Shuttle trial unlikely to take off
A lack of funding seems to have scuttled hopes for a central Christchurch shuttle trial in the near future.
A report prepared for the Greater Christchurch Public Transport Committee, which includes staff from Environment Canterbury (ECan), the Christchurch City Council and the NZ Transport Agency, found funding a trial would not be possible without cutting other services to free up funds.
The committee has been considering options for a replacement to the free hop-on, hop-off service that ran in the central city from 1998 until the February 2011 earthquake.
Three reports have been made to date. The latest one, which goes before the committee today, recommends the shuttle be considered further during a review of the city’s entire public transport network, with funding considered in ECan and the city council’s respective long-term plans.
The report noted a lack of connectivity between the core of the central city and places of leisure was well understood, but said it was difficult to understand how access to new businesses and workplaces west of the Avon River was affected by the lack of a shuttle.
It confirmed running costs would be about $500,000 a year for a service leaving every 10 to 15 minutes and running in one direction. Getting substantial funding from an outside source was deemed unlikely.
The report found funding of a trial would have to come from ‘‘either a re-allocation of existing Metro services or the city council meeting some or all of any additional costs’’.
David Thornley, of the Inner City West Residents Group, said the business plan had ‘‘given insufficient weight to the social needs of inner-city residents’’.
‘‘I have to drive my car rather than take public transport to get across the various parts of the central city. I shouldn’t be having to drive, but I am now 72 years old and I’m not capable of walking large distances.’’
A lot of people who visited facilities such as the Christchurch Art Gallery, Canterbury Museum or Botanic Gardens did not have the ability to walk long distances, Thornley said.
He thought the report had found against the shuttle because it was ‘‘a financial bother to them’’.
It was time to reintroduce the service though, as it would allow people to get accustomed to using it rather than bringing their car to town.
Chester St community member Simone Pearson, who is making a deputation at the committee meeting, said the central city was fragmented, with pockets of development, so ‘‘a central-city shuttle would link up those key projects’’.
It seemed like now would be a good time to trial it – to capitalise on the momentum in the central city, she said.
‘‘I guess if they’re serious about revitalising central city, this would be a key time.’’
City councillor Pauline Cotter, who is on the committee, said it was ‘‘disappointing’’ the shuttle was not viable at this stage.
‘‘It just looks like it’s not really panning out to be viable at the moment because there’s still a lot of developments going on around there.’’
She said she wanted the public transport gap in the central city filled because it was not acceptable for those who were not so ablebodied, or when there was bad weather.
While the report had considered a six-month trial, there could be other ways to do it, such as running a minivan similar to the service provided by Christchurch Hospital’s park-and-ride service, she said.
‘‘I guess it will be a discussion at the meeting – whether we’ve explored it fully.’’
Cotter said she would support a shuttle trial going out for public consultation as part of the city council’s long-term plan.
Having an electric shuttle ‘‘was a bottom line’’ for her, as the city had to ‘‘move with the times’’.
‘‘We have to go electric. We have to move with the times.’’
City councillors Deon Swiggs and Vicki Buck previously said they would support the city council considering funding the shuttle.