One of the significant problems with Christchurch public transport is that it is almost entirely a bus system. There is certainly nothing rapid about the cities mass transit! There is no real 'backbone' to our system that allows quick services along a dedicated corridor which normal bus services feed onto/from.
To illustrate, the number of trips per year made on Christchurch's public transport system is around 17 million (almost all on bus, the rest on one ferry route). In Wellington 35 million trips per year are made on its public transport system, 11 million of which are made by rail. Take away that 11 million and it is 17 million vs 24 million for two cities of similar size. That is still quite some difference (7 million) but not as much as people may have been led to believe. Further, that extra 7 million could be accounted by the fact that buses in Wellington feed onto/from the rail network.
So my point is that we are doing relatively well considering... considering our system doesn't have a backbone! More than anything this example spells out what is wrong with our public transport network, where it still falls short. Unlike Wellington (and Auckland) we don't have dedicated mass transit corridors which our buses can work with, our rail tracks sit quiet all day except for the odd freight train.
Before I get carried away and start talking about bringing rail back I'll stop myself and instead focus on what can be done here and now and at a reasonable price. Most obviously is bringing in a system of express routes that operate frequently and stop only at major centres and popular destinations which other services feed onto. Bus priority measures will also help. I sat on the bus the other day and thought "who would really take this bus?". It was stuck in the same mess as everyone else (for a city of 400 000 people I think Christchurch has pretty bad road congestion). It's really only attractive for short trips, for those who live in inner city suburbs and work in the CBD for example. Otherwise it simply takes too long, and there is little advantage even when factoring in petrol.
If we are going to really get serious about public transport we need to recognise where it's deficiencies are (in comparison to more effective public transport, such as my Wellington example). It's inability to move lots of people quickly is a severe handicap and must be overcome to make our entire transport system operate as it should.
Wednesday, November 11, 2009
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
An Experience
I've been using the buses a bit more lately and decided to do a little report on my experiences. Firstly, I needed to get from Papanui to Rolleston. These were my options:
1) - Catch the #10/14 etc to Merivale, Metrostar to Hornby then #520 to Rolleston
2) - Catch the #10/14 etc to the CBD, #5 to Hornby, #520 to Rolleston
3) - Catch the Orbiter to Ilam, Metrostar to Hornby, #520 to Rolleston
All three options involve transferring twice to get to my destination. While I accept that transferring is a concept widely accepted in most parts of the world it bugs me is that my trip isn't exactly roundabout. In fact, the second transfer at Hornby is pointless! The #520 should operate through from Christchurch with connections to other services at the CBD, Riccarton & Hornby. However, Metro/Ecan see it fit to turn the service into a shuttle from Hornby that runs once per hour (my only options to connect with the #520 were 18:55 & 19:55). Not exactly a seamless service!
The time it takes to use public transport to get to/from Rolleston is a joke, it is little wonder only one per cent of trips made between Rolleston & Christchurch are made using public transport. No one in their right mind would call this service tolerable, let alone an asset.
The main problems are:
1) - Catch the #10/14 etc to Merivale, Metrostar to Hornby then #520 to Rolleston
2) - Catch the #10/14 etc to the CBD, #5 to Hornby, #520 to Rolleston
3) - Catch the Orbiter to Ilam, Metrostar to Hornby, #520 to Rolleston
All three options involve transferring twice to get to my destination. While I accept that transferring is a concept widely accepted in most parts of the world it bugs me is that my trip isn't exactly roundabout. In fact, the second transfer at Hornby is pointless! The #520 should operate through from Christchurch with connections to other services at the CBD, Riccarton & Hornby. However, Metro/Ecan see it fit to turn the service into a shuttle from Hornby that runs once per hour (my only options to connect with the #520 were 18:55 & 19:55). Not exactly a seamless service!
The time it takes to use public transport to get to/from Rolleston is a joke, it is little wonder only one per cent of trips made between Rolleston & Christchurch are made using public transport. No one in their right mind would call this service tolerable, let alone an asset.
The main problems are:
- termination of the #520 at Hornby (shuttle nature of the service)
- low service frequency (one an hour)
- lack of connectivity between other services
If the service ran from the CBD people could access most parts of Christchurch with just the one transfer. Rolleston itself is fast approaching a population of 10-15 000 so I fail to see why this link is lagging behind. Services could run express through the city stopping only at Riccarton, Ilam & Hornby to connect with other services.
Rangiora has a direct service every half hour during weekdays, stylised as the 'Northern Star', running via Kaiapoi, Belfast and Papanui. Why can't Rolleston? What makes it worse is that you have to wait around in Hornby, often at night for some commuters, which isn't exactly the safest scenario. In short, I have found this service to represent all that is wrong with Christchurch's public transport system. Too slow, too infrequent and not much use.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)