20 Viaduct Harbour Avenue Auckland 1010
Private Bag 92250, Auckland 1142, New Zealand
Ph 09 355 3553
Fax 09 355 3550
12 September 2023
Tony Randle
[FYI request #23621 email]
Kia ora Tony,
The information you requested -
CAS-765469-S4F0V0
Thank you for your request for information dated 28 July 2023 regarding the Auckland Rapid Transit
Plan (ARTP) Stages 1-3.
Can AT please provide a copy of the paper, report, project and/or correspondence which is the
authoritative source for the information in Table 3-2?
Your request for information is refused under section 17 (e) of the LGOIMA as there was no specific
document that can be considered the ‘authoritative source’, therefore the information does not
exist.
Can AT please provide a copy of the scope, terms of reference, contract, purchase order or other
document that asked for this for the information in Table 3-2 being provided to AT?
Your request is refused under section 17 (e) of the LGOIMA as the information was sourced
internal y, therefore the information does not exist.
Can AT please provide the authoritative source (transport expert, transport consulting company)
that provided the information in Table 3-2?
Your request is refused under section 17 (e) of the LGOIMA as the information was sourced
internal y, therefore the information does not exist.
Can AT please outline when it received the information in Table 3-2?
Your request is refused under section 17 (e) of the LGOIMA as the information was sourced
internally, no external source was consulted, therefore the information does not exist.
Can AT please provide a copy of any and all reviews (internal or external) of the information in
Table 3-2 that confirmed this information is accurate?
Your request is refused under section 17 (e) of the LGOIMA as this information was not reviewed
outside of the project that produced it to confirm its accuracy.
aucklandtransport.govt.nz
Can AT please provide a copy of the paper, report, project and/or correspondence which is the
authoritative source for the information in “Passengers per hour at peak” chart?
Your request for information is refused under section 17 (e) of the LGOIMA as there was no specific
document that can be considered the ‘authoritative source’; therefore the information does not
exist.
Can AT please provide a copy of the scope, terms of reference, contract, purchase order or other
document that asked for this for the information in “Passengers per hour at peak” chart being
provided to AT?
Your request is refused under section 17 (e) of the LGOIMA as the information was sourced
internal y, no external source was consulted, therefore the information does not exist.
Can AT please provide the authoritative source (transport expert, transport consulting company
that provided the information in “Passengers per hour at peak” chart?
Your request for information is refused under section 17 (e) of the LGOIMA as there was no specific
document that can be considered the ‘authoritative source’; therefore the information does not
exist.
Can AT please outline when it received the information in “Passengers per hour at peak” chart?
Your request is refused under section 17 (e) of the LGOIMA as the information was sourced
internally, therefore the information does not exist.
Can AT please provide a copy of any and all reviews (internal or external) of the information in
“Passengers per hour at peak” chart that confirmed this information is accurate?
Your request is refused under section 17 (e) of the LGOIMA as the information as this information
was not reviewed outside of the project that produced it to confirm its accuracy.
The reasoning being that there is no “authoritative source” of the information in the table,
independent of what is in the document the table is sourced from. The information in the table is
based on calculations undertaken internal y within AT, using what we know of existing or typical
capacities of different types of public transport vehicles and the capacity of different corridors to
operate certain numbers of vehicles per hour.
The figures in the graph are based on the fol owing assumptions about vehicle type:
• For heavy rail, Auckland’s existing AM class electric trains, which have a capacity of 375
passengers per 3-car unit, in either 6-car (‘double EMU’) or 9-car (‘triple EMU’) configuration.
• Light rail/metro:
o For ‘grade separated’, a vehicle with a capacity of around 600 passengers. A
comparable vehicle is the ‘Hitachi Rail Italy Driverless Metro’ operated worldwide,
including in Copenhagen, Honolulu, Milan, Riyadh and Taipei.
o For ‘on-street’, a vehicle with a capacity of around 420 passengers. A comparable
vehicle is the ‘CAF Urbos 3’ model of tram, operated in many Australian cities
(including Canberra and Sydney) and others worldwide.
• Bus:
o For ‘advanced BRT trambus’, a vehicle with capacity of around 120 passengers. A
comparable vehicle is the ‘Van Hool ExquiCity’ model of bus, which operates in
Belfast.
o For ‘busway’ a vehicle with a capacity of around 100 passengers, similar to the double-
decker buses which operate on Auckland’s Northern Busway.
o For ‘bus lanes’, a vehicle with a capacity of around 75, similar to the ‘extra-large bus’
standard (using Waka Kotahi terminology) which operate across Auckland.
o For ‘bus in general traffic’, a vehicle with a capacity of around 50, similar to the ‘large
bus’ standard (using Waka Kotahi terminology) which operate across Auckland.
To calculate the figures in the graph, these vehicle capacities are then multiplied by theoretical
frequencies (as numbers of vehicles per hour), categorised as ‘minimum’ (which is consistently 4 to 8
vehicles per hour), ‘ideal’ (which varies based on known constraints to operating frequency for each
category, such as signal ing requirements), and ‘stretch (which again varies out to a theoretical
maximum assumed for each category).
Vehicle capacities and actual capacity of a corridor wil vary depending on the specifics of what
vehicles are used, and how many are run on a given corridor. The ultimate capacity of a new corridor
wil be determined through business case investigations. The graph used in the ARTP is intended to
demonstrate the varying carry capacities of different modes of transport, rather than being a
definitive source of information.
Should you believe that we have not responded appropriately to your request, you are able to make
a complaint to the Office of the Ombudsman in accordance with section 27(3) of the LGOIMA and
seek an investigation and review in regard to this matter.
Yours sincerely
Hamish Bunn
GM Investment Planning and Policy
