Parramatta light rail

Sydney / New South Wales Transport Discussion
grog
Posts: 614
Joined: Wed Nov 07, 2007 8:09 am
Location: Sydney

Re: Parramatta light rail

Post by grog »

Transtopic wrote: Wed Dec 23, 2020 10:33 pmYou would say that wouldn't you.
What exactly is that supposed to mean? I’d appreciate if you kept the tone respectful.

My comments were talking about the difference between a bus connection from Melrose Park to West Ryde vs. a bus connection via a new bridge to Olympic Park. Melrose Park will be a big development - capacity also needs to be considered.

Links to both stations are needed.
Aurora
Posts: 925
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 10:54 pm
Favourite Vehicle: C set
Location: Sydney Reg 3

Re: Parramatta light rail

Post by Aurora »

Transtopic wrote: Wed Dec 23, 2020 11:47 pmThe overriding consideration appears to be to make use of the Carlingford Line infrastructure, regardless of its merits, compared with the more direct route via Eastwood. Labor made the same mistake when considering options for the Parramatta to Chatswood Rail Link. I hope they don't make the same mistake when considering a future metro link between Parramatta and Macquarie Park. I'll be pushing up daisies by then anyway.
Although they are not using much pre-existing infrastructure except for the rail corridor and the bridges, which are still being adapted for two tracks anyway.

Have to agree the PRL should link up with Eastwood/Epping so that it is not a low patronage white elephant. Otherwise the only real improvement from the project is the removal of Parramatta Road level crossing, and even then, it is a very expensive one.
An asset of NSW. All opinions/comments are strictly my own.
M 5885.
tonyp
Posts: 12348
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 2:31 am

Re: Parramatta light rail

Post by tonyp »

As I recall, the long-term metro plan includes a line Kogarah-Bankstown-Parramatta-Carlingford-Epping
Transtopic
Posts: 1490
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2011 10:10 pm

Re: Parramatta light rail

Post by Transtopic »

tonyp wrote: Fri Dec 25, 2020 10:40 pm As I recall, the long-term metro plan includes a line Kogarah-Bankstown-Parramatta-Carlingford-Epping
I don't think there's any definite plan yet of how the proposed metro lines focussed on Parramatta from Norwest, Epping or Kogarah will link up. The Norwest to Kogarah link would seem to be the most likely with the Parramatta to Epping link as a short stand alone line. It would make more sense to construct the metro from Parramatta to Macquarie Park on the more direct route via Eastwood if a light rail link doesn't materialise. Eastwood is a larger centre than Epping and has much more retail/commercial/residential redevelopment potential anyway. Unlike Epping, it also has a readymade site for a metro station under the existing bus interchange adjacent to the station.
tonyp
Posts: 12348
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 2:31 am

Re: Parramatta light rail

Post by tonyp »

Transtopic wrote: Sat Dec 26, 2020 12:45 am I don't think there's any definite plan yet of how the proposed metro lines focussed on Parramatta from Norwest, Epping or Kogarah will link up. The Norwest to Kogarah link would seem to be the most likely with the Parramatta to Epping link as a short stand alone line. It would make more sense to construct the metro from Parramatta to Macquarie Park on the more direct route via Eastwood if a light rail link doesn't materialise. Eastwood is a larger centre than Epping and has much more retail/commercial/residential redevelopment potential anyway. Unlike Epping, it also has a readymade site for a metro station under the existing bus interchange adjacent to the station.
Well, so far the new lines as they are progressively announced turn out to follow the exact 2056 pattern laid out in the Future Transport Strategy. Not to say there won't be any future tweaking but they did spend at least five years working on the plan (and another more than five years preparatory planning) in conjunction with metropolitan planning strategy, so it's pretty bedded down in some detail. The point about Epping is that it's a junction with two other lines whereas Eastwood and Macquarie Park are each a junction with only one. Transport planning now is predicated on interchange more than single journeys.
Transtopic
Posts: 1490
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2011 10:10 pm

Re: Parramatta light rail

Post by Transtopic »

tonyp wrote: Sat Dec 26, 2020 7:41 am Well, so far the new lines as they are progressively announced turn out to follow the exact 2056 pattern laid out in the Future Transport Strategy. Not to say there won't be any future tweaking but they did spend at least five years working on the plan (and another more than five years preparatory planning) in conjunction with metropolitan planning strategy, so it's pretty bedded down in some detail. The point about Epping is that it's a junction with two other lines whereas Eastwood and Macquarie Park are each a junction with only one. Transport planning now is predicated on interchange more than single journeys.
The reality is that apart from Metro West and the proposed Aerotropolis to St Marys Metro, the other new metro lines are just that - lines on a map. It's not until the detailed investigation and planning has been completed that you can say with any certainty what the outcome will be. You only have to look at how plans have changed over the last couple of decades and even the more recent example with the Parramatta Light Rail Stage 2 looking increasingly precarious. 2056 is an eternity away and anything is possible.

With a more direct metro link or even light rail link from Parramatta to Macquarie University, Eastwood has the same interchange capability with the Northern Line as Epping, as does Macquarie University with Metro Northwest. Together, they interchange with the same two lines as Epping and having two additional interchanges instead of just one at Epping would significantly reduce interchange congestion. Parramatta and Macquarie University would be the major trip generators and it seems logical to me that a direct link without the need to interchange should be a primary consideration. The only way I could see Epping being justified as an interchange point for a Parramatta/Macquarie University Metro is if it branched from Metro Northwest, which was the original intent allowing through running, but that option was effectively closed off when the proposed stub tunnels were eliminated in the final design of the latter.

A practical planning issue to be faced with an Epping route is where to locate a terminus within close proximity of the existing Epping Station to allow for convenient interchange. It would have to be on the western side of Beecroft Rd and with existing approved and proposed major redevelopment projects in the pipeline, they are fast running out of options unless they act quickly to buy or reserve a site. This was part of the challenge in locating a terminus for the light rail line if extended from Carlingford.
tonyp
Posts: 12348
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 2:31 am

Re: Parramatta light rail

Post by tonyp »

TfNSW has excelled for once. Fantastic whack on the head for one of Constance's whackier thought bubbles. It covers all the issues that everybody knows about but was afraid to speak - except that it was written prior to Covid so doesn't cover the don't buy from China issue which should knock it on the head anyway.

https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/lon ... l#comments
Longer commute, inconvenient, not competitive: Internal report raises trackless tram concerns

By Matt O'Sullivan
December 30, 2020 — 12.00am

The NSW government will have to overcome a series of impediments – including a lack of suppliers – before it can operate trackless trams in Sydney, an internal review of the technology by the state's transport agency has found.

The review, completed in December 2019, raises a "number of issues" for the technology pursued by the government as an alternative to light rail, including its impact on bridges and road pavements and the regulatory requirements they will have to meet.

A battery-powered trackless tram in the Chinese city of Zhuzhou.Credit:CRRC Zhuzhou Institute, Peter Newman.

It also reveals that Transport for NSW has been considering a "staging strategy" for the next stage of the Parramatta light rail project, which has been under serious doubt for more than a year and missed out on funding in the recent state budget.

Transport Minister Andrew Constance first floated the idea last year of running trackless trams on the second stage of the Parramatta light rail, as well as to fast-growing urban precincts such as Green Square in inner Sydney.

Under the proposed staging strategy, a bridge would be built over Parramatta River near Sydney Olympic Park, and the light rail line extended in two phases: from Camellia to Melrose Park; and via the new bridge to Wentworth Point and Sydney Olympic Park.

The internal review said the section between Melrose Park and Wentworth Point via the proposed 325-metre bridge "could be considered as a candidate for trackless tram operations".

It warned that operating trackless trams along the entire second stage would "add travel time and inconvenience penalties for some trips" because passengers would have to switch to conventional light rail vehicles at Camellia.

The review into the suitability of trackless trams for the Parramatta light rail project found that buying trackless trams on a "competitive basis may present challenges" because of a lack of suppliers. It said there did not "appear to be any other suppliers" of the trackless tram sought other than that developed by Chinese company CRRC.

Special access to operate on the road network was also likely to be required because CRRC's trackless trams were at least 32 metres long. The maximum length of heavy vehicles that can operate on Sydney's roads with "general access" is 19 metres.
NSW Transport Minister Andrew Constance first floated the idea of trackless trams last year.

Road pavements were also likely to have to be designed specifically for trackless trams, while bridges may have to be altered to accommodate their loads. Furthermore, the standard design of roadside barriers "may not cater for the dynamic behaviour of trackless trams in an impact situation".

Liverpool Council wants to use the system to connect their city centre to the new airport at Badgery's Creek.

Transport for NSW reviewed trackless trams made by China's CRRC, whose 32-metre long trackless trams can carry 300 people and run autonomously between two white lines on a road.

Mr Constance's office declined to comment on the report, referring questions to Transport for NSW.

Labor finance spokesman Daniel Mookhey said the Transport Minister was peddling a "whacky project that his own department warns is untested".
Related Article

"This secret memo warns trackless trams are uncompetitive, untested and unsuitable for a city like Parramatta," he said. "[Mr Constance] should explain why he is abandoning stage two of the Parramatta light rail despite promising it at two successive elections."

The internal review of trackless trams is contained in bundles of sensitive documents tabled to Parliament, in response to a call for papers by Mr Mookhey.

Western Sydney Business Chamber executive director David Borger said trackless trams seemed to have "questionable viability" and the government should build the light rail line it promised.

"If the government wants to test out trackless trams, it would be better to do it on a different route, not something that is earmarked for an extension of the light rail network," he said.

Transport for NSW said it was continuing to investigate emerging transport technologies, such as trackless trams, for potential use as part of an integrated network.

It said a number of considerations, such as city-shaping benefits, were taken into account when assessing which transport mode was right for the broader network.

The agency said the government was still considering the final business case for stage two of the light rail project, and an investment decision would follow.
Last edited by tonyp on Wed Dec 30, 2020 9:00 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
boronia
Posts: 21566
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 6:18 am
Favourite Vehicle: Ahrens Fox; GMC PD4107
Location: Sydney NSW

Re: Parramatta light rail

Post by boronia »

It amazes me that they continue to use that photo of the TT with its tail end swinging around in the adjacent traffic lane, to show the "benefits" of the system.
Preserving fire service history
@ The Museum of Fire.
Merc1107
Posts: 2243
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2012 6:38 pm
Favourite Vehicle: MAN 18.310, MB O405NH, L94
Location: A Coastal City

Re: Parramatta light rail

Post by Merc1107 »

Perhaps they should get onto the blower to the mobs in Perth who are trying to peddle this as a 'solution' to transport along some of our corridors...
tonyp
Posts: 12348
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 2:31 am

Re: Parramatta light rail

Post by tonyp »

Merc1107 wrote: Wed Dec 30, 2020 8:34 am Perhaps they should get onto the blower to the mobs in Perth who are trying to peddle this as a 'solution' to transport along some of our corridors...
The road regulations will knock it on the head wherever it pops up. They can't even get double artics approved. The one in Brisbane is on its own private roadway to bypass the regs.
User avatar
boronia
Posts: 21566
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 6:18 am
Favourite Vehicle: Ahrens Fox; GMC PD4107
Location: Sydney NSW

Re: Parramatta light rail

Post by boronia »

Presumably, this Parramatta suggestion would be on its own RoW, just like a tram line without the tracks.
Preserving fire service history
@ The Museum of Fire.
tonyp
Posts: 12348
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 2:31 am

Re: Parramatta light rail

Post by tonyp »

boronia wrote: Wed Dec 30, 2020 9:58 am Presumably, this Parramatta suggestion would be on its own RoW, just like a tram line without the tracks.
On its own lanes along the middle of quite narrow roads in the case of Sydney. I wonder if TfNSW noticed that there were other "trackless tram" manufacturers but they've closed shop and systems that already have them are replacing them with real trams? Maybe there's a subliminal message in there somewhere.
Glen
Posts: 3365
Joined: Thu May 27, 2004 10:54 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: Parramatta light rail

Post by Glen »

boronia wrote: Wed Dec 30, 2020 8:22 am It amazes me that they continue to use that photo of the TT with its tail end swinging around in the adjacent traffic lane, to show the "benefits" of the system.
The same comment was made in SMH feedback on that article.

Not for a moment passing judgment on the concept, but you may find that the "tail end swinging around" was actually the 'tram' going through a crossover, just like any tram would.

My only comment on this technology is that if Peter Newman says it's worth a look, it might be worth a look.

https://theconversation.com/trackless-t ... ies-125134

https://theconversation.com/why-trackle ... ail-103690
tonyp
Posts: 12348
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 2:31 am

Re: Parramatta light rail

Post by tonyp »

Glen wrote: Wed Dec 30, 2020 7:30 pm My only comment on this technology is that if Peter Newman says it's worth a look, it might be worth a look.

https://theconversation.com/trackless-t ... ies-125134

https://theconversation.com/why-trackle ... ail-103690
I suspect that there is some sort of arrangement between CRRC and either Newman or Curtin University with the outcome that Newman is promoting this product for CRRC. TfNSW seems to have done a good job identifying all the negatives and impediments and there are very few positives in its favour. The technology has been tested in service in Europe and basically failed. Incidentally the claimed passenger capacity would be a Chinese one, probably 8 ppsm. It would not be likely to be allowed more than 200 here (same as a 30 metre tram) and requires a specially-built reinforced road (including inbuilt optical guidance system) with an ongoing maintenance issue (the guided wheels rut the road surface). There are a number of issues that will stop it happening, not least of which will be the national security issue of allowing China to build infrastructure in Australia.
User avatar
boronia
Posts: 21566
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 6:18 am
Favourite Vehicle: Ahrens Fox; GMC PD4107
Location: Sydney NSW

Re: Parramatta light rail

Post by boronia »

Glen wrote: Wed Dec 30, 2020 7:30 pm
boronia wrote: Wed Dec 30, 2020 8:22 am It amazes me that they continue to use that photo of the TT with its tail end swinging around in the adjacent traffic lane, to show the "benefits" of the system.
The same comment was made in SMH feedback on that article.

Not for a moment passing judgment on the concept, but you may find that the "tail end swinging around" was actually the 'tram' going through a crossover, just like any tram would.
Admittedly, photos are not always what they seem, but the rear "bogie" of that set seems to be a long way off the guide lines, unlike the front. "Any tram" would have all its bogies on the rails. Nor is there the same degree of articulation you' expect at each end of the centre section in that situation. There seems to be a lot more than just normal rear tail-swing you'd get on a curve, and you'd at least expect any to be contained with the alignment, not encroaching into an adjacent traffix lane.

No doubt the problem has subsequently been fixed, but they could at least have taken anther photo.
Preserving fire service history
@ The Museum of Fire.
User avatar
Swift
Posts: 13247
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 1:23 pm
Favourite Vehicle: Porshe 911 Carerra
Location: Ettalong- the world capital of 0405s.

Re: Parramatta light rail

Post by Swift »

Here's a You Tube video that discusses light rail vs bus rapid transit (BRT).
https://youtu.be/fh1IaVmu3Y8

What I gleaned from it is BRT works well for the 1/3 cost of LR as long as it includes all the vital features that define BRT without compromise during build or operation. I have not much hope of that knowing Sydney.
Adelaide would be the only hope of a fully functioning BRT system in Australia.
Light rail is difficult to justify in most situations in urban areas for cost alone according to the feature.
NSW, the state that embraces mediocrity.
moa999
Posts: 2923
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2012 3:12 pm

Re: Parramatta light rail

Post by moa999 »

Both Adelaide and Brisbane have what I would call functional BRT.

Brisbane's is arguably better with underground CBD stations and multiple radial dedicated busways.
But Adelaide isn't bad with its O-Bahn to the Northeast.

But both work by having a dedicated busway into the central core and then allowing them to spread out to all points.
All the benefits of a light rail system over the core section, but without the need to transfer modes.

And add electric buses with possible trolley pole charging or flash stop charging over the busway section and some form of automated lane guidance in that section (rather than the o-bahns steel wheel) and you've got a pretty modern system.
tonyp
Posts: 12348
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 2:31 am

Re: Parramatta light rail

Post by tonyp »

Most arguments about this ignore the capacity factor. Capacity is (or should be) the issue that determines the choice of mode. A tram system simply has greater capacity than a bus system, just as a train system has greater capacity than a tram system. What has to be determined carefully in conjunction with the urban planning strategies is the level of future population and activity growth along a corridor and the type of transit system (and supporting systems) has to be carefully chosen on the basis of its capacity to support this growth in the future. Otherwise, growth on the corridor has to be constrained in order to remain within the capacity of the transit system to service it.

There has been a history in some Australian cities of underestimating future growth and building fixed transit systems that are inadequate for that growth in the long term. Melbourne was fortunate enough to build a comprehensive urban rail and tram system in the 19th and early 20th century that provides a good foundation for growth. On the downside, it's been neglected and needs investment and augmentation, but the solid foundations are there. Sydney set itself back by losing momentum, during the late 20th century, in filling out its country-oriented rail system into a comprehensive urban system and then also demolished an excellent tram system. Rectification of this on a major scale has only really started in the last decade and there's still a long way to go. Perth took tremendous initiative in converting its country-oriented rail system into a modern metro system in the 1990s and then moved forward (and continues to move forward) on filling it out.

At the other end of the scale, Adelaide has been a smaller city of fairly modest growth (which will probably be the status quo well into the future) and a bus system, supported by a modest rail system, has mostly been able to do the necessary work. The O Bahn is a piece of infrastructure that is probably adequate for any growth scenarios for the NE for the foreseeable future. So it's successful because it's not under pressure from demand and the capacity is adequate.

Brisbane seems to be a case study in what not to do. It wasn't an overly large city for decades but is now the capital of a region (SE Queensland) of big growth and it has been caught short. It has a passable suburban rail system and, like Sydney, it destroyed an excellent tram system in the belief that buses could do the job. Well, the Brisbane busways turned out to be the classic example of what goes wrong when you choose a mode with insufficient capacity. This extremely costly system started out with high hopes and then soon degenerated into conga lines of vehicles with inadequate capacity as demand grew. So it now has to be converted from being an operation like the Adelaide O Bahn to a trunk service operated by higher capacity vehicles, connecting with feeder services. The same has happened in Ottawa, which was the inspiration for the Brisbane busways, and has converted to trams. The one system they did get right in Queensland was Gold Coast light rail.

So in summary, it's not BRT versus light rail at all. It's horses for courses. Choose the mode that offers the capacity necessary to meet the demand. Returning to topic, this is the basis for the decision that needs to be made about the eastern branch of the Parramatta light rail. The only thing that makes me uncomfortable is that branching halves the capacity of each branch.
tonyp
Posts: 12348
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 2:31 am

Re: Parramatta light rail

Post by tonyp »

Swift wrote: Sat Jan 02, 2021 7:41 pm Here's a You Tube video that discusses light rail vs bus rapid transit (BRT).
https://youtu.be/fh1IaVmu3Y8

What I gleaned from it is BRT works well for the 1/3 cost of LR as long as it includes all the vital features that define BRT without compromise during build or operation. I have not much hope of that knowing Sydney.
Adelaide would be the only hope of a fully functioning BRT system in Australia.
Light rail is difficult to justify in most situations in urban areas for cost alone according to the feature.
I just watched the whole of that video. The problem with the argument is that none of those US light rail systems they're comparing with runs to anywhere near its optimum capacity, whereas the bus lines (run by ordinary 110 passengers artics - though full marks to all-door loading!) are probably running near capacity. Runcorn, incidentally, is now twice the population originally predicted. I wonder how that's going with its quaintly British single door rigid buses?!

Two of my favourite illustrations of the nexus (or disconnect as the case may be) between urban planning/development and transit capacity and how it can turn to disaster as a result of choosing the wrong mode are these:

1. Here we see an early (1950s) medium density development out along a corridor (southern Anzac Pde) served by a mode with vehicles carrying 110-240 passengers. Within a couple of years, the transit was cut back to 70 passenger buses (headways being similar in both cases). Little further such development occurred along the outer end of this corridor subsequently and it awaits a metro line to unlock capacity for further development.

Image
(Rob Caldwell photo)

2. A photo outside UNSW, with the then-new Roundhouse in the background), just before a mode with 110 passenger vehicles was removed and replaced with one using 70 passenger buses (the advent of articulated buses being still 15 years away and the ESR wasn't built to replace the trams as promised). The state's transport planners knew that within a mere three to four years the first wave of post-war boom babies would hit the universities, but they were faced with a crippling political directive. The wave was so huge that it overwhelmed the university's facilties and lectures for core subjects had to be held in the Science Theatre which had, iirc, a capacity of about 1,000. From that point it only went upwards until UNSW soon became one of Australia's largest universities. The bus system was, of course, overwhelmed and students started driving and parking out the streets around the university. Some of the former tramway was converted to "BRT" but it could not compensate for the lack of capacity.
IMG_1610.jpg
(ABC image)

This development vs transit capacity scenario is being played out again on the Rydalmere-Olympic Park corridor, just as it has been so many times in the past. The least we can hope for is that they get it right this time.
tonyp
Posts: 12348
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 2:31 am

Re: Parramatta light rail

Post by tonyp »

Here is the detail design for the PLR:

https://www.cityofparramatta.nsw.gov.au ... %20Res.pdf
tonyp
Posts: 12348
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 2:31 am

Re: Parramatta light rail

Post by tonyp »

Calls for Parramatta Light Rail stage 2 to be funded like Gold Coast project

A fresh $126 million allocation to the Gold Coast light rail has prompted business leaders to call for the same attention for the Parramatta transport project of ‘national importance’.
Joanne Vella
@Parramatta_News
3 min read
May 11, 2021 - 6:00AM
Parramatta Advertiser
0 comments

dailytelegraph.com.au1:25

After the federal government splashed out a whopping $855 million on the Gold Coast Light Rail, frustrated western Sydney business leaders have slammed it for failing to chip in for stage two of the Parramatta Light Rail — a project of “national importance”.

Ahead of the federal budget, Urban Infrastructure Minister Paul Fletcher pledged $126.6 million for the eight-station, stage three rollout on the Gold Coast.

So far the government has committed $395.6 million to the 6.7km third stage that will connect Broadbeach to Burleigh Heads and create 760 jobs.

The Queensland Government poured in $553.95 million and Gold Coast Council injected $91.5 million to fund the project’s third stage. In total the federal government has spent $855.6 million on all stages of the line.

Western Sydney executive director and light rail advocate, David Borger, called on the NSW and federal governments to take the same approach for the Parramatta Light Rail.

Instead, its second stage remains in limbo, leaving residents in rapidly growing communities such as Olympic Park and Wentworth Point, where there are 13,000 residents, devoid of public transport.

Completing the line, from Parramatta to Sydney Olympic Park, would cost $3 billion but there are heavy doubts the 12km line from Westmead to Carlingford will be built.

“It is disappointing that the Federal Government has been absent in partnering on vital infrastructure in the heart of Sydney such as Parramatta Light Rail and Sydney Metro West,’’ Mr Borger said.

“These are projects of national importance that will shape our city and support thousands of homes and jobs for greater Parramatta.’’

Mr Borger — who recently ramped up calls for the government not to neglect the light rail — said the government should allocate funds to the rail as it did for the aerotropolis.

“The federal government should be chipping in on any major piece of infrastructure being constructed by a state government across the country regardless of where it is located,’’ he said.

“It should not be a case of cherrypicking projects on an ad hoc basis.

“It’s fantastic for the Gold Coast that the Federal Government has spent almost a billion dollars on the three stages of their light rail network. We just want to see a similar deal for Parramatta and the infrastructure we need to support our growing city.’’

The Property Council’s western Sydney regions director, Ross Grove, echoed the calls, saying the light rail was critical to attract investment to NSW.

Wentworth Point resident Clement Lun said Parramatta light rail was “a lifeline for Wentworth Point”.

Resident Anna Han said the growing population warranted stage two to be delivered.

“I do think it’s absolutely necessary for the residents of Wentworth Point and the greater peninsula area because we don’t have a train station,’’ she said.

“We only have one road in and out of the area.’’

But while Gold Coast Mayor Tom Tate said the light rail funding was an example of three tiers of governments working together, a spokeswoman for Transport Minister Paul Fletcher said the state government had not formally requested stage two funding.

“The Morrison Government is investing record funding in western Sydney’s infrastructure needs to secure the future of this fast-growing region,’’ she said.

“This includes a $5.25 billion commitment to deliver the Sydney Metro – Western Sydney Airport project, in conjunction with the NSW Government, which is the largest ever Federal contribution to a public rail project.’’

The spokeswoman said the federal government provided $78.3 million for stage one of the Parramatta light rail in the 2017-18 budget.

“The Morrison Government continues to work closely with each state and territory government to identify and fund priority projects through the Budget process and to roll out our record $110 billion infrastructure investment pipeline,’’ she said.

A Transport for NSW spokeswoman said the final case for stage two of Parramatta rail was being considered.
User avatar
boronia
Posts: 21566
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 6:18 am
Favourite Vehicle: Ahrens Fox; GMC PD4107
Location: Sydney NSW

Re: Parramatta light rail

Post by boronia »

Instead, its second stage remains in limbo, leaving residents in rapidly growing communities such as Olympic Park and Wentworth Point, where there are 13,000 residents, devoid of public transport.
Trains and buses at Olympic Park, buses and ferries at Wentworth Point don't count?
“I do think it’s absolutely necessary for the residents of Wentworth Point and the greater peninsula area because we don’t have a train station,’’ she said.
Hundreds of Sydney suburbs don't have train stations; they seem to cope.
Preserving fire service history
@ The Museum of Fire.
tonyp
Posts: 12348
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 2:31 am

Re: Parramatta light rail

Post by tonyp »

I guess one could say that the Gold Coast also has buses.
Jurassic_Joke
Posts: 1138
Joined: Sun Dec 27, 2015 10:08 pm

Re: Parramatta light rail

Post by Jurassic_Joke »

Given the tensions between the QLD and Federal Governments as seen this pandemic, am surprised they’re giving that much to Gold Coast light rail.

But I definitely agree with funding calls for Stage 2 of Parramatta light rail, hope its not formally dumped - Stage 2 to Olympic Park is what actually looks exciting. Stage 1 is just Westmead to Parramatta and then following most of the old Carlingford Line.

Remember Parramatta is already a massive hub of public transport with key train routes to go directly to Western Sydney, Southwest Sydney, The City and North Shore, and it has a plethora of buses as well. Olympic Park has a train to go one stop to Lidcombe and then just a small handful of buses.
User avatar
Fleet Lists
Administrator
Posts: 23803
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 12:49 pm
Location: The Shire

Re: Parramatta light rail

Post by Fleet Lists »

Keep in mind that the West Metro will also serve Olympic Park from Westmead to the City. This may well eliminate the need for the Light Rail.
Living in the Shire.
Post Reply

Return to “Discussion - Sydney / NSW”