AT Level Crossing Survey & Glen Eden Level Crossing Closure?
The level crossing rebuild will take a decade (at least) but AT need to act now...
I dropped into an Auckland Transport community session a few weeks ago, briefly as was cycling elsewhere, about level crossings on the Western Line.
The staging of the 10-to-30-year programme to remove all level crossings and provide safer new connections is influenced by factors like availability of funding, the number of trains on different parts of the rail network and patronage growth.
Inner west from Maungawhau to Mt Albert – passenger growth after CRL opens is expected to require more trains and associated level crossing replacements or removals from the 2030s.
West from Mt Albert to Swanson – passenger growth is expected to require level crossing replacements or removals to support more trains from the late 2030s.
There are several options for giving your input. You can fill in the online form, talk to AT at a drop-in session, or email AT: LevelCrossings@at.govt.nz.
My thoughts on the Western Line
It's a bit odd they seem to anticipate running different levels of service from Maungawhau (formerly Mt Eden) to Mt Albert, then only later in the decade from Mt Albert to Swanson when all the trains run through and there is no yard—nor plans for any—at Mt Albert to hold rolling stock as they do at Henderson?
There are lots of level crossings on the Western line, twenty-one in total, but Glenview Rd in particular is a long-standing local trouble spot and near my home so of more interest than others like Railside Ave, Avondale (St Jude St especially), Portage Rd, and Ranui which also present major problems.
I don't often travel along Glenview Rd, but do take routes to avoid it (by bike and car) due to the traffic conflicts and congestion it induces on West Coast Rd.
What to do with West Coast/Glenview Rd?
Glen Eden is a mess of arterial road (West Coast Road), a rat run connection (Glenview Rd) (1), minor roads (Clayburn & Waikumete Rds), Train Station (2), a confused cramped intersection (3), Apartments and retail with Service Station across the line (4), a Fire Station (5) and a School (6)!
The whole intersection is already compromised by limited car queuing space (3) both sides of the train track and long crossing closures, especially for West bound trains as station/crossing proximity means the gates close for train arrival, dwell and departure, not just the crossing transition time.
Level crossing, traffic queuing and lane markings | Glenview Rd
Trench the rail line?
Apart from cost the option to trench the rail, leaving Glenview Rd open, is compromised by the need to fit in a station (A) and likely complication of excavating between a high-rise apartment block and fuel station with underground tanks (C-D) unless the (fairly new) fuel station is acquired and extensive ground works done.
How you'd build it while maintaining operating services is another matter.
Towards the Station (New Lynn/City) left, Fire Station middle, and Sunnyvale/Henderson right | Glenview Rd
Just close level crossings?
It seems the whole AT focus is on minimising impact on existing use, road traffic, more than optimising the public transport assets.
For Glenview Rd, I think adding good pedestrian/cycle links (underpass preferably) but otherwise closing the crossing would massively improve traffic on West Coast Rd. That intersection, with traffic backed up trying to access Glenview Rd between train interruptions constantly clogs it.
Driver impacts
For drivers 'round the block' using Gt Nth Rd/West Coast Rd is ~2.5km vs 1km direct, approx. +2 minutes driving.
Emergency Services
Retaining emergency services road access for the Fire Service could be considered (surely some sort of on demand coordination with the train network is possible), but I wonder if even needed?
Faster response is better but is a couple of minutes, at most, a factor when the response area covered by this station must include much longer travel times.
From the current Fire Station, it is ~2km around, +2 minutes driving, around to Glen Eden village via Clayburn Rd. It's entirely likely that without navigating congestion at Glenview/West Coast and the level crossing response times could be similar or better.
School
For school access, proper drop off and walk facilities from the crossing area or station carpark area would give safer quicker access than the current crossing provides.
People respond to conditions
I was at a Mt Albert Green Party meeting about Auckland’s transport future recently where the level crossing removal was raised in the Panel Q&A and Julie-Anne Genter was asked to comment.
She answered that the level crossings should be left in at first, with train frequency optimised, or just closed to see if people changed their habits and maybe the money to remove/replace them wouldn’t need to be spent at all.
The context was that the current AT approach seems to be preserving current vehicle access (at billions of dollars cost) with little or no account for change in behaviour in response to changing conditions.
It’s interesting there was no consideration for retaining access when removing pedestrian only level crossings recently. In that case the entire consultation was about improving alternatives, not contesting the removal of existing crossings.
Auckland Transport
The change in vehicle, and public transport, use prompted by $3-4/L fuel has shown how people respond to conditions. It’s entirely likely just running the optimised 6-minute train schedule could induce the same.
Related links
Matt L
Connor Sharp
Auckland Transport
AT's Project Site
