Mt Albert upgrade

[Andrew]

Can someone find out the answer to that cost question? I'm currently outside the area of the world that Jodi has ever travelled ... and as my wife has just pointed out, supposed to be on holiday. Best I can do is ask on Twitter.

[Andrew]

Him I just noticed the Mt Albert page on the AT site is searchable but not browseable, and if I try to navigate to associated pages I get asked for a password.

Browsing from http://www.aucklandtransport.govt.nz/improving-transport/auckland-rail-upgrade/station-upgrades/mtalbert/Pages/default.aspx to "Auckland Rail Upgrade", for example.

[pcuser42]

I'm currently outside the area of the world that Jodi has ever travelled

Are you in Hamilton?

[john-ston]

Are you in Hamilton?

Oi, I was in Hamilton for a week back in April, and will be back in Hamilton for a week later this month

[eurokiwi78]

Are you in Hamilton?

Oi, I was in Hamilton for a week back in April, and will be back in Hamilton for a week later this month

Sorry to hear about that.

[Islander]

I hope that the inclusion of turnstiles has been allowed for but with two access points I suspect that this is not. IMHO this should be a requirement for all upgrade works.

[odaikorob]

What is interesting design-wise, is the new East & West concourses. They look as though they may be able to accommodate ticket gates which would be good as I believe, Mt Albert, along with Glenn Innes, Papatoetoe, and certain other island platform stations, should gated as soon as, to prevent fare evasion.

[john-ston]

What is interesting design-wise, is the new East & West concourses. They look as though they may be able to accommodate ticket gates which would be good as I believe, Mt Albert, along with Glenn Innes, Papatoetoe, and certain other island platform stations, should gated as soon as, to prevent fare evasion.

The East and West concourses are designed to accommodate elevators and not anything particularly fancy. The expectation seems to be that the upgrade is only to cover the next fifteen to twenty odd years.

My chief criticism of the design is the lack of continuous shelter. If you want to encourage people to transfer from bus to train and vice versa, then you really need to have the ability to get from the bus to the train without getting wet. Building a shelter from Carrington Road right to the main shelters should not cost that much - maybe $50,000.

[geoff_184]

The three issues I have with the design would be:

1) The new design will have three nondescript pedestrian entrances, just as the old one does. I.e., it will still not be given a street frontage, so will remain "out of sight, out of mind". It would be better to put the #2 concourse right against Carrington Road, not 50 metres away.

2) The new station will downgrade wheelchair access from the existing three entrances to just one, as the west end concourse will be steps only.

3) The all-weather underpasses at the west end will be replaced by exposed, and longer, overhead walkways. The walking distance will be longer, and during the winter very exposed to wind and rain.

The only real plus here is the provision of decent shelters, but overall I don't think this is $10m worth of value. When the town eventually gets rebuilt they'll probably rip all of this out again in favour of building a whole new shopping complex over the tracks, so it would actually be better to just install a modern shelter at this stage, and leave the bridges and concourses.

[odaikorob]

The three issues I have with the design would be:

1) The new design will have three nondescript pedestrian entrances, just as the old one does. I.e., it will still not be given a street frontage, so will remain "out of sight, out of mind". It would be better to put the #2 concourse right against Carrington Road, not 50 metres away.

2) The new station will downgrade wheelchair access from the existing three entrances to just one, as the west end concourse will be steps only.

3) The all-weather underpasses at the west end will be replaced by exposed, and longer, overhead walkways. The walking distance will be longer, and during the winter very exposed to wind and rain.

The only real plus here is the provision of decent shelters, but overall I don't think this is $10m worth of value. When the town eventually gets rebuilt they'll probably rip all of this out again in favour of building a whole new shopping complex over the tracks, so it would actually be better to just install a modern shelter at this stage, and leave the bridges and concourses.

Geoff, you're damn right, particularly on your third point. Auckland seems to blindly follow Australian station design by putting in these ridiculously long, uncovered walkways. It rains far more in NZ than in Australia so who don't the designers build for 'our' weather?

Auckland really needs to minimize the amount of exposed area on station platforms and accessways. Money is not being wisely spent here.

[john-ston]

Geoff, you're damn right, particularly on your third point. Auckland seems to blindly follow Australian station design by putting in these ridiculously long, uncovered walkways. It rains far more in NZ than in Australia so who don't the designers build for 'our' weather?

Auckland really needs to minimize the amount of exposed area on station platforms and accessways. Money is not being wisely spent here.

The theory is that "people have to get to the station somehow", so another hundred metres of getting drenched is no big deal. Anyone who stands on the Queen/Customs Street intersection on a wet day can see that the amount of space occupied by pedestrians doubles because a large chunk of people have their umbrellas hoisted.

[CCreegan]

Isn't the theory "people are scared of assault in tunnels" (which is not a totally unreasonable theory)

[pickle]

Tunnels that are not well used can be a bit scary. If it is it should be an inside floor with 24/7 lighting and CCTV.

[john-ston]

Isn't the theory "people are scared of assault in tunnels" (which is not a totally unreasonable theory)

I am not disagreeing with the use of ramps, just disagreeing with the lack of shelter provided. Surely, putting up a canvas shelter (like at Ellerslie Station) should not cost that much - a hundred thousand tops.

[odaikorob]

I am not disagreeing with the use of ramps, just disagreeing with the lack of shelter provided. Surely, putting up a canvas shelter (like at Ellerslie Station) should not cost that much - a hundred thousand tops.

Exactly! The amount of exposed area on Auckland suburban station platforms is ridiculous. In a city where it rains all year round, it is meaningless only having the glorified bus shelters that adorn the platforms currently. The current station shelters might look pretty from a distance but not covering more of platforms in at least the canvas style roofing used at Ellerslie, is just plain silly. New Lynn is finally getting the full platform-length shelters it should have got in the first place...time for the rest of the AKL stations to follow suit and get covered.

[geoff_184]

Isn't the theory "people are scared of assault in tunnels" (which is not a totally unreasonable theory)

Are people also scared of assault in building corridors? It's the same thing. If this concern is valid, then forget the CRL stations!

I would leave the existing subway at Mt Albert, fit automatic doors at each entrance, put in a proper tiled or even carpeted floor, some pictures on the walls, lots of lights and CCTV cameras and have some soft classical music playing. You'd just feel like you're in a building. Would be a lot cheaper than building yet another of those Glen Eden style suburban eyesore overbridges, where users are exposed to wind, cold and rain.

[odaikorob]

I would leave the existing subway at Mt Albert, fit automatic doors at each entrance, put in a proper tiled or even carpeted floor, some pictures on the walls, lots of lights and CCTV cameras and have some soft classical music playing. You'd just feel like you're in a building. Would be a lot cheaper than building yet another of those Glen Eden style suburban eyesore overbridges, where users are exposed to wind, cold and rain.

Have seen that treatment done to an existing underpass as part of a station upgrade in Japan. It cost around JPY10 million (NZ$157,000) all up to do. The floor there was kept in the original concrete and the ticket gates / ticket machines were put inside weatherproof housing at the respective entrances to the underpass.

[Nick R]

Isn't the theory "people are scared of assault in tunnels" (which is not a totally unreasonable theory)

Are people also scared of assault in building corridors? It's the same thing.

As a rule, no they aren't. People's perceptions of safety aren't logical or consistent, but they are powerful informants of behavior. Like how parents won't let their kids walk to schools over a very remote chance of abduction, but they'll bundle them into the car where they have a much greater chance of serious bodily harm in a car crash.

An underpass and overpass a much the same spatially, although I guess the underpass has better sight lines and surveillance from the outside.

[john-ston]

An underpass and overpass a much the same spatially, although I guess the underpass has better sight lines and surveillance from the outside.

Don't you mean an overpass has better sight lines?

Personally, I don't have a problem with having overpasses instead of underpasses.

Would be a lot cheaper than building yet another of those Glen Eden style suburban eyesore overbridges, where users are exposed to wind, cold and rain.

Why should all ramps be like Glen Eden. Down the way from Sylvia Park station, there is a spiral ramp - less eyesoreish, still does the same job.

[Nick R]

Yep, I meant overpasses have better sight lines.