27 April 2005 Rail – A Neglected Asset for Christchurch – Opinion editorial by Christopher Kissling

Various options for future urban development for greater Christchurch have been outlined by the Greater Christchurch Urban Development Strategy Forum and are now up for debate. All four strategies, including Business as Usual, failed to mention rail transport as part of any package to serve the growth and spread of the greater urban area. It is to be hoped that this omission does not mean the politicians and planners have turned their backs deliberately on a form of public transport that could enhance mobility when considered in conjunction with walking, cycling and bus transport.

With fuel prices continuing to escalate, and no alternatives to petrol and diesel ready for at least 7-10 years, it would be short-sighted in the extreme if the city's existing rail corridors are neglected.

A number of peripheral settlements are linked to Christchurch by rail. They include Belfast, Kaiapoi and Rangiora on the northern line; Templeton, Rolleston, Burnham and Dunsandel on the southern line; Aylesbury, Kirwee and Darfield on the midland line, and Lyttelton on the port line.

A number of these towns and settlements were once serviced by commuter-style passenger services. They ceased when our society became car-dependent, and road improvements dominated transport expenditure. It is only very recently that government has looked to revive alternative modes of transport. There is a realisation that we cannot build our way out of urban road congestion. Other forms of transport must play their part.

The systematic reduction in rail passenger frequencies and the non-replacement of antiquated rolling stock spelt doom for rail. Young people could aspire to owning and driving their own cars shortly after obtaining their driving licences. This was thanks to the opening of the New Zealand economy, allowing relatively cheap second hand cars to supplant the old cars we used to keep repairing with mechanical ingenuity. In the Christchurch region, several generations have grown up not knowing or experiencing commuter rail transport.

Higher density developments and higher intensity of land uses are two of the major strategies being considered to prevent Auckland-style urban sprawl. Experience elsewhere has shown that this only works well if good access and mobility are part of the planning. Transport corridors offering good accessibility, without consuming excessive space, can link centres of more intense development. Rail options fall into this category. On a per passenger/kilometre basis they can be very energy efficient.

So why isn't rail passenger transport featuring in the strategic thinking for greater Christchurch? Past rail operators have shown they preferred to concentrate on freight. Maybe we need more than one rail operator on the tracks that have been returned to government ownership under the responsibility of OnTrack. One of those operators might specialise in passenger services.

But even if the current monopoly operator (Toll Rail) wishes to embrace passenger services with enthusiasm, there is the drawback for Christchurch that the existing rail corridor does not penetrate the central business district (CBD).

Revitalising the Christchurch CBD is currently reliant upon trying to provide better access for cars and buses. They compete for the same road space, making it difficult for public bus transport to match or better the private car. Simply bolstering future development along the existing rail corridor will still leave the CBD and eastern parts of Christchurch at a relative disadvantage.

Christchurch already enjoys the free hybrid electric shuttle buses that distribute passengers around the central area, albeit on a limited circuit. The addition of further loops and points of interchange could make moving about the central city quick and convenient – even faster than Melbourne's trams – especially if road space is reserved for these shuttle buses. There is a need, therefore, to link this means of inner city distribution efficiently to stations on the main rail network that fringes the inner city.

If such a system were linked to the rail network to the south (Moorhouse Ave) and west (Addington or Riccarton), allowing a smooth transition between trains and shuttles, Christchurch would have a great transport system connecting outlying settlements right to the heart of the city. It would need to have attractive rolling stock, sufficient service frequency and speed to make it attractive.

There is, however, a major snag at Addington. Part of the track has been dismantled, meaning it is no longer possible for trains to turn right from the Lyttelton port line on to the north line without reversing. It is a glaring example of how little thought has been given to the future role of rail along this important transport corridor.

If this could be resolved, there is potential for the Lyttelton rail line to continue across the harbour to expanding settlements on the flanks of Mt Herbert, where the microclimate is better than in Christchurch. Such a direct rail extension would provide better access than the road around the harbour or the ferry. It could also be associated with development of yacht marinas. This line of expansion of the city is logical given that other directions are constrained by sea, river, airport, and prime arable land. One only has to look at the development of North Vancouver to see the impact of the First Narrows bridge.

It is regrettable that other branch rail lines such as to Prebbleton, Lincoln, Little River and Leeston were closed and are unlikely to be recovered for commuter rail. A rail bus on a line to Lincoln and or Leeston, free from conflict with any freight traffic, would marry the convenience of door-to-door connections with the speeds attainable only along an access-controlled corridor that bypasses road traffic congestion. The lesson? Never give up a transport corridor. Keep it in public ownership.

There is great potential still to be realised in the remaining rail corridors serving greater Christchurch. Making best use of those corridors should be a primary consideration in any urban development strategy.

Christopher Kissling, Professor of Transport Studies, Lincoln University, Canterbury, New Zealand