Keeping tabs on technology

What exactly is a ‘‘fit for the future public transport system’’, to borrow a phrase used last week by Greater Christchurch Regeneration Minister Megan Woods? If we take New Zealand’s three largest cities, the ones with the biggest congestion concerns, is there even a one-size-fits-all answer to that question?

Based on comments from Woods following the release of the Government’s 10-year transport plan, it certainly seems there is a view light, or commuter, rail must be a key component of any transport system fit for the future.

However last week’s Government Policy Statement is open for public consultation until May 2, and the New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA), which allocates money to projects from the annual $4 billion National Land Transport Fund, will not comment on specific projects until the engagement process is completed.

Last week we looked at the potential impact of the GPS in Wellington. But it makes sense of course to look beyond the capital.

Woods said the GPS meant ‘‘money is on the table for commuter rail in Christchurch’’. The $100 million pledged by Labour to Christchurch public transport ahead of last year’s election included funding for a commuter rail service between Rolleston, to the city’s south, and Christchurch.

Auckland, with the greatest congestion problem, is also furthest down the light rail track, and it would be tough to argue against the City of Sails getting a system aimed at taking commuters off its gridlocked roads. An announcement last month that light rail would be a priority for a new housing development in the suburb of Mt Albert was widely welcomed.

Housing and Transport Minister Phil Twyford said it would be the ‘‘first major community in Auckland where you can live well and not have to own a car’’.

That would put it on a par with major cities worldwide, from New York and London to Melbourne and Sydney.

Those systems are in place now. It will be at least a decade before we see anything similar in New Zealand.

That is a long time, though, given the pace of technological progress, with innovations like driverless cars, and autonomous air taxis currently being tested. They are in their infancy, of course, but it would be no surprise to see those and other technological innovations have an impact on congestion, and be cheaper in the long term.

Who is to say, then, that by the time the capital’s link is running – a Christchurch one would be years further away – it won’t already be verging on going out of date? $1b would be a massive sum to invest in a service that turned out not to be heavily patronised.

Do our future congestion projections take careful note of how transport technology might change in 10, 20, or even 50 years?

Given the pace at which technology changes, light rail might be the answer for each of our three largest cities, or, given the different development stages they’re at, just one, or two.

The bottom line is that each needs to approach the future with eyes wide open.

Is there even a one-size-fits-all answer to the question?