Why doesn't Bondi Beach have a train station?

 
Topic moved from News by dthead on 05 May 2018 21:22
  Dave46 Station Master

So why is Bondi Junction so named when it's merely a terminus and clearly not a junction at all?
It is still very much a junction with a multitude of bus routes providing for transfers.
james.au
If you have to change mode of transport then it is an interchange rather than a junction.  As Matthew said it is a former tramway junction and the locality/suburb is so named for historical reasons.  Same as Spit Junction, which is a few kms from The Spit.  Now we have Newcastle Interchange named for the same reason, as the line was truncated and it is necessary to change from one mode of transport to another to reach the CBD of Newcastle itself.

Sponsored advertisement

  BFCYU Chief Train Controller

Location: Sydney "Sutherland Shire"
About the Airport Line. I wrote to both The Premier of NSW & Transport Minister last year about the extra Station Access fee for the Sydney International & Domestic Airports. I noted in the email that the former Labor Premier Kristina Keneally dropped the access for the other Airport Stations, [Mascot & Green Square] and every Saturday & Sunday (esp mornings) there is always chaos of vehicle traffic jams around the airport.  

I mentioned also about the environment and green thinking etc, and more people would use the Airport Train link esp on weekends if it was more affordable etc. esp if more than 1-2 people in a group are going to the airport to pick up or drop off friends or family members for an overseas or interstate journey.

No avail.

Premier of NSW Gladys Berejiklian only noted it. (probably secretary)
Minister for Transport and Infrastructure Andrew Constance took about 4 months to reply with a big mumbo jumbo why the have to keep
the station access fee.

It has already been said in the media it has already paid it self off and it is only extra revenue (money hugger).
Just like Macquarie Bank who owns the Airport parking and making over $53 million from it.

PS About The Bondi Junction to Bondi Beach it has been also noted that it is a big hill to decline or incline.
See the video. (also Bronte) I do not think the normal Sydney trains could not do it and no seperate space left.
Possibly a light rail only (tram)



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EZx5GFIJ6W8
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
Thanks for video, interesting.

On the extension to Bondi Beach. The project was on to happen and assume all this had been previously factored in. I believe in the city tunnels the trains face up to 1:35.

The existing railway is most of the way there, don't need to complicate it by adding another mode of transport for last 2-3km. By the time the average user transfers to the bus stop at BJ the train would have arrived at Bondi Beach.

Build the line with 2 or 3 stations. Only need 3 extra train sets in peak. Capture more to rail, remove much of the buses on local roads. Does noy add to city rail congestion  Plenty of spare capacity on corridor to city. Surely this is one of the more viable projects in Sydney on capital cost per passenger.
  Matthew Chief Train Controller

You're not including the new Shellharbour Junction (not really in Sydney I know).  Never was even a railway junction.  The name grates on me every time I pass through it.  Probably reflecting that it is a bit out of Shellharbour itself.
Dave46

I gather the railways want to call the station just 'Shellharbour' to reflect the location it serves. But there was an objection (Geographical names board ?) over naming the station for a location it wasn't in, so they tacked 'Junction' on the same. probably on the basis, there are all these places in nearby Sydney called '-Junction'. (Forgetting the history that they are all tramway junctions).

Probably the UK convention of calling a station out of town '-Parkway' would have been better. Maybe it was suggested but there was some objection to that too.

I once upset a colleague (who lived near Bondi Beach) when I made some comment that the residents objected 'cause they didn't want even more tourists descending on their suburb. He claimed the objection was totally about the need to dig up the Bondi Park next to the beach to build the station and not about keeping people out of their suburb. I gather the objectors went around telling everyone once the park was dug up, they would never get it back, that a line of new high rise would be built right along the beach over the new station and that was the only way the promoter of the line would get their money back.
They turned it totally in an argument about the future of Bondi Park.
Meanwhile, a large portion of the park is paved over for parking and Bondi Road is effectively a car park itself on weekends, it moves so slowly.
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

The ESR was never and is never going to bondi beach. A developer wanted the train line there but locals never have and most likely never will want the train line extended there. The original plan was to go to randwick and maroubra and this is the most likely area of extension in the future.

As for the bus to Bondi beach, there isn't just one bus but 30 an hour in peak, so there is no need for the train line to be extended.
  Matthew Chief Train Controller

As for the bus to Bondi beach, there isn't just one bus but 30 an hour in peak, so there is no need for the train line to be extended.
simstrain
one bus every 2 minutes is almost 'reserved corridor light rail'  material. And since a surface alignment is not going to happen in that region, that means underground railway.

How much is the demand constrained by the buses being stuck in that awful traffic jam every day? They could probably fill twice that number of buses if they could push them through that often.

Pretty much every time I've caught the bus to or from Bondi, I think I could have beat the bus on foot.
  zordmaker Train Controller

Location: NSW
Just out of interest, any direct line from Bondi Junction to Bondi Beach would be fairly steep - about 80m in elevation difference over 3km.
mikesyd
Never mind that it's underground, through mostly sand with an ocean right next to it and about 100 heritage buildings directly above it.
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
Just out of interest, any direct line from Bondi Junction to Bondi Beach would be fairly steep - about 80m in elevation difference over 3km.
Never mind that it's underground, through mostly sand with an ocean right next to it and about 100 heritage buildings directly above it.
zordmaker

The fact that its underground is the benefit, you just have to keep away from the surface and not like they didn't have to deal with buildings in the CBD. Normally the only thing to worry about is deeply sat sewer mains.

Sand isn't an issue for tunneling, although I suspect most of it would be in sandstone, like the rest of Sydney.

Gradient of 1:37 is not an issue for Sydney trains.
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE

Sydney airport railway company went belly up because there was a $15 surcharge on top of the regular fee to access mascot and green square stations and nobody used them. Since that fee was removed numbers jumped massively and a steady increase ever since has occurred. If the fee was also removed from the domestic and international stations you would see a significant increase in those numbers as well.
simstrain
As discussed previously the bulk of the rise in numbers that followed after about 6mth following the removal of the surcharge was driven by the large population growth in the area during to the rapid and large scale development.
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
The ESR was never and is never going to bondi beach. A developer wanted the train line there but locals never have and most likely never will want the train line extended there. The original plan was to go to randwick and maroubra and this is the most likely area of extension in the future.

As for the bus to Bondi beach, there isn't just one bus but 30 an hour in peak, so there is no need for the train line to be extended.
simstrain
If you actually go into the bus timetables and count the number of buses in peak you'd could easily justify a train every 10min or so without looking at the ridership number from west of BJ.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, if the extension to Bondi Beach was to ever occur the line to BB would be one of the highest suburban usage in off-peak/weekend in Sydney.

With the LR being built to the Uni and further south, it will be extremely difficult to justify another $2-3B to extend the railway, certainly not within the next generation or so.
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

As for the bus to Bondi beach, there isn't just one bus but 30 an hour in peak, so there is no need for the train line to be extended.
one bus every 2 minutes is almost 'reserved corridor light rail'  material. And since a surface alignment is not going to happen in that region, that means underground railway.

How much is the demand constrained by the buses being stuck in that awful traffic jam every day? They could probably fill twice that number of buses if they could push them through that often.

Pretty much every time I've caught the bus to or from Bondi, I think I could have beat the bus on foot.
Matthew

Except there is no room for a reserved corridor LR and a train is overkill. The biggest traffic issue in that area is bondi junction to randwick and kingsford. The 400 and 410 services are constantly running late and so are many other services that use that route. The train would make a much better option going in that direction instead of the couple of kilometres to the beach just to make tourists happy.
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

The ESR was never and is never going to bondi beach. A developer wanted the train line there but locals never have and most likely never will want the train line extended there. The original plan was to go to randwick and maroubra and this is the most likely area of extension in the future.

As for the bus to Bondi beach, there isn't just one bus but 30 an hour in peak, so there is no need for the train line to be extended.
If you actually go into the bus timetables and count the number of buses in peak you'd could easily justify a train every 10min or so without looking at the ridership number from west of BJ.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, if the extension to Bondi Beach was to ever occur the line to BB would be one of the highest suburban usage in off-peak/weekend in Sydney.

With the LR being built to the Uni and further south, it will be extremely difficult to justify another $2-3B to extend the railway, certainly not within the next generation or so.
RTT_Rules

The south east light rail will never be able to handle the numbers to the south east. The south east will still need a metro or an extension from the esr to fix all the congestion issues.
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
Personally I don't agree with the CSELR project and would have preferred the money be spent on extending the ESR to Maroobra Junction.

The fact that $2B has been spent on the LR project means another $2B will not be spent dealing with the LR overflow any time soon. Buses will be used to collect any excess capacity on peak for many years to come.

Back OT, you can still do both branches if required. Both were equally deserving before the CSELR project and this project is why LR  to Bondi will not get off the ground.
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

Personally I don't agree with the CSELR project and would have preferred the money be spent on extending the ESR to Maroobra Junction.

The fact that $2B has been spent on the LR project means another $2B will not be spent dealing with the LR overflow any time soon. Buses will be used to collect any excess capacity on peak for many years to come.

Back OT, you can still do both branches if required. Both were equally deserving before the CSELR project and this project is why LR  to Bondi will not get off the ground.
RTT_Rules

I have no problem with the cselr as it links central to moore park and the unsw but by itself it doesn't solve all the issues and more capacity in the form of buses in the short term will be needed. There should be an announcement post 2019 election about the metro west extending in that direction but the esr will still need to head to randwick.
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
How man billion dollars do we throw at a low to medium density SE suburbs?
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

How man billion dollars do we throw at a low to medium density SE suburbs?
RTT_Rules

however many it takes to relieve / remove congestion.
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
How man billion dollars do we throw at a low to medium density SE suburbs?

however many it takes to relieve / remove congestion.
simstrain
I think we both know that your answer above is unrealistic and Sydney has much bigger issues to deal than blow ANOTHER $2B on the minor issues left over after the SE LR project is done apart from potential future extensions further south along ANZAC Pde.

As I said before, the SE LR project should never have been built, the ESR should have been extended. Moore Park doesn't need a billion dollar LR project for a dozen or so events a year and the unused capacity of the ESR would have been better option to improve traffic congestion in the area and make the uni, race track and hospital more accessible.
  djf01 Chief Commissioner

I think we both know that your answer above is unrealistic and Sydney has much bigger issues to deal than blow ANOTHER $2B on the minor issues left over after the SE LR project is done apart from potential future extensions further south along ANZAC Pde.

As I said before, the SE LR project should never have been built, the ESR should have been extended. Moore Park doesn't need a billion dollar LR project for a dozen or so events a year and the unused capacity of the ESR would have been better option to improve traffic congestion in the area and make the uni, race track and hospital more accessible.
RTT_Rules

I agree, the SE LR project is another NSW Transport solution looking for a problem.  I haven't been following this project too closely, but my understanding is the system is under-speced, and there will be increased bus congestion post it's go-live.

I dare say the solution to this will be to extend the LR, even though it's lack of capacity will be the core problem.

I know this won't happen, but I still say extend the ESR: Waverly, Randwick (LR Interface), Maroubra.

Western Metro should connect to CBD-Chatswood-NWRL metro rather than any Eastern Metro and a new HR path built into the CBD for more than just Bankstown.
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
I suppose this is one way to look at it.

The ESR has about 50% spare capacity, train loading, as running mostly 20t/h anyway. Open to correction.

So about ~10,000 per hour spare on ESR.

The LR is rated at what 15,0000 per hour. Open to correction.

So if there is a claim the LR will be maxed out then the ESR would have certainly been maxed out. However the ESR would have have also had significant counter flow ridership as well.

Having stated that to me this would have still be smarter over LR and likely lower cost long-term as extra operating cost to rail would have been bigger all. May have also been positive cash flow.

The excess capacity could have easily been left on bus, so like now but less bus density on roads.

The western Meto cannot cannot to Nth side as no capacity remaining after  Bankstown. So potentially if capacity was an issue for ESR the western Metro could have been extended to have stations at More Park and NSW University next to ESR, that's if required and would be built late 2020's.

The city CBD LR could have still gone ahead buy with the line heading south to Woolomoloo and Green Square area and also allowed the inner west light rail to access the CBD Loop.
  djf01 Chief Commissioner

The LR is rated at what 15,0000 per hour. Open to correction.
RTT_Rules


I don't know if this is much of a correction:
https://www.smh.com.au/opinion/sydney-tram-plan-will-produce-peakhour-chaos-20140706-zsxvr.html  (got it from the wikipedia article).

But if the numbers quoted are right, then 15k seems pretty optomistic for system capacity - unless it means both ways.

The LR project will almost certainly have very high ridership, and lots of contra-flow traffic as well thanks to the sports stadiums, hospitals and UNSW.  I think it will be deemed a success.

Personally, I think the project fails the "what problem are we solving here?" test.  


So if there is a claim the LR will be maxed out then the ESR would have certainly been maxed out. However the ESR would have have also had significant counter flow ridership as well.
RTT_Rules


I don't quite follow the logic here.  IMHO an extended ESR and LR would be quite complementary (as would the ESR and a bus network).  The LR isn't really capable of being a broadly encompassing rapid transit for the entire eastern suburbs, its there because people want to see light rail


The western Meto cannot cannot to Nth side as no capacity remaining after  Bankstown.
RTT_Rules

I say scrap the Bankstown conversion, and scrap the western metro path into the city.  With the money saved, build a new heavy rail path into the city.  Would work out cheaper overall, and certainly have better efficacy.
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
Ok thanks for that link.

So most of the LR project patronage would likely fit well into the spare capacity of the ESR, leaving capacity for Bondi extension option (weak attempt to remain on topic).

The north side Metro needs to someone on other side of city to maximise efficient of station construction and train uterlisation.

Regarding Metro vs DD, technically I'm sure either would have done the job but cost wise something needs to give in Sydney Trains. Not many industries don't change their operational manning in over 50 years. Sydney shouldn't be running a high density network at near capacity in the city with a farebox recovery of 35%. Sydney also has a history of rail tunnel projects running over budget. Something has to change.
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

How man billion dollars do we throw at a low to medium density SE suburbs?

however many it takes to relieve / remove congestion.
I think we both know that your answer above is unrealistic and Sydney has much bigger issues to deal than blow ANOTHER $2B on the minor issues left over after the SE LR project is done apart from potential future extensions further south along ANZAC Pde.

As I said before, the SE LR project should never have been built, the ESR should have been extended. Moore Park doesn't need a billion dollar LR project for a dozen or so events a year and the unused capacity of the ESR would have been better option to improve traffic congestion in the area and make the uni, race track and hospital more accessible.
RTT_Rules

Not really as this government has shown it will spend money on transport projects and finish them even if they go over budget. The City to South East Light Rail could move more then 24,000 passengers per hour in one direction at 60 trams an hour. However it is likely to only operate at about half to 3/4's of that in peak hour.
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

24,000 passengers per hour is still not enough capacity for the south east to relieve congestion. It really needs double that which is why a metro is also needed to the area.
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
24,000 passengers per hour is still not enough capacity for the south east to relieve congestion. It really needs double that which is why a metro is also needed to the area.
simstrain
24,000 per hour is 400 people per minute. Assuming the buses are carrying all this, then at say 80 people per bus (open to correction), then thats 5 buses a minute or one every 12 sec on ANZAC Pde.

Could the city streets now cope with a bus from SE alone + all the others every 12 sec? Remember it takes a few seconds just for one bus to pass, so there would be roughly a 8-9 sec gap between each bus, without stopping for lights and I doubt its that high.

Obviously not all the 24,000 now are currently in buses, so what will happen as LR takes over from buses, people will explore the LR options and if it gets to crowded, then cars will carry the rest plus what ever extra buses the govt runs.

What won't happen is the Transport Minister going to the cabinet in the next decade and saying I need another $2B to deal with the "overflow" of the LR to build a Metro or extend the ESR. They may however get more trams and some more buses. If the ALP govt is the govt of the day, certainly expect the big finger to be raised to the SE and their focus shift to the west where the real PT issues are.
  djf01 Chief Commissioner


Not really as this government has shown it will spend money on transport projects and finish them even if they go over budget. The City to South East Light Rail could move more then 24,000 passengers per hour in one direction at 60 trams an hour. However it is likely to only operate at about half to 3/4's of that in peak hour.
simstrain

Maybe instead of a metro, we could lash 4 trams together.  And if we grade separate the track, we could run 30 of those an hour./s

Sponsored advertisement

Display from:   

Quick Reply

We've disabled Quick Reply for this thread as it was last updated more than six months ago.