“Clayton’s Light Rail”?

It was revealed by Cr Tony Randle in June 2023 (see Events) that a Benefit-Cost Analysis commissioned by LGWM was erroneous, concealing that an epidemic of road speed reductions was actually of very doubtful benefit despite the obvious costs. Yet WCC still makes periodic announcements about extending ‘safer’ 30 km/hour speed limits. Meanwhile traffic cones proliferate around the city; bike lanes remove parking for customers of small businesses. And because cycle lanes & bus lanes cause narrowing and obstruction of roads, the Fire Service is delayed when trying to attend emergencies, with insufficient space for cars to pull over.

We are told that “Let’s get Wellington Moving” (LGWM) is history, canned by the new coalition government. But now it has been confirmed in February that WCC has taken over management of several LGWM initiatives; notably, continuing the push for cycleways rather than spending such money on the more urgent matter of Wellington’s water leaks crisis! Lacking an alternative plan from the Government, “Let’s Get Wellington Crawling” seems to be WCC’s ongoing strategy, along with keeping certain contractors in work....

That is the stick, but the carrot, a fast reliable alternative (to persuade commuters out of their cars) seems no nearer. Instead, traffic (including buses) is hindered by reduced speed limits, and so-called “Light Rail” is said to be no longer an option.

Opposition to ‘Light Rail’, when last heard, was only focused on the ever-escalating construction costs. However the problem of “Light Rail” (if it were ever to re-surface) is worse than mere construction cost, which is only part of the overall costs involved. There would be an ongoing cost burden from making the wrong choice…
 

“Light Rail” is an illusion, and any amount of spending will be money down the drain! This website explains why. To us at FASTR-Wellington, the touted costly fiasco was more accurately called “Clayton’s Light Rail” (CLR). Much was promised, with a lack of rationale.

But, in truth, CLR was  mislabeled and could not possibly satisfy LGWM’s stated priorities of being faster, safer, and more reliable than the current situation. The route to Island Bay* would have lacked room for true Light Rail over more than 50% of its length (as conceded in LGWM’s maps HERE - see the dotted lines). The sharing of all intersections and most - possibly all - roads over this route was a fatal flaw!... Without a substantial percentage of separation for this route, LGWM should have been honest that theirs was a road-sharing TRAM proposal, like those already running in Melbourne, Canberra & now Sydney [for factual detail see SAFER, SURER, SWIFTER buttons on left].
 

LGWM did not back up its vague promises that CLR would be safer, surer, and swifter than at present. Our representative repeatedly asked their spokesman Thomas Nash to explain this, but the eventual response (4/4/2023 and later) again failed to mention SAFETY and pinned hopes simplistically on the larger ‘capacity’ of “LR” vehicles. So the “Light Rail” proposed for tiny Wellington joined the epidemic of misinformation [see “Tram Scam”].

The truth seems to be that first there would have been 1 - 2 decades of construction causing prolonged disruption late into the 2030s or even into the 2040s.

 After that, as in Melbourne (video above) and Sydney (video below), there was likely to be a continuing upwards trend of crashes and breakdowns because of shared roadway, with regular disruption to traffic, and increasing ongoing maintenance costs. For numerous examples, see our page on crashes of so-called “Light Rail“.

...and for what? Unlike true Light Rail, road-sharing Trams would still have been slow because of reduced road speed limits introduced by LGWM itself as an attempt to overcome Trams’ major safety flaw - long stopping distances.

Even now in 2024, buses running on dedicated Bus Lanes are no faster than before; and can only claim to be faster than other traffic as a result of measures introduced to slow down other traffic and increase congestion!...

Despite supposedly safer speed limits, there would always be near-misses, breakdowns, and crashes with the addition of Light Rail. The above 9 NEWS report about Melbourne shows that shroud-waving news, and legislation about driver behaviour is no substitute for intelligent design of road and rail.

We have probably not heard the last of Light Rail, so we need to stay informed. If you want to understand the risks inherent in Trams – along with initial and ongoing costs - see our Backgrounder on the S-Factors.  We quote real-world evidence including ongoing news reports. So it seems certain that Claytons Light Rail will always be a major disappointment, and projected costs of implementation are rising – its future is unCLR!

• In contrast, our FASTR-Wellington website explains a Suspension Monorail (SM) option which LGWM quietly rejected without any cost-benefit analysis or indeed any visible analysis. This was despite SR being the only option that can reliably improve Safety, while being Swifter and Surer, and involving less disruptive construction, so that it could be completed Sooner. SM is cheaper than CLR and can achieve all this while not requiring wider streets (hence, no houses demolished - existing roads would be usable)! 

But don’t misunderstand, in these cash-strapped times: FASTR-Wellington is not pushing for Suspension Monorail to be adopted – it seems there are too many biases to overcome. Instead, in these times of recession, escalating costs, and less affordable housing, we believe Wellington should dump trams and tunnels, and simply improve an electric bus service while paying bus drivers better, to compete in this worldwide driver shortage.

* FOOTNOTE:

• AIRPORT LINE? This plan had been reasonably transparent, with maps showing various possible tunnels. In 2019 FASTR-Wellington showed the flaws in that plan, and when that option went on to fail a Cost-Benefit analysis LGWM realised a tunnel to Kilbirnie would be too expensive (as we had predicted).
• ISLAND BAY LINE? Proponents of Let’s Get Wellington Moving remained determined to the last that “Light Rail” was the preferred solution. But using that term was misinformation. It implied an unachievable type of urban transport with close to 100% separation from other traffic [see “Tram Scam”]. Councillor Nicola Young, in 2023, agreed with us, that: ‘‘It’s a fantasy project. The transport equivalent of a unicorn”.

Yet LGWM persisted in this fantasy, proposing instead a route between the central station and Island Bay. This is a narrow route, which lacks bypass options, but was claimed to have better prospects for housing expansion - a puzzling addition to LGWM priorities, other than - illogically - to conflate this with its illusory Tram Scam.

There remained no mention of where this fanciful scheme might find the necessary wider roads to achieve genuine Light Rail (90% or more well-separated from other traffic); or how many (and which) houses would have been lost to widen the route.

There remains no future in claiming to Get Wellington Moving if that is about slower speed limits. Watch out for trams being re-introduced by stealth, without any likelihood of being  safer, swifter, surer, or even SOON.

Questions still need to be asked. Please share this website with your contacts.

- The FASTR-Wellington team...

 for Recent News: see EVENTS page