kept as simple as possible and that only one rate is charged in relation to the operational costs of any proposed service. This means that rating for the operational costs would best be covered by a regional council rate. Input into which sectors of the community should pay this rate would come from the relevant territorial authority. The FWG recommends the use of the per property rating mechanism. The benefits from the service do not change with property values. As referenced above, the provision and maintenance of the infrastructure to support the service is currently provided by (and funded by) the relevant territorial authority. It is assumed that this situation will continue.
6.5 Funding requirements Funding for this proposed service could be obtained from four different funding sources which are:
Fares NZTA subsidy Auckland Council contribution and Rates (levied within Waikato region)
The rating implication on ratepayers within the Waikato region will be dependent on the level of funding available from the different sources listed above. Contribution from the different sources would reduce the overall requirement for rates funding on the ratepayers however, the funding policy will not be affected by these changes. Revenue from fares has been estimated based on assessment of patronage of the proposed service. Details of patronage and revenue assumptions are contained in section 5 earlier. A funding application will need to be made to NZTA supported by a full business case as part of the Regional Land Transport Programme to seek NZTA funding for the proposed service. However, it needs to be noted that the NZTA have given clear signals that while
Doc # 2049332 Page 28
they will consider a funding application, it is very unlikely that this project will receive subsidy from the National Land Transport Programme. The benefits accruing to Auckland from the proposed service will need to be quantified as part of the business case development and funding contribution will need to be discussed and investigated further with Auckland Council based on these quantified benefits.
6.6 Rating Option The Rail Working Party evaluated five different rating options for funding the service. Based on benefits assessment and impact analysis, the RWP recommends the following rating option
All properties in Hamilton City area rated at 100%. Waikato District properties within 10km of service rated at 100%. Waikato District properties outside of 10km buffer pay 30% differential. All Waipa District properties pay 30% differential. All remaining properties within the Waikato region pay 10% differential
The potential rating impacts have been modelled based on the following cost and funding assumptions (as per Section 5 of this report) have been applied: Operational costs
Total cost of service $1.97 million Fare recoveries Rating requirement
$0.74 million
$1.23 million
Table 9: Potential Rating Impact
Without NZTA Subsidy With NZTA Subsidy
Per property rate ‐
Hamilton City and
10km buffer area in Waikato District $16.63
Per property rate ‐ Direct benefit area $8.32
Per property rate –
Waikato District (outside of 10km buffer area) and
Waipa District $4.99 Per property rate ‐ Waikato/Waipa DC indirect $2.50
Per property rate –
Rest of the properties in the Waikato region $1.59
Per property rate ‐ Region‐wide $0.80
Doc # 2049332 Page 29
6.7 Capital funding Infrastructure provision and maintenance is currently the responsibility of the relevant territorial authority. It is assumed that this position would continue in relation to any station and platform upgrades required to support the service. Rating for any capital expenditure requirements associated with station development or upgrades and maintenance would be carried out by Hamilton City Council and Waikato District Council respectively.
7 Implementation The RWP has been working through the broader feasibility and viability options of the proposed rail service. However, there will be further details to be worked out and other processes completed before the service can be implemented. These are:
Development of the timetable (both for peak and off peak) for the service in conjunction with Auckland Transport and KiwiRail
Possible surveys/focus group sessions to confirm most suitable off peak timetable
Finalization of route both for peak and off peak services Details of ticketing to be developed Development of fares options/differential fares Detailed specs and service arrangement for a link bus at the Strand needs to be
developed Details and costs of managing the service will need to be determined Develop the success factors for the trial service prior to implementation Infrastructure requirements finalised Develop a business case for NZTA funding application. NZTA provided a letter at
the December meeting of the RWP giving the details of what they would require in a business case presented for funding. This letter is attached as Appendix 6.
Proposal will need to be endorsed by the Regional Transport Committee and included in the Regional Land Transport Programme (RLTP) and National Land Transport Programme (NLTP) for NZTA subsidy
Proposal needs to be included in the 2012 Long Term Plan’s of partner Council’s Proposal needs to be consulted upon with ratepayers
8 Risks Some of the risks associated with the implementation of the proposed service are listed below:
NZTA subsidy for the proposal could be declined The proposal could be declined for inclusion in the Regional Land Transport
Programme or the National Land Transport Programme
Doc # 2049332 Page 30
The proposal might not get wider public/ratepayer support for subsidy through rates. This will need to be tested through the LTP processes of the partner Councils.
All or some partner councils (Waikato Regional Council, Hamilton City Council, Waikato District Council and Waipa District Council) might decide not to include the proposal in their LTP’s for public consultation.
9 Recommendations In conclusion, the Rail Working Party has investigated the technical and operational feasibility of various options for the establishment of a Hamilton to Auckland passenger rail service. It has also investigated the funding options for a proposed service, as per its terms of reference.
The RWP recognises that further to this report a Business Case will have to be prepared either by the RWP or jointly by the partner Councils’, for submission to NZTA as a funding application. The Business Case will need to contain details of, the issue or opportunity this proposed service is aiming to address, what alternatives to this proposal have been assessed, how the proposal fits in with the regional and national transport priorities and other criteria that have been highlighted in the letter provided by NZTA (Appendix 5) to the RWP in December 2010.
Given the discussion, and details of the preferred option presented in the previous sections of this report, the Rail Working Party makes the following recommendations to all partner Councils (Waikato Regional Council, Hamilton City Council, Waikato District Council, Waipa District Council and Auckland Council) –
1. That the proposal of a “2 year pilot trial Hamilton to Auckland passenger rail service” (proposed service) proceed to public consultation through the 2012-22 Long Term Plans of Hamilton City Council, Waikato District Council, Waipa District Council and Waikato Regional Council.
2. That a funding application supported by a robust business case be prepared (containing details outlined in the letter provided by NZTA to the RWP in December 2010) to apply for NZTA subsidy.
3. That the partner organizations work together in preparing the funding application
and supporting business case and ensure the preparation is aligned with the timeline of the 2012-2015 Regional Land Transport Programme so that it can be considered for funding through the 2012-2015 National Land Transport Programme.
4. That Auckland Council be approached to contribute funding to the proposed service,
in line with demonstrated quantified benefits for Auckland, as assessed through the Business Case and the proposal be included in the 2012-22 Auckland Council Long Term Plan.
Doc # 2049332 Page 31
5. That an application also be made through the Auckland Regional Land Transport
Programme, for funding the proposed service.
6. That the Rail Working Party conduct high level engagement (including political) with KiwiRail to ensure that the best operating and most cost effective proposal is obtained from KiwiRail.
7. That a targeted differential regional rate be levied, as per details in the funding
section of this report by the Waikato Regional Council for the proposed service.
8. That all partner local authorities of the Rail Working Party (Hamilton City Council, Waikato District Council, Waipa District Council and Waikato Regional Council) formally endorse the rail service proposal and regional rating for it and that the proposal proceed to public consultation through partner councils 2012 Long Term Plans.
9. That all partner local authorities formally reply to the Rail Working Party by 31
October 2011confirming their support for the service and acceptance of the recommendations in the Rail Working Party final recommendations report.
10. That Hamilton City Council and Waikato District Council are responsible for the
infrastructure upgrades required for the proposed service prior to the startup of the service.
11. That the Rail Working Party continue its role through the next stages of the process
of investigating a Hamilton to Auckland passenger rail service.
Doc # 2049332 Page 32
Appendix 1: Investigation reports from Auckland Transport Report 1: Proposed Hamilton – Auckland Rail Passenger Services Auckland Transport Review and Recommendations January 2011
COVER SHEET
Project: Hamilton – Auckland Rail Passenger Services
Paper Title: Proposed Hamilton – Auckland Rail Services AT Review and Recommendations (Rev3-AT&VT)
Written by: Name
Title
Signature
Raymond Siddalls
Rail Network Development Lead
Reviewed by:
Names
Company
Signature
Dirk Prins/Mark Jones
Veolia Transport
Reviewed by:
Name
Title
Signature
Ken McLeod Rail Projects Lead
Recommended by:
Name
Title
Signature
Gareth Willis Rail Services Leader
Doc # 2049332 Page 33
Approved by:
Name
Title
Signature
Mark Lambert
Manager Public Transport Operations
nts: Contents:
1. Purpose
2. Executive Summary
3. Background
4. Options investigated by Auckland Transport
5. Conclusions
5.1 Britomart Station Access during Peak Periods
5.2 Newmarket Station Access during Peak Periods
5.3 Network Access during Peak Periods
5.4 Extension of existing MAXX services to Hamilton NIMT Station
5.5 Terminating Hamilton Services at The Strand and providing bus service connections to the CBD
5.6 Terminating Hamilton Services at Pukekohe to connect with MAXX services
5.7 Terminating Hamilton Services at Papakura
5.8 Connecting Silver Fern Railcar at Pukekohe to a MAXX Carriage service
6. Auckland Transport’s Recommendation
7. Preferred Option
8. Next Steps
Doc # 2049332 Page 34
1. Purpose: The reassessment of options for the provision of Hamilton - Auckland daily commuter rail passenger services by Environment Waikato, KiwiRail, Auckland Transport and Veolia Transport.
Auckland Transport in association with KiwiRail and Veolia Transport is required to:
Confirm technical/network feasibility of Environment Waikato’s preferred option and the timetables as provide by KiwiRail.
Identify any issues with the provision of the Environment Waikato’s preferred option and associated timetable.
Investigate and report on the possibility of using Britomart and/or Newmarket as the terminal stations for the proposed Hamilton services.
Identify and investigate other available alternative service options
2. Executive Summary: Environment Waikato have surveyed their residents and concluded that there is “significant support” for a subsidised Hamilton - Auckland rail passenger service.
Initially their preferred option was to utilise the Silver Fern railcars to operate services that include two return trips per day travelling via Newmarket Station terminating at Britomart station.
However as Auckland Transport is committed to:
an extensive morning and afternoon peak MAXX service timetable
the continued operation of the recently introduced Onehunga services into Britomart
the introduction during 2011 of two additional Western Line services per peak hour
the introduction of Manukau services from mid-2011
the continued growth in the use of MAXX rail services, particularly during commuter peak periods
and the associated reduction in use of private motor vehicles
There is presently no operational and berthing capacity available at either Britomart or Newmarket stations during morning and afternoon peak periods. It is therefore recommended that the proposed Hamilton Silver Fern railcar services terminate at either Pukekohe or Papakura and connect with the existing MAXX services.
Both of these options will provide good connections to access all stations on the planned Auckland Electrified Rail Network without negative impact on the operation of existing MAXX services and those to be introduces during 2011. They also offer a choice of transfer services travelling via the Eastern Line directly to Britomart or via the Southern Line via Newmarket to Britomart
The only negative impact on the existing MAXX services will be caused by the increase in patronage. It is proposed that this is managed by the acquisition of two additional SA carriages. Any further patronage growth will be accommodated by the introduction of EMU services.
Doc # 2049332 Page 35
Environment Waikato however considers that any service that requires passenger transfers could be unattractive to commuters.
At the Environment Waikato Rail Working Group meeting of 13 December 2010 it was generally agreed that their preferred option was a direct service via Newmarket terminating a Britomart Station.
As a direct independent Silver Fern Railcar service could not presently be accommodated due to network and station capacity and access issues, the extension of MAXX Pukekohe – Auckland services with additional carriages with toilet facilities was considered a suitable alternative option. It was generally agreed that the extension of Pukekohe services could provide a required reliable, robust quality commuter service with direct access to and from Britomart Station during peak periods. To accommodate the expected 100+ passenger two additional SA type cars will be required and as the journey is in excess of two hours duration these cars will need to have toilet facilities.
Environment Waikato is to include the costs of providing the proposed Hamilton – Auckland rail service in their draft 2011/12 Annual Plan, do further planning work on the proposed service to include it in their LTCCP and RLTP and also apply for funding from NZTA.
KiwiRail are to provide a detailed operating plan and associated costs for the proposed services for inclusion in the business case being prepared by Environment Waikato for NZTA funding. They are also providing cost estimates for the required station platforms based on similar works recently completed on the Wellington rail network.
Subject to review and funding the target date for the introduction of the service is mid-2012
3. Background:
A telephone survey of a random sample of 1155 residents conducted between 6th October and 8th November 2010 by Versus Research on behalf of Environment Waikato indicated that there is good community support for a rail passenger service between Hamilton and Auckland.
Environment Waikato has concluded that the potential users of the services are: Commuters who want to arrive in Auckland before 8.30 am Social users who want to arrive in Auckland before 11.00 am
Environment Waikato propose that the service comprise two trains each week day from Hamilton to Auckland (1 morning peak and 1 morning off peak) and two trains each week day Auckland to Hamilton (1 afternoon peak and 1 evening off peak). A weekend service is also proposed comprising one train in each direction per day.
The services are initially to depart from Hamilton NIMT Station (Hamilton Terminal) with proposed passenger stops at:
The Base in Hamilton Te Kauwhata Tuakau
KiwiRail have been requested to provide: costs for the proposed midweek services option costs for the proposed weekend service option an indication of additional infrastructure requirements at the stations.
Doc # 2049332 Page 36
and develop the operating timetable
Auckland Transport (in association with KiwiRail) has agreed to: Confirm feasibility of the option Recommend timetable for Auckland section of rail network (to be confirmed by
KiwiRail). Suggest any alternatives, if there are issues. Investigate terminating services at Britomart and/or Newmarket stations Investigate other alternative options for service termination & connection to
Auckland CBD
The provisional analysis of the survey data indicates that the preferred destinations and associated departure/arrival times for services are:
Commuters: o Auckland (CBD) arrival 08:30am o Auckland (CBD) departure between 05:00pm and 06:00pm.
Other users: o Auckland (CBD) arrival mid to late morning o Auckland (CBD) departure between 04:00pm to 07:00pm
Required destinations (from survey respondents):
Auckland CBD (Britomart Station) - 82% (commuters – 60%) Newmarket - 12% (commuters – 6%) Airport (bus service from Papatoetoe Station) - 6% airport
The success of the Hamilton rail passenger service is dependent on meeting the needs of commuters (i.e. travel time, arrival and departure times at their required destinations).
4. Options investigated by Auckland Transport:
4.1. Terminating Hamilton services at Britomart Station and availability of berthing during the morning and afternoon peak periods
4.2. Terminating Hamilton services at Newmarket Station and the availability of berthing at Newmarket Station during morning and afternoon peak periods
4.3. The ability to run an additional train through the network during peak periods without adversely impacting on existing and planned MAXX commuter services
4.4. Extending an existing MAXX Pukekohe - Auckland services to depart from Hamilton Station
4.5. Terminating Hamilton Services at The Strand and providing bus service connections to the CBD
4.6. Terminating Hamilton Services at Pukekohe and connecting with existing MAXX services
4.7. Terminating Hamilton Services at Papakura and connecting with existing MAXX services
4.8. Coupling a Silver Fern railcar at Pukekohe to an existing MAXX locomotive hauled carriage service.
Doc # 2049332 Page 37
These 8 options have been investigated by Auckland Transport PT Planning and Operations Teams in association with Veolia Transport and forwarded to KiwiRail for review and comments. The following conclusions are based on the KiwiRail network capacity, MAXX rail service commitments (particularly during morning and afternoon peak periods), and the station dwell time required by a long distance rail car service.
5. Conclusions:
5.1. Britomart Station Access During Peak Periods:
After a review of the Britomart Station berthing plan it is concluded that there is no berthing capacity available at Britomart Station during both the morning and afternoon peak periods. The recent introduction of Onehunga services has culminated in it being operated at its present capacity. Additional improvements planned by KiwiRail over the next 12 months will increase the terminal’s capacity. However this additional capacity has already been allocated to the introduction of additional Western Line peak services. The introduction of the additional Western Line services are needed to cope with the increased use of rail services in west Auckland and achieve Auckland Transport’s planned growth of rail patronage during the commuter peaks.
The initial introduction of Manukau services in 2011 does not require any additional paths into Britomart Station as they will be extensions of existing Otahuhu short run services.
To achieve the planned MAXX service level and associated timetable to/from this terminal station during peak times Auckland Transport requires o utilisation 19 paths per hour (i.e. 18 MAXX services plus 1 Overlander), for this to be achieved; it is likely that the whole existing MAXX timetable will need to be reconfigured. This will however provide no additional paths into the station.
It is therefore concluded that terminating additional direct Hamilton services at Britomart Station during peak periods is not feasible until the completion of the CBD loop.
5.2. Newmarket Station Access during Peak Periods:
Operating Hamilton services to and from Newmarket Station is presently achievable at the times specified below, without affecting the current MAXX services. However, the introduction of two additional Western Line peak services per hour in 2011 will require the utilisation of all existing capacity at Newmarket and will therefore not allow additional services from Hamilton to terminate at this station.
Prior to the introduction of planned additional Western Line services and Manukau services, the most appropriate available times slots for a Hamilton service to berth at Newmarket Station are:
o Arriving at 0838 and 1435 hours and departing at 0920 and 1915 hours.
Connecting with services at Newmarket to Britomart would require an additional 9 and 11 minutes waiting time plus 8 minutes travel time. This may not be considered appropriate for the needs of commuters.
If Newmarket Station was utilised for terminating Hamilton services the platform dwell times would be limited and after discharging passengers, the train would need
Doc # 2049332 Page 38
to continue to The Strand for any required layover period. Similarly departing trains would have only a very short dwell time at the Newmarket platform for passenger embarkation. It is also likely that different platforms would need to be used by arriving and departing services. This has the potential to confuse infrequent users when they require to catch the return service.
It is however concluded that Option 2 - Terminating Hamilton services at Newmarket Station is not feasible due to it only being available until the Manukau services are introduced. There are also poor connections with CBD and West line services at the proposed morning arrival time, which would significantly affect the number of commuters who can/will use the services.
5.3. Network Access During Peak Periods:
The introduction in 2011 of all the planned Manukau services will result in a frequency of trains between Puhinui and Westfield during peak periods of 12 trains per hour with headways of 4 or 5 minutes. The running of any additional services through this section of the rail network during peak periods would therefore adversely affect the operation off MAXX services and the associated timetable.
The service planning that has formed a major part of the business case for the electrification of the Auckland Rail Network is based on the fundamental principle of evenly spaced services with ten minute headways from Papakura, Manukau and Waitakere, overlaid with two trains per hour on the Onehunga line, with all services operating all-stops to and from Britomart. Due to its regularity and simplicity this timetable is considered to be the most robust and attractive to the potential users of the services. All MAXX customers, potential customers and particularly commuters need only a basic understanding of the timetable and they can be confident that they can catch a train that will take them to where they need/want to go and that they will only have to wait a maximum of ten minutes.
Given this service pattern, the ability to operate additional trains through the network is extremely limited. This is mainly due to stations not having by-pass tracks and there are therefore very few places were trains can overtake other trains travelling in the same direction. The travel time of any express or limited stops service is therefore determined by that of all stops train(s) ahead.
The design of the Silver Fern railcar incorporates narrow end doors and vestibules with interior doors. It has been concluded from recent operational experience that this door arrangement is unsuitable for suburban/metro services operating within a high frequency timetable with short intermediate station dwell times. The door design has been found to slow loading and unloading of passengers at intermediate stations and therefore require extended dwell times. This presents the risk that the station dwell times will be dependent passenger unloading/loading requirements and therefore dwell times are most likely to be randomly extended causing delays to following trains and disruption of the MAXX timetabled services.
It is therefore considered that the operation of an additional passenger train during peak periods will present operational challenges through the highest density sections of the network (Wiri – Westfield) and will likely cause delays to following services and disruption of the MAXX timetable.
5.4. Extension of existing MAXX services to Hamilton NIMT Station:
Doc # 2049332 Page 39
The extension of MAXX Pukekohe – Auckland peak services from/to Hamilton was initially discounted as to implement this option will require resolution of the following acquisitions and contractual and operational issues and will therefore require a significant longer timeframe to complete the provisional work required prior to implementation:
Acquisition of additional passenger rolling stock, the initial requirement for a start-up service is considered to be 2 additional carriages
As the duration of the Hamilton – Auckland journey is predicted by KiwiRail to be 2 hours 15 minutes any passenger rolling stock used will require to have toilet facilities. It should be noted that Auckland Transport have no spare rolling stock available for use on a Hamilton service and none of the existing fleet have toilets.
The availability of suitable rolling stock, upgrade designs for any required refurbishment and the resources to rebuilding or refurbish the additional passenger rolling stock to the required standard and include toilet facilities.
The timeline and associated costs to rebuilding or refurbish of any additional passenger rolling stock with toilet facilities
Agreement with KiwiRail and Veolia for Veolia staff to operate services between Hamilton and Pukekohe or KiwiRail employing suitable staff to operate the services.
Variation of Auckland Transport’s operating agreement with Veolia Transport to include extension of Pukekohe services from/to Hamilton.
Variation of Auckland Transport’s operating agreements with KiwiRail to include access for Hamilton - Pukekohe services.
Completion of relevant staff training and certification for the route extension
Changer to staff rosters and rolling stock operating and stabling plans.
Agreement with KiwiRail/Veolia for the require changes to the rolling stock maintenance and servicing scope and schedules (i.e. to include toilet cars and additional operational kilometrage).
Agreement with KiwiRail and staff representatives to permit the operation of Auckland Transport rolling stock outside the Auckland area (i.e. use of push-pull motive power and associated driving trailer cars). Note that to mitigate or effectively manage this issue without this agreement would require the train set to be split, some vehicles turned and the train remarshaled at the end of each trip, this would have significant impact on the operation of subsequent services operated by the train set and crew.
Stations used by the services will initially be required to accommodate 6 car train sets and if loadings increase as predicted 8 car train sets.
Environment Waikato and Auckland Transport agreement for funding and cost sharing.
It is also likely that due to the additional kilometrage that the rolling stock will be required to run additional rolling stock will be needed to allow for servicing associated maintenance. If KiwiRail have suitable staff and capacity, an alternative solution may be to stable and service the train set over night at Te Rapa.
Doc # 2049332 Page 40
At the Environment Waikato Rail Working Group meeting of 13 December 2010 it was generally agreed that the extension of MAXX services was the preferred option. It was also considered that this option would be sufficiently robust to provide the level of comfort and reliability required specifically for the proposed commuter services and also allows direct access to and from Britomart Station during peak periods.
5.5. Terminating Hamilton Services at The Strand and providing bus service connections to the CBD:
Although this option is operationally feasible, with the introduction of Manukau services the peak frequencies of trains between Puhinui and Westfield will preclude running additional services through this section without adversely affecting MAXX services.
To make this a viable option would also require the provision of new bus services to/from the CBD and the installation of associated bus stops.
It is considered that this option is unlikely to be attractive to prospective customers particularly commuters, due to the remote location of The Strand Rail Station and the requirement of bus service connections to/from the Auckland CBD.
This option does not provide for the stated needs of commuters to have direct access to Britomart Station and therefore it cannot be recommended.
5.6. Terminating Hamilton Services at Pukekohe to connect with MAXX services:
Auckland Transport presently operates 8 morning peak and 6 inter-peak services from Pukekohe to Auckland CBD, which all terminate at Britomart Station:
all Pukekohe services stop at Papatoetoe Station were bus connections are available to Auckland Airport
3 morning services travel via Newmarket and 5 via Glen Innes.
The most appropriate MAXX service connections (current timetable) that meet the stated needs of the Hamilton commuters are:
o Depart 06:54, via Glen Innes, arrives Britomart 08:04 o Depart 07:03, arrives Newmarket 07:57, arrive Britomart 08:06
The evening return commuter service could be scheduled to connect with either of the following MAXX services from Britomart (current timetable):
o Depart 17:26, via Newmarket, arrive Pukekohe 18:33 o Depart 17:30, via Glen Innes, arrive Pukekohe 18:37
The second service could connect with:
Departs Pukekohe 09:49, via Newmarket, arrives Britomart 10:58.
The second evening return service would need to connect with the MAXX service that:
Departs Britomart 19:12, via Glen Innes, arrives Pukekohe 20:18.
Doc # 2049332 Page 41
The operation of connecting services from Hamilton to Pukekohe, subject to KiwiRail network access south of Pukekohe, will permit additional services to be operated with a single train-set and will also provide arrival and departure times that the Environment Waikato survey indicates are appropriate.
This option has significant advantages for potential users over a single direct service as it can provide appropriate departure arrival times for both commuters and day trips, good journey times and the connecting MAXX services provide access to both Britomart Station (Auckland CBD) and Newmarket Station and access to all other destinations on the South and East lines of the Auckland rail network. It also provides the option of transferring to West line services at Newmarket.
However, once EMU services are introduced, the Hamilton services will need to be extended to connect with EMU services at Papakura.
It must be noted that due to the heavy passenger loading on these key MAXX commuter services additional rolling stock will be needed to implement this option. It is considered that one additional SA carriage will be initially required and with the present rate of patronage growth a second is likely to be need by the second year of operation.
5.7. Terminating Hamilton Services at Papakura
This option will provide similar service levels and access to the destinations on the Auckland Rail Network as the Pukekohe transfer option. However terminating at Papakura will offer greater choice of MAXX service connections and associated timetable options that will, subject to KiwiRail network access south of Pukekohe, allow a greater selection of departure times from Hamilton and Auckland to be considered.
KiwiRail will need to confirm that suitable berthing will still be available at Papakura Station, for Hamilton services, when the planned modifications of the track layout is completed.
It is also unlikely that this option will be available until the completion of the Papakura track remodelling program of works (November 2011 – June 2012)
It must also be noted as with the Pukekohe transfer option, due to the heavy passenger loading on these key MAXX peak commuter services similar additional rolling stock will be needed to implement this option.
5.8. Connecting Silver Fern Railcar at Pukekohe to a MAXX Carriage service
It was proposed that the Silver Fern Railcar would operate independently from Hamilton to Pukekohe were it would be coupled to an existing MAXX carriage service and towed as part of the MAXX train consist to Britomart. This could overcome the peak period access issues and allow direct access into the terminal as part of the MAXX service.
This option has been discounted due to a shortage of suitable motive power to haul the combined service. The MAXX service will need to be increased to a 6 car consist as the patronage increases and with the addition of a Silver Fern Railcar would be
Doc # 2049332 Page 42
too heavy for the existing locomotives to operate within the timetable requirements. This option also requires platforms to accommodate 8 car train sets.
There are also significant risks associated with service reliability as the MAXX service would need to depart at the scheduled time and if the railcar arrived late at Pukekohe it would need to continue to Papakura and the passengers would have to transfer to the next available MAXX service, which is unlikely to have insufficient capacity for regular Auckland commuters and the additional Hamilton passengers.
6. Auckland Transport’s Recommendation:
After investigation and review of the above 8 options it is considered that due to Auckland Transport’s commitment to the:
existing MAXX timetable and associated services continuation of Onehunga services introduction of Manukau Services introduction of two additional Western Line services per peak hour continued growth in the use of MAXX rail services particularly during
commuter peak periods and the associated reduction in use of private motor vehicles
There are only three viable options that are suitable for commuter travel from/to Hamilton and provide access to Britomart Station during peak periods:
A. Hamilton services to terminate at Pukekohe and transfer passengers to the appropriate MAXX services in the morning and the reverse in the evening
B. Hamilton services to terminate at Papakura and transfer passengers to the appropriate MAXX services in the morning and the reverse in the evening.
C. Extension of appropriate MAXX services from Pukekohe to Hamilton
Both options A and B are considered to offer an economical operationally viable service, as after passengers transfer from the Hamilton train to MAXX services the railcar could return to Hamilton for the second service:
The running time for the railcar between Hamilton and Pukekohe is estimated as 67 minutes (this will need to be confirmed by KiwiRail)
Running time for MAXX service from Pukekohe to Britomart is 68 minutes and Papakura to Britomart is 52 minutes
Journey times from Hamilton to Auckland CBD of approximately 2 hours and 15 Minutes are therefore achievable.
Option C is generally considered to be the preferred solution, however suitable additional rolling stock with toilet facilities will be need to be supplied prior to its implementation and after the completion of the network electrification and introduction of EMU services it may be necessary to revert to Option B.
It is recommended that:
i. Detailed timetables and associated pricing are completed by KiwiRail for options A and B for Environment Waikato consideration.
Doc # 2049332 Page 43
ii. KiwiRail supply costs and timeline for supply of two refurbished carriages with toilet facilities and similar for two SA carriages
iii. Environment Waikato and partners to select the option required taking
It must be noted that:
a. Environment Waikato and KiwiRail need to take into account the planned introduction of integrated electronic ticketing at all stations on the Auckland Rail Network
b. any business case should not include revenue for trips (including transfers) that are made on MAXX services within the Auckland area.
c. outside the commuter peak periods (i.e. interpeak, evening and weekends), subject to suitable access arrangements and operating time slots that do not conflict with MAXX present and planned scheduled services, options that provide for arrivals and departures at Britomart, could probably be accommodated.
7. Preferred Option: At the Rail Working Group meeting of 13 December 2010 it was generally agreed by Environment Waikato team that their preferred option for the proposed commuter services is the extension of existing MAXX services to initially Hamilton NIMT Station. They considered that this option had the potential to deliver the most reliable and robust direct service that provides access to and from Britomart during peak periods. It was considered that although this option is not immediately available it has the potential to meet the stated needs of their residents and subject to funding and formal approve it is therefore intended to work toward its introduction by July 2012.
8. Next Steps:
KiwiRail to prepare detailed proposed timetables and associated pricing for options A, B and their component of C for Environment Waikato consideration.
KiwiRail to supply costs and timeline for supply of two refurbished carriages with toilet facilities and similar for two SA carriages
KiwiRail to supply costs and timeline for station platform works
Environment Waikato to select the required taking option
Once Environment Waikato have selected their preferred service option and have identified the actual stops they require:
KiwiRail in association with Auckland Transport and Veolia Transport will develop the associated operating schedule, a detailed timetable and associated operating costs.
Doc # 2049332 Page 44
Report 2: Hamilton and Tuakau - Proposed Rail Services Auckland Transport Recommendations
COVER SHEET
Date 27 April 2011
Project: Environment Waikato
Proposed Passenger Rail Services to Auckland
Paper Title: Hamilton and Tuakau - Proposed Passenger Rail Services
Auckland Transport Review and Recommendations
Written by:
Name
Title
Signature
Raymond Siddalls
Rail Network Development Lead
9.3.1.1
Reviewed by:
Name
Title
Signature
Ken McLeod Rail Projects Lead
9.3.1.2
Recipient:
Name
Title
9.3.1.3 Signature
Mark Lambert
Manager Public Transport Operations
Doc # 2049332 Page 45
Contents:
1. Purpose
2. Summary
3. Options investigated by Auckland Transport
4. Conclusions and Recommendations
5. Next Steps
6. Outstanding Issues
APPENDIX 1 – MAXX Timetable Options and Rolling Stock Requirements APPENDIX 2 – Estimated Capex and Opex Requirements APPENDIX 3 – Review and Re-evaluation of Option 3 (requested by the RWG)
Doc # 2049332 Page 46
1. Purpose: To identify the most suitable and feasible options for providing commuter passenger rail services from Hamilton and/or Tuakau to Auckland as proposed by Environment Waikato. Detail the infrastructure needed to operate these services and identify the associated costs. Auckland Transport in association with KiwiRail and Veolia Transport is required to:
confirm technical/network feasibility detail additional infrastructure needed to meet the operational safety and customer
service requirements identify any required civil works and/or rail network modifications and estimates of the
associated costs. provide budget estimate for annual operating costs recommend the most suitable service options detail any likely negative impact on Auckland Transport present and planned passenger
rail services
2. Summary: Environment Waikato have surveyed their residents and concluded that there is “significant support” for a subsidised Hamilton - Auckland rail passenger service. However due to Auckland Transport needing to manage 15% annual patronage growth it is committed to implementing the mature diesel timetable with the associated additional services and increased service frequencies, continuation of the Onehunga - Britomart service frequency and the introduction of Manukau services, there is no operational and berthing capacity available at either Britomart or Newmarket stations during morning and afternoon peak periods for Hamilton services.
To provide the services with arrivals and departures at the times required by commuters from the Waikato there are only three workable options that do not negative impact on existing and planned Auckland Transport services:
2.1 Hamilton – Auckland Service operated by the Silver Fern Railcar or dedicated carriage train:
2.1.1 Operating between Hamilton and Papakura with passenger transferring to MAXX services at Papakura
2.1.2 Operating between Hamilton and Auckland Strand Station with passenger transferring to a dedicated bus services to the required CBD destinations
The Silver Fern Railcar service (as proposed by KiwiRail) or suitable KiwiRail operated, loco hauled carriage train, subject to track access, could be scheduled to connect with any MAXX service that originates from Pukekohe or Papakura or can terminate at The Strand with bus connection to the CBD (1.5km). These options require the least initial capital investment and can be either upgraded as justified by patronage or terminated with minimum financial loss if unsuccessful.
2.2 Extension of limited MAXX services to Hamilton:
This option will provide direct access to Britomart Station. Any train set that is stabled at Pukekohe or Papakura subject to track access, can be scheduled to start its first morning service from Hamilton and extend the last evening service to Hamilton. A train set would run empty to Hamilton, to commence the first morning service and similarly in the evening the last service for a
Doc # 2049332 Page 47
train set can be extended to Hamilton and run empty back to either Pukekohe or Papakura for stabling.
Extending MAXX services to Hamilton requires additional rolling stock to accommodate the initial increased patronage and any future growth and suitable length, standard height platforms at all station used by passengers. (See Appendix 1 for MAXX Timetable Options and Rolling Sock Requirements).
To operate 6-car services with dedicated Hamilton commuter cars station platforms need to be 155m minimum length and 750mm height above track.
2.3 Tuakau – Auckland Services:
Tuakau has a population of 3,504 (2006) and a station site located 7.5km south of Pukekohe Station. It is relatively easy to change the existing MAXX operating schedule to extend any Pukekohe service to Tuakau.
The old Tuakau Station has an island platform, before it can be used for MAXX services it requires upgrading to accommodate the termination of 6-car MAXX trains:
platforms (length-155m, height-750mm) suitable pedestrian access rail network modifications to allow trains to cross from the down to the up main lines and
to stop and reverse direction.
Until a cross-over is installed at Tuakau trains need to run to Mercer to cross from the down main to the up main. This requires each service to run empty for an additional 25.4km. As there are no platforms at Mercer no passengers are able to board or disembark services. Extending MAXX services to Tuakau will also require additional rolling stock to accommodate the increase in patronage.
1. Options investigated:
3.1 Hamilton – Papakura service using Silver Fern Railcars or carriage train 3.2 Hamilton – Auckland (Strand Station) service using Silver Fern Railcars or carriage train 3.3 Extending a limited number of MAXX services to Hamilton 3.4 Extending MAXX Pukekohe services to Tuakau
a) Terminating MAXX services at Tuakau b) Terminating MAXX services at Mercer
2. Conclusions and Recommendations: 4.1 Hamilton – Papakura service using Silver Fern Railcar or carriage train with
passengers transferring to MAXX services. It can be easily implemented with the minimum capital investment and requires no additional rolling stock: offers the widest choice of arrival and departure times and permits several services
to be operated each day. provides access to all Auckland rail stations including Britomart and Newmarket via
the transfer services can stop at stations with 2-car length platforms and therefore requires the least
additional infrastructure initially could stop at stations with existing platforms and additional stops could be
incrementally added to the timetable as suitable platforms are installed can be operated as an interim service and when justified by patronage either
upgraded or if unsuccessful terminated with minimum financial loss.
Doc # 2049332 Page 48
can be migrated to a MAXX service when suitable station platforms are available at all required passenger stops
Papakura Station is presently being redesigned and upgraded to accommodate seamless transfers to EMU services from diesel services operating south of the Auckland electrified area.
It is recognised that transfer of services is not the preferred customer choice by Waikato Councils.
4.2 Hamilton – Auckland (Strand Station) service using Silver Fern Railcars or carriage train is alternative interim solution that provides a direct service to central Auckland. This option has the advantages detailed in 4.1.
The Strand Station is presently being upgraded for emergency use if for any reason Britomart Station is closed. It is also a development vision that it will be the future purpose built Auckland InterCity terminal station.
It is recognised that transfer of services is not the preferred customer choice by Waikato Councils.
4.3 Extending a limited number of MAXX services to Hamilton will provide direct access to Britomart and is therefore recommended as the preferred solution, to be implemented once all required passenger stops have suitable length standard height platforms and the required additional toilet cars are available. However there are only limited timetable options as only MAXX train sets stabled at Pukekohe or Papakura, subject to track access, can be scheduled to start the first morning service from Hamilton and extend the last evening service to Hamilton (see Appendix 1 for MAXX Timetable Options and Rolling Sock Requirements).
4.4 Extending MAXX Pukekohe services to Tuakau is recommended if Environment Waikato decided not to proceed with the Hamilton – Auckland services.
It is relatively easy to change the existing MAXX operation and extend any of the existing Pukekohe services to Tuakau as the services have sufficient layover at Pukekohe to allow them to be extended to Tuakau.
There is presently no cross-over at Tuakau, the nearest place were MAXX trains can cross from the down main to the up main lines and return to Auckland is Mercer. This requires an additional 25.4km empty running per service other than the first service of the day, there is insufficient time in the MAXX timetable to accommodate this requirement without altering timetable.
3. Next Steps: 5.1 Environment Waikato to select the required service option
Once Environment Waikato have selected their preferred service option and have identified the actual stops they require. KiwiRail in association with Auckland Transport and Veolia Transport will develop the operating schedule, a detailed timetable and associated operating costs. Environment Waikato will need to arrange with KiwiRail, upgrading of construction of
appropriate platforms etc at all stations were the service is required stop and board or disembark passenger.
Doc # 2049332 Page 49
4. Outstanding Issues: The Auckland Transport rail passenger services are operated by Veolia Transport whose network access rights only extend to Pukekohe. Any extension of MAXX services south of Pukekohe would require a variation to Veolia’s network access rights and their rail safety license. It will require Veolia staff to be trained to operate trains in this section of the rail network. This will be arranged on confirmation of Environment Waikato requirements for rail service.
Doc # 2049332 Page 50
APPENDIX 1 – Timetable Options and Rolling Stock Requirements
1. Extension of MAXX services to Hamilton - Timetable Options:
The services that arrive in Britomart and Hamilton closest to times requested are:
Morning Services:
Est. Depart Hamilton Depart Pukekohe Arrive Britomart 04:55 06:05 via Newmarket 07:14 05:08 06:18 via Glen Innes 07:18 05:49 06:54 via Glen Innes 08:02 05:58 07:03 * via Newmarket 08:06
NB: The 07:03am service is presently operating with maximum loadings, it therefore cannot be extended to Hamilton.
Evening Services:
Depart Britomart Arrive Pukekohe Est. Arrival Hamilton 5:50 via Glen Innes 6:47 7:52 6:12 via Glen Innes 7:18 8:23 7:12 via Newmarket 8:18 9:23
2. Rolling Stock Requirements:
The additional capacity needed for the number of passenger indicated by the EW survey will require two additional cars. They will need to be either operated independently or added to a MAXX train set, a third car is also needed for maintenance requirements. As the journey duration exceeds two hours these cars will require mobility toilet facilities.
It should be noted that:
None of the vehicles in the MAXX fleet have toilet facilities Due to the 15% annual rail patronage growth Auckland Transport have no spare cars
available A minimum of three BR MKII cars will need to be procured and rebuilt as SH cars (S-
Hamilton car with a mobility toilet). If additional services are required an additional train set including a locomotive and crew
will be need and due to the lack of berthing capacity at Britomart Station any additional peak services can only operate to The Strand Station or as transfer services to Papakura.
Some additional interpeak and off-peak arrivals and departures can be accommodated at Britomart
Doc # 2049332 Page 51
APPENDIX 2 – Estimated Capex and Opex Requirements
A2 Estimated Capex Costs for Civil/Network Works and Rolling Stock:
A2.1 Hamilton – Papakura service using Silver Fern Railcars or carriage train.
A2.2 Hamilton – Auckland (Strand Station) service using Silver Fern Railcars or carriage train.
Both these options require suitable 2-car platforms, pedestrian access and facilities at all stops, KiwiRail will need to specify and cost requirements. The estimated minimum cost of a single sided, standard height 2-car platform, (based on Huapai) - $500,000.00
A2.3 Extending a limited number of MAXX services to Hamilton
Suitable 6-car platforms, pedestrian access and facilities are needed at all stops. Estimated cost per station excluding footbridge - $2,000,000.00
Cost estimate supplied by AT Rail Projects Group, based on similar Auckland station projects. NB: No track alterations needed at Tuakau if Hamilton services are implemented.
A2.4 Extending MAXX Pukekohe services to Tuakau:
A2.4.1 Terminating MAXX services at Tuakau
Platform and common element facilities Estimated Cost - $2,000,000.00
Realignment of track, provision of points and crossing and associated signalling to permit termination of trains (budget estimate based on similar Auckland works, KiwiRail will need to survey site and provide detailed costing). Estimated Cost - $1,500,000.00
Assuming the pedestrian access is via road level crossing (no footbridge) Estimated Cost - $100,000.00
Estimated Total Capex - $3,600,000.00
A2.4.2 Terminating Services at Mercer:
The follow cost estimates are based on similar Auckland common element station projects and assume no footbridges
Estimated Total Capex:
Tuakau Station - $2,000,000.00
Mercer Station - $4,000,000.00
Total - $6,000,000.00
The estimated capital cost without provision of passenger facilities at Mercer is:
Total - $3,500.000.00
A2.5 Additional Rolling Stock:
To accommodate the projected patronage from the Waikato stations the extension of MAXX services will initially require 3 additional carriages. These are presently available in an unrefurbished condition in New Zealand. The estimated lead time for refurbishing them is 24 weeks from date of purchase and delivery to KiwiRail Engineering.
Doc # 2049332 Page 52
Purchase price - $120,000.00/car
Refurbish cost - $1,700,000.00 /car
Estimated Total Capex - $5,570,000.00
A5.6 Estimated Operating costs:
Based on the cost structure developed for the Helensville services the estimate annual cost of extending MAXX services to Tuakau, subject to agreement with KiwiRail on access charges and finalising of operation costs by Veolia Transport is:
6.1 Terminating at Hamilton - $1,100,000.00
6.2 Terminating at Tuakau - $150,000.00
6.3 Terminating at Mercer - $310,000.00.
Note; a detailed costing will need to be completed by Veolia Transport and/or KiwiRail when resources become available after completion of planning for the Rugby World Cup
APPENDIX 3 – Review and Re-evaluation of Option 3 (requested by the RWG) A3.1 Option 3 - Coupling a Silver Fern Railcar to a MAXX Service: As previously stated this option was not considered to be operationally feasible however at the request of the Rail Working Group it has been reviewed and re-evaluated. The review and re-evaluation conducted by Auckland Transport with input from Veolia Transport and KiwiRail operations management concluded that:
A3.1.1 The uncoupling of the railcar from the MAXX train consist and its associated relocation to a stabling area constitutes an additional train movement and due to the congestion at Britomart Station during the morning peak it cannot be accommodated. To carry out this operation would therefore require an operational time slot presently used by a MAXX timetabled service.
A3.1.2 There are serious Health and Safety issues relating to coupling a railcar carrying passengers to a MAXX train set while passenger are boarding. This is considered to be an unnecessary high risk operation that has the potential to cause serious harm and therefore it cannot be recommended.
A3.1.3 There is also very limited availability of suitable locomotives that have sufficient motive power to haul a train consisting of a Silver Fern Railcar and 6- MAXX SA/SD carriages and maintain the required timetable. It is unlikely that KiwiRail would guarantee that a suitable locomotive would be available for the proposed services as they are required for their commercial freight business.
A3.1.4 Due to the configuration of the doors, the railcar would need to be “locked-off” at
intermediate stations between Papakura and Britomart otherwise passengers may attempt to board and alight which will lead to extended station dwell times.
Note: To ensure that sufficient time is provided for passengers to safely board/ alight, a typical dwell time allowance for a railcar is 2 minutes. The station dwell time allowance for an Auckland MAXX service is 30 seconds. There are 14 intermediate stations between Papakura and Britomart, a service that includes a railcar, which is required to stop at all stations will require up to 21 minutes additional journey time.
A3.1.5 It is also unlikely that a safety case would receive the appropriate approval for the railcar to be attached to a MAXX train without provision for boarding/ alighting at all stations the MAXX train stops at.
Doc # 2049332 Page 53
Appendix 2: Comparison of Shortlisted Options In working through the operational feasibility of the proposed service two options were shortlisted by the RWP for final assessment – Option 1: Terminating Hamilton Services at The Strand and providing bus service
connections to the CBD
Option 2: Extending an existing MAXX Pukekohe - Auckland service to depart from Hamilton
The table below summarises the differences between the two options for comparison.
Details Option 1 (Silver Fern service to Auckland)
Option 2 (MAXX extension to Hamilton)
Peak Service
Start Station Frankton Station, Hamilton Frankton Station, Hamilton
Terminating Station The Strand, Auckland Britomart, Auckland
Timing (approx) Start Hamilton – 06:00
Arrive Strand – 08:15(via Newmarket)
Depart Strand – 17:15
Arrive Hamilton – 19:30 (via Newmarket)
NB: These times are indicative
Start Hamilton – 05:49
Arrive Britomart – 08:02 (via Glen Innes)
Depart Britomart – 17:50
Arrive Hamilton – 19:52 (via Glen Innes)
NB: These times might change depending on implementation timeline of the proposed service
Route and Stops The Base, Hamilton Ngaruawahia, Waikato
District Huntly, Waikato District Te Kauwhata, Waikato
District Tuakau, Waikato
District Papakura, Auckland Newmarket, Auckland
The Base, Hamilton Ngaruawahia, Waikato
District Huntly, Waikato District Te Kauwhata, Waikato
District Tuakau, Waikato
District Papakura, Auckland Newmarket/ Glen
Innes, Auckland
Doc # 2049332 Page 54
Off Peak Service An off peak service will be operated to Britomart which could go via Newmarket or Sylvia Park. Option to be further explored later
Would have to use the Silver Fern to run the off peak service
Infrastructure Requirements
Suitable 2 car platforms and pedestrian access
Suitable 6 car platform and pedestrian access
Station facilities (shelter, lighting)
Station facilities (shelter, lighting)
Park and ride facilities Park and ride facilities
Security at parking Security at parking
Rolling Stock Requirement
One refurbished Silver Fern railcar
Three additional BR MKII carriages which will need to be refurbished for long distance travel
Operating Cost $1.9 million $1.1 million
Rolling Stock Costs $0.0 (incl. in opex) $ 5.46 million
Infrastructure Costs
Other Costs (marketing, contingency)
Total Costs
Doc # 2049332 Page 55
Appendix 3: Station survey report from KiwiRail
Hamilton to Auckland Rail Service Platform Review: 1. Platform Standards:
Normal Auckland Metro platform standards are 1420mm from track centreline and 750mm above rail level. The brief for this project is to review the platforms at the following locations and indicate their current condition and assess costs for:
o Immediate start up of a service. o A start up train service requires a 50m platform and a long term
extension to 100m platform. o Long term upgrade to current standards.
The service proposal has indicated stations at the following locations:
o Hamilton o Te Rapa (The Base) o Ngaruawahia o Huntly o Te Kauwhata o Tuakau
2. Current Platform Status: Hamilton Station is in good condition and fit for operation now. Te Rapa (“The Base”) has no station. Ngaruawahia has a single platform on the Down Main. Huntly has a suitable platform fit for purpose on the east loop. Te Kauwhata has a low level island platform somewhat disused. Tuakau has a low level island platform disused. 3. Station Detail:
The report below identifies each station and lists its requirements for start up and long term services.
Doc # 2049332 Page 56
An estimate of cost for each item of the upgrade is also included. The estimates are considered rough order of cost and may vary depending on availability of second hand material and standards of construction specified.
The assumption has been made that the existing low level platforms are suitable for the start up service and that a portable step, if necessary, will be provided on the train.
It has also been assumed that there will be no disability access at the stations for the start up service (like ramps for wheelchairs)
Doc # 2049332 Page 57
Te Rapa: There is no existing platform at Te Rapa “The Base”. Options are to provide: 1. A single platform on the siding and then rearrange the track and
signalling to give mainline train access. Parking facilities are assumed to be provided at The Base. Basic amenities like lighting and shelter will need to be
provided. Constraints:
Access to such a platform will only be from The Base and not from Tasman Road.
Train will require to enter the siding platform which will take longer than option 2 from timetable perspective.
2. An island platform between the two main lines with pedestrian
access by underpass or level crossing to the Base and Tasman Road. Parking facilities will probably need to be provided at both
sides (Base, Tasman Road). Basic amenities like lighting and shelter will need to be
provided. Constraints
The constraints of option 1 will not apply in this case. It will require track work to widen the space between
the two mainline tracks to put in a platform. Ngaruawahia:
There is an existing platform on the Down Main at Ngaruawahia at a height of about 500mm above rail level. Platform is slightly overgrown and has limited access to a lay-by on SH1 in the centre of Ngaruawahia.
To operate passenger trains effectively an additional platform would be required on the Up Main (western) side as well.
No ability to run trains wrong line to this platform. Access is
Doc # 2049332 Page 58
restricted to the western Up Main side and some distance from the nearest roads.
Pedestrian level crossing access may be required. Shelter and lighting will need to be provided There seems to be no space for parking nearby
Huntly: The existing platform is satisfactory for operation of the proposed service.
A small shelter and lighting is available. Pedestrian access is available Secured parking facility will need to be provided. There
appears to be enough suitable space nearby for parking. Ownership, development and use of this will need to be ascertained.
Te Kauwhata:
The existing island platform is satisfactory for operation. The platform is very low but OK for start up.
The existing pedestrian level crossing at the south end gives platform access.
There is no shelter and lighting Secured parking will be needed. There seems to be space
available for this. Ownership, development and use will need to be investigated.
Tuakau:
The island platform is satisfactory from an operational point of view but needs tidy up.
Platform is low but OK for start up. Access needs to be provided from Harrisville Road or
Dominion Road. Shelter and lighting will need to be provided Secured parking will need to be provided. There seems to
be space available for this. Ownership, development and use will need to be investigated.
59
Costs: A summary of costs are shown below: Assumptions:
1. Existing platform heights are satisfactory for start up operating: 2. Start service without Te Rapa & Ngaruawahia (?). 3. Ngaruawahia needs new UM platform before it is viable. 4. Te Rapa (The Base) needs new facility to be functional.
Costs for secured parking have not been estimated Station Costs
Start Up Service with no platform raising
Start up with Platform height increase to 750mm
Longer Term Upgrade facility
Hamilton - - - Te Rapa (The Base)
Option 1: New Platform: $0.40m Signalling & Track $0.60m Lighting & Shelter: $0.10M Option 2: New Platform (Island) $0.50M Signalling & Track $0.50M Lighting and Shelter $0.10M
Ngaruawahia New platform Up Main side: $0.3M Ped. Xing: $0.02m Raise existing DM platform: $0.2m Shelter and Lighting: $0.10M
Huntly - - - Te Kauwhata Tidy existing platform:
$0.03M Shelter $0.03M Lighting $0.05M
Rebuild existing platforms: $0.40m
Nominal improvements $0.05m
Tuakau Tidy existing resurface: $0.05m Pedestrian access: $0.03m Shelter: $0.03m Lighting: $0.05M
Rebuild existing platforms: $0.40m
Nominal improvements: $0.05m
TOTAL: $270,000 $800,000 $1,520,000 TOTAL Costs accumulated for progressive improvements
$1,100,000 $2,700,000
Russell Herbert Technical Manager DART 26 July 2011
Richard Paling Consulting 60
Appendix 4: Updated financial and economic analysis of the proposed rail service
1 Introduction Following on from earlier work, proposals for the introduction of passenger rail services between Auckland and Hamilton are being progressed. This note sets out the current position in respect of the revenue and passenger forecasts and financial and economic evaluation of the options.
2 Main Changes The main proposed changes that have occurred since the earlier work was undertaken include:- The selection of a route that serves the old Strand Railway Station in central
Auckland rather than one which uses Britomart The inclusion of stations at The Base in the north of Hamilton and Te Kauwhata
and possibly at Tuakau. Confirmation of the operation of off peak services Revised capital and operating costs for the service Revision of the likely fares for the service from an average one-way price of $24
to $19.95 The revision of the start date of the services to possibly 2012
3 Scope of this Analysis This analysis updates the financial and economic financial evaluation of the proposed service undertaken in 2009. Within the time available, however it has not been possible to update the basic passenger forecasts although these have been revised to incorporate the effects of adding stations at Tuakau Te Kauwhata and The Base in Hamilton and the shift of the Auckland Terminus away from Britomart to The Strand. The original growth assumption of 4 per cent per year has also been left unchanged. As emphasised in earlier work, forecasting the demand for a completely new service of the type proposed for Hamilton-Auckland is subject to very wide margins of error. In particular, the success of the venture depends critically on the extent to which the package provided by the rail services (including the stations themselves as well as the on-train experience) is able to capture the enthusiasm and meet the aspirations of the travelling public and to provide the service required at an appropriate time of day.
Doc # 2049332 Page 61
For the main part of this analysis, it has been assumed that the service provided will call at the following stations:-
Hamilton Central (in Frankton)
The Base
Huntly
Tuakau
Newmarket
The Strand
In particular scenarios serving Tuakau, the forecast demands will exceed the capacity of a single train from the start of the service, and meeting this demand will require the provision of a second unit with an almost doubling of the costs of the service. The exclusion of the stop at Tuakau has therefore also been considered to identify the effects on the financial and economic analysis of this lower cost option. It is also planned that the service would stop at Papatoetoe to provide more convenient access to parts of the Auckland urban area. The effects of this have not been investigated in detail. The service will comprise two trains per day in each direction providing a peak period service from Hamilton to Auckland in the morning with a return in the evening peak, and an off peak service in each direction operating between these.
4 Demand Forecasts The demand forecasts have been based on the earlier work undertaken in 2009. These have been adjusted to allow for the shift of the Auckland Terminus to The Strand. An allowance has also been made for the additional traffic generated by the proposed station at The Base which is tentatively assumed to increase the total demand from the Hamilton area by about 15 per cent. In addition to the new trips generated by the station at The Base, it would also provide a more convenient option for passengers who would otherwise travel via the station at Hamilton Central. The forecasts for these two stations have therefore been combined. The initial demand forecasts assumed that the trains would terminate at Britomart rather than The Strand as currently proposed. Although it is proposed to provide a bus connection into the main parts of the CBD this would provide a less accessible location than Britomart and the forecasts have been revised to reflect this. Taking into account the overall impact on the total journey cost, the switch of terminals is estimated to reduce the potential demand by about 5 per cent. In undertaking this adjustment, it has been assumed that a reasonably high quality connection in keeping with the rest of the service can be provided. To the extent that this is not realised the forecasts may be optimistic. The Central forecasts for the peak service which would result for 2009 are set out in Table 4.1. Alternative forecasts have also been prepared based following the approach developed earlier which would give a low forecast of 58 per cent of the central forecast and a high forecast of 129 per cent of the central forecast.
Doc # 2049332 Page 62
Table 4.1Daily Peak Period Patronage Forecasts (Flows in each direction)
Station Central
Forecast Low
Forecast High
Forecast
Hamilton and The Base 70 41 90
Huntly 7 5 10
Te Kauwhata 5 3 7
Tuakau 27 16 35
Total all stations 109 65 142
Total excluding Tuakau 82 48 106
In line with the earlier work, it is assumed that these flows would grow by about 4 per cent per year. The forecast growth of the central case peak traffic demand over time is set out in Figure 4.1.
Figure 4.1
Peak period passenger forecasts (one way) It should be noted that a service calling at Tuakau is forecast from the outset of the service probably in 2012 to attract a level of demand which exceeds the capacity of a single Silver Fern unit (taken to be 96). To meet this demand would therefore require the operation of a second Silver Fern train. The Traffic using the off-peak services has been taken to be about 22 per cent of that in the peak, based on the KiwiRail analysis.
0
50
100
150
200
250
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
Year
Pea
k p
asse
ng
ers
(o
ne-
way
)
Central Forecast - Total
Central Forecast - Total exc Tuakau
Capacity
Capacity 2 units
Doc # 2049332 Page 63
5 Revenue Forecasts Revenue forecasts have been made based on an assumed average fare from Hamilton (including The Base) to Auckland of $19.95 including GST, equivalent to 15.8 cents per km including GST or 13.8 cents per km excluding GST. The fares that result for intermediate stations are set out in Table 5.1
Table 5.1Ticket Price Auckland-Hamilton ($ per one-way trip
Inc GST Exc GST
Proposed Hamilton (1)
Total $19.95 $17.35
Per-km $0.158 $0.138
Total Fares for Intermediate Stations to Auckland
Station Distance
(kms) Fare including GST Fare excluding GST
Huntly 92.5 $14.65 $12.74
Te Kauwhata 78.2 $12.38 $10.77
Tuakau 61 $9.66 $8.40
Notes (1) This fare is also assumed to be applicable from The Base The potential total revenues excluding GST for the Central forecast are set out in Table 5.2. It should be noted that these also include revenues from off-peak users
Table 5.2Potential Annual Revenue : Central Forecasts ($m exc GST) (1)
Year Revenue ($m)
All Stations Excluding Tuakau
2012 1.09 0.93
2013 1.14 0.97
2014 1.18 1.01
2015 1.23 1.05
2016 1.28 1.09
2017 1.33 1.14
2018 1.38 1.18
2019 1.44 1.23
2020 1.49 1.28
2021 1.55 1.33
2022 1.62 1.38
2023 1.68 1.44
2024 1.75 1.49
2025 1.82 1.55
2026 1.89 1.62
2027 1.97 1.68
Notes (1) These assume that there is sufficient capacity to meet the forecast demand. In practice in almost all scenarios, the forecast demand will exceed the capacity available at some point and the revenues would need to be adjusted to reflect this.
Doc # 2049332 Page 64
The revenue forecasts do not include any allowance for the costs of the sale of the tickets.
6 Costs of operation
6.3 Operating Costs The costs of operation have been assumed to be $1.97 million per year (excluding GST) for the operation of a single Silver Fern 2 car train with a passenger capacity of 94. This would provide both a peak and an off peak service with two return trips per day between Hamilton and Auckland. The cost of a second unit is understood to be approximately 85 per cent of the costs of the first unit which is assumed to include their operation as a single train. A 5 per cent contingency has been added to these items which would aim to cover items such as the costs of marketing of these services and the costs of ticket sales. These costs will be investigated further and if necessary refined at a subsequent stage.
6.4 Capital Costs The capital costs associated with the new service are assumed to relate to the new or upgraded stations at The Base and Tuakau with no expenditure being included for the existing stations at Hamilton or Huntly. These costs have been divided into the immediate costs to get the service started, which includes the provision of a new station at The Base and minor works at Te Kauwhata and Tuakau and costs incurred over the longer term to upgrade the stations at Te Kauwhata and Tuakau. Based on the material provided by KiwiRail, the costs associated with the station upgrade at Tuakau are estimated at about $0.16 million for immediate start-up costs and $0.45 for upgrading over the longer term. The costs for the other stations, including the construction of a new facility at The Base are estimated at about $0.76 over the short-term and $0.45 over the longer term.
7 Options for Assessment The main option for assessment the Base Case is the provision of a single Silver Fern train calling at all the proposed stations along the route, based on the Central passenger demand forecasts. It is recognised that the capacity to be provided will fall short of the prospective demand but this would avoid the provision of a second train with the consequent almost doubling of the costs. Alternative scenarios for the Central forecasts examine the effects of providing additional capacity to meet demand and the exclusion of stopping at Tuakau. Further tests using the low and high forecasts and assuming that all services stop at Tuakau have also been considered.
8 Financial and Economic Analysis The financial and economic evaluation for the full service calling at all stations (Hamilton Central, The Base, Huntly, Te Kauwhata and Tuakau) but with a single Silver Fern unit is summarised in Tables 8.1 and 8..2. This assumes that services will start in 2012 and because the train will be at capacity from the outset revenues and benefits will remain constant over the evaluation period, taken to cover 15 years of operations.
Doc # 2049332 Page 65
Table 8.1 Financial Evaluation of Base Case
Central Forecast : Single Silver Fern unit calling at all stations NPVs ($m discounted to 2011 at
12 per cent) Annual equivalent for funding
gap ($m)
Net revenues 5.8
Operating Costs 14.1
Operating deficit (8.3)
Annual Funding Gap 1.2
For the Central Base Case with the services stopping at all stations using a single Silver Fern unit, the revenues from passengers would cover about 40 per cent of the costs of operation, leaving an average funding gap of $1.2 million per year over the 15 year period. The revenue shortfall in the initial 2 years of operation 2012 and 2103 would amount to a total of $2.4 million. The results of the economic evaluation are set out in Table 8.2.
Table 8.2 Economic Evaluation of Base Case
Central Forecast : Single Silver Fern unit calling at all stations NPVs $m discounted to 2011 at 8 per cent)
Funding Gap 10.4
Capital Costs 1.7
Total Costs 12.1
PT User Benefits 4.1
Road user Benefits 10.8
Total Benefits 14.9
BCR 1.4
Overall, the project would achieve a BCR of about 1.4, a figure which reflects the high utilisation of the train throughout its operating period.
9 Sensitivity Testing
9.3 Sensitivity Test 1 Central Forecast: Provision of additional capacity to meet the forecast demand
The first sensitivity test considers the effects of providing sufficient capacity for all the forecast passengers while calling at all stations in early years of operation. This would involve the provision of a second Silver Fern unit from the outset of the services. This would reach capacity about 2023 after which date the revenues and benefits are assumed to remain constant. The financial and economic evaluations of this option are set out in Tables 9.1 and 9.2.
Doc # 2049332 Page 66
Table 9.1 Financial Evaluation of Sensitivity Test 2 – 2 Silver Fern units from the start of
services calling at all stations NPVs ($m discounted to 2011 at
12 per cent) Annual equivalent for funding
gap ($m)
Net revenues 9.1
Operating Costs 26.1
Operating deficit (16.9)
Annual Funding Gap 2.5
Revenues would cover about 35 per cent of the costs of the service
Table 9.2 Economic Evaluation of Sensitivity Test 1 :
2 Silver Fern units from the start of services calling at all stations NPVs $m discounted to 2011 at 8 per cent)
Funding Gap 21.2
Capital Costs 1.7
Total Costs 22.9
PT User Benefits 6.7
Road user Benefits 20.3
Total Benefits 27.0
BCR 1.2
Although the benefits would increase relative to the base case because of the less constrained operations and higher patronage, the costs of the service would also increase compared to the Base case. The BCR would be slightly smaller at 1.2.
9.4 Sensitivity Tests 2 and 3: Trains not serving Tuakau
An alternative approach which would avoid the need to operate a second Silver Fern train at least in the early years would be for the service not to call at Tuakau. This would achieve a forecast patronage more closely allied to the level of capacity provided up until the point when additional capacity is required. Two options for this service have been examined:- The first considering the position where revenues and benefits are assumed to remain
constant after 2014 when the capacity of a single car unit is reached (Sensitivity Test 1) and
The second assuming the provision of additional capacity to meet the growing demand (sensitivity Test 2)
Doc # 2049332 Page 67
The financial and economic evaluations of these options are set out in Tables 9.3 and 9.4. Table 9.3
Financial Evaluation of Sensitivity Tests 2 and 3 Trains calling at all stations except Tuakau
(using a discount rate of 12 per cent) Revenues/Costs Sensitivity Test 2
Use of a single Silver Fern unit
Sensitivity Test 3
Use of 2 Silver Fern units after 2014
NPVs $m discounted to
2011
Annual equivalent for funding gap
($m)
NPVs $m discounted to
2011
Annual equivalent for funding gap
($m)
Net revenues 6.6 7.8
Operating Costs 14.1 23.1
Operating deficit (7.5) (15.3)
Annual Funding Gap
1.1 2.3
For Sensitivity Test 2, the revenues from passengers would cover about 47 per cent of the costs of operation, leaving an average funding gap of $1.1 million per year over the 15 year period. For Sensitivity Test 3 where a higher level of capacity is provided, the revenues would cover about 34 per cent of the costs. The results of the economic evaluation are set out in Table 9.4.
Table 9.4 Economic Evaluation of Sensitivity Tests 2 and 3
Trains calling at all stations except Tuakau NPVs $m discounted to 2011 at 8 per cent)
Sensitivity Test 2
Use of a single Silver Fern unit
Sensitivity Test 2
Use of 2 Silver Fern units after 2014
Funding Gap 9.7 19.3
Capital Costs 1.1 1.1
Total Costs 10.8 20.5
PT User Benefits 4.8 5.7
Road user Benefits 12.6 15.2
Total Benefits 17.4 20.9
BCR 1.6 1.0
Removing the stop at Tuakau while still operating a single unit would result in the loss of some passengers but would increase revenues and benefits because of the increased use of the train by longer distance passengers paying higher fares. This would improve both the financial and economic position compared to options serving Tuakau, including the Base Case. It is however recognised that this would reduce the overall impact of the service on regional accessibility and development. If however a second Silver Fern was put into operation in 2014 (Sensitivity Test 3), there would be an increased mismatch between the demand and the capacity provided. As a
Doc # 2049332 Page 68
result, the share of costs covered by revenues would fall to about 33 per cent and the BCR would fall to just over 1. An alternative approach considered under Sensitivity Test 4 would be to operate a single Silver Fern unit calling at all stations except Tuakau until 2014 when the capacity is reached, and then add an additional unit which would also allow the train to serve passengers from Tuakau. The financial and economic returns from this option are set out in Tables 9.5 and 9.6.
Table 9.5 Financial Evaluation of Sensitivity Test 4 (Trains calling at Tuakau from 2014)
NPVs ($m discounted to 2011 at
12 per cent) Annual equivalent for funding
gap ($m)
Net revenues 8.8
Operating Costs 23.1
Operating deficit (14.2)
Annual Funding Gap 2.1
Table 9.6
Economic Evaluation of Sensitivity Test 4 (Trains calling at Tuakau from 2014) NPVs $m discounted to 2011 at 8 per cent)
Funding Gap 17.8
Capital Costs 1.7
Total Costs 19.5
PT User Benefits 6.5
Road user Benefits 19.4
Total Benefits 26.0
BCR 1.3
Expanding the services to stop at Tuakau from 2014 onwards would give increased benefits and both the financial position and the economic returns would improve compared to Sensitivity Test 3. This option could form part of a staged development of the route, using the initial years to develop the demand on the route making the best use of the capacity available and then in subsequent years extending the service and broaden its catchment further again to help make use of the capacity available.
9.5 Sensitivity Tests 5 and 6: Low and High Forecasts
The earlier work identified alternative low and high forecasts. The passenger forecasts that would result from these are set out in Figure 9.1.
Doc # 2049332 Page 69
Figure 9.1
High and Low Passenger Forecasts : Peak Period Trips per Day into Auckland With the low forecasts, there is capacity to handle the passengers from all stations for the period to 2019 or 2020 and throughout the evaluation period if trains do not serve Tuakau. With the high forecasts, two train sets would be required from the outset of the services and although there would be capacity to handle the full level of demand the service, this would be fully utilised by 2017 or 2018. If trains did not serve Tuakau, there would be capacity almost to the end of the evaluation period. In order to undertake the financial and economic evaluation of these options, to simplify the analysis only those serving Tuakau have been assessed. In both cases, it has been assumed that when the initial capacity is fully utilised no additional capacity would be provided and the costs, revenues and benefits would remain constant over the remainder of the evaluation period. The results of the financial and economic assessments are set out in Tables 9.7 and 9.8.
Table 9.7 Financial Evaluation of Sensitivity Tests 5 and 6 : Low and High Forecasts
(NPVs $m discounted to 2011 using a discount rate of 12 per cent)
Item Sensitivity Test 5
Low Forecast
Sensitivity Test 6
High Forecast
Net revenues 5.2 10.7
Operating Costs 14.1 26.1
Operating deficit (8.9) (15.3)
Annual Funding Gap ($m pa)
1.3 2.3
Table 9.8
Economic Evaluation of Sensitivity Tests 5 and 6 : Low and High Forecasts (NPVs $m discounted to 2011 at a discount rate of 8 per cent)
Item Sensitivity Test 5
Low Forecast
Sensitivity Test 6
High Forecast
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026
Year
Pe
ak
pa
sse
ng
ers
(o
ne
-wa
y)
Low-Total
Low Total exc Tuakau
Capacity
High - Total
High - Total exc Tuakau
Capacity 2 units
Doc # 2049332 Page 70
Funding Gap 11.2 19.3
Capital Costs 1.7 1.7
Total Costs 12.9 21.0
PT User Benefits 3.8 7.8
Road user Benefits 11.5 23.7
Total Benefits 15.3 31.5
BCR 1.2 1.5
9.6 Summary of Results The results of the sensitivity tests are summarised in Table 9.9
Table 9.9Summary of Sensitivity Tests
Test Forecast Base
Stations served
Initial No of Silver Ferns
Year when capacity increased
Year when costs and benefits assumed constant
Annual Funding Gap
Cost recovery ratio over evaluation period
BCR
Base
Case
Central Forecas
t All 1 NA 2012 1.2 40% 1.4
ST1
Central Forecas
t All 2 NA 2023 2.5 35% 1.2
ST2
Central Forecas
t Not
Tuakau 1 NA 2014 1.1 47% 1.6
ST3
Central Forecas
t Not
Tuakau 1 2014 NA 2.3 34% 1.0
ST4
Central Forecas
t - Hybrid
Not Tuakau
until 2014 1 2014 2023 2.1 38% 1.3
ST5 Low
forecast All 1 NA 2020 1.3 37% 1.2
ST6
High Forecas
t All 2 NA 2016 2.3 41% 1.5
The economic and financial results for the options tested reflect the extent to which the capacity available is utilised, with the best returns typically being achieved where the train is operating at or near capacity over much of the evaluation period. Because of the large capacity of a train compared to the level of the demand, the options which aim to have sufficient capacity through almost all the evaluation period, ST1, and ST3 and ST5 have relatively poor economic and financial returns.
Doc # 2049332 Page 71
Options where the demand is constrained to match the capacity available typically have much higher economic and financial returns although would not provide the same level of regional impact and accessibility as more unconstrained options. The rate of return generated by the Base Case reflects the high utilisation of the train but this is tempered by the effects of the mix of travellers some of whom only generate limited revenues and benefits since they are only using the service for a relatively short distance. ST4 a hybrid option which aims to provide a good match between demand and capacity by only serving Tuakau when additional capacity is brought on stream has improved economic and financial returns compared to other relatively unconstrained options, but does not perform as well as the more capacity limited options. Funding Issues in Early Years An important issue is the level of revenue support that will be required in the initial period of operation of the new services. This is set out in Table 10.1
Table 10.1Forecast Revenue Support in Initial Years ($m)
Year Operating Costs
Revenues Deficit Base Costs Contingency Total Costs
Base Case 1 Train operation stopping at all stations
2012 1.97 0.10 2.07 0.85 -1.22
2013 1.97 0.10 2.07 0.85 -1.22
2014 1.97 0.10 2.07 0.85 -1.22
ST5 Low Forecast With Tuakau Single Train Operation
2012 1.97 0.10 2.07 0.64 -1.43
2013 1.97 0.10 2.07 0.66 -1.41
2014 1.97 0.10 2.07 0.69 -1.38
ST6 High Forecast With Tuakau 2 train operation
2012 3.64 0.18 3.83 1.41 -2.42
2013 3.64 0.18 3.83 1.46 -2.36
2014 3.64 0.18 3.83 1.52 -2.30
Doc # 2049332 Page 72
10 Overall Assessment The provisional updating of the economic and financial evaluation of the proposed Hamilton-Auckland rail service takes into account a number of changes since the scheme was appraised in 2009. These include:- The selection of a route that serves the old Strand Railway Station in central Auckland
with a bus link to Central Auckland rather than one which uses Britomart The inclusion of stations at The Base, Te Kauwhata and Tuakau (for most of the options
considered) Confirmation of the operation of off peak services Revised capital and operating costs for the service Revision of the likely fares for the service from an average one-way price of $24 to
$19.95 The revision of the start date of the services to possibly 2012 No attempt at this stage has been made to review the basic traffic forecasts on which the earlier analysis was based although allowance has been made for the effects resulting from changes in the stations served. It should be noted that the forecasts produced are subject to wide margins of error and should be used with extreme care. The main changes have resulted from the inclusion of the additional stations at The Base, Te Kauwhata and Tuakau to be served by the new rail service. For the Central Baseline forecasts, the forecast demand for the service exceeds the capacity of a single Silver Fern unit. While the Baseline assessment assumes the provision of a single train throughout, recognising that some revenues and benefits will be lost, the effects of increasing the capacity available and/or managing the demand b\by not providing a service to Tuakau have been examined. Providing capacity to meet the forecast demands from all the stations would require the use of a second Silver Fern unit. This therefore results in a significant increase in costs and for much of the period only limited use would be made of the capacity available. Because of the substantial increase in costs that would result and only limited passenger benefits there is a large funding gap and the economic BCR would fall from a baseline figure of 1.4 to 1.2. If the train did not serve Tuakau, the demand would reach the capacity of a single Silver Fern unit by about 2014. If no additional capacity were provided and the costs and benefits were assumed to remain constant in succeeding years a relatively high rate of return would be achieved since effective use would be made of the capacity available. If however, a second train was added which would allow the potential demand to be satisfied, the additional costs would outweigh the additional benefits and the returns would be reduced. However, even in this scenario a BCR in excess of 1 would be achieved. Low and high forecasts have also been examined. In the low forecast even serving Tuakau, the level of utilisation of the capacity available is relatively low and a more modest rate of return is achieved. For the high forecast, a better balance between demand and capacity and as a consequence a higher BCR is achieved. For all the options assessed, a BCR in excess of 1 is achieved, and options exist for getting a better balance with higher economic and financial returns.
Doc # 2049332 Page 73
Appendix 5: NZTA Letter Regarding Funding
Doc # 2049332 Page 74
Doc # 2049332 Page 75
