Related Tags

Items tagged with:

Tags

  • RSS

Hataitai and Transport

Listings tagged with both Hataitai and Transport.
Select an individual tag to see all listings for that tag.

Hataitai related newsitems

    • Weekly News 10 February 2020
      • 10 Feb 2020
      • Wellington Scottish Athletics Club
      • Five big favours to ask this week for everyone doing RTB: (a) wear your singlet – be visible and promote the club, (b) join us at the yellow tent afterwards, (c) say hello to the people near you during the run/walk and invite them to visit us at the yellow tent, (d) tell friends and colleagues who had fun to come and talk to us, and (e) make sure you sign up for our membership special for 2020-2021. Options for the week  Tuesday 5.30pm, Waterfront 5km, Outside Mac’s Brewbar on Taranaki Wharf. Come and run, volunteer or support.Wednesday 6.15pm, Newtown Park Track workout. Meet 6.15pm for 6.30pm start, lead by Andy and Rowan, shorter distance track reps.Saturday, 8.00am, Newtown Track workout – contact Chandima for info, or check Facebook for details. Longer track reps with a focus on building towards major events.Saturday, 8.00am, Lower Hutt 5km Parkrun, Porirua 5km Parkrun, Kapiti Coast 5km Parkrun.Saturday, 1:58pm, Porritt Classic, Hamilton (Hiro Tanimoto 1500m)Sunday, Round the Bays, half marathon at 7.45am, 10km at 8.30am and 6.5km at 9.15am. Frank Kitts Park.  Results The Tarawera Ultramarathon is such an amazing atmosphere even in the years when the Trail Queens do not turn up in dominating numbers. 102km: Fiona Hayvice 11:54:08, Emma Bessett 13:35:25, Chris Howard 22:33:31. Mel Aitken DNF at 75km. 52km: Nicholas Vessiot 5:53:48, Jaime Vessiot 6:01:25, Emily Solsberg 6:15:10, Jo Badham 6:44:36, Marketa Langova 6:50:01, Ben Cornelius 7:54:28. 21km: Melanie Hart 2:02:41, Kate Slater 2:04:19, Abigail Pitman 2:19:03, Michelle Knight 2:27:32, Isobel Deeley 2:30:08,  Lindsay Young 2:31:14, Kath Littler 2:34:21 – Results So it turns out a lot of you have more than one string to your bow. Capital City Triathlon: Danielle Trewoon won the Medium Distance (750m/15km/5km) in 01:02:30, Anna Breen 01:18:19, and Claire Jennings 01:24:50. Valentino Luna Hernandez was second in the Enduro Distance (2km/60km/15km) in 3:14:58, James Turner 3:40:12, Helen Bradford 4:16:35, Paul Rodway 4:20:58, Richard Sweetman 4:28:41, Greg Williams 4:31:37. Rachael Cunningham did 03:11:48 for a revised distance Triathlon of 2km/60km/10km and Tricia Sloan did 45:05 for the enduro swim. – ResultsMalcolm Hodge ran a big PB 01:09:54.0 for 13th place in the First Half Half Marathon in Vancouver.Hamish Carson ran 1:51.66 for 800m at the Meeting National des Sacres (YouTube) in Reims (France) and 3:42.40 for 1500m at the Orlen Copernicus Cup (YouTube) in Torun (Poland).At the Combined Junior/Senior Track and Field meet at Newtown Park on Sunday 800m: Hiro Tanimoto 2:07.22. 3000m Run: Hiro Tanimoto 9:42.79, Ayesha Shafi 11:08.57. 3000m Walk: Sean Lake 17:54.99, Daphne Jones 22:42.86 – Results. Upcoming events Round the Bays, 16  February, Frank Kitts Park  Round the Bays is the biggest running festival in Wellington. It’s one of our best opportunities to invite new people to join the club. So, repeating from above, here are five big favours to ask this week for everyone doing RTB:  Wear your singlet – be visible and promote the club; Join us at the yellow tent afterwards; Say hello to the people near you during the run/walk and invite them to visit us at the yellow tent; Tell friends and colleagues who had fun to come and talk to us; and Sign up for our membership special for 2020-2021. Michelle Knight will be coordinating that recruitment drive. If you think you can help either beforehand with promotion, publicity and administration support or on the day handing out flyers, staffing our tent and talking to people about Scottish contact her.  Todd Stevens, todd.stevens@pwc.com is looking for a 40min pacer for the 10km. Please let him know if you want to help.  Matairangi Fun Run, 23 February Hataitai Velodrome,  Open to the public, the Matairangi Fun Run, based on Mount Victoria, runs over the iconic Vosseler Shield course. There are two race options: the One Loop Race (5 km); or the Two Loop Race (two 5 km loops, adding up to 10 km). Each loop has approximately 190 metres of elevation. McVilly Shield Relay, 7 March, Karori Park The McVilly Shield is the first club event for the season and a great way to get to know other people in the club. This relay has teams of three people each. Everyone can participate, runners, walkers, J Team, seniors, masters and friends of the club. Just turn up and we will find you a team. You can either race it or use it as an opportunity to do some training.  Each team must do ten laps of Karori Park. No individual team member can do more than four laps. But you can do the laps in any order you like. The race is randomly handicapped after the teams start. Notices Join this week and save $20 or more Join or re-join Wellington Scottish at Round the Bays this year and you get $20 off your new season of Scottish full adult membership (down from $185 to $165). You can sign up at our bright yellow tent at Kilbirnie Park or you email us at membership@scottishathletics.org.nz and pay Wellington Scottish Athletics 38-9005-0501833-00. Put your name and “RTB JOIN” in the reference. If you want a singlet too, add $39. This will be the biggest discount we offer this year so don’t miss out by waiting. Also: if you, as an existing member, sign up an adult friend who is new to the club or has not been a member for the last five years, we will give both you and your friend $15 off your membership fees. If you sign up two friends who are new to the club you get two lots of $15 off your membership fee. And so on. So, talk to your friends and colleagues who are running or walking Round the Bays this year. Tell them they could enjoy the same fun all year round at Scottish. If you get a friend to join make sure you email membership@scottishathletics.org.nz to let us know. Discounts Join a new friend -$15 per new friendRound the Bays discount for adult members -$20 Switch to new email system I have switched from TinyLetter to MailChimp to send out these weekly emails. Hopefully, those of you who want them still receive them and those who don’t won’t. You can unsubscribe at the link below if you choose. Or you can subscribe here: <form aria-describedby="wp-block-jetpack-mailchimp_consent-text" > <input aria-label="Enter your email" placeholder="Enter your email" required title="Enter your email" type="email" name="email" /> Subscribe Processing… Success! You're on the list. Whoops! There was an error and we couldn't process your subscription. Please reload the page and try again. Events calendar Our full events calendar is available on our website. It is also available as a Google Calendar that you can add to your own electronic diary. Keep in touch with the club:  If you want to contact anyone about anything then your first ports of call are our club captains Ben Twyman and Danielle Trewoon, our coaching coordinator Jamie White and our club president Michael Wray.Public Facebook page. And join the Scottish member Facebook group hereInstagramWebsite
      • Accepted from WSAC news by feedreader
      • Tagged as:
      • hataitai
      • kapiti
      • karori
      • kilbirnie
      • mountvictoria
      • porirua
      • waterfront
      • newtown-park
      • velodrome
      • vosseler
      • escooters
      • Velodrome, Hataitai, Wellington, Wellington City, Wellington, 6011, New Zealand/Aotearoa (OpenStreetMap)


    • Free Walking Solution- Hataitai to CBD
      • 30 Sep 2019
      • Sarah Free
      • Would more people walk to work or school from the Eastern suburbs if they didn’t have to use the dark, crowded, loud and smelly Mt Victoria tunnel?Here’s the idea: can WCC and GWRC work together to give walkers a free trip from one side of the Hataitai bus tunnel to the other?Once the bus system is up and running with a bit of spare capacity, think what a boon that could be for walkers.
      • Accepted from Sarah Free posts by feedreader
      • Tagged as:
      • hataitai
      • bus-tunnel
      • buses
      • Hataitai Bus Tunnel, Mount Victoria, Wellington, Wellington City, Wellington, 6011, New Zealand (OpenStreetMap)


    • Long Read: Mass Rapid Transit in Wellington
      • 26 Jun 2019
      • Fair Intelligent Transport (FIT) Wellington
      • Posted by Kerry Wood <figure class=" sqs-block-image-figure intrinsic " > The latest version of ‘trackless tram’ (TT) has been developed by CRRC in China. A trial system has been running in Zhuzhou since 2017, and should be coming onto the market about now. It is of interest in Wellington because of potential cost-savings over light rail, but comes with corresponding problems and is barely commercial at this stage. TT is distinct from BRT but shares some important characteristics. On this page… Key messsages Route and capacity Light Rail BRT Trackless Trams Costs Key messsages The TT feature of interest in Wellington is capacity. It is the highest-capacity BRT-like vehicle on the market, presumably with a much better ride than a bus, and may be able to meet Wellington needs on a two-lane route. Any decision to adopt TT will require careful studies; Wellington has already run into costly problems created by a casual attitude to supposedly minor issues. In a more difficult situation, we must get it right this time: BRT using conventional articulated buses is well-established but an unlikely option for Wellington. High-capacity BRT is generally used in cities having wide streets, unlike Wellington. TT might be an alternative to BRT, if it can offer sufficient capacity, and when ‘the kinks have been ironed out.’ At a time of very rapid change, uncertainties are inevitable and require good management. In this case high-capacity would be a low-risk approach, favouring either light rail or four-lane BRT. Decision-makers need to bear two things in mind: First, light rail becomes cheaper than either BRT or buses at a relatively low ridership. Second, BRT also benefits from a properly segregated route, to minimise congestion, and from diverted underground services to minimise delays. Light rail may well be the lowest-risk option, or even the cheapest option. An independent conclusion comes from Matt L at the Greater Auckland transport blog: I do think that this [TT] technology is promising and definitely worth keeping an eye on, but I’m not convinced that Auckland should be so quick to jump on the bandwagon. Let’s at least wait till at least a handful of cities have successfully rolled this out and ironed out all the kinks… Let’s also wait till there are multiple suppliers with inter-operable systems. Unfortunately, even without the capacity/frequency issues that I think would be an issue for the city centre, I don’t think Auckland can afford to wait. We need to get on fixing transport in this city and so should get on with installing light rail as soon as possible. ↑ Contents Route and capacity The LGWM route has recently been challenged, with proposals for a Mt Victoria tunnel for buses, walkers and cyclists. A tunnel for walkers and cyclists seems sensible, but a new bus tunnel would be a backward step. The existing Bus Tunnel is adequate for serving Hataitai, and a much better MRT route is through Newtown, because of high residential density. Densities are too low for MRT in Hataitai and through to Miramar and the Airport. The Newtown route offers substantially greater residential density, on both sides of the route, as well as potential for future density. Adelaide Rd and Kilbirnie are designated WCC development areas. A Mt Victoria route was proposed in the 2013 Spine Study, apparently to save time, but the real time-savings come from good detail design on the chosen route. Bypassing Wellington Hospital is itself a planning error for MRT: BRT in Brisbane went as far as a stop within the Hospital building. It is not a criticism to recognise that LGWM’s modal demand estimates for 2036 contain serious errors. Ideas and assumptions in transport are changing very quickly, among professionals and through society as a whole. Engineering NZ’s latest Transport Group Conference had the theme ‘Change is in the air.’ Who could have imagined, twelve months ago, that school children would be going on strike to demand action on climate change? Will we really see a third of CBD commuters still travelling by car in 2036, as predicted by LGWM? We don’t know. With so many uncertainties to manage, LGWM might be wise to plan for generous spare capacity on primary public transport routes: rail into Wellington and MRT further south. This might even extend to purchasing delivery options, or more vehicles than needed. If world-wide demand shoots up, small orders for a city like Wellington might take too long. The combination of highly uncertain demand and high-capacity MRT suggests that mass-transit might usefully be over-provided, within reason. Under-providing seems likely to be the greater risk. ↑ Contents Light Rail At this stage, light rail seems to be the only option clearly suited to Wellington and the chosen route. It is also available from multiple suppliers; light rail is well-established and supply-competitive. BRT is also available from multiple suppliers, but TT is only available from CRRC. The example vehicle chosen by FIT is seven-section, similar to the Gold Coast (G-link) vehicle in the photo. It is 63 m long with a capacity of nominally 470 passengers. Shorter vehicles might be best for the early years, reducing costs, but longer vehicles might be cheaper in the long term. The costly parts of a modern tram are the control system and cabs, and operating cost-differences are almost independent of vehicle length. If lack of capacity is a risk, then longer vehicles could usefully be introduced at once. The obvious drawback of light rail is the cost of track and diverting underground services. The usual arrangement is that services running along the light rail route are relocated beside it, and services crossing it are relaid in ducts, so that they can be replaced without disturbing light rail. Large drains are generally an exception because they can be repaired from the inside. ↑ Contents BRT A new route study can be based on the ITDP BRT Standard. In 2017 LGWM’s consultant WSP recommended design to the ITDP ‘Bronze Standard,’ and gave these assumptions: Full separation from general traffic flows (dedicated lanes), except intersections. High priority at traffic signals. Requires integration with surrounding walking, cycling & traffic network. Fully electric vehicles. High frequency 2.0–2.5 min/direction/peak hour (“realistic/normal” operating frequency of BRT on Golden Mile). Less transfers/interchanges for passengers. Maximum Capacity 150+ passengers. Medium potential to attract car users to PT. Modern low floor articulated bus vehicles. Flexible/less physical infrastructure. Generally fixed route, some flexibility (if required). BRT is likely to cost roughly the same as conventional buses. In practice, BRT seems very unlikely to be satisfactory in Wellington, because lack of space in the CBD will require a two-lane route. This might be sufficient with good management, of bus lanes, but can never be enough at stations. BRT stations in Brisbane (scaled from an aerial photograph) are typically about 27 m wide, compared with a street-width of 15.1 m in Wellington’s Manners St, for all purposes. BRT stations need two lanes each way, for buses overtaking buses. Also needed are more bus-berths, dedicated berths for each route (so that passengers know where to wait), and substantial platform width to handle passenger numbers. Some principal CBD junctions may need flyovers, to allow adequate junction time for traffic crossing the busway. WSP (bullet point 5 above) anticipate a reliable maximum time between buses of two or two and a half minutes between buses on the golden mile, only 24–30 bus/hr. The only real alternatives to the golden mile are two lanes on the waterfront or two lanes on the ‘secondary spine’ proposed in the Spine Study, using Featherston and Wakefield Streets southbound, and returning on Jervois Quay. Neither is wide enough, with very poor passenger access and legibility. ↑ Contents Trackless Trams Chinese developer CRRC is now the world’s largest manufacturer of railway rolling-stock (Newman et al. (2019), p 33, The Trackless Tram: is it the transit and city shaping catalyst we have been waiting for?). CRRC’s Autonomous Rail Rapid Transit (‘trackless tram’ or TT) system is now being trialled in Zhuzhou. TT might prove an attractive option, but there are surprising uncertainties here. Detailed information from CRRC is still scarce, and some sources seem very unreliable. Much of what is available is dated 2017, and an apparently official video is remarkably amateur. It is not even clear that CRRC have yet begun to market TT. TT uses digital steering of all six axles to track a pair of painted lines, with supplementary data from GPS and LIDAR. CRRC have paid close attention to ride quality, using high-speed rail technology. The vehicles are battery-powered (in fact condensers), with an anticipated range of 50 km after a ten-minute charge, backed up by an overnight ‘deep recharge’ and a brief top-up at each station (Newman et al. (2019), p 38). CRRC is offering, or planning to offer, vehicles 30 metres long, in three sections, with a five-section option planned. See the photos below. CRRC now has the largest vehicles on offer, with probably the best ride and the most effective batteries and charging systems. Other manufacturers are also in the market, including Alstom, Van Hool and Irizar (Newman et al. (2019), p 34), offering shorter, bus-based vehicles. The route capacity achievable using light rail is about 10,000 passengers an hour in Wellington, which seems a reasonable target for TT. A lower target would be more easily achieved but might risk running into capacity problems. Three-section TT vehicles are 31.6 m long and 2.65 m wide (the standard light rail width). The claimed capacity is 250–300, which seems very high. A standard figure in Europe is a preferred maximum of 4 standing passengers per square metre. Using this figure, and comparing on a floor-area basis (after subtracting two metres at each end, for the drivers’ cabs), gives a TT vehicle capacity of about 220 passengers. A further correction is needed, because TT vehicles have wide wheel-boxes for six axles (like the front wheels of a bus), and the boxing is continued beneath side-facing seats: the seats are set forward from the windows (photo above right). The full vehicle width is only available to passengers around the doors. An estimated width-correction of 300 mm reduces the capacity to 200 passengers, or 330 on a five-section TT, about 50 m long. This is about 70% of the assumed light rail capacity of 470 (FIT example vehicle). An animated video suggests that two TT vehicles can run in convoy only about a metre apart. If such an option becomes practical, TTs might be capable of running together without coupling, matching light rail capacity and eliminating the need for a four lane route. However, stop-length is another consideration. Finding space for platforms longer than about 50 m becomes progressively more difficult, and extremely difficult beyond about 70 m. Two potential TT risks are: A typical modern European tram (Siemens Avenio, 63 m long) weighs nearly three times as much as a full load of passengers, but TT vehicles weigh only about 15% more. The risk here is that long vehicles need adequate ‘buffing strength’ to protect passengers in the event of a crash. The whole vehicle needs to be strong enough to absorb the kinetic energy of the rear end with minimum risk to passengers. TT in New Zealand will need careful checking for compliance with regulations, regardless of whether the system is treated as bus or light rail. In either case, new regulations will be needed, and may need legislation. Wellington would gain a dual advantage from choosing ‘the same as Auckland’: no regulatory costs, and cheaper vehicles and equipment because of repeat orders. In Looking past the hype about trackless trams, Wong (2018) points out that TT is not really revolutionary, and alternatives to light rail have been available for years. However, Wong also challenges TT’s ride quality, which might be unfair, but his paper is still of interest. A guide and manual with application to Trackless Trams, a paper by Peter Newman et al. (2018), develops a new method of assessing public transport, specifically with TT in mind: Traditional transit planning does the transport engineering first and then adds the land use planning as a supplement after finding government funding; the approach being presented here starts with the land development planning and then does the transport engineering after achieving the funding/ financing from the land development potential. [p 6] Four approaches to capital are used: broadly, all-public; mostly public; mostly private; and all-private. While the paper seems very useful (and note the BCR below), explicitly applying it to TT seems doubtful: By integrating higher value into land development within cities, rather than having further land development on the urban fringe, there are significant public and private benefits that vastly outweigh the costs. Some BCR calculations have seen a simple light rail project with a BCR of 1.5 increase to around 7 because of the increased land development. This not only saves public money in infrastructure costs (usually 1.5 times as much as redevelopment) but also provides transport time savings for those living in the [Transit-Oriented Development areas (such as WCC’s plans for Adelaide Rd)] (based on all transport usage). Thus, it is important to ensure land value increases are integrated into the full transit and land system upgrade process. [p 6] Clearly, the model also works with light rail, but perhaps more worrying is this: Towards the end we show that a Trackless Tram is likely to be the new ‘rail’ system for cities as it does all the things light rail does but costs one tenth of it. This low cost makes it possible for entrepreneurial developers to build such systems as it will unlock their developments. [p 14] TT at a tenth of the cost of light rail is implausible. While the four-level model is interesting, other sources suggest that saving 90% of light rail costs is unrealistic. One of Newman’s errors has been picked up by Matt L: The press for the trackless train claims the vehicle can hold 300 people. This seems highly unlikely given the vehicle is only about 30m long. As a comparison, AT say that a 66m light rail vehicle will hold up to 420 people. The interior of the vehicle doesn’t suggest a huge amount of standing space either and a capacity of 180–200 people seems more realistic. But even if it could hold 300 people, it’s not enough, which is why AT are going for higher capacity vehicles. Newman himself notes (Newman et al. (2019), p 39) an Australian estimate of a third of the cost of light rail, which seems a reasonable starting-point; real-world costs must cover more than painting double white lines. Trackless trams, like BRT, look tempting because they seem far more cost-effective than light rail. This has gone on for a long time, and Wong (2018) refers to a 1994 paper, by Henscher and Walters, titled Light rail and bus priority systems: Choice or blind commitment? Perhaps the largest single risk when adopting alternatives to light rail is the simplest. Decision-makers have repeatedly demonstrated how easily they can convince themselves that anything without tracks must be better than light rail. An example is that UCL, in Innovative technologies for light rail and tram: a European reference resource Briefing paper 1 Tyre innovation–rubber tyred trams (a 2015 review of earlier versions of trackless trams), commented: All (BRT) systems installed to date have been more expensive than conventional tramways. At least two of those systems were replaced by light rail. A related blind-commitment temptation is assuming that only light rail needs to disturb underground services. The ignored risk is that underground services can disrupt TT, just as they have always disrupted present-day motor traffic: TT/BRT proponents, including CRRC, claim the benefits of being able to avoid a crash by manually steering around the obstruction. This is as much a disadvantage as an advantage, because the converse is motor vehicles running on TT/BRT ‘tracks.’ Light rail experience in Britain is stoppages when parked cars obstruct the track, and TT/BRT must also address these risks. The light rail photo on page 3 shows a kerb outside the tracks (at right), with prominent ‘TRAM ONLY’ signs painted on the road, to discourage motor vehicles. Light rail has to maintain an exclusive corridor, and effective TT will need to do the same. If TT/BRT is seen as not needing underground services diversion, decision-makers have unwittingly accepted the risk of delays or damage when underground services fail. Motor traffic is frequently delayed in this way, and drivers manage it by travelling at other times or taking an alternative route. Road signs warning of future disruptions are commonplace. Neither management option is available to either TT or BRT, and Wellington has recent experience of the effects. When the Hutt railway line was washed out in 2013, motor traffic also came to a standstill, for several days. Ignoring the need for services diversion for TT/BRT will tend to have the same effect, rarely over days, but even ten minutes can be very disruptive. Wellington decision-makers need to face facts here. Two major studies, the 2011 Bus Review and the 2013 Spine Study, were wiped out by ill-considered cost-savings. Ten years after the problem was first identified, Greater Wellington still has a heavily overloaded bus route and no plans for improvement. This process, of unconsciously working towards a substandard outcome, is well-known; blind commitment is one term, but Wikipedia calls it BRT Creep: BRT creep comprises several types of gradual erosions in service that sometimes affect a bus rapid transit (BRT) system, resulting in a service that is not up to the standards promised by BRT advocates. In its ideal form, BRT aims to combine the capacity and speed of a light rail system with the flexibility, cost and simplicity of a bus system. BRT creep occurs when a system that promises these features instead acts more like a standard, non-rapid bus system… The most extreme versions of BRT creep lead to systems that cannot even truly be recognised as “Bus Rapid Transit”. This is what happens when the bus lobby sidles in and whispers, “we can do exactly the same for half the price.” They do, and they can’t. ↑ Contents Costs Costs for TT vehicles are roughly comparable with light rail; say about $80 million to run a five-minute service. Other cost estimates vary wildly, but real-world costs must cover more than painting double white lines: Road re-grading as needed; TT videos show well-levelled surfaces everywhere. TT vehicles use the same low floor-level as light rail, and will tend to need similar large-radius vertical curves. Heavy-current, high-voltage power at all stops, termini, and especially the depot. Stations, including platforms, shelter, passenger access; ticketing machines and connections at hubs. A depot, with scope for expansion. Motor traffic realignment to make room for TT. Integration with traffic signals for TT priority. Any TT cost-estimates for Wellington will need great care, using data from existing users. Ensuring a dedicated and separated corridor would future-proof TT to support fully autonomous operation when the technology matures: light rail is future-proofed by design. The first light rail line in Montpellier opened in 2001, and in 2008 was carrying 30 million passengers a year. A cost analysis from Marc le Tourneur (2011), Making the case for trams and regional trams, showed that buses and BRT both cost about 45% more than light rail: light rail (actual figures) Investment cost per passenger€ 0.93 Operating cost per passenger€ 0.53 Total€ 1.46 buses (actual figures) Investment cost per passenger€ 0.49 Operating cost per passenger€ 1.61 Total€ 2.12 bus rapid transit (simulated using data from Nantes) Investment cost per passenger€ 0.84 Operating cost per passenger€ 1.27 Total€ 2.11 Montpellier (populaton 290,000) now has four light rail lines, with a total length of 60 km. Data from Transport for London gives equal costs for buses and light rail at about 3200 light rail passengers an hour; a little higher and light rail is cheaper than buses, and a lot cheaper when light rail is running at capacity. One reason is that savings on operations cost are sufficient to pay for greater capital costs. Roughly 70% of operating costs are driver’s wages, for either buses or light rail, but one light rail driver replaces some four to six bus drivers. ↑ Contents
      • Accepted from Fair Intelligent Transport (FIT) Wellington feed by feedreader
      • Tagged as:
      • hataitai
      • kilbirnie
      • miramar
      • newtown
      • waterfront
      • wcc
      • water
      • bypass
      • video
      • bus-rapid-transit
      • engineering
      • airport
      • fringe
      • design
      • mens
      • cycling
      • planning
      • wellington
      • art
      • developments
      • boxing
      • buses
      • primary
      • hospital
      • people
      • secondary
      • lgwm
      • Wellington International Airport, Coutts Street, Rongotai, Wellington, Wellington City, Wellington, 6023, New Zealand (OpenStreetMap)


    • When Road Cycling is Illegal
      • 16 Apr 2015
      • Sustainable Wellington Transport
      • Following my recent post on fixing cyclist infrastructure, I received a reply that questioned the rationale of pushing cyclists into pedestrian space: @sustwelltrans Lets make roads that work for all vehicles - Arras underpass should have bikes ok - leave #footpaths for #pedetrians — Ellen Blake (@Windynell) April 05, 2015 Since I didn’t know how or why cyclist restrictions happen, I emailed WCC to ask. Cyclists can use all roads except for motorways, lanes reserved for Buses Only, pedestrian malls, and some tunnels.  Cyclists are banned from these places due to safety concerns which derive from conflicts very high volumes of other users who have been formally given exclusive priority.  Cyclists may use all normal Bus Lanes, but not Bus Only lanes. Motorways in Wellington City area are: State Highway 1 from the Karo/Willis intersection to Ngauranga State Highway 1 from Johnsonville to Porirua Bus Only lanes are: Throndon Quay southbound centre lane into Lambton Interchange Lambton Quay from Bunny St to Whitmore St (Lambton Interchange site) Lambton Quay southbound from Brandon St to Featherston St Hunter St-Customhouse Quay-Willis St southbound from Featherston St to Manners St Manners St from Willis St to Cuba St both directions Pedestrian Malls are: Cuba St from Ghuznee St to Manners St Tunnels where cyclists are banned are: Arras Tunnel (State Highway 1) Mt Victoria Tunnel road lanes (State Highway 1) Hataitai Bus Tunnel. I’m sure that there are plenty of points that could be contested within that list, but I’ll only touch on a couple. For the road tunnels, the conditions of the road are identical to normal urban roads, with the exception of ventilation and lighting. It’s not clear how or why the Arras and Mt Victoria tunnels would create an actual safety risk beyond that of normal urban cycling. If there is some exceptional risk, wouldn’t it be better to educate the motorists that cause the risk? The decisions are the responsibility of the appropriate Road Controlling Authority.  For all urban roads Wellington City Council is the RCA, for the entire state highway network it is the New Zealand Transport Agency.  The timing of decisions result from safety and management reviews on an as required basis. Both tunnels are part of SH1 and fall under NZTA’s authority. I’ve just sent an OIA request for justification of the exclusion. They have until May 15 to respond.
      • Accepted from Sustainable Wellington Transport posts
      • Tagged as:
      • johnsonville
      • hataitai
      • porirua
      • Porirua, Wellington Region, New Zealand (OpenStreetMap)


    • New threats to the town belt: the expressway, and the city council
      • 5 Jul 2011
      • Wellington Scoop
      • The loss of more of the Town Belt’s open space is threatened by new draft principles for the Town Belt which have been unanimously accepted by the Wellington City Council’s Strategy and Policy Committee (consisting of the mayor and all councillors). The principles are precursors to a council move to override the trust status of the Town Belt. And there’s another threat: the New Zealand Transport Agency wants to take away town belt land in Ruahine Street to use for its expressway to the airport. The illustration above (from the Transport Agency) shows how Ruahine Street would look after two extra lanes of traffic were been created by cutting into town belt land.
      • Accepted from Wellington Scoop features
      • Tagged as:
      • hataitai
      • town-belt-encroachments
      • second-mount-victoria-tunnel
      • Hataitai, Wellington, New Zealand (OpenStreetMap)


    • Another Motorway Battle Looms
      • 7 Jun 2011
      • Auckland Trains
      • Another motorway battle is looming in the Capital.And it’s close to the Greens’ heart. A plan to ram a motorway through Hataitai may affect among others, Greens co-leader Russel Norman as he lives in Hataitai. And it could be another big test for the Wellington’s Greens’ Mayor. The NZTA plans to duplicate the Mt Victoria Tunnel and put a four lane motorway through Hataitai which Norman says would be bad for everyone.
      • Tagged as:
      • basinreserve
      • hataitai
      • second-mount-victoria-tunnel
      • Hataitai, Wellington, New Zealand (OpenStreetMap)


    • Hataitai Tunnel To Be Bus Only
      • 20 Aug 2010
      • Auckland Trains
      • Should buses only be allowed to use Wellington’s Mt Vic bus tunnel, which runs between Pirie Street in Mt Victoria and Waitoa Road,Hataitai? It’s been a hotly debated issue – just like Auckland’s debate about when cars should be allowed to use Grafton Bridge.
      • Tagged as:
      • bus-tunnel
      • transport
      • hataitai
      • Hataitai bus tunnel, Hataitai, Wellington, Wellington Region, 6011, New Zealand (OpenStreetMap)


    • Positive Meeting with Go Wellington
      • 26 Aug 2008
      • Mt Victoria Residents Association
      • Good progress has been made with Go Wellington in an effort to resolve the issue of out-of-service buses using the Pirie Street bus tunnel.According to the Greater Wellington Council bylaw, only scheduled services that have been registered with the Council may use the tunnel. At a meeting convened by GWRC, Go Wellington acknowledged that there was an imperfect understanding of the rules by some drivers, and undertook to educate staff better.
      • Tagged as:
      • hataitai
      • transport
      • bus-tunnel
      • Hataitai tunnel, Wellington


    • The light at the end of the tunnel
      • 17 Dec 2006
      • The Wellingtonista
      • Although we would hate you to think that we had an unnatural love for tunnels, we think it's only fair to warn you that new lights have been installed at either end of the Hataitai/Mt Vic tunnel that are so bright that you'll think you are outside in the sunshine already, even at night. It doesn't make people honk any less though.
      • Tagged as:
      • hataitai
      • transport
      • Hataitai, Wellington, New Zealand (OpenStreetMap)



1 - 24 of 24


Related sites

    • Hataitai Community Website
      • This is the place to learn everything you need to know about the great little village of Hataitai. This website has been provided by the Hataitai Resident's Association. The Resident's Association represents the interests of our community and strengthen its identity.
      • Tagged as:
      • hataitai

    • NZTA - Mt Victoria Tunnel to Cobham Drive
      • We investigated several options for building a second Mt Victoria Tunnel, including replacing the existing tunnel with a wider one and building a separate two-lane tunnel. We’ve decided to build a second tunnel immediately to the north of the existing one. This location was considered during the Corridor Plan’s development and in studies undertaken in the 1970s.
      • Tagged as:
      • second-mount-victoria-tunnel
      • hataitai

    • Pilates Flow
      • We are a boutique studio in the heart of Hataitai village, Wellington.At Pilates Flow we combine modern, evidence-based physiology with Joseph Pilates’ original repertoire and philosophy. Our classes offer Classical Pilates Flow Repertoire for health and fitness, and the evolved Pilates style for injury rehabilitation. We offer both Apparatus and Mat classes. Pilates equipment utilises a spring system that provides both assistance and resistance to a range of exercises. With a maximum of three clients per Apparatus class and six per Mat class we ensure that each person is under the constant guidance of the teacher as they work through a large and varied repertoire. We group clients at the same level so the speed and challenge of the class will meet their needs. http://www.pilatesflow.co.nzACC Registered Physiotherapist
      • Tagged as:
      • hataitai
      • fitness

Latest Newsitems

The latest newslog items.