Skip to content Skip to main navigation

News

Canberra’s most creative
residential property specialists

ACT Light Rail Public Meeting Wed 17/10

By Felix the Cat 17 October 2007 28

The next public meeting of ACT Light Rail will be on at 19:30 on Wednesday 17th October 2007 at the New Griffin Centre, Genge Street, Civic. At this meeting the Group will be under taking a workshop to canvass Light Rail options for the proposed Territory Plan amendments for the new town centre of Molonglo and intensive redevelopment of the East Lake area. Feedback and input from this workshop will be used as a basis to lodge a formal response to the ACT Government.


What’s Your opinion?


Please login to post your comments, or connect with
28 Responses to
ACT Light Rail Public Meeting Wed 17/10
Filter
Showing only Website comments
Order
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newst
Pandy 7:05 pm 02 Nov 07

Can we please have some feedback on how the meeting at the Tuggeranong Community Council went last night? Did Hargraeves dig in to his pockets to fund a feasability study of light rail to Bungendore?

Pandy 10:33 pm 22 Oct 07

Nope! But it would be good if we put up our new rail maps for Canberra as was shown on State Focus somewhere on our website.

Maelinar 3:44 pm 18 Oct 07

You don’t need a bus travelling from Gungahlin to Woden if there is a rail system that delivers the same portability.

The only bus network you will need is the one to deliver a passenger to the rail network, and the one to take them from their rail destination.

Are you guys entirely sane over there in the light rail coalition ?

Pandy 2:12 pm 18 Oct 07

Come off it Maeliner, even the light rail coalition knows you have to invest in a substantial upgrade of the bus network to feed this very expensive infrastructure; unless there is a tram travelling past within 400 metres of every Canberran household.

Maelinar 8:31 am 18 Oct 07

As a model city, the Canberra display village and socio-economic testbed is meant to be showing the larger cities of Australia (Syd,Melb,Adelaide,Perth etc) how to do things greener, more economically, showcase design etc etc.

In this circumstance, does it really compare at cost per million per distance to install if the onsell of this technology is then uptaken by the major cities ?

How on earth can it compare to the massive expenditure the Government went through to install the ‘National ‘ series of monoliths around Canberra ?

Let’s face up to the fact we are living in a cutom-built modern city, and get with the times. To be frank, I think the savings they would make by rendering the associated bus routes obsolete would maintain whatever network they put in to replace it.

Pandy 11:46 pm 17 Oct 07

Well the likes of the light rail coalition do not care what it costs. They willspin you stories of how property prices will go up; all livable cities have them so must we; roads costs a lot, so bugger spending the money on the roads and build it instead; it is a sacrifice worth taking.

And cranky spinoff? Calagary has light rail. How many people go there just to ride it?

Vic Bitterman 10:38 pm 17 Oct 07

Well said cranky.

Springfield Monorail anyone?

cranky 8:09 pm 17 Oct 07

Can anyone provide/extrapolate/establish any sort of potentially accurate numbers of punters using these trams (or whatever) over the course of a normal day?

Strikes me that passenger numbers would need to be substantial over a wide daily time period to justify the massive expense required to provide the service.

I would bet money that any and all succesful tramway/light rail systems anywhere in the world rely on considerably greater, and far more densely located, populations to survive.

There is certainly an aura to light rail, and even a potential tourist spinoff, but please do the sums before sadeling us with a white elephant.

caf 7:47 pm 17 Oct 07

mmm, but you have to admit that the trees on the northbourne nature strip are a significant part of the streetscape. I wouldn’t like to see them removed, that’s for sure.

The Limestone medium strip, on the other hand, seems to have a lot more room for light rail without removing the trees there – perhaps an alternate route of Ainslie Av / Limestone Av then Wakefield (on-road) / Macarthur to Belco and Majura (on-road) / Cowper / … to Gunghalin should be considered?

sepi 7:28 pm 17 Oct 07

The govt is happy to get rid of tree for important projects when they want to – eg Aged Care multi story going up in Ainslie.

Pandy 6:39 pm 17 Oct 07

Once there were treeshttp://i167.photobucket.com/albums/u133/sar409/Adelaide%20tram%20extension/HPIM6660.jpg

http://i167.photobucket.com/albums/u133/sar409/Adelaide%20tram%20extension/HPIM6697.jpg

Before
http://i154.photobucket.com/albums/s264/billd_photo/Vic_Sq_May_5_1098_small.jpg
after
http://i154.photobucket.com/albums/s264/billd_photo/Vic_Sq_May_6_1141_small.jpg

Extent of track works:
http://www.adam.com.au/callan/railpage/2007-07-018-Victoria_Square_looking_North.jpg

Grassy Centre:
http://i203.photobucket.com/albums/aa245/halo_vjk/tramx/P7310273.jpg

Advertiser, Feb 13 wrote: ‹ Contract ›

Council says no to removing 35 trees for the tram extension

Jessica Leo

Adelaide City Council has taken what may be a last stand against the State Governments plans to extend the tramline by voting against the removal of 35 trees earmarked as casualties of the $31 million project.

Last night’s meeting carried a motion from Councillor Anne Moran to spare the trees, although she later addmitted the ‘non endorsement’ of the tram extension would not stop the State Government going ahead with the project. “The loss of the trees is really a deal breaker and the straw that broke the camel’s back” she said. “I’m very happy. Whiles it’s (the Government’s) project and we can’t stop it, now we are reflecting the public voice”.

Pandy 5:57 pm 17 Oct 07
Pandy 5:51 pm 17 Oct 07

You are wrong Jonathon and Benmac.

There are pictures from Adelaide of trees being chopped down to make way for the light rail. And those trees were some distance from the track. Those tracks with grass in between required digging 1 metre into the ground and installing concrete footings and drainage.

HNW, be cheapeer just to convert one of the traffic lanes to bus only.

We have laws in Canberra about tree damaging activities and how the root zone under the drip line *at least* is not to be disturbed with construction activities. Imagine if that was done on Northbourne Avenue. Most of the trees in the center would basically be damaged beyond repair, because the drip line of those trees would be over your nice recessed tram tracks.

Maybe you should consult a professional arborist about this.

BTW that 1.8km Adelaide extension cost $31 million.

hairy nosed wombat 4:51 pm 17 Oct 07

Has anyone considered an O-Bahn system similar to SA for down the middle of Northborne?

caf 1:06 pm 17 Oct 07

Electricity allows you to use regenerative braking, and is cheap to transport to the ACT.

Gungahlin Al 1:00 pm 17 Oct 07

Kramer trying to fit two bus lanes down the middle of Northbourne would likely result in a lot of trees going. So buses would likely be limited to one way only – a “tidal” system could work reasonably.

But rail doesn’t need the same clearance, so two-way tracks would fit, and is I suspect why the trees have always had a gap left down the middle.

But I would think the biggest difference between rail and buses is that rail imposes a commitment on the government and future ones. Outright dropping of services like occurred here last Xmas and resulted in so much disruption couldn’t happen like that to a core rail service.

On overhead powerlines, I agree that they are ugly (although the Adelaide ones are quite low profile). But why electric anyway? Because it’s clean? It isn’t necessarily so. Electricity just shifts the pollution somewhere else.

I’m sure CNG powered rolling stock would be viable, would remove the need for powerlines and the therefore reduce the construction cost stacks. No hazardous in-track power supplies. And CNG engines can be very quite – the CNG buses in Brisbane are so quiet they have an unhealthy habit of sneaking up on your when you’re walking along the edge of the footpath! Much quieter than the Action CNG buses…

MrMagoo 12:33 pm 17 Oct 07

Canberra is designed for it, lets embrace it and bring it to fruition. Major Town Centres and the Parliamentary Triangle serviced by LR while buses service the suburbs feeding the LR. While I am unable to attend the meeting I sincerely voice my total support for the project.

PigDog 11:20 am 17 Oct 07

The Bordeaux tram system doesn’t use overhead power lines:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ground_level_power_supply
But it isn’t reliable and is expensive…

sepi 10:51 am 17 Oct 07

Trams are much much nicer than busses.

A nicer ride.
Nicer to look at.
Easy to see where the trams goes, and where the tramstops are – reliable routes.
Less pollution.

I like the idea of trams down Northbourne too. The only problem is those gum trees drop a fair bit of debris.

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2019 Region Group Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
the-riotact.com | aboutregional.com.au | b2bmagazine.com.au | thisiscanberra.com

Search across the site