Wednesday, January 31, 2018

Cut and Cover railway tunnel - right into central Christchurch!

A diesel hybrid train in Japan - but under Christchurch city? There IS an option.
This essay © David Welch 2018

The Christchurch Railway Station is too far from the centre of the business and commercial area! This has been a complaint since 1863. Complaints were expressed before the city's first station opened on "South Belt" (Moorhouse Avenue). Calls were made for horses to pull the detached railway carriages (arriving from Heathcote) up into the central business area. As researching old newspapers will reveal, the distance of the station from the centre of the city it has been constant Canterbury grievance for 155 years. In 1993, and the then privatisation of rail, the city's “central” passenger station was moved to an even more distant location, at Addington.

Any suggestion of re-instating a regional commuter rail network falls at this, the first huge hurdle. If most of the passengers have to transfer from the train service to buses to access the city centre, it negates any time saving efficiency and renders the whole system too clumsy and expensive to be attractive. Car usage in the modern age has created a cultural expectation of door to door travel with immediately adjacent parking – this has becoming increasingly difficult to achieve in a congested city, but it is still the gold standard.

However, subject to further investigation, there appears to exists a unique opportunity for Christchurch to bring commuter rail services right into the heart of the city and to do so at a relatively low cost by world standards. Such a move seems likely to significantly boost central city revival and increase investment in new businesses and employment.

Auckland's cut and cover tunnel project

Inspiration is offered by the construction of the circa $2.8 - $3.5 billion City Rail Link in Auckland, a 3.5 km underground loop line from the city's main station, Britomart,up to Mt Eden and the western rail corridor. The first kilometre of of the Auckland underground system, from Britomart is to be a "cut and cover" tunnel just below the surface. Most of the remaining underground will be bored at a deeper level - this is a necessity because the Mount Eden  part of Auckland is situated on hills too steep in their incline to allow the railways to follow exactly below surface slopes.

Of particular interest, is the way the City Rail Link follows the alignment of Albert Street through central Auckland, a huge trench being dug out (one side of the road at a time) and then lined with reinforced concrete walls, creating two parallel tunnels. When a concrete ceiling is placed on these, and the various underground services are reconstructed, the road above will be restored as it is now. This concreted trench tunnel will allow commuter trains to run in both directions some metres below the street.

At a quick glance it seems surprising that such a massive excavation can occur right in the midst of large tower buildings, but it is of course common to excavate large holes for the foundations of high buildings, with one high rise excavated right beside another. An added requirement and cost of tunnelling under streets is the construction of new alignments for other underground services, such as water pipes, sewerage, electrical cabling, stormwater drains, etc., along or across the streets.

A cut and cover railway tunnel into the Christchurch central area

I believe, if the political will was there  it would be possible to build a similar cut and cover tunnel, offering two railway lines (possibly more at station points) and three simple underground stations, starting from a point near the current Christchurch railway station at Addington, into the very heart of of central Christchurch.

The suggested a cut and cover tunnel could be built across and under Hagley Park, under hospital corner (and an underground station there) and then, eastwards continue under Tuam Street to an underground station complex near the Bus Exchange and Colombo Street. This cut and cover tunnel could then continue on to an underground terminus at the planned new sports stadium and exhibition centre between Madras and Barbadoes Street.

This scenario would require the purchase of part of the former stock sale-yards site, in Deans Avenue, now demolished and currently in temporary use as a one level car-park for the hospital, served by shuttle buses. All other land required I believe is in the public domain, requiring no land purchase costs or legal disputes.

I have included here some ballpark figures for likely costs. Noted; these are not minimised to be appear more palatable to potential opponents, big "game changing" and city building infrastructure of this nature needs a big pocket. Rather they are calculated in reference to similar projects in Auckland and Wellington, obviously this can only offer a very rough guide, but not one I hope not completely amiss.

A tunnel under Hagley Park
It is envisioned that from the main trunk line between Addington and Riccarton Road (running parallel with Deans Avenue) two separate lines would branch off heading eastwards in to Hagley Park. One line would offer access to trains tofro Rangiora and north, and the other access to trains tofro Rolleston and south. Both these lines would follow a gentle downward sloping curve that would take trains under Deans Avenue and then under Hagley Park. This might require a slight rise to carry Deans Avenue over the tunnel entrances, or even a slight landscaped hill at the edge of Hagley Park, to allow a sufficiently graduated slope into the two railway tunnels. Once under the park these two curving tunnels would come together and become either a straight double-track tunnel, or two parallel tunnels, and head underground towards "Hospital Corner."

Tunnelling costs around the world, are greatly effected by the surface being cut through but there will be no unexpected hard rock mass under Hagley Park or central Christchurch. Drainage will no doubt be a factor, but building a cut and cover tunnel through shingle or soft ground across the open space of Hagley Park, is likely to be cheap tunnelling by any world standards. Allowing for complex railway junctions and all safety and ventilation aspects, on roughly similar projects, I'd guess cost for this section, probably under $60 million.

After completion of the construction phase of the cut and cover tunnel, the earth and grass would restored over the tunnel ceiling perhaps two or three metres below ground-level. There would be no obvious change in the appearance of Hagley Park, other than a possible removal of a few large trees whose roots would otherwise interfere with the tunnel. There has been past resistance to building car park facilities under Hagley Park – but the very concept feels a violation. I would imagine this option, by its nature fostering a “greener” more pedestrian friendly Christchurch, would encounter a much smaller rump of die hard opposition.

A station at hospital corner
At Hospital Corner, the tunnel would pass under Hagley Avenue and into - and of course under - Tuam Street, with obvious potential for station at this point. The existing under-road pedestrian tunnel for hospital staff and a separate public pedestrian tunnel could link to the hospital and outside areas to platforms on both sides of an underground station, as well as to the bus stops above. Modern underground stations typically have glassed off tracks, these doors only opening when trains are actually stopped, preventing accidents, suicides, graffiti etc.

The Hospital Corner station would offer easy walking distance access not only to the hospital and medical school, but also to the planned Metro Sports Facility, Hagley Learning Centre, Hagley Park and the cricket oval, the Botanic Gardens, Museum, Arts Centre, Christs College, City Council buildings and to the office blocks west of the Avon.

A tunnel under Tuam Street to city centre near Bus Exchange

Passing under the alignment of existing streets will be considerably more expensive than tunnelling under open park land. This said, the length of track suggested here, from hospital corner to the suggested terminus is not much over one kilometre. Based on the one kilometre of cut and cover tunnel being cut under Auckland's far more intensely developed lower Queen Street and Albert Street (where large storm water works also had to be shifted) I suspect that such distance in Christchurch might be constructed for about $200 million.

The two underground Stations with above ground entrance foyers, at the Hospital, and a City Central station, near Colombo Street/ and linked to the Bus Exchange might add another $60 million. These stations are fairly close together, the trains would virtually slide along at under 20km, but link directly to different mass catchments, including direct access to all Colombo Street and Cathedral Square. A third station and terminus, only three blocks furtrher east is also suggested and would be need for operational reasons anyway.

Central city rail tunnel continues to new Sports Stadium and Exhibition Centre
The terminus could be about 400 metres further along under Tuam Street between Madras Street and Barbadoes and directly beside or under the proposed new giant sports stadium and exhibition centre. This might also sensibly include an underground stabling area, four to six tracks wide, or similar. This could create significant operational economies as overnight night, or during the off peak period during the middle of working days, some of the trains could be parked and cleaned here. Constructing a couple of island type platforms could also allow several trains to load simultaneously (including those for Dunedin and South Canterbury etc.) following major sporting events, or during large exhibitions and festive events held at the stadium. This station might cost another $60 million, although possibly might instead be built and leased back by the stadium builders or operators. Potential savings in terms of excavation, pile driving, stadium/station pillars etc. might also be achieved by simultaneous construction.

Both the Central City station and a Madras/Barbados Terminus, in the scenarios here would offer easy walking access to the Justice Precinct, the new Hoyts 7 Cinema complex, the Bus Exchange, Ara (Polytech), Catholic Cathedral College, High Street and Cashel Street Malls and Laneways and only slightly longer walking distance, Cathedral Square and other parts of the central city. The area of the central city south of Cathedral Square has always had more capacity to form the busiest shopping, commercial and business part of central Christchurch - the suggested railway line conveniently intersects this primary activity zone.

Hybrid diesel or hybrid electric trains an obvious option
Obviously it is not suitable to use diesel power in busy underground tunnels. Electrification of Auckland railway cost $1.3 billion, not counting the new trains. The huge cost of electrifying all the Canterbury lines could be postponed for many years, or even permanently avoided by using hybrid passenger rail units and locomotives. These systems can operate with batteries linked to either standard diesel, or with overhead powered electric trains. When running only on the batteries these locomotives or units are capable of pulling surprisingly large loads (over a thousand tonnes) over reasonably long distances, typically 60-100km. Several international railway vehicle builders now offer hybrid options. Indeed, Auckland Transport had planned to purchase 17 hybrid such hybrid electric units, until both the main political parties announced they would fund overhead electrification of the line between Papakura and Pukekohe.

The added chance to recharge batteries from an overhead power supply, every time, whilst running through the central city tunnels, or while parked at mid-day or overnight in the underground terminus, would clearly support such a system and ensure smoke and exhaust free operation in the tunnels, as well quiet running trains as far afield as Rolleston and Rangiora, perhaps using diesel only beyond these points. A fleet of, say 20 hybrid 140 seat passenger units, and several separate hybrid locomotives to shunt or pull conventional coaches (including dedicated cycle coaches on the main peak hour trains) - the minimum rolling stock needed to operate a sufficiently frequent service (given population and regional distances) - would probably cost about another $250 million.  

For those who need to cycle at both ends of the rail journey, peak hours trains (rather than units) could probably include dedicated multi-cycle carriages as used in the New York area.

The general upgrade of railway across the city to allow for commuter rail and (and no doubt a chance to improve freight movement) would also be needed, this might absorb another $200 million, and might include over-bridging of rail tracks on some arterial roads and the building extensive car for commuters in outer suburbs and towns. Wellington railway has over 4000 such car parking spaces across the region, Auckland struggling to create more. The old equation “public transport versus private car” still occurs in local newsmedia or politician speeches; - it does no justice to “park and ride” character of public transport over greater distance in many modern metropolitan systems. (Boston for example has over 46,000 park and ride spaces – in other words 46,000 cars that don't get driven into the city or on congested roads). Secure bicycle storing systems would also be necessary at some sub - urban stations.

I am only an amateur "train (and bus) spotter" but I believe it is possible that this core system could be created for around $600 million, spread over several years., and a $250 million loan for the purchase of trains. These actual amounts could be more accurately determined by professional engineer or a proper feasibility study.

If Christchurch is going to catch up, it needs to face realities and lift its game and its vision, study comparable systems in New Zealand and overseas and seek intelligent levels of funding. The city has wasted over two decades investigating piecemeal and underfunded proposals utilising third hand rolling stock and inadequate stations, including such professional absurdities as a “temporary” commuter rail system! It has also completely ignored bus-way corridors, by-passing congestion, and taken an absurd 20 years merely to establish bus lanes on short lengths of congested roads!

Local and Regional authorities to meet only half the cost of construction?

This $850 million seems (and is) a huge amount of money, BUT on the precedent of Auckland and Wellington it might be expected that central Government would provide a $250 million loan for purchasing modern rolling stock. This is then repaid as an annual operating cost by the regional authority overseeing railway operations. By similar precedent, central Government would also fund about half of the construction costs, these met directly by central government and its agencies, and in some aspects as part of KiwiRail.

Well below large tax payer amounts spent (and to be spent) in Auckland and Wellington.

That greater Christchurch should seek about $300 million in direct Government support seems nothing but a bit of transport equality and “balancing of the books”, given the huge investment by Governments (both Labour and then National) in commuter rail in Auckland and Wellington. Since 2003 Auckland has received at least $3,300 million in government support for rail and busway infrastructure with $1,400 million (and more if needed) promised for the underground City Rail Link loop, previously mentioned.

Since 2007 greater Wellington – like Christchurch only quarter the population of Auckland - has only received $500,000 in Government grants and loans towards upgrading railways infrastructure. Just before Christmas the Greater Wellington Regional Council announced it was seeking another $200 million from Government for a further rail upgrade. Further pressure is on for Government funding of light rail to the airport, which on similar costs to the Gold Coast light rail, will require well over a billion dollars and make little difference to journey time.

Both these cities have had an obvious strong case for public transport infrastructure funding from taxpayers, Auckland because of its larger size and rapid growth, Wellington because pf its geography, its restricted central area and bottleneck approaches. This greater need has been recognised by the estimated billion dollars taken out of road and fuel taxes generated in Canterbury and transferred to projects in northern cities.  And this said, the population of greater Christchurch is actually larger, faster growing than that of Wellington region and the  extended metropolitan area population of Christchurch is expected to surpass that of greater Wellington region over the next 25 years. (NZ Transport Agency Stats - circa 567,000 versus 527,000)   Simplified graph here - [or see "Lies, Damned Lies and Statistics" pagem in right hand side box, for thinking operative in determining the comparable areas]

Extremely rapid growth of both Rangiora and Rolleston, and adjacent areas, makes it clear tomorrow's “greater Christchurch” will, in effect, be something of a banana shape extending over 25 kilometres northward and over 25 kilometres southwards. Greater Christchurch too has its bottleneck too – the crossing points of the Waimakariri River and - not least - the finite capacity of the city's own arterial roads and urban intersections to provide effective peak hour journey times

Exactly the sort of profile best met by commuter rail.

Wellington also has it's Wairarapa Line - $25 million was spent on carriages and line upgrades to from Wellington to Masterton (80km), a service which now offers five trains a day. Could we not one day see at least an early morning commuter train from Timaru and Ashburton to Christchurch, to the benefit of all Canterbury? 

On precedents set in Auckland and Wellington, direct grants from the Government or Government agencies or incorporated in KiwiRail capital works, would meet about half the construction costs, leaving $300 million to be found from local and regional public authority sources or from public-private partnerships.

Creating a central city rail corridor seems so fundamental to making an increasingly vibrant and attractive rebuilt Christchurch a truly dynamic city centre, fed by the larger catchment of metropolitan sprawl. This includes being able to tie together the main new growth areas in Rolleston and Rangiora, and keeping the cultural, sporting and business heart of the whole Canterbury province accessible to all. It also allows easier access to housing and employment across the whole metropolitan area, including those in inner city apartments. who residents work further afield. In this light central Government assistance to the tune of around $2-300 million is not an absurdly large expectation. In fact $100 million is already promised by the new Labour government for commuter rail in Christchurch, though this would amount would offer too little make an effective and game changing attractive system by itself..

As is obvious, no railway construction is cheap, but once established, a railway line into the city centre will can create benefits for generations. A good example of such foresight , close to home, is the Lyttelton Railway Tunnel. The decision to build that huge-for-its-era railway tunnel - the first great engineering project in New Zealand - was made in 1858 when Canterbury had less than 5,000 adult residents. These pioneers held a larger vision and the courage to build a far more difficult transport corridor than that is suggested here.

Of course the approximate $900 million doesn't  just buy a 2 kilometre central city railway tunnel - by seizing the central ground, so to speak (and literally) it secures the pivotal point for  whole core commuter railway network for greater Christchurch. 

Even on just existing rail corridors it links almost 60 km of built up area to the city's heart, with obvious room for expanding peripheral lines over the decades ahead.
In contrast to motorways,  this is without adding further to city congestion, without increasing delays and without  parking costs and among other things, likely to vastly increase new apartment building, central city office buildings, central city dining and nightlife, and attract large crowds to sporting and festive events.  

I think this concept put forward here is such a game-changing option that the Councils should professional engineers, transport planners and accountants etc. to do a feasibility study of this concept. Used to assist this, the promised $100 million in Canterbury commuter rail funding by the Labour Government might then go far further than anyone ever dreamed.

For a more detailed info on  historic Wellington expenditure "Take the money and Run"
For the gross imbalance of NZ taxpayers money invested in Auckland (2013) Government asks New Zealand to massively subsidise Auckland transport?
Greater Christchurch to have a potential commuter base 80,000 people more than Wellington region within 25 years, or see [pages, see right hand column] 

Saturday, December 2, 2017

Western rail corridor loop route needed to future proof Christchurch ?

Christchurch Airport station as built under Orchard Road and Christchurch International Airport carpark? 
Not quite !  Actually Stockholm underground - Wikipedia

(This commentary was significantly updated/shortened from a post made back in June 2011 responding to proposals to built a light rail to airport)

In a recent post I advocated building a rail link between Redwood area, just south of the Styx rail overbridge heading west to Johns Road, then past the Christchurch international airport down to Islington, creating what is in effect a circular rail network with lengthy spurs, able to be operated in all sorts of inter-active commuter and freight rail patterns  (see maps below).

(ignore the small spur on right) The green space to construct this line (designated for future housing) is easier to see on Google Maps  as is the potential to take the line under several roads linking up with an elbow in Orchard Road, and then running under Orchard Road.  

(Ignore the small spur top right)the map above was expanded in November 2011 by the one below to create a figure 8 multi-function regional rail network  ( proposed lines in dots)

The same benefits of a loop route apply here in the relatively cheap looping of a service back from Rangiora through Woodend and Pegasus.  In this proposal commuter rail would terminate in the South East near Ferrymead Heritage Park, with park and ride and shuttle buses linking to rest of area. 

As well as adjoining many existing residential areas, industrial and office park areas and major shopping hubs, this network would also serve the airport and the proposed/existing Addington City sports and events zone, and the central city.  

The network as proposed here would serve (and no doubt foster) many new developments, such as Upper Styx or Islington Park. Or  for instance it might add a big boost to redevelopment in the older areas such as those around Charleston, Roimata, Philipstown if,  by boarding a train at Ensors Road,m residents could easily access almost every major industrial-office park zone and several huge retail employers stretching from Rangiora to Rolleston!

Although it lacks the direct "rail to Cathedral Square" quality of the [2011,2012] proposed light rail route, the circular route pattern in the map above links well over 200,000 of our residents (and 100,000 more across the whole province)  into easy access to the central city by conventional and sturdy commuter rail. 

This would have a huge impact far in excess of the minimal cost-benefits of a singular light rail line proposed to Ilam by Bob Parker's team. 

The commuter rail benefits include a reverse pattern flow - comfortable inner city apartment life-styles fostered in central areas because it is possible to get to work by rail to almost every major employment zone - as far afield as Rolleston or Rangiora. 

Peak hour flow going both ways is a huge financial benefit in any public transport system.

This suggested new line between Styx and Islington would be double tracked with grade separation (NO inter-action with cars etc). In  my vision it would be built mainly as part of the  Auckland-Christchurch freight corridor but offer opportunity to structure in commuter rail, presumably also mostly financed by Government and KiwiRail, as has happened in Auckland and Wellington. 

I believe this link rail project could be built for not much more than the $400 million figure estimated for creating a light rail down Riccarton Road. (comparative new and upgraded railway spending to date in Auckland is over $2 billion, before the start of City Rail Link $3 billion plus, Wellington at least $800 million)

I also believe this western rail corridor delivers far more industrial, economic, environmental, and social punch for the money.

Preserving the current single between Styx and Addington (and retaining the attractive cycle and walkway!) this would give Christchurch three lines access tofro the North.  

In the peak hour some commuter express trains might travel straight to Addington then reverse to central Christchurch (or vice versa), but many other services - and most at other times - could loop via airport with most of this route at high speed being grade separated. 

The longer route involved, I believe, is off set-by (a) speed of the services (b) frequency of services in a busier network - travel time in public transport is measured not just by journey time but by the [potential waiting] time between services (c) the multiplicity of functions, journey types - not just suburb-centre city but also suburb to suburb; suburb to airport; airport to city centre; suburb to multiple work zones across whole city; airport to sports stadium; provincial centres to airport and central city etc.

It offers quality service to multiple hubs AS WELL as the city centre, possibly the only way to generate sufficient usage to make commuter rail viable in a city with a population as small as Christchurch.  

The rail loop corridor protects the long term mobility and potential quality of life of ALL city residents (in a way the Riccarton tram line does not)  if oil prices rise dramatically and permanently, as they may well do now that oil production appears to reached peak production.  [or if they don't an congestion increases - 2017]

Apart from much shorter drives to car parks at stations at the periphery of the city (eg Russley, Chapmans Road) trains and bikes can work exceedingly well together and ideally some carriages could be designed especially for cyclists, with a network of quality cycleways tofro each station.

It also reinstates Christchurch truly at the centre of the Province in the sense residents from Timaru and Ashburton etc. and from Amberley and Rangiora etc can rail direct to the International airport and sports stadiums. 

A great advantage of this rail corridor suggested here is that most of the infrastructure can be built in advance of extensive new housing, commercial and industrial areas - at East and West Belfast, The Styx Centre (Northwood), Styx Mill, Johns Road, Spitfire Centre, Dakota Park, Russley, Masham, Broomfield, Islington Park, the Izone at Rolleston, Rolleston itself, Wigram, Addington and Sydenham and (in peak hours anyway) the expansion of the Woolston industrial area. 

This premature design factor, allows removal of conflict between trains, residents and cars (using over passes, underpasses or trenches and subways and also allows access to the rail to be maximized whether for bike and skateboard or for park and ride and kiss and ride. Glassed off platforms could allow direct access into malls and shopping complexes. 

I suggested in my previous posting that the line via the airport could be built in a cut and cover trench (as at New Lynn, Auckland) with a line and station under the length of Orchard Road, adding perhaps $150-200 million to costs). This could be double tracked as with all this link between Styx and Islington, but with a wall between the two tracks opposite the airport station platform [similar to picture above] so freight trains can use the walled off section 24/7 and passenger trains in either direction always cross into airport platform track on entering tunnel. In the middle of the night, freight could use both tracks. 

Although nothing is cheap in the building of rail; and light rail infrastructure, building a trench along Orchard Road (and under a small section of the airport periphery) would seem highly feasible - given this road can be closed in sections with out cutting access to any point.

The station itself would served by a people mover direct from the station and/or a five minute shuttle bus service to airport terminals and work places in the general area.

On my reading [in 2011] the basic line costs of double tracking and necessary signal cabling etc would be under $7 million per kilometre, including currently rural land purchase; the overbridges (such as Buchanans Road, Yaldhurst Road etc) about $15-20 million each, the smaller stations about $5-10 million each. (These figures are only extrapolated from Australia and NZ projects without all factors known and may be widely astray- welcome more accurate guesses!).

Unlike Bob Parker's inspired (yeah right)  "light rail network" which is expected to to cost $1.9 billion and would take years to develop in sequence, line by line after the proposed City-Riccarton tram line, the Western Rail Corridor and associated commuter system, in one move brings a huge chunk of greater Christchurch into one linked system for (probably) less than $500 million while simultaneously hugely upgrading our rail freight base and its potential doorstop link to industry. 

Commuter rail of course also has much greater elasticity and room for expansion than either buses or light rail - in the event of a new "Lancaster Park" at Addington and big Test matches and similar, adding carriages and locomotives to the DMU unit system means rail could deliver tens of thousands directly into the area, from all of Canterbury - and directly.

The made here suggestion relies on tacking commuter rail onto the Government's Auckland-Christchurch freight corridor upgrade; the probable increased use in public transport post peak oil; onto an effective system based on multiple traffic generator points and multiple use patterns. 

Not least this idea also recognises the greater stability of stony north and west land, which suggests a greater rebuild of thousands of lost houses (from the earthquake) in these areas rather than in the east. With its many swamps and large green spaces (QEII, golf courses, estuary etc) the eastside always was always more of  a challenge in terms of sufficient population and geography, to service with a frequent multi-directional public transport network. This challenge seems likely to greatly increase with the reversion of many unstable areas, formerly housing, back to park or paddock. Indeed greater Christchurch may come to look more like a banana shape Rangiora to Rolleston being more the focus of growth and industry than the older parts of the city.

The conditions that once supported commuter rail to the port and population of Lyttelton are alas long gone, and there is, anyway, a growing bottleneck with along the whole city rail-tunnel-wharf corridor even for freight trains. A third track from Heathcote/Hillsboro to Waltham might be needed.

On the other hand a park and ride (and bus drop off/pick up zone) area near  Chapmans Road could service residents working in the north and west from all of the Sumner/Mt Pleasant, Redcliffs/Lyttelton/Harbour area. It would also link Ferrymead Heritage Park and the National Rail Museum of New Zealand direct to the city.

Wellington aside - it is unusual to build rail (light rail or commuter rail) in cities as small as Christchurch, in low density/wealthy/high car ownership countries such as Canada, USA, Australia or New Zealand(Canzus).

Over a period two plus years [about 4 years ago] I checked out a list of over 120 cities in "CANZUS" with metropolitan populations between 300,00 and a million in these four countries. 

Wellington is the ONLY city amongst these 120 cities that has its its own, seven day a week, multiple route, commuter rail system.(Noted - one or two cities have commuter rail links but these are tofro larger cities nearby - eg Newcastle to Sydney, Bridgeport to New York)

However a very effective route structure such as suggested here, with multiple  functions, and potential for peak hour travel operating in both directions and built-in potential for fast freight, separated from passenger rail, could just put Christchurch ahead of the class, creating a very resilient infrastructure to support the city's growth and economic survival in the years ahead. 

The National Government took billions of dollars out of Canterbury road taxes to fund public transport infrastructure in Auckland, common justice alone suggests some transit  infrastructure spending Christchurch is well overdue.

I believe it would be criminal to investigate the current light rail proposal [or the Green party city-airport BRT proposal in 2017!!] without a full and proper study of the option above.