Thanks Andrew,
It’s good to be in the loop. My first thought was around the ‘indicative capacity’ attribute. I couldn’t easily find the theoretical capacity of the cable car, but according to Wikipedia, each car has a maximum load of around 100 (30 seated, 70 standing). The same source states that in 1996, Paul Lambert rode 80 trips in one day, so that suggests capacity is in the order of ~8000. The same source states the normal operating speed is 18km/h, which is faster than average bus speeds on many of our main corridors, so I wonder why the description specifically excludes cable cars? Speed (fast or quick) is surely relative to practical alternatives and the cable car is clearly an efficient connector in its dedicated corridor.
Otherwise it all looked OK to me.
Cheers, Joe
From: Andrew Wharton <[email address]>
Sent: Friday, 22 January 2021 10:22 am
To: Joe Hewitt <[email address]>
Cc: Peter Nunns <[email address]>
Subject: FYI - Possible changes to draft One Network Framework
Hi Joe,
I’ve been helping Amy Kearse from NZTA with edits to the proposed One Network Framework (attached), thought you may be interested in these possible changes. The attached draft has not been published yet BTW.
Rapid transit – One Network Framework – suggested changes 18-22 Jan 2021 – ref pages 47 and 49
Further to the various emails on this topic, here are some suggestions to amend the ‘dedicated’ PT classification in the ONF to better align with the definitions associated with rapid transit in the GPS and NPS-UD and allow more flexibility re the bus elements of the classification.
Note, the ONF is about the corridor; rapid transit in the GPS and NPS-UD are about the services/stops. However, the current wording of the ONF uses some of the characteristics of rapid transit.
As the ONF is a non-statutory document, RMA decision makers it will not have decisive legal weight; decision makers will need to have regard to it. This means a rapid transit service may still need to be justified by using measuring its frequency, quickness, reliability and capacity relative to the relevant location (as per NPS-UD and GPS definitions), and if it supports NPS-UD’s objectives of providing well-functioning urban environments, competitive land and development markets, and having more people living near public transport.
Metro rail and dedicated busways
All metro rail lines and dedicated busways are classified as PT1 ‘Dedicated’, and consequently are rapid transit corridors. By design, they are able to cater for an increasing frequency and capacity of public transport service while retaining the services’ speed and reliability.
|
Class |
Public Transport Service Level descriptor |
Strategic significance (Role in Public Transport Network) |
Indicative capacity – Vehicle Volume (at peak) |
Indcative Capacity – People Movement (indicative) (bi-directional) |
Description |
|
PT1 |
Dedicated |
Corridors where ‘rapid transit’ services are operated, providing a fast, quick, frequent, highly reliable, and high-capacity public transport service that form of urban transport along a dedicated PT corridor operates on a permanent route (road or rail) that is largely separated from other traffic. |
All metro rail corridors and dedicated corridors for non-rail public transport: all services.
Buses and other non-rail public transport on largely separated corridors: ≥12 services per hour
|
>53000 per day |
Dedicated and largely separated public transport corridors provide for the fast and efficient long distance movement of people by rapid transit. By definition, they include dedicated busways and all metro rail lines. They primarily only service public transport (excepting rail lines that can also provide a goods movement function under the freight mode). The ‘quick’ descriptor means that gondolas, cable cars and similarly slow-moving vehicles are not rapid transit services on PT1 corridors. , but which is exclusive use by one or the other at a time).
|
|
|
Spine |
Corridors where many frequent services operate and many different bus services merge together to create very high frequencies and overall passenger movement. Any deficiencies on these corridors affect multiple services and large parts of an urban area. |
>12 bus services per hour |
1000 to 10000+ per day |
Spine corridors are where many inbound services come together or outbound services operate, usually within city centres or at major transport interchanges, and much of the street space can be dedicated to public transport infrastructure, including significant space utlitised for bus stops. Examples are Symonds Street in Auckland central, and Manners Street in Wellington. The Auckland Harbour Bridge would also be considered a Spine corridor. |
|
Andrew Wharton |
|
|