The Mysteries of the Northwest Metro
Like a blinding flash, came the proposal for a North West Metro line...the question is will it get built? Another question is why has it erupted in the middle of a very orderly and integrated upgrade to the current CityRail system? For these and other mysteries, read on...
Before the Metro came...
A bit of scene setting from earlier this year:
Rail the only way out of mess, planners say
Mark Coultan, SMH, March 4, 2008
A CAR-dominated Sydney is ill-equipped to cope with the coming economic shocks of carbon constraints and oil which could reach $150-$200 a barrel within a few years, a transport planner has warned.
Garry Glazebrook, a lecturer in urban planning at University of Technology Sydney, told the Herald round table that Sydney had some very car-dependent suburbs. "We're not really equipped for the sort of economic shocks that are coming. We saw what happened in the 1970s."
The main priority should be to complete the government railway building program, which includes lines to Rouse Hill and Leppington, and separating Sydney's complex system of rail lines.
"That's the most important single investment for this city. It links the new areas in the north-west and south-west and half a million jobs. It unblocks the rest of the rail system for 50 years.
"If we don't make it I predict that in five to 10 years we won't be a world-class city."
Transport and planning experts invited to the round table were uniformly disappointed and frustrated by the lack of long-term commitment to public transport, and the series of announcements by the State Government which were then deferred, cancelled, modified, or replaced by new, different promises.
Julie Bindon, state president of the Planning Institute of Australia, said: "There seems to be an apparent lack of a really well-researched growth management plan that is actually linked to infrastructure."
Dr Glazebrook suggested there should be a single body controlling all transport, including public transport, road building, road pricing and parking, as well as fares and funding. This occurred in Germany and Singapore, while Queensland had a body to organise road, rail and buses into one transport system, he said.
He advocated appointing a commissioner of transport who could not be sacked unless both sides of politics agreed. This would be one way of guaranteeing support and financing for projects which required many years to plan and build, such as new rail lines.
Chris Stapleton is a transport expert who last year proposed a radical new Sydney transport strategy involving new light rail, heavy rail and bus services. The strategy aimed to have public transport within 400 metres of 95 per cent of houses and businesses, with services leaving every 10 minutes.
Mr Stapleton said moving people by rail cost one sixth of private road transport.
The round table was in agreement that it was the State Treasury which was blocking plans for extra rail lines.
Chris Brown, the managing director of the Tourism and Transport Forum, said Treasury despised rail. "The one form of transport Treasury liked was the Cross-City Tunnel. It was because it didn't cost them a cent," he said. He paraphrased the attitude of the Treasurer, Michael Costa, as: "Any person who steps on a train costs me money."
Mr Brown supported the concept of new metro lines but wondered if they were just an excuse to cancel the north-west rail link to Rouse Hill.
A planning consultant, John Mant, said one plan to integrate land use and transport planning had been thwarted partly by the professional rivalries of the planners themselves.
The one note of scepticism about public transport came from Tony Recsei, president of the community group Save Our Suburbs, which opposes overdevelopment.
"The only way you're really going to get public transport to be the dominant transport system is in a city like Hong Kong where you've got something like 50,000 people per square kilometre," Dr Recsei said. "And if Sydney was to be like that, you'd have all of Sydney within five kilometres of Central Station. Do you really want to live like that?"
The elephant is out of the bag...
Sydney set for new European-style metro
Linton Besser, SMH, March 18, 2008 - 7:50AM
The State Government is set to unveil a major transport policy at 10am this morning.
The Herald expects details for a European-style metro underground will be promoted as the next step in the evolution of Sydney's transport network.
The first underground line is likely to be the ANZAC line, which would run underneath Victoria Road from St James to West Ryde - with the possibility that the line could extend all the way into the city's north-west.
A closer look at transport priorities
Let’s take a closer look at yesterday’s transport announcements. The $8 billion Metropolitan Rail Expansion Plan is to be dumped, although $1bn for the South-West Rail Link will go ahead. The other $7bn in public money committed to this vital rail plan has disappeared.
In its place we now have the $12 billion North West Metro, to be financed, it seems, almost entirely by the private sector. Considering how much private money has been committed so far – zero – and the abject failure of the privately funded Airport Rail Link and the abandonment of the privately backed Bondi Beach Rail Link, I’d say the chances of the private sector committing $12bn to this metro line are also zero. In other words, expect to see it quietly shelved in the next year or two.
As for the missing $7bn, I have no doubt that NSW Treasurer Michael Costa – who is, of course, well known for his climate change scepticism and ferocious anti-public transport views – has already allocated it to his pet project, the soon-to-be-revealed M4 East mega motorway.
J.
Budget Issues are indeed a problem
North-West Metro 'won't drain budget'
SMH, March 28, 2008 - 4:08PM
NSW Premier Morris Iemma has denied $12.5 billion allocated for a north-western Sydney metro line will leave the state transport budget short for other key projects.
Treasury officials have told The Australian newspaper they've been briefed that the investment for additional road and rail projects built between now and 2021 will be $16.5 billion.
But the state government has already allocated three-quarters of that figure - $12.5 billion - for the metro rail line which will run between Sydney's north-west and the CBD.
The NSW opposition said it was worrying that only $4 billion would be left for commuters using roads and rail services in other parts of the state.
But Mr Iemma said the $16.5 billion figure for transport could be increased by dipping into $190 billion of unallocated capital if the government felt it was needed.
"That's always open for governments to change the mix," Mr Iemma told reporters.
"If we decide to invest more in transport, then it's always open for governments to do that.
"What we have done is set aside what we believe is a prudent, conservative, discretionary spend of about $16.5 billion."
Mr Iemma said governments change their priorities from time to time and that his government currently saw transport, and particularly a north-west metro, as a priority.
"The metro is too important for the future of the state not to make the investment - it's going ahead, it's fully funded, it's not dependent on private sector being involved," the premier said.
"If there is a viable private sector proposal it will help defray the cost of $12.5 billion which will then boost the $4.5 (billion) that's left."
Opposition Leader Barry O'Farrell said he wanted to see the 38-kilometre metro-rail delivered, but he was worried about how much was left to be spent on other commuters.
"There is $4 billion left over to apparently deliver, amongst other things, world-class services across 11 other rail lines," he said.
"Treasury clearly isn't behind this project, and that's a worry for any project being delivered by government."
What we could do with 190 billion
That would more than pay for a complete upgrade of the public transport system. Now seems like a good time to have the expenditure argument - anybody think there is a reason to NOT push for a significant committment, on the order of Ron Christie's 50 billion, over the next 10 years? With bipartisan support to ensure that it gets done?
LM
Treasury leaked this...in The Australian
This is the original story in the Australian yesterday, based on a Treasurary leak, and revealing concerns about other CityRail problems not being addressed. Government's main concern,as reported today, seems to be to trace the leak.
P.
New rail system to exhaust finances
Imre Salusinszky, NSW political reporters, The Australian | March 28, 2008
THE new $12.5 billion metro rail system promised for outer northwestern Sydney will plunder the state's capital spending reserves, leaving only about $4billion in the pot for other major transport projects between now and 2021.
Senior NSW Treasury officials were told yesterday the estimate of the extra investment in road and rail available over the next 13 years - without extra borrowing - was $16.5billion.
At a briefing by the Office of Financial Management, they were told the new metro would consume about three-quarters of this amount, casting severe doubt on NSW Premier Morris Iemma's claim the project is independent of the planned sale of about $10billion in state-owned electricity assets.
The officials were told the $16.5billion estimate was generous and would be reduced if public sector wage increases exceeded budget limits.
To make matters worse, a senior OFM official told the meeting that "a problem with the (metro) project is that it does not address capacity constraints in the existing rail system".
NSW Treasury chief John Pierce confirmed the $16.5billion figure last night, but insisted "the northwest metro can and will be fully funded by the state Government independent of the electricity sale process".
He said total discretionary infrastructure spending to 2021 was $190 billion.
The 38km metro system, due for completion in 2017, was announced by Mr Iemma last week and already has a television advertising campaign built around it.
It is not clear how the metro will ease overcrowding across the CityRail network, or how the Government will now be able to deliver a rail service to Sydney's other major growth centre in the outer southwest.
In 2005, the Metropolitan Rail Expansion Program allocated $3billion for a conventional rail link to the northwest, $1billion for the southwest and a further $4billion to connect the two lines in the CBD.
The Government is already committed to a $49.6billion capital spending program over the next four years, $20billion of which will be financed by extra debt.
Mr Iemma and NSW Treasurer Michael Costa are on a collision course with unions over the electricity privatisation proposal, with the unions appearing to have the numbers to scupper the plan at Labor's state conference in May.
A report by Curtin University economics professor Tony Owen, commissioned by Mr Iemma last year, said the Government would need to invest an extra $15billion in its electricity assets by 2013 if they were not sold.
NSW Opposition Leader Barry O'Farrell said the fact there was only $16.5billion to spend until 2021 revealed "the mirage of Morris Iemma's promise of a world-class northwest rail link".
"It defies belief that, with all the state's infrastructure problems, the promised funds will be allocated," he said.
Infrastructure Partnerships Australia director Garry Bowditch said: "If the Treasury forecasts are correct and the Government is left with just $4billion in discretionary (road and rail infrastructure) funds for the next 13 years, then the case for electricity reform is even more pressing."
Iemma admits metro may eat other projects
Imre Salusinszky, NSW political reporter, The Australian | March 29, 2008
NSW Premier Morris Iemma has conceded other infrastructure projects might have to be bumped to pay for a $12.5 billion metro rail system to outer northwest Sydney.
"From time to time, governments change their priorities," Mr Iemma said yesterday. "Has the Government done that? You bet we have. We have decided metros are too important for the state's future not to start building them."
His admission came on the day The Australian revealed the metro had swallowed about three-quarters of the funds available for new road and rail projects between now and 2021.
Senior Treasury officials were told at a briefing on Thursday there was $190 billion available for new infrastructure spending over the next 13 years, including $16.5billion for major transport works.
Mr Iemma said the suggestion the metro would leave only $4 billion for other transport projects "assumes that you don't take a couple of billion here and there from the other pot".
"That's been set aside and it is always open to governments to do that," he said.
Mr Iemma said the $16.5 billion figure did not take account of possible increased revenues through stronger-than-expected employment growth. However, at the briefing, Treasury officials were told there was a risk the figure would be smaller if public sector wage increases could not be contained.
They were also told a problem with the metro was that it "does not address capacity constraints in the existing rail system".
Mr Iemma said the building of the metro did not depend on private sector involvement, or the proceeds of the planned sale of $10 billion in state-owned electricity assets. But he said other projects would be threatened if the electricity privatisation was scuppered.
NSW Opposition Leader Barry O'Farrell said the report in The Australian revealed the metro as "the latest Iemma Government mirage".
NSW Treasurer Michael Costa yesterday ordered an investigation of how The Australian had obtained confidential
Two things to be said here:
a). Imre Salusinszky has apparently been forced by Howard's demise to
earn a living as a reporter and,
b). His motive for reporting this interesting stuff is that he'd
personally rather see the $12.5b spent on freeways.
Imre has always been a RABID anti-PT freeway lover. He has written in
this vein very frequently. Interesting that he writes this stuff from
leaks from Treasury ... i.e., COSTA.
FMGG
More a stalking horse than an elephant
Morris Iemma's metro rail proposal would have been fine, had it been
advanced a decade ago, but in the situation we now face it would be a
disaster. Even if the project began immediately it's most unlikely this
very expensive option could be completed in nine years. In 2017, there
will be less than a quarter of today's levels of petroleum fuel
available for urban motoring, assuming that we preserve current levels
of supply to agriculture, industry, buses, freight delivery and
essential services.
Regardless of the personal sincerity of Morris Iemma, the 'bold' metro
vision is not so much a white elephant as a stalking horse for the RTA
and Treasury who have their collective hearts set on a really big
albino pachyderm: a vast underground freeway called the M4 East.
Funding for this project is guaranteed, while funding for the metro
line depends on the whim of the private sector.
Quite why another freeway is needed when it will be deserted upon
opening is never explained. What we need very quickly is light rail
along all our major roads and freeways. We could have a whole system in
place for the price of the M4 East before the worst effects of oil
depletion cause chaos and real hardship.
FMGG
What a stunt!
Hi all,
What a stunt! Although I have nothing against a metro stopping in Epping - where I live but I am too old to ever see it - this station with a comparatively small intermediate concourse leading to the underground platforms has in no way been designed to connect to a metro station and handle the traffic. This would require Moscow type of escalators to platforms deep underground, something which would be needed to prepare Sydney for a nuclear attack (maybe one day a stray missile in one of the post peak oil wars?)
What I see here is a combination of what Costa - Sartor - Watkins want
Costa wants a project he doesn't have to spend a cent on (since every dollar is earmarked for the M4East) and since the airport heavy rail link didn't work out it has to be a separate rail line not connected to Railcorps, financed by the private sector. If no investor can be found it's not his problem.
Sartor wants to whack in his Rouse Hill subdivisions because he promised it to developers and of course Sydney needs growth. In modern planning documents the word sustainability must be included so a rail line mentioned in all estate development plans is a necessity.
Watkins wants something going through his electorate Ryde
So this is the birth of the City - Ryde - Rouse Hill rail, call it metro.
OK planners, Garry and Dave, find a good set of town planning arguments for this artificial baby and write a glossy brochure for the investors.
But, arghh, what is this - no stop between Epping and Cherrybrook. So let me check. Berlin's U7 is 31.8 km long with 40 stops. Takes almost 1 hr.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Karte_berlin_u_u7.jpg
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U7_(Berlin_U-Bahn)
So the "Rouse Hill Metro" (38 kms and 16 stops) is not a real European metro with much more frequent stops.
Please note that some U Bahn lines in Berlin go through outer suburbs with similar densities as here, although above ground. Look at that rural design station built in the 1920s. Must have been a modal split of 100% at the time.
For the post peak oil era we need a surface metro with many stops to increase catchment areas. A fast ride to the city will not be the standard trip. And time will not matter. The most important thing will be that you have a mechanised piece of transport not too far away to walk to from where you live.
M.
Where to begin???
How do I and where do I start to comment on the North West Metro ......
.....well its good to see the North West Rail Link (NWRL) alignment will be used for the Metro mode option on the NW Sector portion ..... the patronage impacts are well understood out in the North West Sector between Cherrybrook ( Franklin Road) and Rouse Hill and this alignment between Franklin Road and Rouse Hill is a good one, linking all major centres in the NW Sector that are not directly connected by roads ....
Coming further east to Epping and then via Top Ryde and on to "a Victoria Road alignment" to Wynyard ... I can welcome a Metro along Victoria Road as no doubt a Metro is the real long term solution to Victoria Road congestion and it is time for this large bus operational movement to migrate to a Metro .... directly into the Sydney CBD
A Victoria Road Metro would "fine grain" the existing CityRail network and would offer greater value via a rail/ rail interchange at the existing West Ryde Stn with a design provision to continue along Victoria Road to Parramatta
Metros have a legitimate role for urban passenger transport in Sydney ... but its a "horses for courses" application thing ..... the right mode on the right alignment to meet passenger demand and travel patterns whilst improving benefit to all
The fundamental issue is .... is it appropriate for an arranged "shotgun marriage" between the NWRL and a Victoria Road Metro to be consummated ..... or even contemplated ???????????????
I make the following brief comments:
1. I concur with D. on patronage modelling
"A new Metro represents yet another mode of public transport for Sydney. I hope the forecasts are defensible." ...
I too hope the numbers are right ... however my experience is the devil is in the detail ....the origin/ destination pairs and the rail/ rail interchange locations/ numbers/ flows go to the heart of appraising the appropriateness (on a number of fronts) of this proposal over the original NWRL proposal
2. this then leads to a comment by S.:
.... "if MREP was aimed at addressing significant capacity issues in the inner part of the rail network (I
seem to recall the analysis was suggesting capacity would be tight/exhausted by 2017-2020), what are the options for network capacity." ...and continues ..... " Even so, what options are there for the CBD now. In particular, will there be adequate capacity for the heavy rail services out of Leppington and Campbelltown to run around the City Circle?"
Whilst agreeing with S.n on his example, I believe the problems facing the existing CBD railway and all approaches to the CBD where " capacity would be tight/exhausted by 2017-2020" ( or perhaps sooner) are more fundamental .... the most glaring issues are the Main West and the connection to the North Shore.
Garry Glazebrook in his SMH article rightly and fundamentally asks ...." How can the overcrowding at Wynyard and Town Hall stations be relieved if the harbour rail link is deferred?" as proposed by the NW Metro
These questions go to the heart of the transport patronage modelling, assumptions on passenger behaviour, volumes and location of rail/ rail interchange movements.
3. Garry in his SMH article makes another pertinant observation ....
"Will the soon-to-be completed Epping-Chatswood line become a ghost line, when it is starved of feeder trains from the north-west? "
Garry obviously recognises the issues associated with a rail/ rail passenger interchange at Epping ......... and the intricacies of passenger behavour as well as CityRail network operations
4. the ongoing debates between landuse and transport planners to integrate these planning aspirations will again be tested by the NW Metro proposal .... one "small" example .... recently Ryde City Council placed on public exhibition a DCP/ MasterPlan leading to a LEP for re-development of Macquarie Park Corridor where 3 stations of the soon to be opened Epping-Chatswood line are imbedded ..... Council proposal talks about increasing a combination of commercial/ retail employment, Mac Uni students / staff etc from the current 66,000 to around 165,000 by 2031
By the way, at 165,000 this is about 70% of the current Sydney CBD employment
Council planning was based on the Metropolitan Planning Strategy (Metro Strategy) and State Plan with the public transport components, including NWRL linking to ECRL, included therein
5. drawing a few thoughts of S., D. and Garry together .... MREP provided real capacity solutions for the existing CityRail network, including the all important north - south Harbour Rail link, across the entire CityRail network ... does the NW Metro offer the same whole of CityRail network benefits ?
I leave it to the jury of experts to decide .... I'm just a humble transport planner
R.
The Gordian knot
Let me cut the gordian knot here. I don't think there's the remotest chance that the Iemma Government is serious about the Metro line thing. Of course the transport planners who are pushing it are totally sincere, but I also think very naive – politically and technically.
Politically, because they're just being used as a stalking horse for the RTA. I've lived a long time and seen many things and I've seen this trick over and over again. A shining vision is put forward for a big new PT infrastructure. Bold visions, etc. But ... first the next motorway has to go ahead. Funding for the motorway is guaranteed but the PT project is just a vision. We've only beaten this trick twice.
The RTA and Treasure will LOVE Metro because it's so big and so awfully expensive, they know it'll never get built.
Technically I think the planners are naive because they really have taken no account of the problems that peak will bring in relation to construction of such a long tunnel. Sure, if we had 40 or 50 years with abundant fuel and concrete and other resources, Metro might have been the way to go. Stalin built a whole system in record time but he had slave labour and plenty of oil.
We really need a big bang for our buck and we need it quickly. Better to have 150 km of LR by 2015 that 40 km of Metro by 2017 (even if that were possible).
FMGG
Getting the issues out onto the table
I'm wondering if there is anything we can do to bring these issues out onto the table before any money gets spent...A peak oil taskforce would do this but it has to get up and then convened. Any other potential sources of technical criticism for this kind of thing?
LM
A peak oil task force would do something but...
It's an educational tool. The real discussion will be in the media. M4 East (the only real thing in the running), must be solidly interrogated so that it doesn't get up, or if it does, it's under conditions that a contract can be pulled without too much damage.
Meanwhile, the UGLY FACT that people are surging onto public transport because they have no choice.
FMGG
A royal commission?
Another Royal Commission into another failed tollway venture should provide the impetus for getting this debate into the mainstream media. There are some signs that institutional investors are getting very nervous about further tollway 'investments'. The usual Q3/Q4 oil price increases this year should help, as will the Garnaut outcomes. The challenge for us will be to keep the debate going.
S.
Rumour has it...
...That the Perth rail project got through by saying no to the visionary
underground metro projects proposed by the opponents.
Interesting, no?
LM
Opportunities to maximise catchements
I have suggested to the developer that they reduce the car park under Top Ryde Shopping Centre and make room for a metro station there with short tunnel sections to Victoria Rd, (then continuing as light rail/surface metro), which could be financed from the 150 million of the Iron Cove Bridge widening. It is, of course very late now, but maybe this could be a hook to make clear Victoria Rd needs many more stops at which point they will realize that their North West Metro is a hybrid with too many compromises. All they want is fast access to the city and NOT to maximise catchments along the line.
M.
Interesting Development
From the SMH - 31st of March
Metro will be too fast to get on
IT WAS the gold-plated transport ticket for a beleaguered government. But the day the Premier announced the $12 billion underground to Rouse Hill, March 18, some transport experts were left scratching their heads - the North West Metro was either an absurdly fast train, or one that did not stop for passengers.
Excellent work from Kevin!
And if anyone needs reminding of just how fast this Government slowed down CityRail to be in 2005, herewith some of my old notes:
For example in the new timetable the off-peak running time from Cronulla to Bondi Junction will rise from 58 minutes to 1 hour 7 minutes, an increase of 9 minutes or 16% slower. Likewise Waterfall trains will be 7 minutes (12%) slower. Meanwhile the quickest transit time from Wollongong to Central will increase by 9 minutes, from 1 hour 23 minutes to 1 hour 32 minutes.
That the biggest travel time increases are in the off-peak period is particularly disappointing because that is the very time that car travel is at its fastest. Clearly RailCorp does not understand the value that people place on travel time when choosing modes.
Running times on the network are now so slow (8-10km/h slower than trains in Brisbane and Perth, and 15% slower than the single-deckers of the 1920’s, in the days long before the boom in private car ownership) that it should be virtually impossible for Sydney’s trains to run late, seemingly guaranteeing achievement of the 92% On-Time Running target. Yet even under the slower timetable, On Time Running is not as good as it should be.
G.
More old numbers
While I have the June 1984 timetable to hand...
Weekdays:
Bondi Jct - Cronulla (PM express) = 56 mins#
Bondi Jct - Cronulla (off-peak) = 61 mins*
# only stops Redfern, Hurstville, Penshurst,Sutherland & all stations North Sydney - Emu Plains (PM express) = 71 mins
(only stops Redfern, Strathfield, Mt Druitt & all stations)
Weekends:
Bondi Jct - Cronulla (Sat) = 61 mins*
Bondi Jct - Waterfall (Sat) = 61 mins
Bondi Jct - Royal National Pk (Sun) = 53 mins
* = all stations from Hurstville
R.
Fantasy Train Story
Metro expert rails at 'fantasy' train
THE man who designed the Zurich public transport network has criticised the NSW Government's new plan for a metro to the north-west, labelling it a "fantasy" that will never succeed.
Dr Rolf Bergmaier said the North-West Metro was a poor hybrid of two rail systems that would result in high fares, low cost benefits and a prohibitively uncomfortable ride.
http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/metro-expert-rails-at-fantasy-train/...
Comment: Hybrid. That's exactly what I said. The glossy real estate brochure for Rouse Hill containing the word sustainable and a reference to a NW metro plus Watkin's Ryde tube as election bait. But then why are they building 3,000 car spaces under Top Ryde and not a metro station?
The only thing I don't agree with is the low density stuff. Due to the oil crisis, the modal split for rail will dramatically increase. Many will simply have no other choice than to walk or cycle to the next train station. On the other hand, there will be job losses in the CBD if the financial crisis continues as it does now. All this has to be modeled. No one is doing this. The endless debate will go on until judgment day when the 1st petrol lines start at the filling stations. Then forget your metro. The jobless financial advisers can then lay rail tracks directly on empty car lanes. (RailWorkWithoutOil.jpg)
Also:
The great train robbery
http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/the-great-train-robbery/2008/04/04/1...
Attached Ron Christie's plan
M.
The function of a metro is
The function of a metro is to maximise catchment areas along the line
with many stops, around 1 km apart. The proposed NW metro has only 16
stops while there should actually be 38 stops. It is therefore not a
metro and the objective is obviously to connect a 300,000 town planned
in Rouse Hill on the fastest route to the CBD. The originally planned
NW heavy rail tunnel which is now being replaced by the so-called NW
metro (privately funded) would have been too costly for Costa who is
interested to use funds from the power sale to build his beloved M4East.
The NW metro plans serve the sole purpose of being included in glossy
brochures for massive real estate developments in the NW, pushed by
Planning Minister Sartor. In the meantime, as we are facing an imminent
oil crisis, we are running out of time to build much cheaper mass
transit light rail (not trams) on all major roads and toll-ways as is
done in Perth. The NSW transport planning for Sydney is in a total mess.
M.
PS:
How this works in Frankfurt, have a look at this video where a light
rail train (75 m long, 100 m in peak hour) runs in the middle of a
major road:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SN_XXUH4J1w&feature=related
That has nothing to do with Costa's romantic trams. It's a surface
metro, which runs in some short tunnel sections, same trains, using ramps
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cSY5eoxHbTU
or here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sgjwDubHRvw
The numbers stack up but the power may not...
Actually the metro numbers do stack up.
I sent this to the Herald, but they didn't believe me.
P.
Simple high school physics suggests that there is no metro mystery for the 38 km 16 hop proposal (Metro express: so fast there's no time to get on, Herald, March 31). Assuming 80km/h maximum speed and 1.0m/sec² acceleration/retardation (a comfort limit of one tenth gravity) gives a non-stop system running time of 29 minutes, an extra 25 seconds per hop for speeding up and slowing down (7 minutes for the system) and station dwell times averaging 30 seconds (8 minutes) for a total of 44 minutes!
However, it's vital that there is enough power to maintain the high acceleration over the full speed range; our CityRail dawdlers start running out of (their less) puff above 30km/h.
Where is the plannning in all this? SMH article 7th May 2008
Metro throws Sydney's big plan on its head
Linton Besser Transport Reporter, SMH, May 7, 2008
http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/sydneys-big-plan-thrown-on-head/2008...
YEARS of careful planning to link Sydney's housing, transport and employment hubs has been jettisoned by the decision to abandon a heavy rail line to Rouse Hill and replace it with an independent metro line, Australia's top planning body has warned.
The announcement of the new $12 billion North West Metro has scuttled the integrated transport and housing policies that underpinned the State Government's all-encompassing Metropolitan Strategy, says the Planning Institute of Australia.
Thousands of future north-west residents were expected to travel by rail from their new homes to jobs specifically created in the "global arc" between Macquarie Park and North Sydney. But the metro will force these commuters to interchange at Epping to a line that now will not have room for them. More than 10,000 people an hour could be stuck at Epping during the morning peak, competing for just 4000 spaces on the Epping to Chatswood CityRail line.
The sudden shift of priorities - from an $8 billion CityRail expansion plan to a single underground all-stops metro - has thrown into doubt the very principles by which hundreds of planning decisions have been made. For instance, no provision has been made for high-density development at key stops on the metro at Rozelle, Drummoyne and Gladesville.
In a new policy paper, the institute says it supports the North-West Metro line as far west as Epping, but that extending a subway to Rouse Hill contravenes the world's best transport and land use principles. The metro and "its connectivity with Victoria Road overturns years of careful planning by the State Government to integrate land use and transport planning for Sydney's global city corridor from Epping to the airport", it says.
The metro was announced in March as a replacement for the $8 billion Metropolitan Rail Expansion Program, which would have included the North-West Rail Link and a new rail line through the CBD as part of the CityRail network. The line to Rouse Hill was always premised on the link between housing designated for the north-west and the concentration of jobs in areas between Macquarie Park and Chatswood, St Leonards and North Sydney.
The new line will still service the north-west but will force commuters to change at Epping or Wynyard to reach those employment hubs via CityRail lines.
"The Epping to Rouse Hill leg should be retained as a heavy rail corridor that is part of the CityRail network," the institute says. "This [would] provide a strong direct rail link between the north-western parts of Sydney and major employment locations on the northern side of Sydney Harbour."
The metro will carry up to 30,000 passengers an hour to Epping, where many will be forced to change to the CityRail network to travel to this employment arc. The Government has calculated that 38 per cent of north-west passengers want to access the Macquarie Park corridor, as well as Chatswood to North Sydney. That means 11,400 people an hour in the peak will be trying to change on to a rail line that is now configured for a maximum of 4000 an hour between Epping and Chatswood. Under the former rail plan, the capacity of the Epping to Chatswood line would have been substantially enhanced. The importance of a direct connection was recognised by the Government in its 2002 overview report on the North-West Rail Link. "The North-West Rail Link's primary aim is to allow people from Sydney's north-west direct access to employment, shopping and community facilities in the broad area between Epping, Chatswood, North Sydney, [and] Sydney CBD," it said.
The institute is concerned that strategic planning for Sydney was largely underpinned on a rail plan that has now been shelved. It included a new CBD rail line that would ease congestion at stations such as Wynyard. The institute asks about the capacity of the already pressured Wynyard "to support forced interchange of passengers onto the CityRail network".
The Minister for Transport, John Watkins said: "I welcome the Planning Institute of Australia's praise … they have joined the chorus of support for this vital project.
"Passengers travelling to the business centres at Macquarie Park, Chatswood and North Sydney can interchange with the existing CityRail network at Epping, Wynyard, Martin Place and St James stations."
Metro Mystery No 1
On page 16 of the Sydney Morning Herald of 8.5.08 is a large display
ad headed “Industry Consultation and Market Soundings”
It’s about the North West Metro.
It calls for expressions of interest from industry for Operations,
Safety, Construction etc.
It gives interested parties just ONE DAY to respond; surely the
shortest period ever for a response to government.
It's on page 16 – the Entertainment page.
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ???????????????????
K.
All for nought...they can't avoid CityRail
As I see it, and submitted, the conflict between project and land use integration considerations can be eased by building Epping-Parramatta and providing a Parramatta to Lower North Shore shuttle to increase capacity through Macquarie and connectivity from the west. Cross platform interchange, requiring (if feasable) major ECRL rework at Epping, would also help.
Nicely ironic, a project intended to bypass CityRail investment needs other CityRail investment to make it effective. The common issue is CityRail needs major reform anyway.
P.