{"id":166071,"date":"2025-12-03T13:27:11","date_gmt":"2025-12-03T13:27:11","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/166071\/"},"modified":"2025-12-03T13:27:11","modified_gmt":"2025-12-03T13:27:11","slug":"light-rail-lives-on-greater-auckland","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/166071\/","title":{"rendered":"Light Rail Lives On? – Greater Auckland"},"content":{"rendered":"

Earlier this year Te Waihanga, the New Zealand Infrastructure Commission, invited submissions for Round 2 of its Infrastructure Priorities Programme<\/a> (IPP), looking to help identify proposals and projects that:<\/p>\n

are nationally importantwill meet New Zealand\u2019s strategic objectivesrepresent good value for moneyand can be delivered.<\/p>\n

The process is open to everyone, from councils, public agencies, community organisations and the private sector.<\/p>\n

While most proposals come from government agencies, councils, and organisations, I made a submission as an individual \u2013unaffiliated with any agency or organisation \u2013 making the case for light rail on the Auckland isthmus.<\/p>\n

And, as is being announced today, my proposal has been endorsed (at \u2018Stage 1\u2019) for identifying a nationally significant issue, under the name Mass Rapid Transit in the City Centre to M\u0101ngere corridor.<\/p>\n

It\u2019s been pretty awesome to get this into the programme even at \u2018Stage 1\u2019. Light rail was my entry point into transport advocacy<\/a> and, after the current government cancelled all work on the City Centre to M\u0101ngere corridor without a replacement workstream in early 2024<\/a>, is a project that really needs to be restarted. I\u2019ve also been writing a book on the whole story over the last decade, so it\u2019s a topic I know way too much about (although the book has a lot of work to go, but in June I wrote about one thing I\u2019d found<\/a>).<\/p>\n

Regardless this, at least for now, serves as a first step to reigniting this project.<\/p>\n

What is the IPP, and what does \u2018endorsement\u2019 mean?<\/p>\n

In Te Waihanga\u2019s words<\/a>:<\/p>\n

The Infrastructure Priorities Programme (IPP) is an independent and standardised process to identify proposals and projects that are nationally important, will meet New Zealand\u2019s strategic objectives, represent good value for money and can be delivered. The IPP is administered by the New Zealand Infrastructure Commission, Te Waihanga.<\/p>\n

The IPP is a part of the development of the Commission\u2019s National Infrastructure Plan. Proposals and projects assessed as meeting the criteria under the IPP will be published and included within the National Infrastructure Plan.<\/p>\n

When it comes to endorsing projects, the IPP has three stages, which represent various levels of project development:<\/p>\n

Endorsements are provided at three stages. Proposals endorsed at Stage 1 were found to identify problems requiring business case development. Those at Stage 2 focus on multiple options to solve the problem ready for detailed design. A Stage 3 endorsement reflects an investment-ready project.<\/p>\n

Today, my proposal joins another 24 infrastructure proposals endorsed in Round 2, which along with Round 1\u2019s endorsements means the IPP now has a total of 44 projects on its list.<\/p>\n

As per today\u2019s media release:<\/p>\n

These include endorsements for Golden Triangle Rail Electrification, Waimakariri Eastern Transport, Auckland Biosolids Servicing, Auckland Level Crossings, and Queenstown Transport proposals as well as hospital projects in Tauranga, Hawke\u2019s Bay and Palmerston North.<\/p>\n

\u201cEach endorsed proposal has been rigorously assessed against criteria including strategic alignment with New Zealand\u2019s needs, value for money, and deliverability,\u201d [Te Waihanga Chief Executive Geoff] Cooper says.<\/p>\n

\u201cWe know that premature project announcements increase the odds of cost overruns and delivery delays. The IPP provides clear assessment of the investment readiness and the appropriate next step for each proposal.\u201d<\/p>\n

The endorsed proposals, submitted by both public and private organisations, were assessed by the Commission and reviewed by an independent panel of five leading infrastructure experts.<\/p>\n

Notably absent are all the Roads of National Significance (or any NZTA project for that matter). You could argue this says a lot about NZTA and how they think the RoNS might or should be assessed in terms of national significance, strategic import, value for money, and deliverability.<\/p>\n

It\u2019s me: \u2018Unaffiliated\u2019<\/p>\n

What\u2019s actually been \u2018endorsed\u2019 for City Centre to M\u0101ngere rapid transit?<\/p>\n

Given the substantial amount of work that\u2019s already been done along the CC2M corridor, I submitted my proposal at \u2018Stage 2\u2019, putting forward light rail on the surface along Dominion Road as the preferred solution (at least for the section from the City Centre to Mt Roskill).<\/p>\n

However, while my proposal satisfied requirements that this was a priority problem for New Zealand \u2013 and thus the problem itself could be endorsed \u2013 Te Waihanga found there was not quite enough information to endorse a particular solution\u2026 yet.<\/p>\n

The report noted that these two key aspects were missing from my proposition:<\/p>\n

complete details on the process for longlisting, which should result in 8-12 discreet\/standalone options, andevidence that price was sufficiently considered when filtering to a shortlist.<\/p>\n

(You can read the full report here, which goes into it in a lot more detail.<\/a>)<\/p>\n

From my perspective, the major reason this proposal was endorsed at Stage 1 and not at Stage 2 is due to the haphazard process over the last decade of work on isthmus light rail by the various agencies, and in particular, by a lack of quality documentation of the work.<\/p>\n

Unfortunately, there isn\u2019t even one single business case to point to that contains a longlist and shortlist of all the options that have been looked at over the years.<\/p>\n

For example, most of the work undertaken by Auckland Transport between 2014-2018 was not really documented in a proper business case<\/a>. Still, that work carefully explored every possible lower-cost option, such as bus-based solutions, to address the central problem of public transport capacity constraints in the City Centre. Their conclusion was that Auckland indeed needed a higher capacity mode, such as light rail.<\/p>\n

Surface light rail sliding along George St, Sydney. Could be us; could\u2019ve been us already! photo Patrick Reynolds<\/p>\n

However, despite all the work essentially being there to justify a higher-cost and higher-capacity solution like light rail, it isn\u2019t available in a form that\u2019s easy to pick up without having the prior institutional knowledge. Nor does it fit well into the standardised process of the IPP.<\/p>\n

Additionally, as the Infrastructure Commission highlights in its report, the more recent work (and business cases) carried out in the 2020s <\/a>didn\u2019t take the step of quantifying what the \u2018problem\u2019 of the CC2M corridor \u2018costs\u2019 us \u2013 and therefore couldn\u2019t adequately explain why higher-cost options like a tunnelled metro system emerged as \u2018preferred\u2019 in those business cases.<\/p>\n

Combined with the significant cost of the tunnelled metro option \u2013 and evolving political attitudes \u2013 it is unlikely any of this more recent work would be progressed, or indeed progressable, any time soon<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Hence Te Waihanga endorsing my proposal at Stage 1: where it is clear there is a problem to be solved, and yet nothing substantial is currently being progressed in the way of a solution\u2026<\/p>\n

\u2026or at least, not in the persuasive and quantifiable terms required for a Stage 2 endorsement.<\/p>\n

Of course, it\u2019s still a significant step to have won Stage 1 endorsement. It means that at least we as a nation have identified a pressing problem, and that this issue is on the list of things we should solve.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

So what\u2019s next?<\/p>\n

The next step would be for an actual agency to pick this up \u2013 either from central government or Auckland Council \u2013 as I have probably reached the limit of what one individual can do.<\/p>\n

As Geoff Cooper makes clear in this morning\u2019s media release, receiving endorsement in the IPP doesn\u2019t guarantee funding or prioritisation towards delivery:<\/p>\n

\u201cThe programme is voluntary and open to anyone, from government agencies and councils to community groups and the private sector. This ensures we are able provide a list of infrastructure needs and solutions from across the country.<\/p>\n

\u201cWhile endorsement doesn\u2019t guarantee funding, or prioritisation by Government, it sends a strong signal to decision-makers about infrastructure priorities that have passed independent scrutiny.\u201d<\/p>\n

Arguably, as things stand Auckland Council is best placed to pick up this work. With Auckland Transport soon to be absorbed into Council, along with the development of the 30-Year Integrated Transport Plan<\/a>, there is a timely opportunity to reignite work towards solving this problem.<\/p>\n

At minimum, following the recommendations of the Auckland Rapid Transport Pathway 2025<\/a>, a mode needs to be confirmed for the City Centre to Mt Roskill section of the CC2M corridor.<\/p>\n

George St Sydney photo Patrick Reynolds<\/p>\n

Further work could then compile and consolidate the existing work over the past decade, to advance development of the project, readying it for future business cases \u2013 or even lodging route protection and related Notices of Requirement.<\/p>\n

Regardless of how (and by whom) this is picked up and carried it forward, I\u2019m glad to have played my part (although I suspect my role in this won\u2019t be over anytime soon). This is a really important step forward for a vital solution on a critical corridor, that has been left by the wayside since 2023.<\/p>\n

Moreover, with moves imminent to develop the 30-Year Transport Plan for Auckland, you can expect to see a lot more from Greater Auckland in 2026 about what our city needs in the transport and housing space. So watch this space \u2013 as well as the CC2M one!<\/p>\n

This post, like all our work, is brought to you by the Greater Auckland crew and made possible by generous donations from our readers and fans. If you\u2019d like to support our work, you can\u00a0join our circle of supporters here<\/a>, or support us on\u00a0Substack.<\/a><\/p>\n

A render of Dominion Road light rail from Auckland Transport, 2017<\/p>\n

Share this<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"Earlier this year Te Waihanga, the New Zealand Infrastructure Commission, invited submissions for Round 2 of its Infrastructure…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":166072,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[108482,108483,108484,71305,111,43,139,69,108485],"class_list":["post-166071","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-new-zealand","tag-cc2m","tag-dominion-road","tag-ipp","tag-light-rail","tag-new-zealand","tag-news","tag-newzealand","tag-nz","tag-te-waihanga"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/166071","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=166071"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/166071\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/166072"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=166071"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=166071"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=166071"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}