South East Light Rail - why not a metro?

 
  james.au Chief Commissioner

Location: Sydney, NSW
The title has it all - was a metro ever considered to be an option for the South East Light Rail (Central to Randwick/Kingsford etc) instead of a light rail?  Yes, more expensive, but higher capacity and less disruptive to the surface.  Plus would simplify the network somewhat.

Sponsored advertisement

  Nightfire Minister for Railways

Location: Gippsland
All about $$

A lot of European cities are turning to light rail lines Instead of underground railways, due to the massive cost savings.
  billybaxter Deputy Commissioner

Location: Bosnia Park, Fairfield
Yes, as an extension of ESR. Light rail is quicker and easier to build, easier to extend and modify, can have closer spaced stops and is quite fashionable right now. For the distances involved here, and as long as ticketing is integrated with the rest of the public transport system, it's the best choice.
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

Yes, as an extension of ESR. Light rail is quicker and easier to build, easier to extend and modify, can have closer spaced stops and is quite fashionable right now. For the distances involved here, and as long as ticketing is integrated with the rest of the public transport system, it's the best choice.
billybaxter

Is light rail really that much quicker and easier to build. I like the light rail project as it provides a great connection to the moore park precinct, but I am also a believer in the esr being extended to randwick and maroubra.
  RTT_Rules The Ghost of George Stephenson

Location: Dubai UAE
LR can move around half to 2/3 of that of HR and there are already warning signs that the SE LR will be opened at or close capacity and may need additional investment. The other warning sign for me is the trip travel time reportedly pushing 40-45min.

I would not have done a Metro, I would have however for the same price extended the underutilized ESR which has able spare capacity for decades to come.

If you look at the LR project, a good chunk of the money is being spent digging up the city to just beyond Central. Ther is then only one stop between Central and SCG. Much of the stops within the park district area will be lightly used apart from the odd event. The bulk of the users will come from the two branches, these two branches were basically stations on the proposed ESR project.

The extension of the ESR to 9 ways is about 5km. The original project had 5 stations, I would consider cutting to 4 as I don't think a separate station for Randwick is needed anymore. University station could be placed in such a way with underground connection tunnels to service the uni, hospital and location for bus shuttle within Randwick racecourse.

So all up, 5km of track, 4 to 6 sets of trains, 4 stations and a turn back loop and 2 sidings at the end to enable easy extension in future is about $1.5B. But for another 2.5 km of tunnels, 1-2 sets of trains and 1 more station you can add Maroubra and really blooster the numbers for the same price as the LR and the leave the streets alone and significantly faster travel time.
  mejhammers1 Assistant Commissioner

All about $$

A lot of European cities are turning to light rail lines Instead of underground railways, due to the massive cost savings.
Nightfire
That is not strictly true. Most medium sized cities (less than 1 million) are expanding their light rail. But almost all large cities like London are increasing their Heavy rail network e.g Crossrail. Cost is not the only thing under consideration. Light Rail will work for Lyon and Manchester but would be totally useless for London and Paris.

Michael
  RTT_Rules The Ghost of George Stephenson

Location: Dubai UAE
All about $$

A lot of European cities are turning to light rail lines Instead of underground railways, due to the massive cost savings.
That is not strictly true. Most medium sized cities (less than 1 million) are expanding their light rail. But almost all large cities like London are increasing their Heavy rail network e.g Crossrail. Cost is not the only thing under consideration. Light Rail will work for Lyon and Manchester but would be totally useless for London and Paris.

Michael
mejhammers1
The term "Light Rail" has become a political buss word used to solve everything, or at least promised too. I think in some cases the application was misguided and the outcome disappointing for the investment cost. Its also not cheap with similar projects in a number of cities averaging around $100m a km. HR tunnel is probably 2-3 times that, but also moves many more people at significantly faster speeds. LR average speed seems to be around 20-30km/h on street running, 30-60km/hr off street running. Metro will typically average 50-60km/hr for stations spaced 1km apart. So LR is fine for about 5km or so, beyond that and its juts too slow for my liking.

Melbourne replaced two HR lines with LR with travel times increasing from 6min to 20min.
  kitchgp Junior Train Controller

Train
Flinders Street Station - St Kilda: 9 mins
Flinders Street Station - Port Melbourne: 7 mins

Tram  (extra stops)
Spencer Street Bridge - St Kilda*: 11 mins
Spencer Street Bridge - Port Melbourne: 9 mins

* - to site of old railway station, no need to change modes for further travel along Fitzroy Street, The Esplanade & Acland Street.


PS: Shouldn't this be in Sydney Suburban or Trams & Light Rail?
  RTT_Rules The Ghost of George Stephenson

Location: Dubai UAE
Train
Flinders Street Station - St Kilda: 9 mins
Flinders Street Station - Port Melbourne: 7 mins

Tram  (extra stops)
Spencer Street Bridge - St Kilda*: 11 mins
Spencer Street Bridge - Port Melbourne: 9 mins

* - to site of old railway station, no need to change modes for further travel along Fitzroy Street, The Esplanade & Acland Street.


PS: Shouldn't this be in Sydney Suburban or Trams & Light Rail?
kitchgp
Ok thanks,
I never caught the train, but did the tram a few times and 9min from Port Melbourne seems a bit quick, but if that's what it is so be it.

Currently Kingsford to Circular Quay is listed as 30min on a bus, 25min to drive.

Correct me if I'm wrong but the LR is listed at 37min from Kingaford and 35min from Uni.

Potential savings in walk time if using tram over train from ESR. The train trip from BJ station is 13min to Central, another 5km and 4 stations = 18min total. Circular quay involves a change of train and going back two stops, so 10min more say.

So yes overall time is probably splitting hairs tram vs train, although the bus is 7min faster than the tram has has more stops!!!

Still, I think cost wise, the ESR should have been extended over building the LR and far less intrusive to the traffic for the 3 year construction period and finishing at Maroubra in one construction phase would have been very popular in the SE with locals over a tram stopping 2km short with a promise to extend which won't happen if the project is perceived to have been a failure or no capacity to do so.
  tonyp Chief Commissioner

Location: Shoalhaven
The title has it all - was a metro ever considered to be an option for the South East Light Rail (Central to Randwick/Kingsford etc) instead of a light rail?  Yes, more expensive, but higher capacity and less disruptive to the surface.  Plus would simplify the network somewhat.
james.au
Yes a metro was considered down the Anzac Pde corridor but trams were considered more flexible in serving the important points that needed to be serviced - notably Moore Park, Randwick racecourse, UNSW, Kingsford, POW hospital and Randwick. It was not possible to have the density of coverage with a metro, basically due to its high cost and thus the limitations on the number of stations that it is reasonably possible to build. Underground stations are very expensive to build and maintain and for this reason (also maintaining good average speed of the trains) metro stations are typically a couple of km apart.

So basically there would have been, say, metro stations at Moore Park (to service both the stadiums and the racecourse, with long walks to both), UNSW - and Maroubra Jct might have been the logical terminus point. Thus no service along Alison Rd corridor to POW/Randwick, Kensington or Kingsford, which means having to continue the buses to feed the train. Metro (any kind of train for that matter) is better for longer distances along a single corridor (that has to be fed by bus feeders) and may still be considered south of Kingsford as an extension of the Parramatta-Sydney proposal. That's only an option under consideration at this stage.

Metro can't provide the ground coverage of tram and still requires feeder buses whereas tram can replace the buses. Capacity is a balancing act.
  RTT_Rules The Ghost of George Stephenson

Location: Dubai UAE
The title has it all - was a metro ever considered to be an option for the South East Light Rail (Central to Randwick/Kingsford etc) instead of a light rail?  Yes, more expensive, but higher capacity and less disruptive to the surface.  Plus would simplify the network somewhat.
Yes a metro was considered down the Anzac Pde corridor but trams were considered more flexible in serving the important points that needed to be serviced - notably Moore Park, Randwick racecourse, UNSW, Kingsford, POW hospital and Randwick. It was not possible to have the density of coverage with a metro, basically due to its high cost and thus the limitations on the number of stations that it is reasonably possible to build. Underground stations are very expensive to build and maintain and for this reason (also maintaining good average speed of the trains) metro stations are typically a couple of km apart.

So basically there would have been, say, metro stations at Moore Park (to service both the stadiums and the racecourse, with long walks to both), UNSW - and Maroubra Jct might have been the logical terminus point. Thus no service along Alison Rd corridor to POW/Randwick, Kensington or Kingsford, which means having to continue the buses to feed the train. Metro (any kind of train for that matter) is better for longer distances along a single corridor (that has to be fed by bus feeders) and may still be considered south of Kingsford as an extension of the Parramatta-Sydney proposal. That's only an option under consideration at this stage.

Metro can't provide the ground coverage of tram and still requires feeder buses whereas tram can replace the buses. Capacity is a balancing act.
tonyp
This is where the ESR extension could have serviced the two branches on the LR more effectively, but would not have benefited LR stations in and next to Moore Park, which apart from major events at SCG etc will not be a major user of the LR line.
  tazzer96 Assistant Commissioner

ESR extensions have been thought out and none are financially feasible.   In a dream world, It would be nice have the ESR split at Bondi Junction with one branch heading to bondi beach(terminating in dover heights) and the other heading towards marouba.
  RTT_Rules The Ghost of George Stephenson

Location: Dubai UAE
ESR extensions have been thought out and none are financially feasible.   In a dream world, It would be nice have the ESR split at Bondi Junction with one branch heading to bondi beach(terminating in dover heights) and the other heading towards marouba.
tazzer96
Bondi Beach extension is another gripe, but focusing on solely the southern extension to Maroubra Jnct, I struggle to see how the LR project is cheaper over 30 years.

Sponsored advertisement

Subscribers: doyle, Gaz170, Nightfire, RTT_Rules

Display from: