19 April 2016

Beware light rail cost blow-outs

| Marcus Paul
Join the conversation
181
lightrail

Well, what a debacle that mess in the ACTON Tunnel was. It’s hard to imagine in this city of ours how much of a headache an over-height truck can cause. However, due to the unfathomable use uf ‘asbestos’ tiles on the roof of this decades old structure it did indeed cause a headache. What this writer hopes, in the impending investigation, authorities perhaps consider the removal of these tiles so as to avoid lengthy disruptions in the future should another truck smash into this infrastructure.

What was surprising, in my view, was the suggestion the Capital Metro Light Rail could have avoided some of the traffic chaos and disruption. Really? I read with a wry grin comments such as “one could just imagine people whizzing by on a tram peering down on the bumper to bumper action below”. Last time I checked the Capital Metro was running from Civic to Gungahlin, and most of the traffic nightmare was centred on the inner and south of the city, while the north was spared. Sure, things were also slow along Northbourne Ave but again this was mostly in a southbound direction.

Today however, comes the announcement the ACT Government plans to extend the light rail through The Parliamentary Triangle, into Woden, Fyshwick and onto Canberra Airport. They’re calling it the 25 year ‘master plan’ and it highlights the current government’s plans to use this type of infrastructure to attract development.

In theory, this all sounds fine. After all, the G-Link on the Gold Coast is going extremely well, and there is little doubt this major regional Australian city is benefitting from light rail. Indeed, the Queensland Government is also in the planning and approval stages of their network extending toward the hinterland via the suburbs with support from the Federal Government announced last week. The ACT government will be hoping to attract similar Federal support for the second stage of its project.

What we do know here in the ACT is the first ‘controversial’ stage of Capital Metro will run via Northbourne from Civic to Gungahlin. It’s expected to cost in the vicinity of $780 million and should be operational within four years. Again, the Government will put this before the public and ask for commentary and consultation, and this is the right course of action. However, will Andrew Barr and the out-going Simon Corbell actually listen? Depending on which survey you believe (and there are many out there), Canberrans either want or do not want this infrastructure by a slim margin.

There are many factors to consider here. First and foremost from a rate payers perspective it’s almost horrifying to think of the costs involved. It goes without saying cost blowouts in major infrastructure and developments are almost inevitable. The big question remains – and may well be answered at next years ACT Election – will Canberran’s support this vision or not?

Join the conversation

181
All Comments
  • All Comments
  • Website Comments
LatestOldest

rubaiyat said :

How can you SO miss the point I have repeated ad nauseum?

LEAVE the open land of the “Garden City” alone.

STOP covering it with more malodorous bitumen, hot concrete and ugly fat buildings for ugly fat people in ugly fat cars.

Oh – I think I’ve got it now. Of course we should “leave the open land of the garden city alone” – just so the Light Rail can densify said open land and the ACT Gov’t can salt and pepper public housing onto the rest of it. Makes sense.

rubaiyat said :

How can YOU so consistently miss the point that the entire Molonglo Township, soon to be West Belconnen, Majura Parkway and Ikea go right over what were rural leases but are now going to be hectares of bitumen, concrete and Macmansions.

In NSW Googong and Jerrabombera have done the same. All making money for a few individuals and problems in perpetuity.

How can u, in your never ending quest to demonise cars, trucks, roads, car parks & Macmansions, miss the point that the rural land is leasehold from the ACT Govt and reasonably unproductive in terms of farming anyway.

If u want to complain about loss of productive farmland, how about turning your attention/comments to the loss of Australia’s prime agricultural land to overseas based companies & superannuation funds, whilst successive Federal & State Govt’s do little about it. The future loss of that primary produce is of far, far greater long term concern than the loss of produce from building a few suburbs or roads in Canberra.

Personally I feel the cost of losing 860 viable trees, underwriting the Risk of running the LR for 20 years to the management company and the pathetic way this thing has been project managed is far too much of a cost for this community to bear in view of the fact that it will only be servicing the needs of so few and charged expensively to so many

Someone needs to get a new job and someone or some others need to take control of really looking at what are the needs and wants of Canberrans in terms of transport. How do we cater for working families, how to provide affordable efficient transport for a relatively small population. Better to spend the time in proper planning by a few at a modest price and then implement that plan in viable stages.

bj_ACT said :

it’s a bit like the Ashley Drive Extension which ACT Labor have proudly been announcing and re-announcing for about 8 years but have never actually started any work on.

Just be thankful that there is an election late next year – or they may still not have kicked that project off. Still, work is to commence in 2016 I think to duplicate most of Ashley drive, except for the last 150 metres or so at the Calwell end. It beggers belief.

chewy14 said :

rubaiyat said :

chewy14 said :

rubaiyat said :

What a total surprise, we’ve blown $300 million on the still unfinished Majura Parkway and much more on the remote greenfields big box developments in Majura Park, both burying good agricultural land.

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/farmers-blast-nca-and-act-governments-neglect-of-rural-land-20151125-gl7lq2.html

The line out to Ikea this weekend trailed all the way back to ADFA. Who could have predicted that!

To quote Forrest Gump, “Stupid is as stupid does.”

So hobby “farmers” complain that they won’t be able to have their city amenities with rural charm?

Shock me.

Allowing this type of landuse in these locations will only ever be temporary and it’s ridiculous to expect to be able to utilise it for this on anything but a short term basis. The land is worth far more from a city, social and economic standpoint than it ever will be producing small scale agricultural use.

I don’t know how someone who supports the light rail concept could also support extreme low density living like this so close to our growing city centre.

As for the line out to Ikea, it’s almost like the airport precinct can do whatever they want with that land, bypassing any good planning practices or dealing with transport issues. I’m truly shocked that the ACT government has let them get away with it……

How can you SO miss the point I have repeated ad nauseum?

LEAVE the open land of the “Garden City” alone.

STOP covering it with more malodorous bitumen, hot concrete and ugly fat buildings for ugly fat people in ugly fat cars.

The ACT government and their roads department are entirely responsible for the enormously expensive and ultimately ineffectual surrounds to the Airport.

Wait,
Miss the point?

You linked to an article discussing rural leases? Garden city on rural leases, is that a joke?

How can you so consistently post links that either are irrelevant to the point you are trying to make or actively refute your own arguments?

How can YOU so consistently miss the point that the entire Molonglo Township, soon to be West Belconnen, Majura Parkway and Ikea go right over what were rural leases but are now going to be hectares of bitumen, concrete and Macmansions.

In NSW Googong and Jerrabombera have done the same. All making money for a few individuals and problems in perpetuity.

bj_ACT said :

dungfungus said :

In the latest ACT Government’s “Our Canberra” (Tuggeranong Edition), there is a section devoted to “Transport Canberra – One Ticket, One Fare, One Network” which claims that from mid 2016 the light rail and bus network will be run by a single ACT Government agency called Transport Canberra.
Hello? – the light rail (if indeed it proceeds) is not planned to become operational until 2020.
In attempting to kid us even further, they have even added an artist’s impression of a tram with the destination “TUGGERANONG” on the front even though there is no plan to extend the “network” anywhere else at this stage.
It will be interesting to see if the other localised editions of this propaganda publication have trams with “WESTON”, “BELCONNEN” etc. on the tram picture.
And if that isn’t enough there is a promise that “More than a million bus kilometres will be freed up and redistributed when the first stage of the light rail begins running”.

That makes the George Bush Iraq “Mission Accomplished” sign seem quiet reasonable. At least they had started the mission.

If I was any good with Photoshop I would have the train image with TUGGERANONG side by side to the same image with Mission Accomplished.

it’s a bit like the Ashley Drive Extension which ACT Labor have proudly been announcing and re-announcing for about 8 years but have never actually started any work on.

Fair comment. We will have to wait a long time to see both those signs together.
I have reviewed the two previous posts I made and it appears I neglected to actually point clearly out that the online newsletters all show “CITY” as the destination but the printed newsletters delivered to our mailboxes (at great cost, no doubt) show “TUGGERANONG” in that delivery area and as far as I know, WODEN, BELCONNEN etc. in the others. I say “as far as I know” because everyone in the other areas I know didn’t look at the Our Canberra.
The comments are almost unanimously “I throw anything from the ACT Government like that in the garbage”.

dungfungus said :

In the latest ACT Government’s “Our Canberra” (Tuggeranong Edition), there is a section devoted to “Transport Canberra – One Ticket, One Fare, One Network” which claims that from mid 2016 the light rail and bus network will be run by a single ACT Government agency called Transport Canberra.
Hello? – the light rail (if indeed it proceeds) is not planned to become operational until 2020.
In attempting to kid us even further, they have even added an artist’s impression of a tram with the destination “TUGGERANONG” on the front even though there is no plan to extend the “network” anywhere else at this stage.
It will be interesting to see if the other localised editions of this propaganda publication have trams with “WESTON”, “BELCONNEN” etc. on the tram picture.
And if that isn’t enough there is a promise that “More than a million bus kilometres will be freed up and redistributed when the first stage of the light rail begins running”.

That makes the George Bush Iraq “Mission Accomplished” sign seem quiet reasonable. At least they had started the mission.

If I was any good with Photoshop I would have the train image with TUGGERANONG side by side to the same image with Mission Accomplished.

it’s a bit like the Ashley Drive Extension which ACT Labor have proudly been announcing and re-announcing for about 8 years but have never actually started any work on.

dungfungus said :

In the latest ACT Government’s “Our Canberra” (Tuggeranong Edition), there is a section devoted to “Transport Canberra – One Ticket, One Fare, One Network” which claims that from mid 2016 the light rail and bus network will be run by a single ACT Government agency called Transport Canberra.
Hello? – the light rail (if indeed it proceeds) is not planned to become operational until 2020.
In attempting to kid us even further, they have even added an artist’s impression of a tram with the destination “TUGGERANONG” on the front even though there is no plan to extend the “network” anywhere else at this stage.
It will be interesting to see if the other localised editions of this propaganda publication have trams with “WESTON”, “BELCONNEN” etc. on the tram picture.
And if that isn’t enough there is a promise that “More than a million bus kilometres will be freed up and redistributed when the first stage of the light rail begins running”.

As I suspected, the Woden, Weston Creek, Molonglo version has “CITY” emblazoned on the tram destination sign.
http://www.act.gov.au/our-canberra/december2015/transport-canberra-one-ticket,-one-network,-one-agency

In the latest ACT Government’s “Our Canberra” (Tuggeranong Edition), there is a section devoted to “Transport Canberra – One Ticket, One Fare, One Network” which claims that from mid 2016 the light rail and bus network will be run by a single ACT Government agency called Transport Canberra.
Hello? – the light rail (if indeed it proceeds) is not planned to become operational until 2020.
In attempting to kid us even further, they have even added an artist’s impression of a tram with the destination “TUGGERANONG” on the front even though there is no plan to extend the “network” anywhere else at this stage.
It will be interesting to see if the other localised editions of this propaganda publication have trams with “WESTON”, “BELCONNEN” etc. on the tram picture.
And if that isn’t enough there is a promise that “More than a million bus kilometres will be freed up and redistributed when the first stage of the light rail begins running”.

wildturkeycanoe11:57 pm 01 Dec 15

Sorry for another quick post but an article in the news caught my attention and this bit about the new Uber X…
“Uber also said their Canberra “driver-partners” had the highest average rating of any throughout the country and average arrival times in Canberra were also quicker than the national average, with cars turning up in just 3.1 minutes. This could also be put down to the lack of other cars on Canberra’s wide and airy boulevards.” http://www.news.com.au/technology/innovation/motoring/canberra-now-ubers-fastest-growing-city-following-ridesharing-services-legalisation/news-story/02b464df1c3a624cc4ab3d5c47440060
So contrary to popular belief, we don’t have traffic problems in Canberra thanks to our beautiful road networks and fewer vehicles. It’s in the national news, it can’t be wrong can it? Why do we need a tram that shows up at the platform only every 5 to 7 minutes when a car comes to your door in just over 3 and takes you directly to where you want?

rubaiyat said :

chewy14 said :

rubaiyat said :

What a total surprise, we’ve blown $300 million on the still unfinished Majura Parkway and much more on the remote greenfields big box developments in Majura Park, both burying good agricultural land.

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/farmers-blast-nca-and-act-governments-neglect-of-rural-land-20151125-gl7lq2.html

The line out to Ikea this weekend trailed all the way back to ADFA. Who could have predicted that!

To quote Forrest Gump, “Stupid is as stupid does.”

So hobby “farmers” complain that they won’t be able to have their city amenities with rural charm?

Shock me.

Allowing this type of landuse in these locations will only ever be temporary and it’s ridiculous to expect to be able to utilise it for this on anything but a short term basis. The land is worth far more from a city, social and economic standpoint than it ever will be producing small scale agricultural use.

I don’t know how someone who supports the light rail concept could also support extreme low density living like this so close to our growing city centre.

As for the line out to Ikea, it’s almost like the airport precinct can do whatever they want with that land, bypassing any good planning practices or dealing with transport issues. I’m truly shocked that the ACT government has let them get away with it……

How can you SO miss the point I have repeated ad nauseum?

LEAVE the open land of the “Garden City” alone.

STOP covering it with more malodorous bitumen, hot concrete and ugly fat buildings for ugly fat people in ugly fat cars.

The ACT government and their roads department are entirely responsible for the enormously expensive and ultimately ineffectual surrounds to the Airport.

Wait,
Miss the point?

You linked to an article discussing rural leases? Garden city on rural leases, is that a joke?

How can you so consistently post links that either are irrelevant to the point you are trying to make or actively refute your own arguments?

OpenYourMind8:21 pm 01 Dec 15

rubaiyat said :

OpenYourMind said :

BTW, how do you get to your Ski Lodge, Rubaiyat??

Sold it.

Can’t quite put my finger on exactly why, but we are down to a few short weeks of mostly wet snow a year.

When I bought the lodge we had a good 3 months skiing a year.

Maybe you haven’t been paying attention:

http://www.25zero.com

Autonomous cars do nothing about cars on roads being a waste of energy and space, as well as still being noisy and dividing our cities with 60’s style freeways and parents too afraid to let their overweight kids out on the roads.

Cars are getting slower, older and even more patently ridiculous, and you still don’t get it.

But not to worry we’ll be “soon” driving them on Clean Coal and desperate Fracking of our landscape.

Tell me, since you SO get it, since autonomous cars are practically here and will solve everything, why exactly are we still spending billions of dollars on roads?

Burying good land under concrete and bitumen freeways?

I don’t think anyone was advocating ski lodge ownership. Just when you boasted of having owned one, you instantly smacked of the kind of tram advocate (possibly on the payroll) we see. Public transport is great for everyone…except me. I and others don’t know your personal circumstances, but you have declared ski lodge ownership and kids at grammar…that doesn’t sound like your average tram commuter to me!

We are still spending on roads because the vast majority of our tax and ratepayers use roads. Even those who don’t drive a car still rely on roads for delivery of goods, ambulance services, fire services. A tram aint gonna solve any of that, we will still need roads. An autonomous car (very likely to be completely silent btw), just makes much, much better use of roads and doesn’t need parking closer to major employment sites etc. The car can take itself off to recharge in a nice environmentally powered hole somewhere out of harm’s way.

As for cars being slower and noisier, well they’ve actually gotten faster and more quiet. Most journeys in Canberra now and in the forseeable future are incredibly rapid in Canberra. This will be the case even if we doubled the population. Electric cars will be completely silent and will wash away any wrongly perceived enviro value of trams.

Take a look at the announcement about uber today. It’s already taken off and hasn’t needed tram money or tram time to be successful.

Time is one thing trams don’t have. Time will be very unkind to trams.

wildturkeycanoe3:01 pm 01 Dec 15

rubaiyat said :

Burying good land under concrete and bitumen freeways?

What do you expect the tram is going to run on, fields of clover? It will need concrete and gravel underneath even in the green areas to support the weight. The tram won’t eliminate the need for roads or make any existing roads redundant. Buses will still be needed, so will cars. Instead of nice gum trees lining Northbourne we will have power lines and stanchions. Your aesthetic “green”, anti asphalt argument just doesn’t have any real evidence to back it up. The tram corridor will make Canberra more like Sydney and less bush than it is now. How is that sustainable? High density housing looks worse than leafy suburbs, probably with more impact on nature too.

rubaiyat said :

What I don’t get is with all the falling population, employment and impending new technology of autonomous hoverboards and Psychic WiFi, why isn’t everyone here up in arms over the billions wasted on freeways and road works?

It’s a mystery, it’s a mystery!

Yeah, it is strange.

Maybe they simply want to have something, anything over actually assessing what the best outcome would be?

dungfungus said :

rubaiyat said :

dungfungus said :

rubaiyat said :

dungfungus said :

There is no way Canberra can grow to a population of 500,000 at anytime.

“There is no way Canberra can grow to a population of 385,000 at anytime.”

You should get those eyes checked for rear vision stigmatism.

There is no growth left in the public service and tertiary education has peaked so tell me where are the extra jobs going to come from? The only “export industry” we have is the reclaimed paper, plastic, glass, computers and metal that we ship to recycling facilities in Asia.
Canberra is a nice place to live because it is different and doesn’t have to morph into big cities like Sydney and Shanghai with the constraints of living standards that go with them.

You keep saying all this as if it were true.

Just because you haven’t worked in years doesn’t mean we don’t STILL have the lowest unemployment rate in Australia.

So… you are denying the employment, population growth, the Paris trams, the global warming…?

I think I see the where the error is occurring…

When you decide where the error is please also tell me where the jobs are coming from.

The error is obvious enough.

I thought you weren’t into central planning.

I have this book that explains it ALL, any time you want to lend it! 😀

rubaiyat said :

dungfungus said :

rubaiyat said :

dungfungus said :

There is no way Canberra can grow to a population of 500,000 at anytime.

“There is no way Canberra can grow to a population of 385,000 at anytime.”

You should get those eyes checked for rear vision stigmatism.

There is no growth left in the public service and tertiary education has peaked so tell me where are the extra jobs going to come from? The only “export industry” we have is the reclaimed paper, plastic, glass, computers and metal that we ship to recycling facilities in Asia.
Canberra is a nice place to live because it is different and doesn’t have to morph into big cities like Sydney and Shanghai with the constraints of living standards that go with them.

You keep saying all this as if it were true.

Just because you haven’t worked in years doesn’t mean we don’t STILL have the lowest unemployment rate in Australia.

So… you are denying the employment, population growth, the Paris trams, the global warming…?

I think I see the where the error is occurring…

When you decide where the error is please also tell me where the jobs are coming from.

OpenYourMind said :

BTW, how do you get to your Ski Lodge, Rubaiyat??

Sold it.

Can’t quite put my finger on exactly why, but we are down to a few short weeks of mostly wet snow a year.

When I bought the lodge we had a good 3 months skiing a year.

Maybe you haven’t been paying attention:

http://www.25zero.com

Autonomous cars do nothing about cars on roads being a waste of energy and space, as well as still being noisy and dividing our cities with 60’s style freeways and parents too afraid to let their overweight kids out on the roads.

Cars are getting slower, older and even more patently ridiculous, and you still don’t get it.

But not to worry we’ll be “soon” driving them on Clean Coal and desperate Fracking of our landscape.

Tell me, since you SO get it, since autonomous cars are practically here and will solve everything, why exactly are we still spending billions of dollars on roads?

Burying good land under concrete and bitumen freeways?

The train is coming weather we like it or not . I t won’t be as successful as the gov says as most traffic will go one way in the morning and one way back in the arvo. Large money will be owed by us, there’s no doubt.

As they said we Canberra doesn’t have 13 million visitors a year. That’s an average 250,000 extra people a week on top of Gold Coasts population . The Gold Coast is also a long strip city Canberra isn’t.

dungfungus said :

bj_ACT said :

Whilst I am very sure the proposed Light Rail model is the NOT best option for Canberra. I do agree with with posters that the Canberra Population will get to 500,00 and based on current 1.4% growth rates it will get there in 18 years. So a new plan will be needed.

However, I think this also means that are wider Canberra public transport solution needs to be found. The current proposal for Civic light rail will only meet the needs of about 5% of the population (if that).

So, I ask again, where are all the jobs going to be “created”?
Federally, Australia cannot afford the current level of immigration especially unskilled people.
Do you want Canberra to end up like Western Sydney?

Dungfungus,
The jobs will come from the same place they’ve always come from and I don’t know why you would think otherwise.

We have a service based economy and the idea that major industries like the federal public service or tertiary education sectors won’t grow is completely wrong.

People will come here, have children, go to restaurants, etc, etc, etc. Canberra is a growing city and will remain so for the forseeable future.

dungfungus said :

bj_ACT said :

Whilst I am very sure the proposed Light Rail model is the NOT best option for Canberra. I do agree with with posters that the Canberra Population will get to 500,00 and based on current 1.4% growth rates it will get there in 18 years. So a new plan will be needed.

However, I think this also means that are wider Canberra public transport solution needs to be found. The current proposal for Civic light rail will only meet the needs of about 5% of the population (if that).

So, I ask again, where are all the jobs going to be “created”?
Federally, Australia cannot afford the current level of immigration especially unskilled people.
Do you want Canberra to end up like Western Sydney?

Happy to try and answer your questions but I need some more context to what you mean and also how it relates to my first post.

What I don’t get is with all the falling population, employment and impending new technology of autonomous hoverboards and Psychic WiFi, why isn’t everyone here up in arms over the billions wasted on freeways and road works?

It’s a mystery, it’s a mystery!

bj_ACT said :

Whilst I am very sure the proposed Light Rail model is the NOT best option for Canberra. I do agree with with posters that the Canberra Population will get to 500,00 and based on current 1.4% growth rates it will get there in 18 years. So a new plan will be needed.

However, I think this also means that are wider Canberra public transport solution needs to be found. The current proposal for Civic light rail will only meet the needs of about 5% of the population (if that).

So, I ask again, where are all the jobs going to be “created”?
Federally, Australia cannot afford the current level of immigration especially unskilled people.
Do you want Canberra to end up like Western Sydney?

dungfungus said :

rubaiyat said :

dungfungus said :

There is no way Canberra can grow to a population of 500,000 at anytime.

“There is no way Canberra can grow to a population of 385,000 at anytime.”

You should get those eyes checked for rear vision stigmatism.

There is no growth left in the public service and tertiary education has peaked so tell me where are the extra jobs going to come from? The only “export industry” we have is the reclaimed paper, plastic, glass, computers and metal that we ship to recycling facilities in Asia.
Canberra is a nice place to live because it is different and doesn’t have to morph into big cities like Sydney and Shanghai with the constraints of living standards that go with them.

You keep saying all this as if it were true.

Just because you haven’t worked in years doesn’t mean we don’t STILL have the lowest unemployment rate in Australia.

So… you are denying the employment, population growth, the Paris trams, the global warming…?

I think I see the where the error is occurring…

OpenYourMind5:17 pm 30 Nov 15

rubaiyat said :

OpenYourMind said :

rubaiyat said :

miz said :

Transport expert reckons light rail likely to fail
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-11-27/light-rail-expert-warns-act-government-to-rethink-plans/6979196?WT.ac=localnews_canberra

miz said :

Transport expert reckons light rail likely to fail
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-11-27/light-rail-expert-warns-act-government-to-rethink-plans/6979196?WT.ac=localnews_canberra

‘Minister Corbell said. “City planning, city development is not perfect.”‘

A mild understatement. That is what makes this Hobson’s choice. Continue to do nothing or do something.

I’m for something, anything rather than all the awful planning we have had so far and has been taking us further and further down the wrong freeways.

The problem with the freeways and the distant suburbia is people don’t see the inevitable coming, despite the thousands of examples around the world showing exactly what the end result is.

Walter Burley Griffin intelligently planned Canberra with public transport over 100 years ago, and here we are captives to the same bureaucrats who sabotaged WBG’s scheme, still saying “Not Now”.

Doesn’t matter how many times you say these things, it doesn’t make it right.

Canberra growth is not such that we need to worry about this looming problem now or in the relative future. We are not now or in the forseeable future Melbourne or Sydney size.

Before you stare into the future, take a look at the current paradigm. If you have a child, you will note a very significant reality, and that is your child and your child’s friends are growing up in a car centric Canberra. For better or worse, Gunghalin is full of McMansions, children are driven to school and sport in their McMansion mobile, usually a CX7, Tiguan or big arsed Subaru. Children celebrate the day when they can drive, and then they start transporting their younger brothers and sisters in cars. We live in a car driving city now, our children will know no other reality. So how the hell can you imagine light rail will be a success when it is feeding car centric Gunghalin? Forget the bit along the Nbn corridor. That’s pretty much walking distance for those whose destinations is only the City.

The future is full of electric cars, autonomous transport, shared economies, telecommuting and things that us oldies can’t even imagine. The tram will be a ridiculous anachronism in our eyes, doubly so in our children’s.

How blinkered can you be?

Canberra is heading to 500,000 people in the next 25 years. It is rubbish that we have to be the size of Sydney or Melbourne to have a clean unobtrusive and pleasant transport network. Plenty of cities a fraction of our size have them.

Your kids are grossly fat, or you can’t see that either.

And it is like there is no environmental problem, or oil will last forever and it isn’t feeding petrodollars into the global trouble spots.

And the perpetual nonsense of the “autonomous car” that will “fix” crowded roads by driving around empty vehicles, or having a car pooling system that hasn’t worked ever, anywhere, because the self centred people in the cars, never want to share or have to go anywhere else but where they want to go.

I just came back from dining in Pialligo (fantastic meal at Pod Food) and we passed the kilometres long traffic jam going round to Majura Road and Majura Park. You just pretend that this isn’t real and it will all go away?

Amazing what you can see with your head firmly buried in the sand.

Insulting other people doesn’t help your cause.
Speak for yourself about your own children and members of my family old enough to cycle can all outbicycle any time a tram does by many minutes.

As for the environmental issue and petrol, well the electric paradigm and recycled batteries and cars is upon us. The energy to drive this process is increasingly renewable. Trams have zero advantage in this regard in the future.

Self driving is a fast approaching reality. The milestones for this tech keep getting closer, rather than further away. Tesla has just released their self driving update albeit for highway use. Autonomous is being tested in South Australia etc. Autonomous changes the entire transport paradigm and you don’t get it. It means eliminating carparks, most accidents, changes the way goods are transported, changes the car ownership paradigm and potential our land use in cities. Your tram is slow and old and ridiculous.

As for any traffic jam around Majura. Well, I work out there and don’t have any major issues…and that’s during the current roadworks, which are about to improve traffic flow markedly.

BTW, how do you get to your Ski Lodge, Rubaiyat??

Whilst I am very sure the proposed Light Rail model is the NOT best option for Canberra. I do agree with with posters that the Canberra Population will get to 500,00 and based on current 1.4% growth rates it will get there in 18 years. So a new plan will be needed.

However, I think this also means that are wider Canberra public transport solution needs to be found. The current proposal for Civic light rail will only meet the needs of about 5% of the population (if that).

rubaiyat said :

dungfungus said :

There is no way Canberra can grow to a population of 500,000 at anytime.

“There is no way Canberra can grow to a population of 385,000 at anytime.”

You should get those eyes checked for rear vision stigmatism.

There is no growth left in the public service and tertiary education has peaked so tell me where are the extra jobs going to come from? The only “export industry” we have is the reclaimed paper, plastic, glass, computers and metal that we ship to recycling facilities in Asia.
Canberra is a nice place to live because it is different and doesn’t have to morph into big cities like Sydney and Shanghai with the constraints of living standards that go with them.

dungfungus said :

There is no way Canberra can grow to a population of 500,000 at anytime.

“There is no way Canberra can grow to a population of 385,000 at anytime.”

You should get those eyes checked for rear vision stigmatism.

dungfungus said :

“Canberra is heading to 500,000 people in the next 25 years.”
That sounds like the same sort of doomsday modelling that the climate warmists use.
There is no way Canberra can grow to a population of 500,000 at anytime.

so what Canberra is going to stay at its current population forever? I remember when the population was 220,000 and people said it wouldn’t go past 300,000. We are now past 380,000. So 500,000 doesn’t seem so far fetched to me. Especially when people realise living in the western suburbs of Sydney really isn’t that great a lifestyle choice.

So what are we going to do with all the people. We can’t just build houses with nice big backyards for everyone. just like going all green is also not a reality. I don’t really think a high density corridor and lightrail is that bad an idea. I’d like the whole of Canberra public transport looked at, but if they can fit 100,000 in the transit corridor it means the rest of us benefit.

The world changes, Canberra changes. People need to accept that. Put up a viable solution, but the right side of politics of not doing anything until they absolutely has to is just as bad as the greens wanting to do everything environmentally friendly regardless of cost.

JC said :

That would be the heavy rail line that would connect with the line from Sydney, then go north towards Yass to meet the line to Melbourne. Deisgned to bring the pollies into town not to move people around town.

Most of the roads in his design that have Avenue in their name were designed for tramways to be installed in the median.

Yes it was heavy rail but WBG’s plans had stations at close intervals through Canberra’s northern suburbs, so looks like he intended a commuter service and predicted that is where growth would happen.

rubaiyat said :

JC said :

dungfungus said :

rubaiyat said :

miz said :

Transport expert reckons light rail likely to fail
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-11-27/light-rail-expert-warns-act-government-to-rethink-plans/6979196?WT.ac=localnews_canberra

miz said :

Transport expert reckons light rail likely to fail
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-11-27/light-rail-expert-warns-act-government-to-rethink-plans/6979196?WT.ac=localnews_canberra

‘Minister Corbell said. “City planning, city development is not perfect.”‘

A mild understatement. That is what makes this Hobson’s choice. Continue to do nothing or do something.

I’m for something, anything rather than all the awful planning we have had so far and has been taking us further and further down the wrong freeways.

The problem with the freeways and the distant suburbia is people don’t see the inevitable coming, despite the thousands of examples around the world showing exactly what the end result is.

Walter Burley Griffin intelligently planned Canberra with public transport over 100 years ago, and here we are captives to the same bureaucrats who sabotaged WBG’s scheme, still saying “Not Now”.

We have had an efficient albeit lowly patronised public transport system in Canberra for many years (as WBG planned). It’s called ACTInternalOmnibusNetwork.
The other method of transport WBG planned was travel by private motor car and by gosh, hasn’t it been a success and it continues to be just that.

Actually Burley Griffin designed the public transport corridors to be tramways and our main roads have for the most poart kept the wider median he reserved for them. Ironically one of the main routes was to be down Northborne Ave.

And and as for the car yes it has been a success but think you can thank the NCDC and the Y plan for that not Burley Griffin. Hard to denay the road network didn’t serve us well but frankly the whole Y plan when viewed in modern standards is not sustainable and the traffic it help created is reaching capacity and alternative options for town planning and transportation (road and public transport) are very much needed. Otherwise we might just end up with a 100 lane freeway right through town just to support all these cars.

I went back to source.

WBG’s Rail line was 3 blocks east of Northbourne Ave and was a continuation of the main line to Sydney.

That would be the heavy rail line that would connect with the line from Sydney, then go north towards Yass to meet the line to Melbourne. Deisgned to bring the pollies into town not to move people around town.

Most of the roads in his design that have Avenue in their name were designed for tramways to be installed in the median.

chewy14 said :

rubaiyat said :

What a total surprise, we’ve blown $300 million on the still unfinished Majura Parkway and much more on the remote greenfields big box developments in Majura Park, both burying good agricultural land.

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/farmers-blast-nca-and-act-governments-neglect-of-rural-land-20151125-gl7lq2.html

The line out to Ikea this weekend trailed all the way back to ADFA. Who could have predicted that!

To quote Forrest Gump, “Stupid is as stupid does.”

So hobby “farmers” complain that they won’t be able to have their city amenities with rural charm?

Shock me.

Allowing this type of landuse in these locations will only ever be temporary and it’s ridiculous to expect to be able to utilise it for this on anything but a short term basis. The land is worth far more from a city, social and economic standpoint than it ever will be producing small scale agricultural use.

I don’t know how someone who supports the light rail concept could also support extreme low density living like this so close to our growing city centre.

As for the line out to Ikea, it’s almost like the airport precinct can do whatever they want with that land, bypassing any good planning practices or dealing with transport issues. I’m truly shocked that the ACT government has let them get away with it……

How can you SO miss the point I have repeated ad nauseum?

LEAVE the open land of the “Garden City” alone.

STOP covering it with more malodorous bitumen, hot concrete and ugly fat buildings for ugly fat people in ugly fat cars.

The ACT government and their roads department are entirely responsible for the enormously expensive and ultimately ineffectual surrounds to the Airport.

chewy14 said :

As for the line out to Ikea, it’s almost like the airport precinct can do whatever they want with that land, bypassing any good planning practices or dealing with transport issues. I’m truly shocked that the ACT government has let them get away with it……

Too right, good loop hole they use out there to get away with what they like.

Though Ikea is built on the ACT government side. Their theory is cannot beat them join them, and frankly it’s the ideal place for that kind of development. Close to roads, I mean to say its not like in Canberra you are going to get a tram to Ikea and take your Billy bookcase home on the tram.

Though must admit when I lived in London I did go to Ikea at Brent Cross and got a mini cab home with my stuff. But not the kind of thing we have here in the ACT.

So really things like Ikea and shopping of that nature very much still needs a road network. Day to day commuting needs public transport options. It’s all about the balance.

rommeldog56 said :

rubaiyat said :

Well what is your solution other than ignoring the cost of cars. in more ways than one. and lying about the cost of rail?

Glad u asked. I dont have one – I doubt any city in the world has. I’m certainly not arrogant or intellectually superior enough to claim that i have a “solution”. But, instead of jumping to the “solution” and backwards reengineering everything else (which to me, seems to be what has happened here) – what about this :

1) Dispense with the “urgency” pressure. There are only about 350,000+ (?) residents here – its not like we are grid locked – yet. The claims that we have to do something now are absurd.

If effective planning means to hasten slowly, then so be it. Its not like we have millions of people in Canberra.

2) Because of the ACTs very narrow revenue raising base, there may well be only 1 shot at getting this right, so PLAN !

Start by engaging non ACT Gov’t independent advisers to cost out, at a high level, each option or combination of options – what ever technologies are involved.

Yes – this will be expensive & takes time, but its part of good project management and business case preparation.

3) Go to tender for at least 2 or more of the options/combination of options. Let the market place solve the integration plan for you, cost effectively. What the ACT Govt has done is go to tender for a backbone, non integrated m$640 solution, but have said that they will spend up to m$780 for contingency. How absurd. Tenderers will be targeting that m$780 at the minimum.

4) Evaluate tendered solutions as a holistic and integrated transport solution and plan – built and costed around the backbone (eg. rapid tram, rapid buses, driverless cars, hovercraft, monorails, etc – what ever).

That will provide indicative comparative whole of plan costs. Sensitivity analysis would contain the “what if’s” such as flexibility to adopt emerging technologies or maybe even when to convert from the initial backbone solution (eg. maybe rapid buses) to a better one when density/population/technologies permit.

5) Public Private Partnerships : Government (at any level) love the “Partnership” buzzword but generally have no idea how to tender, evaluate then contract manage a true partnership. What they tend to do is to call it a “partnership”, then tender, evaluate & contract manage along more traditional purchaser/provider models. If the want to do the latter, be honest and call it a purchaser/provider or even a lease back arrangement. A PPP is in my view, without Federal funding contribution to lessen reliance on the PPP provider, a death knell for the ACT Tram project in the longer term because the PPP provider/consortia will have so much more contract management skills they will run rings around the ACT Gov’t and claw back anything they lost from the competitive bidding process – plus more.

I could write much, much more – but the above would provide a framework to demonstrate a comprehensive and methodologically based assessment of all options – to arrive at a affordable and sustainable solution – a best fit – that will reduce the risk of taking funds away from what should be other ACT Govt fiscal priorities.

What a good document/process to take to an election !

“Canberra is heading to 500,000 people in the next 25 years.”
That sounds like the same sort of doomsday modelling that the climate warmists use.
There is no way Canberra can grow to a population of 500,000 at anytime.

rubaiyat said :

dungfungus said :

WBG’s Rail line was 3 blocks east of Northbourne Ave and was a continuation of the main line to Sydney.

Why wasn’t it built 100 years ago then?

Because like minded bureaucrats to yourself were stealing WBG’s plans off his desk and “disappearing” them, to surface 50 years later buried in the archives.

Even if what you suggest is correct, why wasn’t the tram route put in 50 years ago then?

rubaiyat said :

What a total surprise, we’ve blown $300 million on the still unfinished Majura Parkway and much more on the remote greenfields big box developments in Majura Park, both burying good agricultural land.

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/farmers-blast-nca-and-act-governments-neglect-of-rural-land-20151125-gl7lq2.html

The line out to Ikea this weekend trailed all the way back to ADFA. Who could have predicted that!

To quote Forrest Gump, “Stupid is as stupid does.”

So hobby “farmers” complain that they won’t be able to have their city amenities with rural charm?

Shock me.

Allowing this type of landuse in these locations will only ever be temporary and it’s ridiculous to expect to be able to utilise it for this on anything but a short term basis. The land is worth far more from a city, social and economic standpoint than it ever will be producing small scale agricultural use.

I don’t know how someone who supports the light rail concept could also support extreme low density living like this so close to our growing city centre.

As for the line out to Ikea, it’s almost like the airport precinct can do whatever they want with that land, bypassing any good planning practices or dealing with transport issues. I’m truly shocked that the ACT government has let them get away with it……

dungfungus said :

WBG’s Rail line was 3 blocks east of Northbourne Ave and was a continuation of the main line to Sydney.

Why wasn’t it built 100 years ago then?

Because like minded bureaucrats to yourself were stealing WBG’s plans off his desk and “disappearing” them, to surface 50 years later buried in the archives.

What a total surprise, we’ve blown $300 million on the still unfinished Majura Parkway and much more on the remote greenfields big box developments in Majura Park, both burying good agricultural land.

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/farmers-blast-nca-and-act-governments-neglect-of-rural-land-20151125-gl7lq2.html

The line out to Ikea this weekend trailed all the way back to ADFA. Who could have predicted that!

To quote Forrest Gump, “Stupid is as stupid does.”

rubaiyat said :

JC said :

dungfungus said :

rubaiyat said :

miz said :

Transport expert reckons light rail likely to fail
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-11-27/light-rail-expert-warns-act-government-to-rethink-plans/6979196?WT.ac=localnews_canberra

miz said :

Transport expert reckons light rail likely to fail
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-11-27/light-rail-expert-warns-act-government-to-rethink-plans/6979196?WT.ac=localnews_canberra

‘Minister Corbell said. “City planning, city development is not perfect.”‘

A mild understatement. That is what makes this Hobson’s choice. Continue to do nothing or do something.

I’m for something, anything rather than all the awful planning we have had so far and has been taking us further and further down the wrong freeways.

The problem with the freeways and the distant suburbia is people don’t see the inevitable coming, despite the thousands of examples around the world showing exactly what the end result is.

Walter Burley Griffin intelligently planned Canberra with public transport over 100 years ago, and here we are captives to the same bureaucrats who sabotaged WBG’s scheme, still saying “Not Now”.

We have had an efficient albeit lowly patronised public transport system in Canberra for many years (as WBG planned). It’s called ACTInternalOmnibusNetwork.
The other method of transport WBG planned was travel by private motor car and by gosh, hasn’t it been a success and it continues to be just that.

Actually Burley Griffin designed the public transport corridors to be tramways and our main roads have for the most poart kept the wider median he reserved for them. Ironically one of the main routes was to be down Northborne Ave.

And and as for the car yes it has been a success but think you can thank the NCDC and the Y plan for that not Burley Griffin. Hard to denay the road network didn’t serve us well but frankly the whole Y plan when viewed in modern standards is not sustainable and the traffic it help created is reaching capacity and alternative options for town planning and transportation (road and public transport) are very much needed. Otherwise we might just end up with a 100 lane freeway right through town just to support all these cars.

I went back to source.

WBG’s Rail line was 3 blocks east of Northbourne Ave and was a continuation of the main line to Sydney.

Why wasn’t it built 100 years ago then?

rommeldog56 said :

rubaiyat said :

Well what is your solution other than ignoring the cost of cars. in more ways than one. and lying about the cost of rail?

Glad u asked. I dont have one – I doubt any city in the world has. I’m certainly not arrogant or intellectually superior enough to claim that i have a “solution”. But, instead of jumping to the “solution” and backwards reengineering everything else (which to me, seems to be what has happened here) – what about this :

1) Dispense with the “urgency” pressure. There are only about 350,000+ (?) residents here – its not like we are grid locked – yet. The claims that we have to do something now are absurd.

If effective planning means to hasten slowly, then so be it. Its not like we have millions of people in Canberra.

2) Because of the ACTs very narrow revenue raising base, there may well be only 1 shot at getting this right, so PLAN !

Start by engaging non ACT Gov’t independent advisers to cost out, at a high level, each option or combination of options – what ever technologies are involved.

Yes – this will be expensive & takes time, but its part of good project management and business case preparation.

3) Go to tender for at least 2 or more of the options/combination of options. Let the market place solve the integration plan for you, cost effectively. What the ACT Govt has done is go to tender for a backbone, non integrated m$640 solution, but have said that they will spend up to m$780 for contingency. How absurd. Tenderers will be targeting that m$780 at the minimum.

4) Evaluate tendered solutions as a holistic and integrated transport solution and plan – built and costed around the backbone (eg. rapid tram, rapid buses, driverless cars, hovercraft, monorails, etc – what ever).

That will provide indicative comparative whole of plan costs. Sensitivity analysis would contain the “what if’s” such as flexibility to adopt emerging technologies or maybe even when to convert from the initial backbone solution (eg. maybe rapid buses) to a better one when density/population/technologies permit.

5) Public Private Partnerships : Government (at any level) love the “Partnership” buzzword but generally have no idea how to tender, evaluate then contract manage a true partnership. What they tend to do is to call it a “partnership”, then tender, evaluate & contract manage along more traditional purchaser/provider models. If the want to do the latter, be honest and call it a purchaser/provider or even a lease back arrangement. A PPP is in my view, without Federal funding contribution to lessen reliance on the PPP provider, a death knell for the ACT Tram project in the longer term because the PPP provider/consortia will have so much more contract management skills they will run rings around the ACT Gov’t and claw back anything they lost from the competitive bidding process – plus more.

I could write much, much more – but the above would provide a framework to demonstrate a comprehensive and methodologically based assessment of all options – to arrive at a affordable and sustainable solution – a best fit – that will reduce the risk of taking funds away from what should be other ACT Govt fiscal priorities.

What a good document/process to take to an election !

Not disagreeing with most of what you wrote, because they are motherhood statements.

But really it is just more delays and procrastination, whilst freeways, roads and enormously expensive “intersection improvements” eat up the budget, divide the city even more than it already is and add further obstacles to anything else but the entrenched addiction to cars.

All of which never undergoes the critical close scrutiny that sensible alternatives get.

rubaiyat said :

Well what is your solution other than ignoring the cost of cars. in more ways than one. and lying about the cost of rail?

Glad u asked. I dont have one – I doubt any city in the world has. I’m certainly not arrogant or intellectually superior enough to claim that i have a “solution”. But, instead of jumping to the “solution” and backwards reengineering everything else (which to me, seems to be what has happened here) – what about this :

1) Dispense with the “urgency” pressure. There are only about 350,000+ (?) residents here – its not like we are grid locked – yet. The claims that we have to do something now are absurd. If effective planning means to hasten slowly, then so be it. Its not like we have millions of people in Canberra.

2) Because of the ACTs very narrow revenue raising base, there may well be only 1 shot at getting this right, so PLAN ! Start by engaging non ACT Gov’t independent advisers to cost out, at a high level, each option or combination of options – what ever technologies are involved. Yes – this will be expensive & takes time, but its part of good project management and business case preparation.

3) Go to tender for at least 2 or more of the options/combination of options. Let the market place solve the integration plan for you, cost effectively. What the ACT Govt has done is go to tender for a backbone, non integrated m$640 solution, but have said that they will spend up to m$780 for contingency. How absurd. Tenderers will be targeting that m$780 at the minimum.

4) Evaluate tendered solutions as a holistic and integrated transport solution and plan – built and costed around the backbone (eg. rapid tram, rapid buses, driverless cars, hovercraft, monorails, etc – what ever). That will provide indicative comparative whole of plan costs. Sensitivity analysis would contain the “what if’s” such as flexibility to adopt emerging technologies or maybe even when to convert from the initial backbone solution (eg. maybe rapid buses) to a better one when density/population/technologies permit.

5) Public Private Partnerships : Government (at any level) love the “Partnership” buzzword but generally have no idea how to tender, evaluate then contract manage a true partnership. What they tend to do is to call it a “partnership”, then tender, evaluate & contract manage along more traditional purchaser/provider models. If the want to do the latter, be honest and call it a purchaser/provider or even a lease back arrangement. A PPP is in my view, without Federal funding contribution to lessen reliance on the PPP provider, a death knell for the ACT Tram project in the longer term because the PPP provider/consortia will have so much more contract management skills they will run rings around the ACT Gov’t and claw back anything they lost from the competitive bidding process – plus more.

I could write much, much more – but the above would provide a framework to demonstrate a comprehensive and methodologically based assessment of all options – to arrive at a affordable and sustainable solution – a best fit – that will reduce the risk of taking funds away from what should be other ACT Govt fiscal priorities. What a good document/process to take to an election !

OpenYourMind said :

rubaiyat said :

miz said :

Transport expert reckons light rail likely to fail
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-11-27/light-rail-expert-warns-act-government-to-rethink-plans/6979196?WT.ac=localnews_canberra

miz said :

Transport expert reckons light rail likely to fail
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-11-27/light-rail-expert-warns-act-government-to-rethink-plans/6979196?WT.ac=localnews_canberra

‘Minister Corbell said. “City planning, city development is not perfect.”‘

A mild understatement. That is what makes this Hobson’s choice. Continue to do nothing or do something.

I’m for something, anything rather than all the awful planning we have had so far and has been taking us further and further down the wrong freeways.

The problem with the freeways and the distant suburbia is people don’t see the inevitable coming, despite the thousands of examples around the world showing exactly what the end result is.

Walter Burley Griffin intelligently planned Canberra with public transport over 100 years ago, and here we are captives to the same bureaucrats who sabotaged WBG’s scheme, still saying “Not Now”.

Doesn’t matter how many times you say these things, it doesn’t make it right.

Canberra growth is not such that we need to worry about this looming problem now or in the relative future. We are not now or in the forseeable future Melbourne or Sydney size.

Before you stare into the future, take a look at the current paradigm. If you have a child, you will note a very significant reality, and that is your child and your child’s friends are growing up in a car centric Canberra. For better or worse, Gunghalin is full of McMansions, children are driven to school and sport in their McMansion mobile, usually a CX7, Tiguan or big arsed Subaru. Children celebrate the day when they can drive, and then they start transporting their younger brothers and sisters in cars. We live in a car driving city now, our children will know no other reality. So how the hell can you imagine light rail will be a success when it is feeding car centric Gunghalin? Forget the bit along the Nbn corridor. That’s pretty much walking distance for those whose destinations is only the City.

The future is full of electric cars, autonomous transport, shared economies, telecommuting and things that us oldies can’t even imagine. The tram will be a ridiculous anachronism in our eyes, doubly so in our children’s.

How blinkered can you be?

Canberra is heading to 500,000 people in the next 25 years. It is rubbish that we have to be the size of Sydney or Melbourne to have a clean unobtrusive and pleasant transport network. Plenty of cities a fraction of our size have them.

Your kids are grossly fat, or you can’t see that either.

And it is like there is no environmental problem, or oil will last forever and it isn’t feeding petrodollars into the global trouble spots.

And the perpetual nonsense of the “autonomous car” that will “fix” crowded roads by driving around empty vehicles, or having a car pooling system that hasn’t worked ever, anywhere, because the self centred people in the cars, never want to share or have to go anywhere else but where they want to go.

I just came back from dining in Pialligo (fantastic meal at Pod Food) and we passed the kilometres long traffic jam going round to Majura Road and Majura Park. You just pretend that this isn’t real and it will all go away?

Amazing what you can see with your head firmly buried in the sand.

JC said :

dungfungus said :

rubaiyat said :

miz said :

Transport expert reckons light rail likely to fail
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-11-27/light-rail-expert-warns-act-government-to-rethink-plans/6979196?WT.ac=localnews_canberra

miz said :

Transport expert reckons light rail likely to fail
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-11-27/light-rail-expert-warns-act-government-to-rethink-plans/6979196?WT.ac=localnews_canberra

‘Minister Corbell said. “City planning, city development is not perfect.”‘

A mild understatement. That is what makes this Hobson’s choice. Continue to do nothing or do something.

I’m for something, anything rather than all the awful planning we have had so far and has been taking us further and further down the wrong freeways.

The problem with the freeways and the distant suburbia is people don’t see the inevitable coming, despite the thousands of examples around the world showing exactly what the end result is.

Walter Burley Griffin intelligently planned Canberra with public transport over 100 years ago, and here we are captives to the same bureaucrats who sabotaged WBG’s scheme, still saying “Not Now”.

We have had an efficient albeit lowly patronised public transport system in Canberra for many years (as WBG planned). It’s called ACTInternalOmnibusNetwork.
The other method of transport WBG planned was travel by private motor car and by gosh, hasn’t it been a success and it continues to be just that.

Actually Burley Griffin designed the public transport corridors to be tramways and our main roads have for the most poart kept the wider median he reserved for them. Ironically one of the main routes was to be down Northborne Ave.

And and as for the car yes it has been a success but think you can thank the NCDC and the Y plan for that not Burley Griffin. Hard to denay the road network didn’t serve us well but frankly the whole Y plan when viewed in modern standards is not sustainable and the traffic it help created is reaching capacity and alternative options for town planning and transportation (road and public transport) are very much needed. Otherwise we might just end up with a 100 lane freeway right through town just to support all these cars.

I went back to source.

WBG’s Rail line was 3 blocks east of Northbourne Ave and was a continuation of the main line to Sydney.

The first light rail leg should perhaps have been from Dickson to Civic, Russell and the airport (with the latter paid for by the Snows), with another track past the “arts precinct” and the cultural institutions. Buses could feed from Gungahlin, which would be much more flexible in terms of getting people from close to their houses to a light rail hub.

bj_ACT said :

The concerns for about 50% of experts and 50% of residents is that the Civic to Gunghalin light rail is not the ‘best use of money’ to solve Canberra’s future public transport needs. There is a risk that if it this proposal is not highly successful, it will hamper future public transport development in Canberra for many many years.

At about $8000 per Canberra household to build and $250 a year per household in operating costs the project will have a heavy impact right across Canberra, but only benefit a very small proportion of households.

Unlike Health and Education costs which are certainly a high proportion of the budget and are funded right across Canberra household, benefits from Health/Education funding are distributed relatively evenly across Canberra households. The current light rail proposal will only benefit a few people and areas and will only transfer workers who reside near stops to Civic in the morning and back home in the afternoon. This is unlikely to be a recipe for success.

Successful light rail moves not only workers during peak hour, but also moves people at multiple sites across the network to hospitals, beaches, higher education sites, casinos, tourist attractions, restaurants and shopping center’s out of peak hour. This is just not going to happen for Canberra’s light rail proposal as Canberra is not geospatially constructed naturally or via planned construction to suit light rail. A straight line strip of beaches is a great natural feature for light rail to run parallel to.

My personal view is that Canberra needs to adopt a Public Transport future. BUT…. there are better ways to improve Canberra’s future public transport options that have a higher likelihood of getting tens of thousands of Canberran’s out of their cars and into public transport. Unfortunately the current light rail proposal even by their own estimates will only achieve this transition for about three to four thousand people in Canberra.

Well said. Spot on.

rommeldog56 said :

rubaiyat said :

I’m for something, anything rather than all the awful planning we have had so far and has been taking us further and further down the wrong freeways.

So, that’s the crux of it, isn’t it – “something is better than nothing”. The issues with transport planning are obvious – but in my view somewhat over stated and sensationalised/beaten up by developers & tram consortia – but that’s a different story.

So, Corbell says planning is about “seizing the moment”. Is that your view of the b$1 for 12K of tram track – that “something”, however obviously flawed, poorly planned and with a p**s poor Benefits Costs Ratio, is better “than nothing” ? To take any half baked, expensive, non integrated, no alternatives costed solution that floats past the window, is “better than nothing”. By your own admission, you say that the route is wrong.

Personally, I have not heard anyone say “lets not do anything” – its just the suitability of the tram solution, the PPP funding model, its cost and widespread disbelief that it will ever spread across all of Canberra as an integrated transport solution, is what is being adversely commented on.

If the tram is the opportunity to fix that perceived transport problem, then that opportunity has and will be lost.

It’s easy to be the ACT Gov’t and play around with Ratepayers monopoly money – it seems that the ACT Labor/Greens Gov’t can do what it likes now without fear of loosing power.

That’s what a ‘something is better than nothing” attitude entrenches – poor ACT Gov’t decision making and poor fiscal priority setting.

Well what is your solution other than ignoring the cost of cars. in more ways than one. and lying about the cost of rail?

dungfungus said :

rubaiyat said :

miz said :

Transport expert reckons light rail likely to fail
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-11-27/light-rail-expert-warns-act-government-to-rethink-plans/6979196?WT.ac=localnews_canberra

miz said :

Transport expert reckons light rail likely to fail
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-11-27/light-rail-expert-warns-act-government-to-rethink-plans/6979196?WT.ac=localnews_canberra

‘Minister Corbell said. “City planning, city development is not perfect.”‘

A mild understatement. That is what makes this Hobson’s choice. Continue to do nothing or do something.

I’m for something, anything rather than all the awful planning we have had so far and has been taking us further and further down the wrong freeways.

The problem with the freeways and the distant suburbia is people don’t see the inevitable coming, despite the thousands of examples around the world showing exactly what the end result is.

Walter Burley Griffin intelligently planned Canberra with public transport over 100 years ago, and here we are captives to the same bureaucrats who sabotaged WBG’s scheme, still saying “Not Now”.

We have had an efficient albeit lowly patronised public transport system in Canberra for many years (as WBG planned). It’s called ACTInternalOmnibusNetwork.
The other method of transport WBG planned was travel by private motor car and by gosh, hasn’t it been a success and it continues to be just that.

Actually Burley Griffin designed the public transport corridors to be tramways and our main roads have for the most poart kept the wider median he reserved for them. Ironically one of the main routes was to be down Northborne Ave.

And and as for the car yes it has been a success but think you can thank the NCDC and the Y plan for that not Burley Griffin. Hard to denay the road network didn’t serve us well but frankly the whole Y plan when viewed in modern standards is not sustainable and the traffic it help created is reaching capacity and alternative options for town planning and transportation (road and public transport) are very much needed. Otherwise we might just end up with a 100 lane freeway right through town just to support all these cars.

OpenYourMind8:38 pm 28 Nov 15

rubaiyat said :

miz said :

Transport expert reckons light rail likely to fail
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-11-27/light-rail-expert-warns-act-government-to-rethink-plans/6979196?WT.ac=localnews_canberra

miz said :

Transport expert reckons light rail likely to fail
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-11-27/light-rail-expert-warns-act-government-to-rethink-plans/6979196?WT.ac=localnews_canberra

‘Minister Corbell said. “City planning, city development is not perfect.”‘

A mild understatement. That is what makes this Hobson’s choice. Continue to do nothing or do something.

I’m for something, anything rather than all the awful planning we have had so far and has been taking us further and further down the wrong freeways.

The problem with the freeways and the distant suburbia is people don’t see the inevitable coming, despite the thousands of examples around the world showing exactly what the end result is.

Walter Burley Griffin intelligently planned Canberra with public transport over 100 years ago, and here we are captives to the same bureaucrats who sabotaged WBG’s scheme, still saying “Not Now”.

Doesn’t matter how many times you say these things, it doesn’t make it right.

Canberra growth is not such that we need to worry about this looming problem now or in the relative future. We are not now or in the forseeable future Melbourne or Sydney size.

Before you stare into the future, take a look at the current paradigm. If you have a child, you will note a very significant reality, and that is your child and your child’s friends are growing up in a car centric Canberra. For better or worse, Gunghalin is full of McMansions, children are driven to school and sport in their McMansion mobile, usually a CX7, Tiguan or big arsed Subaru. Children celebrate the day when they can drive, and then they start transporting their younger brothers and sisters in cars. We live in a car driving city now, our children will know no other reality. So how the hell can you imagine light rail will be a success when it is feeding car centric Gunghalin? Forget the bit along the Nbn corridor. That’s pretty much walking distance for those whose destinations is only the City.

The future is full of electric cars, autonomous transport, shared economies, telecommuting and things that us oldies can’t even imagine. The tram will be a ridiculous anachronism in our eyes, doubly so in our children’s.

rubaiyat said :

I’m for something, anything rather than all the awful planning we have had so far and has been taking us further and further down the wrong freeways.

So, that’s the crux of it, isn’t it – “something is better than nothing”. The issues with transport planning are obvious – but in my view somewhat over stated and sensationalised/beaten up by developers & tram consortia – but that’s a different story.

So, Corbell says planning is about “seizing the moment”. Is that your view of the b$1 for 12K of tram track – that “something”, however obviously flawed, poorly planned and with a p**s poor Benefits Costs Ratio, is better “than nothing” ? To take any half baked, expensive, non integrated, no alternatives costed solution that floats past the window, is “better than nothing”. By your own admission, you say that the route is wrong.

Personally, I have not heard anyone say “lets not do anything” – its just the suitability of the tram solution, the PPP funding model, its cost and widespread disbelief that it will ever spread across all of Canberra as an integrated transport solution, is what is being adversely commented on.

If the tram is the opportunity to fix that perceived transport problem, then that opportunity has and will be lost.

It’s easy to be the ACT Gov’t and play around with Ratepayers monopoly money – it seems that the ACT Labor/Greens Gov’t can do what it likes now without fear of loosing power. That’s what a ‘something is better than nothing” attitude entrenches – poor ACT Gov’t decision making and poor fiscal priority setting.

rommeldog56 said :

miz said :

Transport expert reckons light rail likely to fail
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-11-27/light-rail-expert-warns-act-government-to-rethink-plans/6979196?WT.ac=localnews_canberra

Some quotes from the (unpaid by the ACT Government) experts in the linked article :

” We should be making decisions about transport in terms of which transport mode will provide the best services overall. Rather than viewing which one will provide the most uplift in that area.”

“Because you can end up with a slow tram which is viewed as being more preferable then a fast frequent bus service and that would be the wrong outcome.”

“But Minister for Capital Metro Simon Corbell defended the Government’s decision to select the Gungahlin to the City route as the first stage for light rail. “That’s why we’re doing the light rail network planning work at the moment. Some people will say that that’s an exercise that should have been undertaken ahead of the selection for Gungahlin to the City corridor,” Minister Corbell said.

“City planning, city development is not perfect. It’s about the right time, the right place and seizing the opportunity to make it happen.”

So, city planning for the Tram is about the right time (clearly, that’s not now now – so why didn’t they plan properly for effective transport into/out of Gunners in the 1st place !), the right place (see experts comments about the route for stage 1) and seizing the opportunity to make it happen (that must mean not getting a capital contribution from the Federal Gov’t like the Gold Coast Light rail). Its obvious that by “seizing the opportunity”, integrated planning has suffered.

Backwards reengineering a whole of Canberra (CBD-CBD only) tram network over a 25 year perion is laughable – its just not going to happen as that timeframe is too long. Will we get relief for ACT Ratepayers for the other stages Mr Corbell – some Federal funding injections perhaps ?

There is just so much wrong about Corbell’s comments – its no wonder the project is a mess and isn’t well supported.

Perhaps the greatest aesthetic Canberra offers is the pole free and tree lined vista that Northbourne Avenue presents to visitors and residents alike (the latter group take it for granted).
Can anyone out there honestly tell me that replacing this with stanchions, steel rails, concrete and wire with substations on the verge to replace a proven public transport with another untried one is progress?
I don’t care what they do with Flemington Road and Gunghalin so why doesn’t stage one terminate at Epic and from there travel by bus? Such a compromise may be what we are all looking for and depending on the success, expansion of the light rail could go from there (but never down Northbourne Avenue).

rubaiyat said :

miz said :

Transport expert reckons light rail likely to fail
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-11-27/light-rail-expert-warns-act-government-to-rethink-plans/6979196?WT.ac=localnews_canberra

miz said :

Transport expert reckons light rail likely to fail
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-11-27/light-rail-expert-warns-act-government-to-rethink-plans/6979196?WT.ac=localnews_canberra

‘Minister Corbell said. “City planning, city development is not perfect.”‘

A mild understatement. That is what makes this Hobson’s choice. Continue to do nothing or do something.

I’m for something, anything rather than all the awful planning we have had so far and has been taking us further and further down the wrong freeways.

The problem with the freeways and the distant suburbia is people don’t see the inevitable coming, despite the thousands of examples around the world showing exactly what the end result is.

Walter Burley Griffin intelligently planned Canberra with public transport over 100 years ago, and here we are captives to the same bureaucrats who sabotaged WBG’s scheme, still saying “Not Now”.

We have had an efficient albeit lowly patronised public transport system in Canberra for many years (as WBG planned). It’s called ACTInternalOmnibusNetwork.
The other method of transport WBG planned was travel by private motor car and by gosh, hasn’t it been a success and it continues to be just that.

miz said :

Transport expert reckons light rail likely to fail
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-11-27/light-rail-expert-warns-act-government-to-rethink-plans/6979196?WT.ac=localnews_canberra

IT’s really worth watching this. Cornell actually admits that they didn’t think the project through, and oh well, it has to go ahead in its present form, but it looks as though they’ll need to immediately add more light rail “legs” to make the project viable. Well, Corbell has spent the last several years arguing that the Gungahlin-City rail was viable on its own. The transport planner Matt Burke is clear: other light rail has succeeded because it has taken students, tourists and everyday folk to “string of pearl” destinations. It was specified during the program that just taking Gungahlin workers into the city and back again at peak hour doesn’t resemble ANY of the successful models that Corbell claimed we were replicating. The light rail needs a “destination” at both ends – no tourists are going to catch the tram to Gungahlin! The Light Rail project manager, Emma Thomas, who was interviewed throughout the program, sounded completely out of her depth. Why are we being asked to accept a project that the government is now admitting was badly planned? Another explanation (to the project’s detriment) was that the cost benefit analysis on the basic transport issues, was in the negative; Corbell had – as surmised by rail skeptics since at least a year ago – had to broaden the CBA terms out very, very wide indeed to come up with a figure of $1.20 for every $1.00 spent. Yet another interviewee pointed out that we are indeed going to be starving hospital and other funding to fund light rail. Literally, he said, people will die from a lack of medical funding and infrastructure in order to fund light rail. There we have it, folks. And Corbell is of course slinking away at the next election, having boobytrapped the project for his successors.

The concerns for about 50% of experts and 50% of residents is that the Civic to Gunghalin light rail is not the ‘best use of money’ to solve Canberra’s future public transport needs. There is a risk that if it this proposal is not highly successful, it will hamper future public transport development in Canberra for many many years.

At about $8000 per Canberra household to build and $250 a year per household in operating costs the project will have a heavy impact right across Canberra, but only benefit a very small proportion of households.

Unlike Health and Education costs which are certainly a high proportion of the budget and are funded right across Canberra household, benefits from Health/Education funding are distributed relatively evenly across Canberra households. The current light rail proposal will only benefit a few people and areas and will only transfer workers who reside near stops to Civic in the morning and back home in the afternoon. This is unlikely to be a recipe for success.

Successful light rail moves not only workers during peak hour, but also moves people at multiple sites across the network to hospitals, beaches, higher education sites, casinos, tourist attractions, restaurants and shopping center’s out of peak hour. This is just not going to happen for Canberra’s light rail proposal as Canberra is not geospatially constructed naturally or via planned construction to suit light rail. A straight line strip of beaches is a great natural feature for light rail to run parallel to.

My personal view is that Canberra needs to adopt a Public Transport future. BUT…. there are better ways to improve Canberra’s future public transport options that have a higher likelihood of getting tens of thousands of Canberran’s out of their cars and into public transport. Unfortunately the current light rail proposal even by their own estimates will only achieve this transition for about three to four thousand people in Canberra.

wildturkeycanoe said :

rubaiyat said :

We went through all of that. You did not know the fares. You had no clue. We had to tell you.

You gave us an argument as to “typical” costs which presumed everyone in Canberra runs an old next to worthless car that they service themselves, using scavenged tyres and no insurance other than the compulsory 4rd Party.

Thanks to having no car for a good 6 months or so a couple of years ago, I did know the fares thank you. There were no places nearby to top it up and the online credit card top up system is pathetically slow, so not the most convenient system except for cash fares. I have spent many, many hours on public transport and do not regret leaving it behind me for one minute.

At least my “typical costs” although not based on ideal or average scenarios, are based on actual costs. All the tram figures are speculative and depend on multiple sequences of events to happen in the future in order to have any accuracy. Projected numbers, just like those of the greenhouse fraternity, are just as convincing as the predictions of the winner in the Melbourne cup.
You think I presume, yet the pro-tram lobby presumes that all of Gungahlin will use the tram instead of their cars. In 2011 the government presumed that “the introduction of the MyWay system and the reduction in fares will bring us some more patronage.” http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-03-21/1-in-5-bus-passengers-using-myway/2649148. Yet reports showed now that “Canberra’s ACTION buses had 400,000 fewer passenger boardings than expected since the start of the financial year, despite the introduction of paid parking in the Parliamentary Triangle.”
Read more: http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/action-patronage-falls-20150211-13cim5.html#ixzz3qWJR7oMf
If enticements haven’t worked and disincentives to drive haven’t either, how can predictions of patronage aboard a “new” transport solution that has a billion dollars riding on its back possibly be taken as gospel?

So unreliable car, had to fall back on the public transport you detest, but did not die from all the infectious diseases?

And convinced that the historically measured heating up of the planet due to the billions of tonnes of carbon we have burnt is just a fraud?

Then make up exaggerated costs and claims “that all of Gungahlin will use the tram” so you can argue against them.

btw I apologise. There are TWO lots of contingency in the Capital Metro costing, the main one is actually $176 million not $150 as I previously said.

miz said :

Transport expert reckons light rail likely to fail
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-11-27/light-rail-expert-warns-act-government-to-rethink-plans/6979196?WT.ac=localnews_canberra

miz said :

Transport expert reckons light rail likely to fail
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-11-27/light-rail-expert-warns-act-government-to-rethink-plans/6979196?WT.ac=localnews_canberra

‘Minister Corbell said. “City planning, city development is not perfect.”‘

A mild understatement. That is what makes this Hobson’s choice. Continue to do nothing or do something.

I’m for something, anything rather than all the awful planning we have had so far and has been taking us further and further down the wrong freeways.

The problem with the freeways and the distant suburbia is people don’t see the inevitable coming, despite the thousands of examples around the world showing exactly what the end result is.

Walter Burley Griffin intelligently planned Canberra with public transport over 100 years ago, and here we are captives to the same bureaucrats who sabotaged WBG’s scheme, still saying “Not Now”.

miz said :

Transport expert reckons light rail likely to fail
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-11-27/light-rail-expert-warns-act-government-to-rethink-plans/6979196?WT.ac=localnews_canberra

Some quotes from the (unpaid by the ACT Government) experts in the linked article :

” We should be making decisions about transport in terms of which transport mode will provide the best services overall. Rather than viewing which one will provide the most uplift in that area.”

“Because you can end up with a slow tram which is viewed as being more preferable then a fast frequent bus service and that would be the wrong outcome.”

“But Minister for Capital Metro Simon Corbell defended the Government’s decision to select the Gungahlin to the City route as the first stage for light rail. “That’s why we’re doing the light rail network planning work at the moment. Some people will say that that’s an exercise that should have been undertaken ahead of the selection for Gungahlin to the City corridor,” Minister Corbell said.

“City planning, city development is not perfect. It’s about the right time, the right place and seizing the opportunity to make it happen.”

So, city planning for the Tram is about the right time (clearly, that’s not now now – so why didn’t they plan properly for effective transport into/out of Gunners in the 1st place !), the right place (see experts comments about the route for stage 1) and seizing the opportunity to make it happen (that must mean not getting a capital contribution from the Federal Gov’t like the Gold Coast Light rail). Its obvious that by “seizing the opportunity”, integrated planning has suffered. Backwards reengineering a whole of Canberra (CBD-CBD only) tram network over a 25 year perion is laughable – its just not going to happen as that timeframe is too long. Will we get relief for ACT Ratepayers for the other stages Mr Corbell – some Federal funding injections perhaps ?

There is just so much wrong about Corbell’s comments – its no wonder the project is a mess and isn’t well supported.

wildturkeycanoe10:17 pm 04 Nov 15

rubaiyat said :

We went through all of that. You did not know the fares. You had no clue. We had to tell you.

You gave us an argument as to “typical” costs which presumed everyone in Canberra runs an old next to worthless car that they service themselves, using scavenged tyres and no insurance other than the compulsory 4rd Party.

Thanks to having no car for a good 6 months or so a couple of years ago, I did know the fares thank you. There were no places nearby to top it up and the online credit card top up system is pathetically slow, so not the most convenient system except for cash fares. I have spent many, many hours on public transport and do not regret leaving it behind me for one minute.

At least my “typical costs” although not based on ideal or average scenarios, are based on actual costs. All the tram figures are speculative and depend on multiple sequences of events to happen in the future in order to have any accuracy. Projected numbers, just like those of the greenhouse fraternity, are just as convincing as the predictions of the winner in the Melbourne cup.
You think I presume, yet the pro-tram lobby presumes that all of Gungahlin will use the tram instead of their cars. In 2011 the government presumed that “the introduction of the MyWay system and the reduction in fares will bring us some more patronage.” http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-03-21/1-in-5-bus-passengers-using-myway/2649148. Yet reports showed now that “Canberra’s ACTION buses had 400,000 fewer passenger boardings than expected since the start of the financial year, despite the introduction of paid parking in the Parliamentary Triangle.”
Read more: http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/action-patronage-falls-20150211-13cim5.html#ixzz3qWJR7oMf
If enticements haven’t worked and disincentives to drive haven’t either, how can predictions of patronage aboard a “new” transport solution that has a billion dollars riding on its back possibly be taken as gospel?

https://www.minnpost.com/politics-policy/2015/11/why-local-officials-arent-freaking-out-about-148-billion-price-tag-bottineau

The Capital Metro Agency business plan looks to be heading for a similar outcome.
Where is that Northbourne Avenue underground services audit?

wildturkeycanoe said :

If your calculations are based on assumptions as accurate as your perception of my intelligence, my thoughts on Canberra’s planning and my trade qualifications I am sorry to say they are way off. I am aware of the bus fare costs, I do not have any particular thoughts either way on town planning and I am a genuinely qualified electrician, so you are totally wrong on all counts. How much of your calculations of the tram costs are on the mark, if assumptions like these are so wrong?

We went through all of that. You did not know the fares. You had no clue. We had to tell you.

You gave us an argument as to “typical” costs which presumed everyone in Canberra runs an old next to worthless car that they service themselves, using scavenged tyres and no insurance other than the compulsory 4rd Party. Concealing that that was actually two not one.

All we did was try to unravel this unlikely and atypical scenario, going only on what you chose to tell us. As we pointed out you may think it is all about you but it isn’t. We are only guessing as to whether anything you say is true, and guessing most of it is just made up to fit your argument as convenient. My guess is you don’t even live anywhere near the Light Rail route.

What you do or think is not important. You are so anti-public transport that you appear to be more willing to throw yourself under a “plague ridden” tram than actually catch one. Or ANY public transport for a set of ever more ludicrous excuses.

wildturkeycanoe said :

rubaiyat said :

The report for Light Rail costed everything.

Except for how much it will cost to relocate all the underground services along Northbourne Avenue, that remains a mystery to all. Again you have made a definitive statement that is factually incorrect.

That is what the over $150 milliion contingency is for. You have worked on a building site right? You do know how you cover for unknowns?

btw We’ll be seeing you at 11pm tonight (because you don’t travel in peak hours) to fix our fully costed lighting? The car is working isn’t it? …and you won’t be charging us for travel, now that we know it is next to nothing.

miz said :

Rubaiyat ACTION made the same mistake for years that light rail will lock us into – it concentrated on the main Y plan routes.
ACTION has now realised that Canberra is different and you cannot transplant transport concepts from elsewhere. So it solved the ‘Why would you travel to work via a town centre before going to where you really want to go, and take three times as long as driving?’ problem by implementing Xpresso routes which largely bypass town centres unless they are en route.
Unfortunately, the light rail proposal, which seems to have been picked up from interstate, will entrench the failed Y plan transport model and unpick a number of excellent Xpresso bus routes to force commuters to change onto the light rail. This shows that the light rail proponents do not understand Canberra and don’t even appear to care about that because that is overridden by it being ‘clean and green.’ It may very well be slightly greener than our present buses, but what is the point if no one is buying? It would appear that both the design and the people promoting it are imports. Public transport has to cover enough of Canberra to be useful and used. Even the government’s own research and advice found that buses were significantly better value for money. It is astounding that the proponents are prepared to spend OUR money on a useless gewgaw to massage their political egos.

No it doesn’t. In this case all it has to do is what any light rail or transport system anywhere does, which is provide transport along its route. No transport system anywhere covers the entire set of possibilities, although it should do as much as is possible.

As a first step it will succeed if it provides a commuter service for Gungahlins and anyone along Northbourne, and hopefully Constituton Ave, taking a large number of people off the road. The alternative is what? knock down the verge and turn Flemington Road and Northbourne into 10-12 lanes of freeway leading in the the City and dumping all the vehicles there? Look at Perth to see, listen and smell what that does to a city.

It will be cleaner than the alternative without a shadow of a doubt but your constant ignoring or dismissing of that reveals you don’t really care or even think that is important.

And again it is tiresome to get the same “I reckon” delivered as if it is fact it is not, it is just your guess based on “feelings”. There is a lot of this that can be researched and calculated, what you think is a fact or certainty is not. It is just you and the prospect of something new.

I repeat for the millionth time, the fact that this is new or works around new developments is not new in the Canberra context. Everything in Canberra right down to Canberra itself was new at one stage. The original bureaucrats never thought Canberra would grow beyond a small country town which explains why they didn’t bother planning for its transport infrastructure. Walter Burley Griffin did both, probably why they hated and resented him so much.

The sad thing is that the mess left behind by the bunch of self interested and uninspiring bureaucrats who sabotaged WBG’s design, is being treated as if it was written on tablets handed down from Mt Sinai.

Rubaiyat ACTION made the same mistake for years that light rail will lock us into – it concentrated on the main Y plan routes.
ACTION has now realised that Canberra is different and you cannot transplant transport concepts from elsewhere. So it solved the ‘Why would you travel to work via a town centre before going to where you really want to go, and take three times as long as driving?’ problem by implementing Xpresso routes which largely bypass town centres unless they are en route.
Unfortunately, the light rail proposal, which seems to have been picked up from interstate, will entrench the failed Y plan transport model and unpick a number of excellent Xpresso bus routes to force commuters to change onto the light rail. This shows that the light rail proponents do not understand Canberra and don’t even appear to care about that because that is overridden by it being ‘clean and green.’ It may very well be slightly greener than our present buses, but what is the point if no one is buying? It would appear that both the design and the people promoting it are imports. Public transport has to cover enough of Canberra to be useful and used. Even the government’s own research and advice found that buses were significantly better value for money. It is astounding that the proponents are prepared to spend OUR money on a useless gewgaw to massage their political egos.

rubaiyat said :

dungfungus said :

rubaiyat said :

wildturkeycanoe said :

rubaiyat said :

No matter how often I ask I don’t see you are at all interested to cleaning up Canberra’s dated and dirty and inefficient and extremely expensive transport system.

I’ve done the figures. I’ve laid them out in detail and when faced with them you just ignore them and make another flat statement again with nothing to back it up. You just say so. That’s it.

How do we know the tram will not also be an inefficient and extremely expensive transport system? Thus far it has relied on patronage figures based on guesses to make it work on paper. You’ve done the figures but what are they based on? Crystal ball gazing? If we can’t get people to use the existing public transport system which is flexible, affordable and doesn’t just go along one track, then how do they expect to get the numbers required to keep the tram running at a profit? Pro-trammers bring facts, anti-trammers bring facts. The government had all the facts and they said BRT was the better option, but still went ahead with rail. Why? Those opposed to the project have data too, but the same way you are arguing, the metro supporters won’t listen to reason either.
It seems to be pretty clear cut that nobody is going to change their mind about it, whatever way the figures are twisted or statistics revealed. In the end, I still maintain that all this is really pointless because it is going ahead regardless of what we all say. Labor is standing firm, Liberals are not very clear cut about whether they will can the tram or not, so inevitably we just have to wait and see how far we will break the bank.

Action buses have detailed patronage figures because of the MyWAY which you seem to know next to nothing about, not even having a notion as to what fares cost. Part of the benefit of the MyWAY card is that it details the movement of bus commuters.

It can of course only detail that for an existing system that is failing. Declining service and patronage, because the two go together, along with the bad town planning that you as a tradie think is brilliant and anyone else who actually has any qualifications thinks is a rolling disaster.

As demonstrated on the Gold Coast where they ran buses along the same route as the new Light Rail. People massively prefer the Light Rail and patronage of the public transport has jumped and continues to grow dramatically. When they complete the connection to the Brisbane Rail network and the airport, the system will really take off.

The government did not say that the BRT option was “better”, just cheaper. Not everything cheaper is better, particularly when it has hidden costs.

There was no costing for the buses, the operation of the buses, or any of the wages and administrative costs for the buses. It was purely for the right of way and engineering. A very odd method of cost comparison.

The report for Light Rail costed everything.

Including the “commercial in confidence” purchase of the land in Dickson to be used as part of the light rail infrastructure?

It was in the Capital Metro business case.

If it was up to me I’d be resuming some of the ugly jerry built commercial buildings at the ends of Challis Street inside Chinatown and run the Light Rail directly through there to make a chain of destinations immediately adjacent to the line, all the way down Lonsdale Street and the heart of the City. Which would link Dickson and the City and beyond, save the avenue of trees and let the locals get away from the traffic noise and fumes.

It was forecast in the Capital Metro business case but was it costed? I don’t think so because the government is pulling down the cone of silence on this one.
Please read the Canberra Times article and then give a link to the amount that has been set aside for this purchase.
http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/new-bus-interchange-site-acquired-at-dickson-ahead-of-light-rail-construction-20151021-gkehm8.html

rosscoact said :

dungfungus said :

What? You are talking to me again?
Next thing rubaiyat will be offering me a free weekend at one of his ski-lodges.
Canberra maybe isn’t so bad after all.

Only if it means I can help you to relocate to a place (obviously without internet access) where you will be happy and content. Nobel prises have been won for less.

Is a Nobel prise something that is done with a lever?

dungfungus said :

rubaiyat said :

wildturkeycanoe said :

rubaiyat said :

No matter how often I ask I don’t see you are at all interested to cleaning up Canberra’s dated and dirty and inefficient and extremely expensive transport system.

I’ve done the figures. I’ve laid them out in detail and when faced with them you just ignore them and make another flat statement again with nothing to back it up. You just say so. That’s it.

How do we know the tram will not also be an inefficient and extremely expensive transport system? Thus far it has relied on patronage figures based on guesses to make it work on paper. You’ve done the figures but what are they based on? Crystal ball gazing? If we can’t get people to use the existing public transport system which is flexible, affordable and doesn’t just go along one track, then how do they expect to get the numbers required to keep the tram running at a profit? Pro-trammers bring facts, anti-trammers bring facts. The government had all the facts and they said BRT was the better option, but still went ahead with rail. Why? Those opposed to the project have data too, but the same way you are arguing, the metro supporters won’t listen to reason either.
It seems to be pretty clear cut that nobody is going to change their mind about it, whatever way the figures are twisted or statistics revealed. In the end, I still maintain that all this is really pointless because it is going ahead regardless of what we all say. Labor is standing firm, Liberals are not very clear cut about whether they will can the tram or not, so inevitably we just have to wait and see how far we will break the bank.

Action buses have detailed patronage figures because of the MyWAY which you seem to know next to nothing about, not even having a notion as to what fares cost. Part of the benefit of the MyWAY card is that it details the movement of bus commuters.

It can of course only detail that for an existing system that is failing. Declining service and patronage, because the two go together, along with the bad town planning that you as a tradie think is brilliant and anyone else who actually has any qualifications thinks is a rolling disaster.

As demonstrated on the Gold Coast where they ran buses along the same route as the new Light Rail. People massively prefer the Light Rail and patronage of the public transport has jumped and continues to grow dramatically. When they complete the connection to the Brisbane Rail network and the airport, the system will really take off.

The government did not say that the BRT option was “better”, just cheaper. Not everything cheaper is better, particularly when it has hidden costs.

There was no costing for the buses, the operation of the buses, or any of the wages and administrative costs for the buses. It was purely for the right of way and engineering. A very odd method of cost comparison.

The report for Light Rail costed everything.

Including the “commercial in confidence” purchase of the land in Dickson to be used as part of the light rail infrastructure?

It was in the Capital Metro business case.

If it was up to me I’d be resuming some of the ugly jerry built commercial buildings at the ends of Challis Street inside Chinatown and run the Light Rail directly through there to make a chain of destinations immediately adjacent to the line, all the way down Lonsdale Street and the heart of the City. Which would link Dickson and the City and beyond, save the avenue of trees and let the locals get away from the traffic noise and fumes.

wildturkeycanoe4:22 pm 03 Nov 15

rubaiyat said :

Action buses have detailed patronage figures because of the MyWAY which you seem to know next to nothing about, not even having a notion as to what fares cost. Part of the benefit of the MyWAY card is that it details the movement of bus commuters.

It can of course only detail that for an existing system that is failing. Declining service and patronage, because the two go together, along with the bad town planning that you as a tradie think is brilliant and anyone else who actually has any qualifications thinks is a rolling disaster.

If your calculations are based on assumptions as accurate as your perception of my intelligence, my thoughts on Canberra’s planning and my trade qualifications I am sorry to say they are way off. I am aware of the bus fare costs, I do not have any particular thoughts either way on town planning and I am a genuinely qualified electrician, so you are totally wrong on all counts. How much of your calculations of the tram costs are on the mark, if assumptions like these are so wrong?

I have not said anything about calculating the patronage of the existing system, I am talking about predicting the patronage of the tram network which is purely and simply a stab in the dark using current commuter numbers. How many of the existing bus users will continue to use buses because the tram does not make the right connection to where they are actually headed? How many will try the tram out and then revert to other bus routes because they are faster and will have fewer transfers? Nobody knows because no-one has done a study that details where all the present travelers are coming from and going to, it simply counts heads going past points on current bus routes.
Now the expected passengers who will be using the tram must all be heading to Civic for a reason. Will it be work? Well if so, what are the job opportunities there? The public service would have to be the largest employer group, but their numbers have been dwindling. If for retail jobs and to go shopping, then sadly that also seems to be on the decline. With all the fuss about how to revamp Bunda Street and Gareema Place to try and liven up the area, can we expect there to be some changes to make it a place for everyone to want to go to? How much is that going to cost us? I don’t think tourists would be using the tram much either because the hotels are all located in the city and tourist attractions aren’t out Gungahlin way. If anything, going across the lake would be a priority for tourist transport, not northward to an industrial zone and another set of identical shops to what Civic already has. What else is there for a tourist to see out Gunners way?

rubaiyat said :

The report for Light Rail costed everything.

Except for how much it will cost to relocate all the underground services along Northbourne Avenue, that remains a mystery to all. Again you have made a definitive statement that is factually incorrect.

rubaiyat said :

wildturkeycanoe said :

rubaiyat said :

No matter how often I ask I don’t see you are at all interested to cleaning up Canberra’s dated and dirty and inefficient and extremely expensive transport system.

I’ve done the figures. I’ve laid them out in detail and when faced with them you just ignore them and make another flat statement again with nothing to back it up. You just say so. That’s it.

How do we know the tram will not also be an inefficient and extremely expensive transport system? Thus far it has relied on patronage figures based on guesses to make it work on paper. You’ve done the figures but what are they based on? Crystal ball gazing? If we can’t get people to use the existing public transport system which is flexible, affordable and doesn’t just go along one track, then how do they expect to get the numbers required to keep the tram running at a profit? Pro-trammers bring facts, anti-trammers bring facts. The government had all the facts and they said BRT was the better option, but still went ahead with rail. Why? Those opposed to the project have data too, but the same way you are arguing, the metro supporters won’t listen to reason either.
It seems to be pretty clear cut that nobody is going to change their mind about it, whatever way the figures are twisted or statistics revealed. In the end, I still maintain that all this is really pointless because it is going ahead regardless of what we all say. Labor is standing firm, Liberals are not very clear cut about whether they will can the tram or not, so inevitably we just have to wait and see how far we will break the bank.

Action buses have detailed patronage figures because of the MyWAY which you seem to know next to nothing about, not even having a notion as to what fares cost. Part of the benefit of the MyWAY card is that it details the movement of bus commuters.

It can of course only detail that for an existing system that is failing. Declining service and patronage, because the two go together, along with the bad town planning that you as a tradie think is brilliant and anyone else who actually has any qualifications thinks is a rolling disaster.

As demonstrated on the Gold Coast where they ran buses along the same route as the new Light Rail. People massively prefer the Light Rail and patronage of the public transport has jumped and continues to grow dramatically. When they complete the connection to the Brisbane Rail network and the airport, the system will really take off.

The government did not say that the BRT option was “better”, just cheaper. Not everything cheaper is better, particularly when it has hidden costs.

There was no costing for the buses, the operation of the buses, or any of the wages and administrative costs for the buses. It was purely for the right of way and engineering. A very odd method of cost comparison.

The report for Light Rail costed everything.

Including the “commercial in confidence” purchase of the land in Dickson to be used as part of the light rail infrastructure?

dungfungus said :

What? You are talking to me again?
Next thing rubaiyat will be offering me a free weekend at one of his ski-lodges.
Canberra maybe isn’t so bad after all.

Only if it means I can help you to relocate to a place (obviously without internet access) where you will be happy and content. Nobel prises have been won for less.

rosscoact said :

dungfungus said :

Do you realise that insulting those with different opinions to your own does not help your cause? You will find that those opposed to the tram are from many parts of our community. Just because we think the tram is a white elephant of the worst kind, doesn’t mean we are not educated or scared of the future. Hell, plenty of us are advocating autonomous cars and smart electric buses as part of the solution. We know this is a time of massive and exciting change including shifts in how we communicate, share economies, telecommuting, shared employment, running businesses on the net, you name it. It is you who is clinging to the past with trams.

As for fear, we have a very legitimate fears and that fear includes this turkey blowing out massively before it’s even completed one minor stage that replaces a simple bus run. We fear our rates rising at a time when wage growth is stagnating in Canberra. We fear a bloated organisation attempting to run both buses and trams and comanding ridiculous salaries. We fear that when this terrible idea meets its demise, we will bear the demolition costs.

Many of us are content with the Canberra we have and we don’t need this royal shafting.

I share your thoughts but being a “retired person in Tuggeranong” my only purpose in the ACT is to cop the ever increasing rates and shutup.
Recently, some “school only” bustops in my suburb were massively upgraded and a seat was even added at the request of a local resident who doesn’t even use the buses nor do his family. In fact, the demographic here reflects half the residents are retired and the ones still with school age children either drive their kids to school or they drive their own car (cars are cheaper, safer and more efficient than they have ever been).
On making enquiries, I am told that the upgrading of the “school only” bustops is future planning for expansion to “all services” but trying top explain to them that no one in my suburb uses buses is futile.
After more than 30 years of living contentedly in Canberra I now feel the need to “move on”.
I have said enough for now on the impending “me too” tram disaster but watch this space.

I suggest Cooma. No trams, Council meetings, plenty of the more mature residents, welcoming to strangers, opportunities to shake fists at clouds.

What? You are talking to me again?
Next thing rubaiyat will be offering me a free weekend at one of his ski-lodges.
Canberra maybe isn’t so bad after all.

wildturkeycanoe said :

rubaiyat said :

No matter how often I ask I don’t see you are at all interested to cleaning up Canberra’s dated and dirty and inefficient and extremely expensive transport system.

I’ve done the figures. I’ve laid them out in detail and when faced with them you just ignore them and make another flat statement again with nothing to back it up. You just say so. That’s it.

How do we know the tram will not also be an inefficient and extremely expensive transport system? Thus far it has relied on patronage figures based on guesses to make it work on paper. You’ve done the figures but what are they based on? Crystal ball gazing? If we can’t get people to use the existing public transport system which is flexible, affordable and doesn’t just go along one track, then how do they expect to get the numbers required to keep the tram running at a profit? Pro-trammers bring facts, anti-trammers bring facts. The government had all the facts and they said BRT was the better option, but still went ahead with rail. Why? Those opposed to the project have data too, but the same way you are arguing, the metro supporters won’t listen to reason either.
It seems to be pretty clear cut that nobody is going to change their mind about it, whatever way the figures are twisted or statistics revealed. In the end, I still maintain that all this is really pointless because it is going ahead regardless of what we all say. Labor is standing firm, Liberals are not very clear cut about whether they will can the tram or not, so inevitably we just have to wait and see how far we will break the bank.

Action buses have detailed patronage figures because of the MyWAY which you seem to know next to nothing about, not even having a notion as to what fares cost. Part of the benefit of the MyWAY card is that it details the movement of bus commuters.

It can of course only detail that for an existing system that is failing. Declining service and patronage, because the two go together, along with the bad town planning that you as a tradie think is brilliant and anyone else who actually has any qualifications thinks is a rolling disaster.

As demonstrated on the Gold Coast where they ran buses along the same route as the new Light Rail. People massively prefer the Light Rail and patronage of the public transport has jumped and continues to grow dramatically. When they complete the connection to the Brisbane Rail network and the airport, the system will really take off.

The government did not say that the BRT option was “better”, just cheaper. Not everything cheaper is better, particularly when it has hidden costs.

There was no costing for the buses, the operation of the buses, or any of the wages and administrative costs for the buses. It was purely for the right of way and engineering. A very odd method of cost comparison.

The report for Light Rail costed everything.

dungfungus said :

Do you realise that insulting those with different opinions to your own does not help your cause? You will find that those opposed to the tram are from many parts of our community. Just because we think the tram is a white elephant of the worst kind, doesn’t mean we are not educated or scared of the future. Hell, plenty of us are advocating autonomous cars and smart electric buses as part of the solution. We know this is a time of massive and exciting change including shifts in how we communicate, share economies, telecommuting, shared employment, running businesses on the net, you name it. It is you who is clinging to the past with trams.

As for fear, we have a very legitimate fears and that fear includes this turkey blowing out massively before it’s even completed one minor stage that replaces a simple bus run. We fear our rates rising at a time when wage growth is stagnating in Canberra. We fear a bloated organisation attempting to run both buses and trams and comanding ridiculous salaries. We fear that when this terrible idea meets its demise, we will bear the demolition costs.

Many of us are content with the Canberra we have and we don’t need this royal shafting.

I share your thoughts but being a “retired person in Tuggeranong” my only purpose in the ACT is to cop the ever increasing rates and shutup.
Recently, some “school only” bustops in my suburb were massively upgraded and a seat was even added at the request of a local resident who doesn’t even use the buses nor do his family. In fact, the demographic here reflects half the residents are retired and the ones still with school age children either drive their kids to school or they drive their own car (cars are cheaper, safer and more efficient than they have ever been).
On making enquiries, I am told that the upgrading of the “school only” bustops is future planning for expansion to “all services” but trying top explain to them that no one in my suburb uses buses is futile.
After more than 30 years of living contentedly in Canberra I now feel the need to “move on”.
I have said enough for now on the impending “me too” tram disaster but watch this space.

I suggest Cooma. No trams, Council meetings, plenty of the more mature residents, welcoming to strangers, opportunities to shake fists at clouds.

OpenYourMind said :

rubaiyat said :

Why are people so afraid of change?

If they have X they are afraid of Y.

If they have Y they are afraid of X.

Is it because they have so much trouble with understanding anything, that to have to cope with something different is a personal threat?

What happened to reading and discovering as much as you can, so you don’t become frightened of your own shadows?

Do you realise that insulting those with different opinions to your own does not help your cause? You will find that those opposed to the tram are from many parts of our community. Just because we think the tram is a white elephant of the worst kind, doesn’t mean we are not educated or scared of the future. Hell, plenty of us are advocating autonomous cars and smart electric buses as part of the solution. We know this is a time of massive and exciting change including shifts in how we communicate, share economies, telecommuting, shared employment, running businesses on the net, you name it. It is you who is clinging to the past with trams.

As for fear, we have a very legitimate fears and that fear includes this turkey blowing out massively before it’s even completed one minor stage that replaces a simple bus run. We fear our rates rising at a time when wage growth is stagnating in Canberra. We fear a bloated organisation attempting to run both buses and trams and comanding ridiculous salaries. We fear that when this terrible idea meets its demise, we will bear the demolition costs.

Many of us are content with the Canberra we have and we don’t need this royal shafting.

I share your thoughts but being a “retired person in Tuggeranong” my only purpose in the ACT is to cop the ever increasing rates and shutup.
Recently, some “school only” bustops in my suburb were massively upgraded and a seat was even added at the request of a local resident who doesn’t even use the buses nor do his family. In fact, the demographic here reflects half the residents are retired and the ones still with school age children either drive their kids to school or they drive their own car (cars are cheaper, safer and more efficient than they have ever been).
On making enquiries, I am told that the upgrading of the “school only” bustops is future planning for expansion to “all services” but trying top explain to them that no one in my suburb uses buses is futile.
After more than 30 years of living contentedly in Canberra I now feel the need to “move on”.
I have said enough for now on the impending “me too” tram disaster but watch this space.

wildturkeycanoe11:14 pm 02 Nov 15

rubaiyat said :

No matter how often I ask I don’t see you are at all interested to cleaning up Canberra’s dated and dirty and inefficient and extremely expensive transport system.

I’ve done the figures. I’ve laid them out in detail and when faced with them you just ignore them and make another flat statement again with nothing to back it up. You just say so. That’s it.

How do we know the tram will not also be an inefficient and extremely expensive transport system? Thus far it has relied on patronage figures based on guesses to make it work on paper. You’ve done the figures but what are they based on? Crystal ball gazing? If we can’t get people to use the existing public transport system which is flexible, affordable and doesn’t just go along one track, then how do they expect to get the numbers required to keep the tram running at a profit? Pro-trammers bring facts, anti-trammers bring facts. The government had all the facts and they said BRT was the better option, but still went ahead with rail. Why? Those opposed to the project have data too, but the same way you are arguing, the metro supporters won’t listen to reason either.
It seems to be pretty clear cut that nobody is going to change their mind about it, whatever way the figures are twisted or statistics revealed. In the end, I still maintain that all this is really pointless because it is going ahead regardless of what we all say. Labor is standing firm, Liberals are not very clear cut about whether they will can the tram or not, so inevitably we just have to wait and see how far we will break the bank.

OpenYourMind10:47 pm 02 Nov 15

rubaiyat said :

Why are people so afraid of change?

If they have X they are afraid of Y.

If they have Y they are afraid of X.

Is it because they have so much trouble with understanding anything, that to have to cope with something different is a personal threat?

What happened to reading and discovering as much as you can, so you don’t become frightened of your own shadows?

Do you realise that insulting those with different opinions to your own does not help your cause? You will find that those opposed to the tram are from many parts of our community. Just because we think the tram is a white elephant of the worst kind, doesn’t mean we are not educated or scared of the future. Hell, plenty of us are advocating autonomous cars and smart electric buses as part of the solution. We know this is a time of massive and exciting change including shifts in how we communicate, share economies, telecommuting, shared employment, running businesses on the net, you name it. It is you who is clinging to the past with trams.

As for fear, we have a very legitimate fears and that fear includes this turkey blowing out massively before it’s even completed one minor stage that replaces a simple bus run. We fear our rates rising at a time when wage growth is stagnating in Canberra. We fear a bloated organisation attempting to run both buses and trams and comanding ridiculous salaries. We fear that when this terrible idea meets its demise, we will bear the demolition costs.

Many of us are content with the Canberra we have and we don’t need this royal shafting.

dungfungus said :

rubaiyat said :

dungfungus said :

And now some of our young people

What young people?

dungfungus said :

are being told

By whom?

dungfungus said :

not to sing our National Anthem.

Really? Where?

All sounds lovely and vague… and dungfunguserish.

http://www.smh.com.au/national/muslim-children-should-not-be-forced-to-sing-national-anthem-says-hizb-uttahrir-20151101-gknwy9.html

Irrelevant to this discussion, but you did actually read it before you posted?

It didn’t say that children “are being told not to sing our National Anthem”.

It said they “should not be forced to”.

Do you take it that coercion is the norm?

rubaiyat said :

dungfungus said :

And now some of our young people

What young people?

dungfungus said :

are being told

By whom?

dungfungus said :

not to sing our National Anthem.

Really? Where?

All sounds lovely and vague… and dungfunguserish.

http://www.smh.com.au/national/muslim-children-should-not-be-forced-to-sing-national-anthem-says-hizb-uttahrir-20151101-gknwy9.html

miz said :

Rubaiyat I have said on numerous occasions I commute to work by bus daily. I am completely familiar with our bus system and other cities’ public transport systems (Sydney and Melbourne).
Most people in Tuggeranong are still of working age. Sweeping generalisations intended as insults do not an argument make.
I am a total fan of public transport done right. As stated above, the proposed light rail model will set us back at least 20 years, as it will lock us into the bus interchange model ACTION has been trying to ditch. Because of Canberra’s design, we need flexibility, not the rigidity of one line.

All just words.

We have heard nothing but sweeping generalisations from you.

We are supposed to just accept them as fact, or do you actually have something to back them up?

No evidence that I can see for anything, other than you are just flatly against a clean quiet safe alternative to what we have. No matter how often I ask I don’t see you are at all interested to cleaning up Canberra’s dated and dirty and inefficient and extremely expensive transport system.

I’ve done the figures. I’ve laid them out in detail and when faced with them you just ignore them and make another flat statement again with nothing to back it up. You just say so. That’s it.

Rubaiyat I have said on numerous occasions I commute to work by bus daily. I am completely familiar with our bus system and other cities’ public transport systems (Sydney and Melbourne).
Most people in Tuggeranong are still of working age. Sweeping generalisations intended as insults do not an argument make.
I am a total fan of public transport done right. As stated above, the proposed light rail model will set us back at least 20 years, as it will lock us into the bus interchange model ACTION has been trying to ditch. Because of Canberra’s design, we need flexibility, not the rigidity of one line.

dungfungus said :

And now some of our young people

What young people?

dungfungus said :

are being told

By whom?

dungfungus said :

not to sing our National Anthem.

Really? Where?

All sounds lovely and vague… and dungfunguserish.

ungruntled said :

If we do not get it right, it will be very wrong for a very long time and in ways not yet thought about. That is why it is important.

Of course. I remember you getting extremely upset over the billions that the government spent on freeways and urban sprawl.

I also recognise that you have to pick your fights carefully. Which is why you have chosen Light Rail to make your stand.

It all reminds me of when Nat King Cole bought a house in Hancock Park L.A. and was told by the suddenly very hysterical but very official sounding Hancock Park Property Owners Association, “It’s important that we don’t let the WRONG people move in and spoil the neighborhood”.

Nat politely replied that he was ALSO concerned that the wrong people didn’t move in.

But I don’t think they were actually talking about the same “wrong people”.

http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/music/news/the-story-of-nat-king-cole-and-his-racist-neighbours-9391316.html

rubaiyat said :

ungruntled said :

“will Canberran’s support this vision or not?”

Marcus as far as I’m concerned, this is not a vision, it’s a nightmare!

It’s the cost, it’s the devisive social effects it is set to produce, it’s the fact that in order to get some people to agree we are all being fed misinformation (even a dodgy academic report or two . . or three), it’s the inequite, it’s the appauling lack of due process, “it’s the vibe”!

Oh dear, don’t get me started.

Someone take this bad dream away . . . PLEASE?

Really!!? It’s just a tram!

It’s not like the Metric System or something equally as unthinkable and impossible.

I lived thru getting the metric system & all that. It was exciting, not unthinkable.
It is not just a tram. If it were, it would not be an issue.
It is not just money. If it were, it would not be such an issue.

Planning of infrastructure has long lasting & wide reaching economic and social implications. It is this that is the issue. If we do not get it right, it will be very wrong for a very long time and in ways not yet thought about. That is why it is important.

I am not living in the past, nor am I blind to the wonderful potential this time can bring. However, this is a poorly thought out, out of date, unresearched decision which looks to be taking us in quite a wrong direction.

If it were really that good a choice, why have some of the Assembly members been concealing information from other members & from the Community at large? Why did all the possible options not get well researched & offered to all of Canberra with all the pros & cons clearly laid out?

Seems to me to be an expression of someone’s under developed ego, needing to be secured from the outside – “Look at this big thing I did”, or his Daddy didn’t by him a train set when he was little & he still hasn’t gotten over it.

There can be no other reason for the unseamly rush to get this done, before someone is not there to claim it as there own, or other plans may be proven to be better or more timely.

rubaiyat said :

dungfungus said :

You say “the future is a larger population”
And how is this going to happen?
Where are the jobs?
Most people living in Canberra that were not born here did not come here by choice; it was employment opportunity.

Ah, what 20/20 hindsight you have.

How exactly did we get to 385,000 people/

And will you be still saying this after just natural growth, not new arrivals, will get us to 500,000 by 2030?

But is that where we WANT to be in 2030?
We really do need to start setting a goal & heading towards it, rather than being led along willy-nilly, as though the destination is an aforegone conclusion.
It is blatantly irresponsible not to plan when we have the ability and know what our resources are & can be.

rubaiyat said :

Why are people so afraid of change?

If they have X they are afraid of Y.

If they have Y they are afraid of X.

Is it because they have so much trouble with understanding anything, that to have to cope with something different is a personal threat?

What happened to reading and discovering as much as you can, so you don’t become frightened of your own shadows?

I really do hear what you are saying. Being averse to change seems to me to be directly & inversley proportional to the level of one’s security. If one feels secure in one’s existence (income, family, self worth, roof over head etc.) then to be adventuous is not only do-able but enjoyable. When there is not security, change does become a threatening thing. That is just how it is. It is part of the human condition.

ungruntled said :

JC said :

Going to ignore most of your post, but cost lets put this into perspective for a second.
$780m sounds like a lot and it is a lot, it works out to be $65m/km. Over the 10 year cost cylce it also works out to be $228 per person per year, so maybe not so bad.

So if it works out by your math to be $228pp/yr, why are we being slugged $6oo/ ratepayer per year for how many years?

But also lets look at some road projects.

Road projuct benifit most of the population at some point & many people often.
This project, by its own planners, even at it’s zenith, will benifit no more than 10% of the population.

Gundaroo Drive duplication, 1km from Gungahlin Drive to Mirrabi Drive, $31m, so $31m/km.

That is just under half the cost by my math.

Majura Parkway, 12km, $244m, $20.3m/km, also put that cost over 10 years and it turns out that every vehicle that drives on that road is costing $2 in direct cost.

Once again, the issue of how many people get to use it is skewing the numbers – it’s users v population. You need to campare apples with apples, not avacardoes.

Do you hear any uproar about the costs of these roads, nope what you hear is whinging they should have been done earlier, but when they do get done earlier (John Gorton Drive in Molongolo for example) people whinge that money has been built on roads to nowhere. But I digress.

Not digressing needlessly. We didn’t really have any idea how much development was being planned for ACT after “self government”.
I doubt anyone in the general populace understood that the Assembly would see no other ways to develop income for the Territory, besides building apartments & shops. Doubt that level of un-creativity was within the ken of many!

Now these road projects are 1/2rd to 1/3rd the cost of light rail, but total construction cost is not the complete story. Take Majura parkway for a second. Yes, each vehicle driving on that road is costing $2, based on cost along you could argue it should be a toll road, but no look at the bigger picture and that road is saving money elsewhere, so very much a worth while and affordable project.

And what are the direct costs for the tram? Has anyone told us? I do not recall.

Gundaroo drive duplication, yeah could argue it is needed, but economically, maybe not.

Light rail, yeah high direct cost, but what is the full economic picture. How much extra money will it generate in terms of land sale and rates? How much money will it save on not having to build extra or wider roads?

Infrastructure development is not just about its cost.
We all pay rates & taxes of various sorts, to put in place the structures & services we all need . . schools, hospitals, public transport, sewerage, water, police, army etc, etc.
That money is provided by all. In Australia we have traditionally had a tax system that had those better able to pay, pay more & support those less able.
All societies are made up of both groups of people and all the ones in between. Our tax system was part of what made Australia a country of “the fair go”, with most of its population falling under the “inbetween” group.
We were not to be a land of beggars & kings. I value that still. Very much.
It was what my Father & uncle went to war for (amongst other things). It was what that generation, after a depression and a war worked incredibly hard to secure for us and those who come after us.

Please, no one tell me about those who are not paying their share and point to those who don’t have jobs. If you are going to say that, point to the really big ones who employ full time tax consultants to minimize to negligibility their fair share of community input – like the Packers & Conglomerates.
We know there are not enough jobs for all.
Just look at the numbers – 6% unemployment and that is after they count everyone with an hour’s work a week as “employed”!
About 40 years ago Australia’s unemployment rate was around 2% and those statistics were based on people with full time employment. No wonder the saying goes “there’s lies, damned lies & then statistics” !

I’m beginning to think that all the input from the USA through TV etc has undermined what we are really about. We’ve gone from universal health and education, government controlled house mortgage interest for first homes, (so all could own), and caring for the wellbeing of all our community to “up gangway, I’m on board” & “catch as catch can & the devil take the hindmost” in less than one generation!
No wonder our young people don’t want to vote. Vote for what? Be inspired by what?

Right on!
And now some of our young people are being told not to sing our National Anthem.
Stone the crows!

Why are people so afraid of change?

If they have X they are afraid of Y.

If they have Y they are afraid of X.

Is it because they have so much trouble with understanding anything, that to have to cope with something different is a personal threat?

What happened to reading and discovering as much as you can, so you don’t become frightened of your own shadows?

JC said :

Going to ignore most of your post, but cost lets put this into perspective for a second.
$780m sounds like a lot and it is a lot, it works out to be $65m/km. Over the 10 year cost cylce it also works out to be $228 per person per year, so maybe not so bad.

So if it works out by your math to be $228pp/yr, why are we being slugged $6oo/ ratepayer per year for how many years?

But also lets look at some road projects.

Road projuct benifit most of the population at some point & many people often.
This project, by its own planners, even at it’s zenith, will benifit no more than 10% of the population.

Gundaroo Drive duplication, 1km from Gungahlin Drive to Mirrabi Drive, $31m, so $31m/km.

That is just under half the cost by my math.

Majura Parkway, 12km, $244m, $20.3m/km, also put that cost over 10 years and it turns out that every vehicle that drives on that road is costing $2 in direct cost.

Once again, the issue of how many people get to use it is skewing the numbers – it’s users v population. You need to campare apples with apples, not avacardoes.

Do you hear any uproar about the costs of these roads, nope what you hear is whinging they should have been done earlier, but when they do get done earlier (John Gorton Drive in Molongolo for example) people whinge that money has been built on roads to nowhere. But I digress.

Not digressing needlessly. We didn’t really have any idea how much development was being planned for ACT after “self government”.
I doubt anyone in the general populace understood that the Assembly would see no other ways to develop income for the Territory, besides building apartments & shops. Doubt that level of un-creativity was within the ken of many!

Now these road projects are 1/2rd to 1/3rd the cost of light rail, but total construction cost is not the complete story. Take Majura parkway for a second. Yes, each vehicle driving on that road is costing $2, based on cost along you could argue it should be a toll road, but no look at the bigger picture and that road is saving money elsewhere, so very much a worth while and affordable project.

And what are the direct costs for the tram? Has anyone told us? I do not recall.

Gundaroo drive duplication, yeah could argue it is needed, but economically, maybe not.

Light rail, yeah high direct cost, but what is the full economic picture. How much extra money will it generate in terms of land sale and rates? How much money will it save on not having to build extra or wider roads?

Infrastructure development is not just about its cost.
We all pay rates & taxes of various sorts, to put in place the structures & services we all need . . schools, hospitals, public transport, sewerage, water, police, army etc, etc.
That money is provided by all. In Australia we have traditionally had a tax system that had those better able to pay, pay more & support those less able.
All societies are made up of both groups of people and all the ones in between. Our tax system was part of what made Australia a country of “the fair go”, with most of its population falling under the “inbetween” group.
We were not to be a land of beggars & kings. I value that still. Very much.
It was what my Father & uncle went to war for (amongst other things). It was what that generation, after a depression and a war worked incredibly hard to secure for us and those who come after us.

Please, no one tell me about those who are not paying their share and point to those who don’t have jobs. If you are going to say that, point to the really big ones who employ full time tax consultants to minimize to negligibility their fair share of community input – like the Packers & Conglomerates.
We know there are not enough jobs for all.
Just look at the numbers – 6% unemployment and that is after they count everyone with an hour’s work a week as “employed”!
About 40 years ago Australia’s unemployment rate was around 2% and those statistics were based on people with full time employment. No wonder the saying goes “there’s lies, damned lies & then statistics” !

I’m beginning to think that all the input from the USA through TV etc has undermined what we are really about. We’ve gone from universal health and education, government controlled house mortgage interest for first homes, (so all could own), and caring for the wellbeing of all our community to “up gangway, I’m on board” & “catch as catch can & the devil take the hindmost” in less than one generation!
No wonder our young people don’t want to vote. Vote for what? Be inspired by what?

dungfungus said :

You say “the future is a larger population”
And how is this going to happen?
Where are the jobs?
Most people living in Canberra that were not born here did not come here by choice; it was employment opportunity.

Ah, what 20/20 hindsight you have.

How exactly did we get to 385,000 people/

And will you be still saying this after just natural growth, not new arrivals, will get us to 500,000 by 2030?

ungruntled said :

“will Canberran’s support this vision or not?”

Marcus as far as I’m concerned, this is not a vision, it’s a nightmare!

It’s the cost, it’s the devisive social effects it is set to produce, it’s the fact that in order to get some people to agree we are all being fed misinformation (even a dodgy academic report or two . . or three), it’s the inequite, it’s the appauling lack of due process, “it’s the vibe”!

Oh dear, don’t get me started.

Someone take this bad dream away . . . PLEASE?

Really!!? It’s just a tram!

It’s not like the Metric System or something equally as unthinkable and impossible.

miz said :

We still actually have a Y plan – even if it is not being developed further, you have to work with what you have. (What is particularly galling is that policy makers have lately tended to encourage Civic as a quasi CBD, to the detriment of the other town centres, when it should not.)
Good, flexible public transport planning can actually creatively overcome the Y plan, and indeed the successful Xpresso bus model already does just that. It would not be difficult to increase those services during the day.
However rigid rail lines are only going to entrench the Y plan issues and create large swathes that do not have direct access to it. It is exactly like the old unsuccessful bus model which forced people to connect to everywhere via the bus interchanges, as people are going to be forced to link to the light rail, i.e., go the long way.
It is well known that having to transfer between differing forms of transport increases the complexity of the journey and is a significant deterrent.

For the most part you are right we still do have the Y plan and save bulldozing the place and starting again not much can be done to change that. That said new developments have broken the Y plan including Gungahlin. Gungahlin. Has been built with higher density development along Flemmington road as a keystone as opposed to the Y plan model of endless suburbs all focused on a local shopping centre and school.

I am on the record here as saying that light rail will only work to Gungahlin and the parl triangle and this is the reason. Elsewhere unless we do away with the arterial roads that linked the towncentres and development them as commuting corridors then forget it.

“will Canberran’s support this vision or not?”

Marcus as far as I’m concerned, this is not a vision, it’s a nightmare!

It’s the cost, it’s the devisive social effects it is set to produce, it’s the fact that in order to get some people to agree we are all being fed misinformation (even a dodgy academic report or two . . or three), it’s the inequite, it’s the appauling lack of due process, “it’s the vibe”!

Oh dear, don’t get me started. Someone take this bad dream away . . . PLEASE?

rubaiyat said :

OpenYourMind said :

rubaiyat said :

miz said :

Yes Canberra isn’t meant to have a ‘CBD’, it was designed to have several town centres of equal standing. The gradual encroachment of the CBD concept during the last few years has created a monster, including justification for the tram (which is based on the unrealistic premise that everyone will work in Cvic).

Circular logic.

We got a bad result because we were supposed to.

Just like the traffic jams down Northbourne and Parkes Way.

Your argument is also circular.

The only problem we’ve got with Canberra is that we’ve drifted away from the decentralised model and moved closer to your ideal of concentrating employment in Civic and putting everyone in high density living….except of course, those with Rubaiyat style ski lodges.

So say all the retirees in Tuggeranong. Tell that to my son who has to negotiate all the traffic around Northbourne. And personally I am sick of all the traffic noise, trashing of once clean countryside and the awful Macmansions that people are wacking up on their tiny “rural”blocks” in some demented fantasy that they have that they are doing this for the kids that they are fattening up for the World’s Biggest Loser. All they are doing is creating problems for the future, that their kids are going to have to deal with.

Canberra has changed, some are simply imagining that they are living in the ’60s and won’t have a bar of planning for the inevitable future that is upon us. That future is larger population, too much traffic because of Canberra’s bad sprawl and lack of adequate public transport and both young people and older people who are moving into that hih rise in the city or surrounds and are progressively using their cars less.

I get it that people think they can ignore everything and it will all go away.

News just in, it won’t.

You say “the future is a larger population”
And how is this going to happen?
Where are the jobs?
Most people living in Canberra that were not born here did not come here by choice; it was employment opportunity.

Leave it up to those who can’t be bothered learning what is really going on, to leave it ’til “Too Late!”.

They always do.

miz said :

We still actually have a Y plan – even if it is not being developed further, you have to work with what you have. (What is particularly galling is that policy makers have lately tended to encourage Civic as a quasi CBD, to the detriment of the other town centres, when it should not.)
Good, flexible public transport planning can actually creatively overcome the Y plan, and indeed the successful Xpresso bus model already does just that. It would not be difficult to increase those services during the day.
However rigid rail lines are only going to entrench the Y plan issues and create large swathes that do not have direct access to it. It is exactly like the old unsuccessful bus model which forced people to connect to everywhere via the bus interchanges, as people are going to be forced to link to the light rail, i.e., go the long way.
It is well known that having to transfer between differing forms of transport increases the complexity of the journey and is a significant deterrent.

What happened to how Canberra was “meant” to be?

Do you actually use the buses, sounds like you don’t. They can’t work with urban sprawl, never could which is why ridership is so low and the high rises are shooting up.

And the dreadful Y plan got stuffed up long ago, just as it stuffed up the original plan, first by Gungahlin and then Molonglo with further outliers such as the Airport, Jerrabombera, Googong and now Bungendore.

OpenYourMind said :

rubaiyat said :

miz said :

Yes Canberra isn’t meant to have a ‘CBD’, it was designed to have several town centres of equal standing. The gradual encroachment of the CBD concept during the last few years has created a monster, including justification for the tram (which is based on the unrealistic premise that everyone will work in Cvic).

Circular logic.

We got a bad result because we were supposed to.

Just like the traffic jams down Northbourne and Parkes Way.

Your argument is also circular.

The only problem we’ve got with Canberra is that we’ve drifted away from the decentralised model and moved closer to your ideal of concentrating employment in Civic and putting everyone in high density living….except of course, those with Rubaiyat style ski lodges.

So say all the retirees in Tuggeranong. Tell that to my son who has to negotiate all the traffic around Northbourne. And personally I am sick of all the traffic noise, trashing of once clean countryside and the awful Macmansions that people are wacking up on their tiny “rural”blocks” in some demented fantasy that they have that they are doing this for the kids that they are fattening up for the World’s Biggest Loser. All they are doing is creating problems for the future, that their kids are going to have to deal with.

Canberra has changed, some are simply imagining that they are living in the ’60s and won’t have a bar of planning for the inevitable future that is upon us. That future is larger population, too much traffic because of Canberra’s bad sprawl and lack of adequate public transport and both young people and older people who are moving into that hih rise in the city or surrounds and are progressively using their cars less.

I get it that people think they can ignore everything and it will all go away.

News just in, it won’t.

rubaiyat said :

JC said :

miz said :

Yes Canberra isn’t meant to have a ‘CBD’, it was designed to have several town centres of equal standing. The gradual encroachment of the CBD concept during the last few years has created a monster, including justification for the tram (which is based on the unrealistic premise that everyone will work in Cvic).

The Y plan died a natural death in the 80’s and rightly so. The Y plan is responsible for many planning faults in this town which in turn is what makes providing public transport so difficult.

The break with the plan was the then “new” satellite town of Gungahlin so frankly using the Y plan as an excuse for not having light rail is just echoing the mistakes that were made with the Y plan.

Walter Burley Griffin designed Canberra.

He did not design it with satellite towns.

He designed Canberra with radial arms supporting high density retailing and commercial with a citywide tram network down the wide median strips of the main avenues.

https://www.be.unsw.edu.au/sites/default/files/upload/pdf/schools_and_engagement/resources/_notes/5A4_2.pdf

Now that you know what Canberra was “meant” to have, you will of course demand that the entire Light Rail network be built immediately.

Or perhaps you will come up with another excuse?

We voted against self-government twice so what is your point?

We still actually have a Y plan – even if it is not being developed further, you have to work with what you have. (What is particularly galling is that policy makers have lately tended to encourage Civic as a quasi CBD, to the detriment of the other town centres, when it should not.)
Good, flexible public transport planning can actually creatively overcome the Y plan, and indeed the successful Xpresso bus model already does just that. It would not be difficult to increase those services during the day.
However rigid rail lines are only going to entrench the Y plan issues and create large swathes that do not have direct access to it. It is exactly like the old unsuccessful bus model which forced people to connect to everywhere via the bus interchanges, as people are going to be forced to link to the light rail, i.e., go the long way.
It is well known that having to transfer between differing forms of transport increases the complexity of the journey and is a significant deterrent.

OpenYourMind6:25 am 02 Nov 15

rubaiyat said :

miz said :

Yes Canberra isn’t meant to have a ‘CBD’, it was designed to have several town centres of equal standing. The gradual encroachment of the CBD concept during the last few years has created a monster, including justification for the tram (which is based on the unrealistic premise that everyone will work in Cvic).

Circular logic.

We got a bad result because we were supposed to.

Just like the traffic jams down Northbourne and Parkes Way.

Your argument is also circular.

The only problem we’ve got with Canberra is that we’ve drifted away from the decentralised model and moved closer to your ideal of concentrating employment in Civic and putting everyone in high density living….except of course, those with Rubaiyat style ski lodges.

That document above is a great read.

I learnt that the mess of circles within circles of the lower south was the work of the mediocrities in the Federal bureaucracy, who worked tirelessly to sabotage Griffin’s original elegant designs, even going so far as to steal Griffin’s plans from his desk.

Interesting that they have been so taken as heroes of Canberra’s negativity that they are feted here, with the same spirit of civic destruction and resentment that they perfected.

Sorry JC, that of course was meant for miz.

JC said :

miz said :

Yes Canberra isn’t meant to have a ‘CBD’, it was designed to have several town centres of equal standing. The gradual encroachment of the CBD concept during the last few years has created a monster, including justification for the tram (which is based on the unrealistic premise that everyone will work in Cvic).

The Y plan died a natural death in the 80’s and rightly so. The Y plan is responsible for many planning faults in this town which in turn is what makes providing public transport so difficult.

The break with the plan was the then “new” satellite town of Gungahlin so frankly using the Y plan as an excuse for not having light rail is just echoing the mistakes that were made with the Y plan.

Walter Burley Griffin designed Canberra.

He did not design it with satellite towns.

He designed Canberra with radial arms supporting high density retailing and commercial with a citywide tram network down the wide median strips of the main avenues.

https://www.be.unsw.edu.au/sites/default/files/upload/pdf/schools_and_engagement/resources/_notes/5A4_2.pdf

Now that you know what Canberra was “meant” to have, you will of course demand that the entire Light Rail network be built immediately.

Or perhaps you will come up with another excuse?

JC said :

miz said :

Yes Canberra isn’t meant to have a ‘CBD’, it was designed to have several town centres of equal standing. The gradual encroachment of the CBD concept during the last few years has created a monster, including justification for the tram (which is based on the unrealistic premise that everyone will work in Cvic).

The Y plan died a natural death in the 80’s and rightly so. The Y plan is responsible for many planning faults in this town which in turn is what makes providing public transport so difficult.

The break with the plan was the then “new” satellite town of Gungahlin so frankly using the Y plan as an excuse for not having light rail is just echoing the mistakes that were made with the Y plan.

The light rail needs the “value-added” component to make the J curve kick in.
Until then it will be sixes & sevens.

miz said :

Yes Canberra isn’t meant to have a ‘CBD’, it was designed to have several town centres of equal standing. The gradual encroachment of the CBD concept during the last few years has created a monster, including justification for the tram (which is based on the unrealistic premise that everyone will work in Cvic).

It would be counter-intuitive for outlying town centres to have the same standing as the centre of the city though …

miz said :

Yes Canberra isn’t meant to have a ‘CBD’, it was designed to have several town centres of equal standing. The gradual encroachment of the CBD concept during the last few years has created a monster, including justification for the tram (which is based on the unrealistic premise that everyone will work in Cvic).

The Y plan died a natural death in the 80’s and rightly so. The Y plan is responsible for many planning faults in this town which in turn is what makes providing public transport so difficult.

The break with the plan was the then “new” satellite town of Gungahlin so frankly using the Y plan as an excuse for not having light rail is just echoing the mistakes that were made with the Y plan.

miz said :

Yes Canberra isn’t meant to have a ‘CBD’, it was designed to have several town centres of equal standing. The gradual encroachment of the CBD concept during the last few years has created a monster, including justification for the tram (which is based on the unrealistic premise that everyone will work in Cvic).

Circular logic.

We got a bad result because we were supposed to.

Just like the traffic jams down Northbourne and Parkes Way.

Yes Canberra isn’t meant to have a ‘CBD’, it was designed to have several town centres of equal standing. The gradual encroachment of the CBD concept during the last few years has created a monster, including justification for the tram (which is based on the unrealistic premise that everyone will work in Cvic).

OpenYourMind1:22 pm 31 Oct 15

wildturkeycanoe said :

rubaiyat said :

The Business Council has been critical of the absurd multiplicity of “Town Centres” in Canberra, none of which can get up a head of steam because they are too small and too far apart to allow easy communication but too close to allow individual advancement.

At my local Advertising Agency I surveyed everyone as to where they were coming from to get to work. It was everywhere in Canberra. We need a real CBD that centralises most commercial and retailing and is a hub for everything else. Not lots of stunted attempts at decentralisation with freeways chopping up all the residential sprawl in between.

Distance is a barrier as much as all the dirty, noisy, dangerous multi-lane freeways lined with earth berms and 4m high concrete walls that chop up Canberra.

Aim for the middle with transport radiating outwards. Belconnen, Tuggeranong and now Molonglo don’t even centre their own rubbishy Town “Centres”. Bad design on top of already bad design.

I do not understand why having satellite businesses located remotely from Civic is a bad thing. With today’s technology [NBN if we ever get it] we can eliminate the need for most of the commuters to travel at all. When most office workers get to their seat, what exactly do they do? They get on their computer and spend the entire day typing, scrolling and browsing. Why can’t they do that from home or from a smaller office near their place of residence? Conference calls via the internet, scanning and emailing, data entry, all these tasks can be done from pretty much anywhere but for some reason we need to get all of them into one building. That is poor design. You talk about moving forward to save the planet but we work like we did in the 1970s.

The “solution” of putting medium to high density housing in place will also not fix the problem because humans enjoy Canberra’s country town feel, with open spaces and no city high-rise blocking their view of the morning sun. They prefer to be living in a free standing house with a yard. As mentioned by someone else in another thread, if they want to live next to work in a concrete jungle they will move to Sydney for the pleasure. Canberra is not Sydney, it isn’t Perth and certainly not like any other city in Europe for that matter.
Your comment that we need to centralize everything is exactly what causes the freeways that chop up the residential sprawl. My wife for instance, would rather not have to commute to the other side of town to work, but there is more demand over there because that is where all the folks are during the day. If more government departments, commercial businesses and retail had been relocated away from Civic, then she’d be able to work locally and not be part of the congestion problem. Just look at what was said about relocating the immigration department from Belconnen recently. Many retail venues would have lost patronage and would have had to shut down. What then? They’d open up in civic instead and have to commute to get there along with all the other locals whose jobs got moved 20km away.

But if the glorious light of the wonder tram has blinded people so much that they cannot see reason, an election may be the only thing to save us from fiscal doom. The subsidizing through rates by those in suburbia will certainly kill off the fringes and drive people either out of Canberra or into the drab, gray sardine tins along Northbourne Avenue.

Well said. Of course the other place people may move is out of town to semi rural blocks. That way they aren’t paying rates for the tram and they are commuting a lot, thus completely defeating Rubaiyat’s undesirable agenda for Canberrans.

rommeldog56 said :

rosscoact said :

wildturkeycanoe said :

If urban sprawl is the cause of all these traffic problems, what we are saying in fact is that we have people living in one place and working in another. To ease the issue, should not the government be creating work, business and shopping opportunities where the population is? The Gungahlin commercial hub was supposed to do this but now we have a problem with every Gungahlite needing to go to Civic. Who dropped the planning ball? Why are all the jobs in Civic instead of spreading out into suburbia?

Federal government wants them centralised in Civic. Ring Zed, he’ll fix it.

I dunno about the Feds, but the ACT Labor/Greens Govt wants to build a new building next to the current Legislative Assembly building in Civic. Complete with sky ridge connecting the two. That will house its public servants relocated from elsewhere in Canberra. This will be another Public Private Partnership and is no doubt being done to help boost passenger numbers on the toy train set white elephant.

Making a prediction like that truly visionary (in the sense that it is probably 100% correct!).

wildturkeycanoe said :

With today’s technology [NBN if we ever get it] we can eliminate the need for most of the commuters to travel at all.

Ignoring that fantasy, this is from the same object at all costs people who opposed the NBN for all the same innumerate and no clue reasons.

So don’t do one, don’t do the other, and wait for a mythical solution just around the corner (like universal WiFi) that will also be more “Don’ like it!”

…and complain bitterly about the traffic jams that Blind Freddy could see coming 50 years ago.

rommeldog56 said :

rosscoact said :

wildturkeycanoe said :

If urban sprawl is the cause of all these traffic problems, what we are saying in fact is that we have people living in one place and working in another. To ease the issue, should not the government be creating work, business and shopping opportunities where the population is? The Gungahlin commercial hub was supposed to do this but now we have a problem with every Gungahlite needing to go to Civic. Who dropped the planning ball? Why are all the jobs in Civic instead of spreading out into suburbia?

Federal government wants them centralised in Civic. Ring Zed, he’ll fix it.

I dunno about the Feds, but the ACT Labor/Greens Govt wants to build a new building next to the current Legislative Assembly building in Civic. Complete with sky ridge connecting the two. That will house its public servants relocated from elsewhere in Canberra. This will be another Public Private Partnership and is no doubt being done to help boost passenger numbers on the toy train set white elephant.

Nope. That idea was dropped in 2012.

rosscoact said :

wildturkeycanoe said :

If urban sprawl is the cause of all these traffic problems, what we are saying in fact is that we have people living in one place and working in another. To ease the issue, should not the government be creating work, business and shopping opportunities where the population is? The Gungahlin commercial hub was supposed to do this but now we have a problem with every Gungahlite needing to go to Civic. Who dropped the planning ball? Why are all the jobs in Civic instead of spreading out into suburbia?

Federal government wants them centralised in Civic. Ring Zed, he’ll fix it.

I dunno about the Feds, but the ACT Labor/Greens Govt wants to build a new building next to the current Legislative Assembly building in Civic. Complete with sky ridge connecting the two. That will house its public servants relocated from elsewhere in Canberra. This will be another Public Private Partnership and is no doubt being done to help boost passenger numbers on the toy train set white elephant.

wildturkeycanoe7:04 am 31 Oct 15

rubaiyat said :

The Business Council has been critical of the absurd multiplicity of “Town Centres” in Canberra, none of which can get up a head of steam because they are too small and too far apart to allow easy communication but too close to allow individual advancement.

At my local Advertising Agency I surveyed everyone as to where they were coming from to get to work. It was everywhere in Canberra. We need a real CBD that centralises most commercial and retailing and is a hub for everything else. Not lots of stunted attempts at decentralisation with freeways chopping up all the residential sprawl in between.

Distance is a barrier as much as all the dirty, noisy, dangerous multi-lane freeways lined with earth berms and 4m high concrete walls that chop up Canberra.

Aim for the middle with transport radiating outwards. Belconnen, Tuggeranong and now Molonglo don’t even centre their own rubbishy Town “Centres”. Bad design on top of already bad design.

I do not understand why having satellite businesses located remotely from Civic is a bad thing. With today’s technology [NBN if we ever get it] we can eliminate the need for most of the commuters to travel at all. When most office workers get to their seat, what exactly do they do? They get on their computer and spend the entire day typing, scrolling and browsing. Why can’t they do that from home or from a smaller office near their place of residence? Conference calls via the internet, scanning and emailing, data entry, all these tasks can be done from pretty much anywhere but for some reason we need to get all of them into one building. That is poor design. You talk about moving forward to save the planet but we work like we did in the 1970s.

The “solution” of putting medium to high density housing in place will also not fix the problem because humans enjoy Canberra’s country town feel, with open spaces and no city high-rise blocking their view of the morning sun. They prefer to be living in a free standing house with a yard. As mentioned by someone else in another thread, if they want to live next to work in a concrete jungle they will move to Sydney for the pleasure. Canberra is not Sydney, it isn’t Perth and certainly not like any other city in Europe for that matter.
Your comment that we need to centralize everything is exactly what causes the freeways that chop up the residential sprawl. My wife for instance, would rather not have to commute to the other side of town to work, but there is more demand over there because that is where all the folks are during the day. If more government departments, commercial businesses and retail had been relocated away from Civic, then she’d be able to work locally and not be part of the congestion problem. Just look at what was said about relocating the immigration department from Belconnen recently. Many retail venues would have lost patronage and would have had to shut down. What then? They’d open up in civic instead and have to commute to get there along with all the other locals whose jobs got moved 20km away.

But if the glorious light of the wonder tram has blinded people so much that they cannot see reason, an election may be the only thing to save us from fiscal doom. The subsidizing through rates by those in suburbia will certainly kill off the fringes and drive people either out of Canberra or into the drab, gray sardine tins along Northbourne Avenue.

rosscoact said :

Federal government wants them centralised in Civic. Ring Zed, he’ll fix it.

Thought that was Chrissy Pyne’s job.

wildturkeycanoe said :

If urban sprawl is the cause of all these traffic problems, what we are saying in fact is that we have people living in one place and working in another. To ease the issue, should not the government be creating work, business and shopping opportunities where the population is? The Gungahlin commercial hub was supposed to do this but now we have a problem with every Gungahlite needing to go to Civic. Who dropped the planning ball? Why are all the jobs in Civic instead of spreading out into suburbia?

Federal government wants them centralised in Civic. Ring Zed, he’ll fix it.

wildturkeycanoe said :

If urban sprawl is the cause of all these traffic problems, what we are saying in fact is that we have people living in one place and working in another. To ease the issue, should not the government be creating work, business and shopping opportunities where the population is? The Gungahlin commercial hub was supposed to do this but now we have a problem with every Gungahlite needing to go to Civic. Who dropped the planning ball? Why are all the jobs in Civic instead of spreading out into suburbia?

Again you have the wrong end of the stick.

Everyone in Gungahlin, or anywhere, is given a life long job in their profession or trade and gets to keep that same job for as long as they want and have invested in a house/apartment next to it?

Despite changes in careers, regular government cutbacks and natural elimination of types of work?

When I did my Design degree we got a month of “practical” course with the Sydney College Printing School. I didn’t need it because I was already working in an Advertising Agency but what stuck in my mind was the lecturer had been through 11 trades, all of which no longer existed, before finally becoming a teacher.

The Business Council has been critical of the absurd multiplicity of “Town Centres” in Canberra, none of which can get up a head of steam because they are too small and too far apart to allow easy communication but too close to allow individual advancement.

At my local Advertising Agency I surveyed everyone as to where they were coming from to get to work. It was everywhere in Canberra. We need a real CBD that centralises most commercial and retailing and is a hub for everything else. Not lots of stunted attempts at decentralisation with freeways chopping up all the residential sprawl in between.

Distance is a barrier as much as all the dirty, noisy, dangerous multi-lane freeways lined with earth berms and 4m high concrete walls that chop up Canberra.

Aim for the middle with transport radiating outwards. Belconnen, Tuggeranong and now Molonglo don’t even centre their own rubbishy Town “Centres”. Bad design on top of already bad design.

wildturkeycanoe2:27 pm 30 Oct 15

If urban sprawl is the cause of all these traffic problems, what we are saying in fact is that we have people living in one place and working in another. To ease the issue, should not the government be creating work, business and shopping opportunities where the population is? The Gungahlin commercial hub was supposed to do this but now we have a problem with every Gungahlite needing to go to Civic. Who dropped the planning ball? Why are all the jobs in Civic instead of spreading out into suburbia?

NoNonsense said :

It’s understandable that Labor wants to inflict this white elephant on Canberra – it was the price of buying Rattenbury’s support to get themselves into power. What is frankly bewildering is that a proportion of voters have fallen for the hype! $780m is just the tip of the iceberg – when interest costs and operational subsidies are factored in, the 20-year cost is more like $1.8billion … just for the Gunghalin section. And with world-leading transport experts assessing a benefit:cost ratio of around 0.6, don’t expect the private sector to carry any risks – the cost of empty trams for many hours a day will fall squarely on ratepayers! Even worse, starting on this now will lock Canberra into light rail for the next 25 years it will take to build a city-wide network and beyond, right at a time when new and more modern options (driverless vehicles etc) are coming onto the agenda. Farewell city of the future! It looks like it’s “Back to the Past” for Canberra!

Ah the mythical cost blowout.

How did you make up those figures, spin a wheel, then double it?

The old “autonomous cars” furphy. Too many cars on the road with only one driver in them? Add even more with NO DRIVERS in them! Then the government can issue taxpayer funded ear plugs and gas masks to everybody on either side of the roads to match that charming set of blinkers they have already put on for themselves.

NoACTLightRail said :

There is no doubt rail of some form will be needed for Canberra in the future, but not now. The ACT government really has to take a hard look at itself in regards to the current state of the ACTION bus system. For 30yrs since self government both Labor and Liberal have been cutting services.

Ridership in 1985 was 24million with pop. of 250,000. Ridership for 2014-15 is 17.4million with 385,000. The target figure was 18.5million. We have gone from the 2nd best to the 2nd worst in the country. If you cannot get people onto buses how are you going to get them on a train?

The cost for running buses has increased by 8% to $5.52 per km. This actually is not that bad with Melbourne buses costing $4.55 per km (2011). In Sydney it is $6.50 per km (2011). Yeah I know, full of stats. I have tonnes! Anyway, the talk about privatising ACTION is a little premature.

All the ‘gimmicks’ that the buses have – park n ride, bike n ride, bike racks, free wi-fi will not get bums on seats if you cannot get from A to B in a reasonable amount of time. A synchronised bus system needs to be brought back. This is where express buses arrive at an interchange and you catch your area bus within a couple of minutes. That’s how it used to be, quick, efficient. It will cost more to do but the benefit to the community far outweighs any negative. Ridership increases, income for the government increases, roads less congested. A win, win really.

The answer to all the above problems is to build even more suburbs further out with new town centres with next to nothing in them.

The further you have to go to get somewhere obviously the better the traffic and the better the bus service.

More buses but unfortunately not more bus drivers, because virtually every government in Australia has chosen the far sighted “Not now” option and failed to invest in public transport.

The W.A. government failed to upgrade their high speed trains whilst the boom was on and now they have reached their capacity because of high demand they can not even get an order through for years because there is high demand around the world for better cleaner transport. Light Rail or any change will take years. Better before it is absolutely required than long after.

wildturkeycanoe said :

rubaiyat said :

How much carbon emitting concrete walls and barriers to kill how many plants and wildlife?

The light rail will minimise the damage, not just in the short term but for the long term and will certainly give a much cleaner end result using a whole lot less resources even in its construction.
.

But the light rail’s success relies on more development along the tract of land it runs through, meaning more multi-storey buildings, apartments, shops and businesses. How does all this magically appear without employing the same polluting equipment that builds the roads? You will need excavators to dig the footings, semis to deliver the steel and the scaffolding, concrete pumpers and a whole fleet of mixers to pour the walls and floors, tower crane delivery, then all the workers need to get to site somehow. Do you think the tradies will simply leave their utes at home and catch buses into Civic every day? Fat chance. The tram will indirectly cause more pollution through all the new development, also causing traffic disruptions. How will the tram entice passengers when the verges are cordoned off on every building site because there is no space to house all the shipping containers and deliveries? If you’ve ever been near a construction site you’d know what I’m talking about, they are not the most pedestrian friendly environment. Take the work around Parkes Way and Coranderrk St. near the big roundabout as an example. It is slowing down traffic, making pedestrians detour and it isn’t even a high-rise construction. After completion of the tram, Civic and Gungahlin residents will suffer for many years whilst the plague of high density slowly creeps along this artery of public transport. Do not look forward to any improvement in congestion for a looong time.
BTW, what is the future of the Mitchell Resource Management Centre? Will the “powers that be” allow new housing to develop downwind or will they close it and move all our rubbish out of sight?

You have an uncanny ability to grab the stick by the wrong end.

Do those tradies ever get out of their vehicles to do their work or do they do it all from the cabin of their 10 year old bomb with the wreckers tyres?

So what you are saying is all that work will be done by pedestrians!! Oh the horror!

wildturkeycanoe said :

BTW, what is the future of the Mitchell Resource Management Centre? Will the “powers that be” allow new housing to develop downwind or will they close it and move all our rubbish out of sight?

There is housing opposite it and has been for some time. No housing can go closer because the National Archive is being developed across the road and the existing housing is fully developed.

Next!

NoACTLightRail1:04 am 30 Oct 15

There is no doubt rail of some form will be needed for Canberra in the future, but not now. The ACT government really has to take a hard look at itself in regards to the current state of the ACTION bus system. For 30yrs since self government both Labor and Liberal have been cutting services.

Ridership in 1985 was 24million with pop. of 250,000. Ridership for 2014-15 is 17.4million with 385,000. The target figure was 18.5million. We have gone from the 2nd best to the 2nd worst in the country. If you cannot get people onto buses how are you going to get them on a train?

The cost for running buses has increased by 8% to $5.52 per km. This actually is not that bad with Melbourne buses costing $4.55 per km (2011). In Sydney it is $6.50 per km (2011). Yeah I know, full of stats. I have tonnes! Anyway, the talk about privatising ACTION is a little premature.

All the ‘gimmicks’ that the buses have – park n ride, bike n ride, bike racks, free wi-fi will not get bums on seats if you cannot get from A to B in a reasonable amount of time. A synchronised bus system needs to be brought back. This is where express buses arrive at an interchange and you catch your area bus within a couple of minutes. That’s how it used to be, quick, efficient. It will cost more to do but the benefit to the community far outweighs any negative. Ridership increases, income for the government increases, roads less congested. A win, win really.

wildturkeycanoe10:12 pm 29 Oct 15

rubaiyat said :

How much carbon emitting concrete walls and barriers to kill how many plants and wildlife?

The light rail will minimise the damage, not just in the short term but for the long term and will certainly give a much cleaner end result using a whole lot less resources even in its construction.
.

But the light rail’s success relies on more development along the tract of land it runs through, meaning more multi-storey buildings, apartments, shops and businesses. How does all this magically appear without employing the same polluting equipment that builds the roads? You will need excavators to dig the footings, semis to deliver the steel and the scaffolding, concrete pumpers and a whole fleet of mixers to pour the walls and floors, tower crane delivery, then all the workers need to get to site somehow. Do you think the tradies will simply leave their utes at home and catch buses into Civic every day? Fat chance. The tram will indirectly cause more pollution through all the new development, also causing traffic disruptions. How will the tram entice passengers when the verges are cordoned off on every building site because there is no space to house all the shipping containers and deliveries? If you’ve ever been near a construction site you’d know what I’m talking about, they are not the most pedestrian friendly environment. Take the work around Parkes Way and Coranderrk St. near the big roundabout as an example. It is slowing down traffic, making pedestrians detour and it isn’t even a high-rise construction. After completion of the tram, Civic and Gungahlin residents will suffer for many years whilst the plague of high density slowly creeps along this artery of public transport. Do not look forward to any improvement in congestion for a looong time.
BTW, what is the future of the Mitchell Resource Management Centre? Will the “powers that be” allow new housing to develop downwind or will they close it and move all our rubbish out of sight?

Rotten_berry10:10 pm 29 Oct 15

wildturkeycanoe said :

Forget about the cost blowout. From a CT article today http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/traffic-changes-across-canberra-city-as-part-of-light-rail-development-application-20151028-gkkhos.html
describing the DA for the tram, 4.2 million litres of diesel will be used to make the tramway. That equates to 12,180 tonnes of CO2 into the environment. Way to go green!
Also, major intersections to be closed for entire weekends, others for up to a month. All the traffic diversions and congestion will cause all sorts of problems, not to mention the digging up of water, sewer lines, power and data infrastructure. Prepare for disruptions to all kinds of services, long delays, pretty much chaos for everything in the city and Gunners.

While I am no fan of the tram, these numbers need to be kept in perspective. Let’s round it up to 5 million litres of diesel to allow for the embodied energy in the trams themselves. The tram is projected to move about 5 million passengers/year, so over 30 years we are looking at about 33 millilitres of diesel per trip. Which is not much at all, and probably similar to the embodied energy in roads.

JC said :

dungfungus said :

Queanbeyanite said :

Ha! $780 million, more like $1.2 billion. That’s just for the northern sixth. For something a dozen more bendy busses could achieve for a fraction of the debt.

Let’s not mention that all of this is to justify the land grab along Northbourne to rake in the stamp duty on the luxury apartments to blow on public art and to employ more transport workers union members.

The Gold Coast built the luxury units first, grew the population to over half a million and attracted millions of visitors a year, then they put in the light rail.
In Canberra, we will do it in the reverse order.
We are different in Canberra. Let’s rejoice for the vision and lack of commercial judjement of our leaders.

The reverse way is the way to do it. I mean to say we build roads in reverse, roads first then people. Obviously it needs to be that way. But when it comes to arterial roads they build them as single lane because the population doesn’t support dual lane, yet people complain that the government didn’t think ahead and do it “right” the first time. But hey we are talking about roads, different rules apply don’t they?

So in this case we could build the Bus Rapid Transit option for less than half the price and upgrade it to light rail if the overall need and situation warrants it later?

It’s understandable that Labor wants to inflict this white elephant on Canberra – it was the price of buying Rattenbury’s support to get themselves into power. What is frankly bewildering is that a proportion of voters have fallen for the hype! $780m is just the tip of the iceberg – when interest costs and operational subsidies are factored in, the 20-year cost is more like $1.8billion … just for the Gunghalin section. And with world-leading transport experts assessing a benefit:cost ratio of around 0.6, don’t expect the private sector to carry any risks – the cost of empty trams for many hours a day will fall squarely on ratepayers! Even worse, starting on this now will lock Canberra into light rail for the next 25 years it will take to build a city-wide network and beyond, right at a time when new and more modern options (driverless vehicles etc) are coming onto the agenda. Farewell city of the future! It looks like it’s “Back to the Past” for Canberra!

wildturkeycanoe said :

Forget about the cost blowout. From a CT article today http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/traffic-changes-across-canberra-city-as-part-of-light-rail-development-application-20151028-gkkhos.html
describing the DA for the tram, 4.2 million litres of diesel will be used to make the tramway. That equates to 12,180 tonnes of CO2 into the environment. Way to go green!
Also, major intersections to be closed for entire weekends, others for up to a month. All the traffic diversions and congestion will cause all sorts of problems, not to mention the digging up of water, sewer lines, power and data infrastructure. Prepare for disruptions to all kinds of services, long delays, pretty much chaos for everything in the city and Gunners.

Wow, the pot calling the kettle black!

How much diesel was used to create all the freeways?

How much disruption and road closures were caused by all the roadworks?

How much cancer causing bitumen and other petrochemicals to cover how much good agricultural land?

How much carbon emitting concrete walls and barriers to kill how many plants and wildlife?

The light rail will minimise the damage, not just in the short term but for the long term and will certainly give a much cleaner end result using a whole lot less resources even in its construction.

Change is change, even change for the better.

wildturkeycanoe said :

Forget about the cost blowout. From a CT article today http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/traffic-changes-across-canberra-city-as-part-of-light-rail-development-application-20151028-gkkhos.html
describing the DA for the tram, 4.2 million litres of diesel will be used to make the tramway. That equates to 12,180 tonnes of CO2 into the environment. Way to go green!
Also, major intersections to be closed for entire weekends, others for up to a month. All the traffic diversions and congestion will cause all sorts of problems, not to mention the digging up of water, sewer lines, power and data infrastructure. Prepare for disruptions to all kinds of services, long delays, pretty much chaos for everything in the city and Gunners.

Thanks WillyTurk for the CT article. At the end of the article it went “Members of the public have until November 18 to give feedback.”
I would be interested in the NCA response. Don’t they still have some say re the thoroughfares into this joint ?

How many people are going to be killed doing stupid things on the level crossings? Go around the barrier to beat the train and avoid the wait to cross Northbourne Ave.

At a cost of $5,166 per household plus interest, plus cost blowouts, plus the ongoing operating loss for something that is only going to be regularly used by 1% of the population this is a fool of a project. Good think Labor will lose the next election and it will never go ahead. We will just have to pay the cancellation fees.

wildturkeycanoe said :

Forget about the cost blowout. From a CT article today http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/traffic-changes-across-canberra-city-as-part-of-light-rail-development-application-20151028-gkkhos.html
describing the DA for the tram, 4.2 million litres of diesel will be used to make the tramway. That equates to 12,180 tonnes of CO2 into the environment. Way to go green!
Also, major intersections to be closed for entire weekends, others for up to a month. All the traffic diversions and congestion will cause all sorts of problems, not to mention the digging up of water, sewer lines, power and data infrastructure. Prepare for disruptions to all kinds of services, long delays, pretty much chaos for everything in the city and Gunners.

Mayor Rattenbury will mandate that all the diesel used building the light rail be at least Bio-20 grade so no problem there.
I have no problem with the thousand of tonnes of CO2 as that will stimulate green growth on the verges. The Greens have their own rules to cover this type of situation to ensure the trams are emission free.
The steel and cardboard flatpacks the trams come in can be recycled anytime (sooner that the government may want,actually).
The rest of the stuff can be moved to the arboretum to create a great tourist attraction like the Momento Park in Budapest (a museum displaying the gigantic monuments of Communism. A last glimpse behind the Iron Curtin. Several tons of authentic Communism)

wildturkeycanoe said :

Forget about the cost blowout. From a CT article today http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/traffic-changes-across-canberra-city-as-part-of-light-rail-development-application-20151028-gkkhos.html
describing the DA for the tram, 4.2 million litres of diesel will be used to make the tramway. That equates to 12,180 tonnes of CO2 into the environment. Way to go green!
Also, major intersections to be closed for entire weekends, others for up to a month. All the traffic diversions and congestion will cause all sorts of problems, not to mention the digging up of water, sewer lines, power and data infrastructure. Prepare for disruptions to all kinds of services, long delays, pretty much chaos for everything in the city and Gunners.

All one offs that would happen regardless of the solution. Even burying the head in the sand and saying nothing needs doing will cause more issues and pollution because Gungahlin is growing and with it comes more congestion and more congestion means more pollution.

switch said :

dungfungus said :

We are different in Canberra. Let’s rejoice for the vision and lack of commercial judjement of our leaders.

Dungers! Have you finally “seen the light?”

The light (at the end of the tunnel) you refer to is actually a tram coming.

wildturkeycanoe2:22 pm 29 Oct 15

Forget about the cost blowout. From a CT article today http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/traffic-changes-across-canberra-city-as-part-of-light-rail-development-application-20151028-gkkhos.html
describing the DA for the tram, 4.2 million litres of diesel will be used to make the tramway. That equates to 12,180 tonnes of CO2 into the environment. Way to go green!
Also, major intersections to be closed for entire weekends, others for up to a month. All the traffic diversions and congestion will cause all sorts of problems, not to mention the digging up of water, sewer lines, power and data infrastructure. Prepare for disruptions to all kinds of services, long delays, pretty much chaos for everything in the city and Gunners.

dungfungus said :

Queanbeyanite said :

Ha! $780 million, more like $1.2 billion. That’s just for the northern sixth. For something a dozen more bendy busses could achieve for a fraction of the debt.

Let’s not mention that all of this is to justify the land grab along Northbourne to rake in the stamp duty on the luxury apartments to blow on public art and to employ more transport workers union members.

The Gold Coast built the luxury units first, grew the population to over half a million and attracted millions of visitors a year, then they put in the light rail.
In Canberra, we will do it in the reverse order.
We are different in Canberra. Let’s rejoice for the vision and lack of commercial judjement of our leaders.

The reverse way is the way to do it. I mean to say we build roads in reverse, roads first then people. Obviously it needs to be that way. But when it comes to arterial roads they build them as single lane because the population doesn’t support dual lane, yet people complain that the government didn’t think ahead and do it “right” the first time. But hey we are talking about roads, different rules apply don’t they?

Queanbeyanite said :

Ha! $780 million, more like $1.2 billion. That’s just for the northern sixth. For something a dozen more bendy busses could achieve for a fraction of the debt.

Let’s not mention that all of this is to justify the land grab along Northbourne to rake in the stamp duty on the luxury apartments to blow on public art and to employ more transport workers union members.

The ‘land grab’ as you so put it will happen light rail or not and along Flemmington Road in Gungahlin is very much happening already. Ever stopped to think that this plan is a way of trying to effectively transport those people?

dungfungus said :

We are different in Canberra. Let’s rejoice for the vision and lack of commercial judjement of our leaders.

Dungers! Have you finally “seen the light?”

JC said :

dungfungus said :

OpenYourMind said :

An interesting anti-tram letter in the Canberra Times this morning claims that around the world, more light rail has been ripped up in the last 80 years than has been built. Furthermore, the majority ripped up are in sparsely populated cities. If that figure is true, it’s not a good omen for our city.

The most recent failure of a light rail project was in Spain where Velez-Malaga council, in Spain’s south with a population of 75,000, shut down its light rail line after just six years of operation.
Patronage on the line, which cost $60 million to build, fell from a high of 900,000 passengers a year in 2007 to just 700,000 before it was closed.
Ironically, 3 of the trams have since been leased to NSW and they are running on the Dulwich Hill line.
Notice the population of 75,000, which is about the same that Canberra’s light rail will service, was unable to sustain viability and patronage actually fell after it started.
To be fair, the reason for the falling patronage had a lot to do with the GFC in Europe but Canberra is yet to experience its GFC.

You fail to mention it was a half built line anyway that didn’t go to the city, it stopped outside and people had to change to a bus, so what many did was just stay on the bus rather than get the tram.

Oh Sydney has returned the ones they leased and added to the order they had for new ones, plus replaced their original fleet of 7 Variotrams.

I knew you would fill in the gaps and that is why I didn’t mention it.
Notwithstanding all those extra bits it was still a failure.

rubaiyat said :

JC said :

dungfungus said :

OpenYourMind said :

An interesting anti-tram letter in the Canberra Times this morning claims that around the world, more light rail has been ripped up in the last 80 years than has been built. Furthermore, the majority ripped up are in sparsely populated cities. If that figure is true, it’s not a good omen for our city.

The most recent failure of a light rail project was in Spain where Velez-Malaga council, in Spain’s south with a population of 75,000, shut down its light rail line after just six years of operation.
Patronage on the line, which cost $60 million to build, fell from a high of 900,000 passengers a year in 2007 to just 700,000 before it was closed.
Ironically, 3 of the trams have since been leased to NSW and they are running on the Dulwich Hill line.
Notice the population of 75,000, which is about the same that Canberra’s light rail will service, was unable to sustain viability and patronage actually fell after it started.
To be fair, the reason for the falling patronage had a lot to do with the GFC in Europe but Canberra is yet to experience its GFC.

You fail to mention it was a half built line anyway that didn’t go to the city, it stopped outside and people had to change to a bus, so what many did was just stay on the bus rather than get the tram.

Oh Sydney has returned the ones they leased and added to the order they had for new ones, plus replaced their original fleet of 7 Variotrams.

I have no idea who was behind the Spanish line nor why they designed such a bad system, but it is not uncommon for people to cock up sensible solutions for all sorts of bizarre reasons. The Indian Pacific having crossed our whole continent stops short in East Perth and does not go into the city. The same as the stupid arrangement in Canberra.

People need to stand up and demand the best solution, not oppose it. They did in Sydney where after years of pressure on the recalcitrant politicians they forced them to take the electric trains all the way into the city not stop at Redfern as the pollies wanted.

The debate in Canberra should stop being this asinine anti-public tram nonsense from people who won’t use it anyway, and get on with the best outcome for a longterm solution.

It is not “anti-tram nonsense” when it is not needed, won’t make any positive difference to commuters and the people who can’t use will be paying for it.

Queanbeyanite said :

Ha! $780 million, more like $1.2 billion. That’s just for the northern sixth. For something a dozen more bendy busses could achieve for a fraction of the debt.

Let’s not mention that all of this is to justify the land grab along Northbourne to rake in the stamp duty on the luxury apartments to blow on public art and to employ more transport workers union members.

The Gold Coast built the luxury units first, grew the population to over half a million and attracted millions of visitors a year, then they put in the light rail.
In Canberra, we will do it in the reverse order.
We are different in Canberra. Let’s rejoice for the vision and lack of commercial judjement of our leaders.

Queanbeyanite6:59 pm 28 Oct 15

Ha! $780 million, more like $1.2 billion. That’s just for the northern sixth. For something a dozen more bendy busses could achieve for a fraction of the debt.

Let’s not mention that all of this is to justify the land grab along Northbourne to rake in the stamp duty on the luxury apartments to blow on public art and to employ more transport workers union members.

JC said :

dungfungus said :

OpenYourMind said :

An interesting anti-tram letter in the Canberra Times this morning claims that around the world, more light rail has been ripped up in the last 80 years than has been built. Furthermore, the majority ripped up are in sparsely populated cities. If that figure is true, it’s not a good omen for our city.

The most recent failure of a light rail project was in Spain where Velez-Malaga council, in Spain’s south with a population of 75,000, shut down its light rail line after just six years of operation.
Patronage on the line, which cost $60 million to build, fell from a high of 900,000 passengers a year in 2007 to just 700,000 before it was closed.
Ironically, 3 of the trams have since been leased to NSW and they are running on the Dulwich Hill line.
Notice the population of 75,000, which is about the same that Canberra’s light rail will service, was unable to sustain viability and patronage actually fell after it started.
To be fair, the reason for the falling patronage had a lot to do with the GFC in Europe but Canberra is yet to experience its GFC.

You fail to mention it was a half built line anyway that didn’t go to the city, it stopped outside and people had to change to a bus, so what many did was just stay on the bus rather than get the tram.

Oh Sydney has returned the ones they leased and added to the order they had for new ones, plus replaced their original fleet of 7 Variotrams.

I have no idea who was behind the Spanish line nor why they designed such a bad system, but it is not uncommon for people to cock up sensible solutions for all sorts of bizarre reasons. The Indian Pacific having crossed our whole continent stops short in East Perth and does not go into the city. The same as the stupid arrangement in Canberra.

People need to stand up and demand the best solution, not oppose it. They did in Sydney where after years of pressure on the recalcitrant politicians they forced them to take the electric trains all the way into the city not stop at Redfern as the pollies wanted.

The debate in Canberra should stop being this asinine anti-public tram nonsense from people who won’t use it anyway, and get on with the best outcome for a longterm solution.

HiddenDragon6:33 pm 28 Oct 15

dungfungus said :

OpenYourMind said :

An interesting anti-tram letter in the Canberra Times this morning claims that around the world, more light rail has been ripped up in the last 80 years than has been built. Furthermore, the majority ripped up are in sparsely populated cities. If that figure is true, it’s not a good omen for our city.

The most recent failure of a light rail project was in Spain where Velez-Malaga council, in Spain’s south with a population of 75,000, shut down its light rail line after just six years of operation.
Patronage on the line, which cost $60 million to build, fell from a high of 900,000 passengers a year in 2007 to just 700,000 before it was closed.
Ironically, 3 of the trams have since been leased to NSW and they are running on the Dulwich Hill line.
Notice the population of 75,000, which is about the same that Canberra’s light rail will service, was unable to sustain viability and patronage actually fell after it started.
To be fair, the reason for the falling patronage had a lot to do with the GFC in Europe but Canberra is yet to experience its GFC.

If only we could get it done for $60m!

OpenYourMind5:33 pm 28 Oct 15

rubaiyat said :

I get that drivers are deadly afraid if you let one tram into Canberra that they’ll take your precious cars and freeways away from you.

But it isn’t us you need to worry about. I just witnessed a huge Barney between two road ragers.

The truth is you should be worried about each other, particularly as the inevitable congestion bites.

I don’t think constantly attacking evil motorists is doing your cause any good, if anything it’s probably convincing people that pro-tram people are unbalanced.

I’ve lived in Canberra for many decades and one of the great things about this place is the limited congestion we have. Sure Gunghalin needs some road issues addressed, but specially for us on the sunny southside, life has been pretty darn good and is unlikely to change well into the very long future, certainly long after the tram is forgotten as the bad idea it was. I also ride to work quite regularly and we have a wonderful cycling infrastructure that makes tram commute times look silly.

Do you honestly think you will get a big chunk of people driving to the hyperdome or wherever, parking, then commuting on a tram. Really?

Trams have their place, that place is not Canberra.

dungfungus said :

OpenYourMind said :

An interesting anti-tram letter in the Canberra Times this morning claims that around the world, more light rail has been ripped up in the last 80 years than has been built. Furthermore, the majority ripped up are in sparsely populated cities. If that figure is true, it’s not a good omen for our city.

The most recent failure of a light rail project was in Spain where Velez-Malaga council, in Spain’s south with a population of 75,000, shut down its light rail line after just six years of operation.
Patronage on the line, which cost $60 million to build, fell from a high of 900,000 passengers a year in 2007 to just 700,000 before it was closed.
Ironically, 3 of the trams have since been leased to NSW and they are running on the Dulwich Hill line.
Notice the population of 75,000, which is about the same that Canberra’s light rail will service, was unable to sustain viability and patronage actually fell after it started.
To be fair, the reason for the falling patronage had a lot to do with the GFC in Europe but Canberra is yet to experience its GFC.

You fail to mention it was a half built line anyway that didn’t go to the city, it stopped outside and people had to change to a bus, so what many did was just stay on the bus rather than get the tram.

Oh Sydney has returned the ones they leased and added to the order they had for new ones, plus replaced their original fleet of 7 Variotrams.

wildturkeycanoe3:10 pm 28 Oct 15

rubaiyat said :

I get that drivers are deadly afraid if you let one tram into Canberra that they’ll take your precious cars and freeways away from you.

But it isn’t us you need to worry about. I just witnessed a huge Barney between two road ragers.

The truth is you should be worried about each other, particularly as the inevitable congestion bites.

Congestion doesn’t cause road rage any more than alcohol causes violence, it is already in those people to behave like that. You might as well expand on your hypothesis and say that putting people into a tram will cause more racial violence, thanks to putting so many cultures in such close proximity of each other.

wildturkeycanoe2:58 pm 28 Oct 15

gooterz said :

We already ripped out the tracks from civic three times.

I thought the FBI were hunting down and prosecuting people for illegally ripping tracks. 🙂

I get that drivers are deadly afraid if you let one tram into Canberra that they’ll take your precious cars and freeways away from you.

But it isn’t us you need to worry about. I just witnessed a huge Barney between two road ragers.

The truth is you should be worried about each other, particularly as the inevitable congestion bites.

OpenYourMind said :

An interesting anti-tram letter in the Canberra Times this morning claims that around the world, more light rail has been ripped up in the last 80 years than has been built. Furthermore, the majority ripped up are in sparsely populated cities. If that figure is true, it’s not a good omen for our city.

We already ripped out the tracks from civic three times.

OpenYourMind said :

An interesting anti-tram letter in the Canberra Times this morning claims that around the world, more light rail has been ripped up in the last 80 years than has been built. Furthermore, the majority ripped up are in sparsely populated cities. If that figure is true, it’s not a good omen for our city.

The most recent failure of a light rail project was in Spain where Velez-Malaga council, in Spain’s south with a population of 75,000, shut down its light rail line after just six years of operation.
Patronage on the line, which cost $60 million to build, fell from a high of 900,000 passengers a year in 2007 to just 700,000 before it was closed.
Ironically, 3 of the trams have since been leased to NSW and they are running on the Dulwich Hill line.
Notice the population of 75,000, which is about the same that Canberra’s light rail will service, was unable to sustain viability and patronage actually fell after it started.
To be fair, the reason for the falling patronage had a lot to do with the GFC in Europe but Canberra is yet to experience its GFC.

OpenYourMind said :

An interesting anti-tram letter in the Canberra Times this morning claims that around the world, more light rail has been ripped up in the last 80 years than has been built. Furthermore, the majority ripped up are in sparsely populated cities. If that figure is true, it’s not a good omen for our city.

That is hardly a surprising finding (if true, and it probably is). There was a mass shift towards buses and the like in the middle of the 20th century that saw a lot of major networks ripped up. There has been a shift in the last couple of decades in some fairly major cities to reintroduce trams – but for a long time, there was only one way that tram networks were going.

I don’t lean one way or the other on this issue, except on the basis that I’m a believer in the ‘real options’ approach where possible to major infrastructure – which in this case would suggest that bus rapid transit would be the better approach at this time, designed in such a way (for instance by utilising the middle of Northbourne Avenue for dedicated bus lanes) so that it can be upgraded in future for light rail if required.

farq said :

cbrmale said :

The tram journey time from Gungahlin to Civic will take longer than at present by bus. The end to end journey time by bus to Gungahlin and then tram to Civic will take substantially longer than now.

Andrew Bar has always reminded me of Lyle Lanley https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZDOI0cq6GZM

Yes, it’s almost like the government is atoning for the A Better Place debacle by “doubling the dose”.
Selling trams is akin to “selling the sizzle, not the steak”. It’s sure going to give us lots of indigestion.

OpenYourMind8:08 am 28 Oct 15

An interesting anti-tram letter in the Canberra Times this morning claims that around the world, more light rail has been ripped up in the last 80 years than has been built. Furthermore, the majority ripped up are in sparsely populated cities. If that figure is true, it’s not a good omen for our city.

wildturkeycanoe6:14 am 28 Oct 15

rubaiyat said :

The best you can hope for with the current transport solution considered compulsory by those above is that when you almost inevitably become a victim of either the cars or the lifestyle, is that you are run over by a hearse.

You keep babbling on about the roads killing people, but let the statistics from the Australian Institute for Health and Welfare put your argument into some perspective. In the leading causes of premature mortality for Australians, deaths by land transport accidents [which covers a broader range of vehicles than simply cars on roads] is ranked as 18th, only claiming less than a percent of the population. Suicide on the other hand is ranked 13th and claims almost 2% of the population. Even the flu claims twice as many victims as commuting, so getting all the sick people to share their germs in a confined space on public transport is a backward step in reducing mortality rates.
Road death tolls are also falling and have been doing so since the invention of the automobile. You make it sound like we have a problem spiraling out of control, whereas in fact the opposite is true.
Now if you are referring to hospitalization rates due to vehicle crashes, yes the numbers are high. To put those figures into perspective though, there are twice as many people admitted to hospitals for “falls” than MVAs, so perhaps we need to first focus on a safety campaign to alert people to the dangers of gravity before panicking over the 0.23% of Australians that had a boo boo because they were involved in a bingle. How many more will succumb to trips and falls once the tram is chosen as their “modus operandi”, thanks to the increased exposure to cracked footpaths, loose pavers, divots in the nature strip and the gap between the platform and the tram?

cbrmale said :

The tram journey time from Gungahlin to Civic will take longer than at present by bus. The end to end journey time by bus to Gungahlin and then tram to Civic will take substantially longer than now.

Andrew Bar has always reminded me of Lyle Lanley https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZDOI0cq6GZM

henryans said :

Queue green social engineering apologists who equate road works with white elephants like light rail for Canberra. You need basic infrastructure like roads, which then act as a conduit for other services that are laid down while the holes are there, you know like power, Internet, storm water, water, waste etc
You can’t have a functioning city without roads, no matter what fantasy the commentators write or what Barr pimps. We have an ageing population and the hospitals can’t even manage with the patients they have now, let alone over the next 10 years as baby boomers retire and age… That doesn’t matter, don’t worry about Ambulances that can’t fit down allot of Gungahlin roads, these people can just catch a tram to hospital!
Light rail works in highly populated places like Gold coast as they have the population density and the other big factor is tourists, we have neither

Great post Henryans.
It is difficult to argue with common sense and facts but expect to be ridiculed anyway.

blow outs are a certainty from a government who took a week to remove a truck from a tunnel. The amount of clip board holding stand around jobs will have to tripple.

They the nanny state ACT Gov said we have a 25 year plan .
In hindsight we all know governments in Australian cant see 25 years ahead they have proved it time and time again.

All they care about is 25 years of taxpayers paying off their luxury lifestyle and houses.

JC said :

dungfungus said :

Masquara said :

That’s about six billion dollars worth of light rail pictured there, folks. The ACT Labor Government is incontinent!

Yes, unmitigated channelling of all things nice from the Euro continent can lead to ideological incontinence.
Regarding the costs, there has been little mentioned about how much it will cost ActewAGL to provide the massive infrastructure to the light rail network.
The only reference to it I can find is from an ActewAGL community meeting in December 2014 which only says ActewAGL “are in discussions with the Capital Metro Agency”.
The costings released by the Capital Metro Agency only appear to cover a small part of the supply of the electricity infrastructure that will be required so given ActewAGL’s current financial commitments they may be averse to further investment unless the government guarantees future payment levels. This would depend on the on-going success or failure of the light rail.
The fact that Minister Corbell has already stated the light rail will only use renewable energy means that Canberr’a light rail will be the most expensive to run in Australia.
Whatever the outcome, ACT ratepayers will be the ones exposed yet we have no say in the matter.

Another unfounded exaggeration. You will find all direct costs, such as the provision of substations and connection to the grid are factored into the cost of light rail, much like when you build a new subdivision the cost is borne by the developer not ACTEW.

What isn’t how ever is the cost of relocation of existing services.

I was referring to the grid; especially where it is underground. That’s why I said ActewAGL. I am aware developers are responsible for head-work costs.
Re the cost of re-location of existing services, have you seen the audit that Capital Metro carried out on what was under the median strip along Northbourne Avenue?

Queue green social engineering apologists who equate road works with white elephants like light rail for Canberra. You need basic infrastructure like roads, which then act as a conduit for other services that are laid down while the holes are there, you know like power, Internet, storm water, water, waste etc
You can’t have a functioning city without roads, no matter what fantasy the commentators write or what Barr pimps. We have an ageing population and the hospitals can’t even manage with the patients they have now, let alone over the next 10 years as baby boomers retire and age… That doesn’t matter, don’t worry about Ambulances that can’t fit down allot of Gungahlin roads, these people can just catch a tram to hospital!
Light rail works in highly populated places like Gold coast as they have the population density and the other big factor is tourists, we have neither

rubaiyat said :

The best you can hope for with the current transport solution considered compulsory by those above is that when you almost inevitably become a victim of either the cars or the lifestyle, is that you are run over by a hearse.

A self powered hearse will get you to where you are going faster than a tram will.

The best you can hope for with the current transport solution considered compulsory by those above is that when you almost inevitably become a victim of either the cars or the lifestyle, is that you are run over by a hearse.

The ONLY blow-outs we have here are in the usual hysterical fact-free fear mongering from the usual “never use public transport, never will” cheer squad.

The ONLY denial we have here is that the Light Rail will actually take vehicles off the Gungahlin City route, won’t burn massive pollutants, won’t generate vast amounts of noise, won’t bury huge amounts of green space under bitumen and concrete, won’t divide our city with 4m high concrete walls and won’t kill and maim our citizens in an unending but apparently unmentionable consequence of both physical and mental laziness.

The ONLY waste of money we have here is on the most expensive transport option of all, cars and freeways.

What we need is someone of the stature of the Marlboro Man, the actor who famously died of lung cancer, to stand up for cars and roads. Perhaps a Lazy Len, a Fat Fred, a Diabetes Dan, a Vacuous Varicous Vein Vic, a Too Puffed to Walk Phil.

We live in an extraordinary world where sensible solutions are to blame for our stupidities. Where the change that is inevitable can’t be even considered because it IS change.

dungfungus said :

Masquara said :

That’s about six billion dollars worth of light rail pictured there, folks. The ACT Labor Government is incontinent!

Yes, unmitigated channelling of all things nice from the Euro continent can lead to ideological incontinence.
Regarding the costs, there has been little mentioned about how much it will cost ActewAGL to provide the massive infrastructure to the light rail network.
The only reference to it I can find is from an ActewAGL community meeting in December 2014 which only says ActewAGL “are in discussions with the Capital Metro Agency”.
The costings released by the Capital Metro Agency only appear to cover a small part of the supply of the electricity infrastructure that will be required so given ActewAGL’s current financial commitments they may be averse to further investment unless the government guarantees future payment levels. This would depend on the on-going success or failure of the light rail.
The fact that Minister Corbell has already stated the light rail will only use renewable energy means that Canberr’a light rail will be the most expensive to run in Australia.
Whatever the outcome, ACT ratepayers will be the ones exposed yet we have no say in the matter.

Another unfounded exaggeration. You will find all direct costs, such as the provision of substations and connection to the grid are factored into the cost of light rail, much like when you build a new subdivision the cost is borne by the developer not ACTEW.

What isn’t how ever is the cost of relocation of existing services.

dungfungus said :

This trend of setting off the cost of light rail against roads is totally spurious.
How many people use the GDE and Majura Parkway daily for example compared with the 5,000 (if they are lucky) that will use the City to Gungahlin light rail?
You do realise that when the trams are delivered to Canberra they will come by road transport?

Again I am not anti road, even said I support Majura Parkway and some other projects.

But the comparison is far from spurious. There is very much a double standard.

I reckon if the government proposed a $780m road from Gungahlin to the city, no one would batter an eyelid what so ever, even those lost and forgotten soles who choose to live in Tuggeranong.

Yet light rail people whing and whine about the costs, quote figures like you have without actually looking at the bigger picture and the opportunity costs and benefits and not to mention the social benefits too.

OpenYourMind said :

You are making a terrible assumption here. People use these roads; you think people will use light rail? That’s an awfully big gamble to take. We have a bus system that in its own struggling way at least covers the geographically disperse city that is Canberra and which has enormous ongoing cost and low levels of utilisation. Canberra is not the Gold Coast or a tight little European city. Whether we like it or not, it’s a car oriented city and will be for the forseeable future. Most of us ratepayers have configured our lives around it, the schools we choose, the daycare, our workplaces our real estate selection. The tram cannot cater for this in the near term, it simply can’t. Even if we spent the $9878billion and built the tracks seen in the diagram, people still wouldn’t use it as they would still have to drive and park at a tram station…that’s the kind of city Canberra is.

Personally, I’d love to see fractions of that money spent on better cycling infrastructure than we have now. But I’m also realistic (unlike tram people) and accept that the choice of cycling (or trams) is not acceptable to many Canberrans.

Which came first the chicken or the egg? Meaning do people use roads because there are no viable alternatives, or for other reasons?

As for European cities, Canberra is VERY much like many European cities I have visited, in particular the planned Gungahlin line, which for what it is worth is the only line (with Parl Triange extension) in Canberra that I think has a chance of being viable.

Wants some examples that to me mirror Canberra somewhat. How about we talk about Strasbourg, Nottingham, Toulouse and Dublin?

Plus many many more, they do exactly what Canberra is planning. Which is light rail out of a CBD through corridors of higher development into the burbs.

Even places like Madrid and Paris have lines that simulate what Canberra is planning too. Now know some will argue that these are massive cities, but look at where the lines service and again you will see they service satellite townships which are not too different from the Civic to Gungahlin corridor. So the overall size of the city is a red herring. Same with the population size of Canberra, what matters is the population density along thr route.

Postalgeek said :

JC said :

Going to ignore most of your post, but cost lets put this into perspective for a second.

$780m sounds like a lot and it is a lot, it works out to be $65m/km. Over the 10 year cost cylce it also works out to be $228 per person per year, so maybe not so bad.

But also lets look at some road projects.

Gundaroo Drive duplication, 1km from Gungahlin Drive to Mirrabi Drive, $31m, so $31m/km.

Majura Parkway, 12km, $244m, $20.3m/km, also put that cost over 10 years and it turns out that every vehicle that drives on that road is costing $2 in direct cost.

Do you hear any uproar about the costs of these roads, nope what you hear is whinging they should have been done earlier, but when they do get done earlier (John Gorton Drive in Molongolo for example) people whinge that money has been built on roads to nowhere. But I digress.

Now these road projects are 1/2rd to 1/3rd the cost of light rail, but total construction cost is not the complete story. Take Majura parkway for a second. Yes each vehicle driving on that road is costing $2, based on cost along you could argue it should be a toll road, but no look at the bigger picture and that road is saving money elsewhere, so very much a worth while and affordable project.

Gundaroo drive duplication, yeah could argue it is needed, but economically, maybe not.

Light rail, yeah high direct cost, but what is the full economic picture. How much extra money will it generate in terms of land sale and rates? How much money will it save on not having to build extra or wider roads?

Need to factor in freight and services i.e. trucks and commercial vehicles that will never be replaced by light rail. Yes, by pushing commuters off the road wear and tear can be reduced and expensive duplication may not be needed and I think there are arguments for that, but if you’re buying food at a store, it is not going to be supplied to you by public transport.

Roads facilitate passengers, freight, and services. The light rail will facilitate passengers AFAIK.

If you took the time to actually read what I wrote you would see I am not anti road, though there is another poster who replies to this thread whi is, but I am far far from it. In other posts I have even said that when I move to Gungahlin for my lifestyle I will be making the active choice to continue to drive.

But what did I say about roads, Majura Parkway in particular? Let me remind you. “but no look at the bigger picture and that road is saving money elsewhere, so very much a worth while and affordable project.”

And that is the point, projects are expensive but you need to look at the big picture and that is what is very much lacking in the light rail debate. People just oh ah about the headline cost, but put it into perspective it isn’t that bad.

wildturkeycanoe said :

ffisher said :

Do you really want to bus/walk/wait or drive/park/walk/wait, standing around in minus 5 in winter or 30 in summer to catch a train when you could be in your nice warm/cool car and already well on your way before the train arrives.
.

This is exactly right. Anyone who believes that a majority of Gunners people will use the tram on a daily basis is deluded. Only those who are in close proximity will walk to a stop to catch the tram whilst the rest will drive or catch a bus [either to the tram stop or to their destination], so there will be more demand for buses and only a little less demand for cars. The tram also seems to rely on everyone needing to travel from Gungahlin to Civic. Has anyone actually done a study to see where all the traffic that runs along Northbourne avenue has originated from and is going to? Surely they aren’t all going to the town center.
Whilst buses take a shorter time to travel the same distance as the tram, people will still prefer the faster alternative, though my guess is that ACTION will remove the rapid bus services in order to attract more tram passengers.

The government is in denial that its light rail will simply duplicate what is already available with ACTION with no apparent improvement if service.
Its solution to this problem was announced today on the CT namely, merging ACTION and Capital Metro and replacing the exiting bus services where the tram is running the parallel route.
They will then claim “success – people are choosing to travel by light rail in preference to buses”.
Someone else suggested there will be mass rejection of all ACT public transport if this governmnet arrogance continues. I second that.

Masquara said :

That’s about six billion dollars worth of light rail pictured there, folks. The ACT Labor Government is incontinent!

Yes, unmitigated channelling of all things nice from the Euro continent can lead to ideological incontinence.
Regarding the costs, there has been little mentioned about how much it will cost ActewAGL to provide the massive infrastructure to the light rail network.
The only reference to it I can find is from an ActewAGL community meeting in December 2014 which only says ActewAGL “are in discussions with the Capital Metro Agency”.
The costings released by the Capital Metro Agency only appear to cover a small part of the supply of the electricity infrastructure that will be required so given ActewAGL’s current financial commitments they may be averse to further investment unless the government guarantees future payment levels. This would depend on the on-going success or failure of the light rail.
The fact that Minister Corbell has already stated the light rail will only use renewable energy means that Canberr’a light rail will be the most expensive to run in Australia.
Whatever the outcome, ACT ratepayers will be the ones exposed yet we have no say in the matter.

Acton tunnel is what would happen if light rail broke down or was involved in an accident! I noticed how flexible our buses were, being easily able to keep on the road and bypass the problem area – this flexibility could not happen so efficiently in a post light rail Canberra, as so many present bus routes are going to be re-routed to the light rail line. My bus home was only 10 mins late that day, which I thought was impressive.
Light rail may appear to be ‘cool’ to the decision makers (who clearly never use public transport), but the proposed light rail venture is a disaster in so many ways.

That’s about six billion dollars worth of light rail pictured there, folks. The ACT Labor Government is incontinent!

wildturkeycanoe10:23 pm 26 Oct 15

ffisher said :

Do you really want to bus/walk/wait or drive/park/walk/wait, standing around in minus 5 in winter or 30 in summer to catch a train when you could be in your nice warm/cool car and already well on your way before the train arrives.
.

This is exactly right. Anyone who believes that a majority of Gunners people will use the tram on a daily basis is deluded. Only those who are in close proximity will walk to a stop to catch the tram whilst the rest will drive or catch a bus [either to the tram stop or to their destination], so there will be more demand for buses and only a little less demand for cars. The tram also seems to rely on everyone needing to travel from Gungahlin to Civic. Has anyone actually done a study to see where all the traffic that runs along Northbourne avenue has originated from and is going to? Surely they aren’t all going to the town center.
Whilst buses take a shorter time to travel the same distance as the tram, people will still prefer the faster alternative, though my guess is that ACTION will remove the rapid bus services in order to attract more tram passengers.

“bottomless pits” this is the cost of an ageing population. There’s no ethical way to prevent the escalation of healthcare costs…. Light rail or not, the government needs to maintain health and education. Both federally funded- state/territory administered BTW.

JC makes very excellent points far better than the article above with evidence to back it up. JC highlights the often forgotten point in the consideration of PT infrastructure, the other important point to note is that LR also brings about corridor development it builds communities! Roads don’t and never will, they just become a barrier in the development of an area. Marcus the point you make around running is just unfounded and rubbish, there is no way the ongoing running of the tram will compare with the upkeep of the Majura parkway. The longer we leave the infrastructure the more it will cost, you’re moaning about the cost now imagine in 5-10 years when it doubles you will be moaning even more. We need to bite the bullet and just build the thing.Having lived most of my life commuting by rail, it’s a different mentality, it will change behaviours and it will rejuvenate the corridor this is not about a transport solution this is about building a future, building communities and creating a sustainable future. Delivering the infrastructure through a PPP also gives the ACT Gov certainty over the price, if there are blowouts they are on the consortia not the government so again your point is invalid. Finally, this is master plan is not about the gungahlin to city corridor it’s about the role out accross the ACT, therefore your point again is incorrect.

JC said :

Going to ignore most of your post, but cost lets put this into perspective for a second.

$780m sounds like a lot and it is a lot, it works out to be $65m/km. Over the 10 year cost cylce it also works out to be $228 per person per year, so maybe not so bad.

But also lets look at some road projects.

Gundaroo Drive duplication, 1km from Gungahlin Drive to Mirrabi Drive, $31m, so $31m/km.

Majura Parkway, 12km, $244m, $20.3m/km, also put that cost over 10 years and it turns out that every vehicle that drives on that road is costing $2 in direct cost.

Do you hear any uproar about the costs of these roads, nope what you hear is whinging they should have been done earlier, but when they do get done earlier (John Gorton Drive in Molongolo for example) people whinge that money has been built on roads to nowhere. But I digress.

Now these road projects are 1/2rd to 1/3rd the cost of light rail, but total construction cost is not the complete story. Take Majura parkway for a second. Yes each vehicle driving on that road is costing $2, based on cost along you could argue it should be a toll road, but no look at the bigger picture and that road is saving money elsewhere, so very much a worth while and affordable project.

Gundaroo drive duplication, yeah could argue it is needed, but economically, maybe not.

Light rail, yeah high direct cost, but what is the full economic picture. How much extra money will it generate in terms of land sale and rates? How much money will it save on not having to build extra or wider roads?

I still have this trouble with the idea that extra money will be generated in terms of land sale and rates.

Couldn’t they still go ahead and build all these high density joints without a tram.?
Are people going to rush to buy the things so they can sit out on the balcony just to watch a blessed tram trundle by ?
Will they be yelling out “hurry come quick a tram is going to be going past shortly !! , (something those would be uppitty southsiders don’t have) , and don’t spill your shardy on the carpet !! “

HiddenDragon5:40 pm 26 Oct 15

“….The ACT government will be hoping to attract similar Federal support for the second stage of its project….”

All the public comments I have heard from our shiny new public transport-friendly federal Ministry have included a caveat along the lines of “if it stacks up” – so substantial federal assistsance would be very nice, but with all the other calls on federal funding (and that deficit which just won’t go away), anything more than token assistance will be miraculous.

Marcus Paul said :

Thanks for your comment JC.

You make some great points, and it’s hard to argue with the figures you present.

The only issue is (perhaps) while roadways do from time to time require maintenance … light rail will require on-going running costs.

While I am actually a fan of this infrastructure, I personally believe we should wait at least another five or so years and could better spend the money in health and schools.

Light Rail long term is certainly a good idea, however if we rush into it over the next few years I hope we don’t have an expensive white elephant siphoning rate payers $$.

I have an issue with this idea that we should spend more money on health and schools. Its the same argument used anytime something looks expensive. The ACT budget allocated 56% of the budget to health and education. So over half my rates and taxes already go to health and education and yet yourself and others say more should be spent on them. I’m all for free healthcare and education and agree its a valuable thing to spend money on. But we can’t just keep putting more money into these bottomless pits. No amount of money is going to make the health and education systems flawless.

The health system needs an overhaul. Private medical insurance is a con we are forced to pay for, yet i can’t afford to use due to the gap. I’m happy to pay when I can afford it. Recently I needed after hours medical attention. I went to the hospital and it was packed with people coughing. I’m not sure how many were emergencies but the queue was at 40+ people. I asked if there was anywhere else I could go and there was a doctors in the hospital and would cost me $90 before medicare rebate. I went there and paid my money and was out within an hour. Yet I hear of people who complain about emergency and they tell me they took their child there because they were ill and there are no bulk billing doctors around. Clearly we could improve the health system and part of the problem are Canberrans themselves.

I’m waiting for when the government will want to build a new convention centre and stadium. I’m sure the same argument will be used then. Back to the light rail, the current plan makes a lot of sense. Extending it all over Canberra doesn’t. Creating the high density corridors, enabling people to live in Canberra and not need to own a car if they choose not to or only owning one car between 2 or more people will help. More housing with suitable transport options is a good plan. Sure the upfront cost is high, but infrastructure costs money and usually benefits the economy in many ways. It probably should be extended to Russell and the airport as part of stage one. Then extended to the triangle, Kingston and Manuka (Maybe Fyshwick with a big park and ride station). But that is as far as I think it needs to go in the medium term. Those who want their suburbs, backyards and cars can still do so. There are benefits to the community, it should reduce traffic on the roads, compared to no light rail in 10-20 years, provide more housing and lifestyle options, keep carparking costs down in the city and also reduce the amount of roadworks and improvements.

My only observation of road maintenance is it must cost a fair bit, there are many roads needing maintenance and not the budget to fix them properly.

The tram journey time from Gungahlin to Civic will take longer than at present by bus. The end to end journey time by bus to Gungahlin and then tram to Civic will take substantially longer than now. As a former resident of Melbourne who commuted by train to their city centre for many years, I know that the rail component of a home to work journey is only a percentage of the total journey time. This is one failing of fixed rail, and the other failing is our city has a very low population density compared to most cities which have built light rail networks over the past few decades. This low population density and the proliferation of work destinations means that a large percentage of commuters will rely on car or bus for their commutes, which often are not to the city centre. I have found tram networks in cities like Amsterdam to be excellent, but these cities are compact compared to Canberra.

In other words I truly hope we don’t have an expensive white elephant siphoning ratepayer dollars. At the moment rates are so expensive in Canberra that I am seriously thinking about selling up and moving out, and I don’t believe there is any scope to increase rates above that which is being charged at the moment.

JC said :

Going to ignore most of your post, but cost lets put this into perspective for a second.

$780m sounds like a lot and it is a lot, it works out to be $65m/km. Over the 10 year cost cylce it also works out to be $228 per person per year, so maybe not so bad.

But also lets look at some road projects.

Gundaroo Drive duplication, 1km from Gungahlin Drive to Mirrabi Drive, $31m, so $31m/km.

Majura Parkway, 12km, $244m, $20.3m/km, also put that cost over 10 years and it turns out that every vehicle that drives on that road is costing $2 in direct cost.

Do you hear any uproar about the costs of these roads, nope what you hear is whinging they should have been done earlier, but when they do get done earlier (John Gorton Drive in Molongolo for example) people whinge that money has been built on roads to nowhere. But I digress.

Now these road projects are 1/2rd to 1/3rd the cost of light rail, but total construction cost is not the complete story. Take Majura parkway for a second. Yes each vehicle driving on that road is costing $2, based on cost along you could argue it should be a toll road, but no look at the bigger picture and that road is saving money elsewhere, so very much a worth while and affordable project.

Gundaroo drive duplication, yeah could argue it is needed, but economically, maybe not.

Light rail, yeah high direct cost, but what is the full economic picture. How much extra money will it generate in terms of land sale and rates? How much money will it save on not having to build extra or wider roads?

This trend of setting off the cost of light rail against roads is totally spurious.
How many people use the GDE and Majura Parkway daily for example compared with the 5,000 (if they are lucky) that will use the City to Gungahlin light rail?
You do realise that when the trams are delivered to Canberra they will come by road transport?

No right answer but it seems like too much money for Canberra.
For Gunghalin drive they should first remove the two traffic lights at Franklin and Mitchell and put the turning traffic on merging lane and overhead road; its the traffic lights that slow down that road.
Unless they are proposing carparking for 5000+ cars in Gunghalin who do they think is going to use the light rail; it will only be those who live a 10 min walk from it. 60,000 residents in Gunghalin. It will be white elephant.
Gundaroo drive needs duplication also from Crace to Barton Highway otherwise what will be the point; traffic is slow at Crace and on Gunghalin Drive.
Hoskin Street at Mitchell should continue thru and join up with Randwick Road to allow another route to ease traffic.
Surely these solutions would be cheaper than light rail. Do you really want to bus/walk/wait or drive/park/walk/wait, standing around in minus 5 in winter or 30 in summer to catch a train when you could be in your nice warm/cool car and already well on your way before the train arrives.
Why should all of Canberra pay to fix a problem created by bad planning – the planners have done a bad job of planning the Gunghalin region (including the town centre), perhaps their pay should be docked to fix it.

JC said :

Going to ignore most of your post, but cost lets put this into perspective for a second.

$780m sounds like a lot and it is a lot, it works out to be $65m/km. Over the 10 year cost cylce it also works out to be $228 per person per year, so maybe not so bad.

But also lets look at some road projects.

Gundaroo Drive duplication, 1km from Gungahlin Drive to Mirrabi Drive, $31m, so $31m/km.

Majura Parkway, 12km, $244m, $20.3m/km, also put that cost over 10 years and it turns out that every vehicle that drives on that road is costing $2 in direct cost.

Do you hear any uproar about the costs of these roads, nope what you hear is whinging they should have been done earlier, but when they do get done earlier (John Gorton Drive in Molongolo for example) people whinge that money has been built on roads to nowhere. But I digress.

Now these road projects are 1/2rd to 1/3rd the cost of light rail, but total construction cost is not the complete story. Take Majura parkway for a second. Yes each vehicle driving on that road is costing $2, based on cost along you could argue it should be a toll road, but no look at the bigger picture and that road is saving money elsewhere, so very much a worth while and affordable project.

Gundaroo drive duplication, yeah could argue it is needed, but economically, maybe not.

Light rail, yeah high direct cost, but what is the full economic picture. How much extra money will it generate in terms of land sale and rates? How much money will it save on not having to build extra or wider roads?

Need to factor in freight and services i.e. trucks and commercial vehicles that will never be replaced by light rail. Yes, by pushing commuters off the road wear and tear can be reduced and expensive duplication may not be needed and I think there are arguments for that, but if you’re buying food at a store, it is not going to be supplied to you by public transport.

Roads facilitate passengers, freight, and services. The light rail will facilitate passengers AFAIK.

OpenYourMind1:02 pm 26 Oct 15

JC said :

Going to ignore most of your post, but cost lets put this into perspective for a second.

$780m sounds like a lot and it is a lot, it works out to be $65m/km. Over the 10 year cost cylce it also works out to be $228 per person per year, so maybe not so bad.

But also lets look at some road projects.

Gundaroo Drive duplication, 1km from Gungahlin Drive to Mirrabi Drive, $31m, so $31m/km.

Majura Parkway, 12km, $244m, $20.3m/km, also put that cost over 10 years and it turns out that every vehicle that drives on that road is costing $2 in direct cost.

Do you hear any uproar about the costs of these roads, nope what you hear is whinging they should have been done earlier, but when they do get done earlier (John Gorton Drive in Molongolo for example) people whinge that money has been built on roads to nowhere. But I digress.

Now these road projects are 1/2rd to 1/3rd the cost of light rail, but total construction cost is not the complete story. Take Majura parkway for a second. Yes each vehicle driving on that road is costing $2, based on cost along you could argue it should be a toll road, but no look at the bigger picture and that road is saving money elsewhere, so very much a worth while and affordable project.

Gundaroo drive duplication, yeah could argue it is needed, but economically, maybe not.

Light rail, yeah high direct cost, but what is the full economic picture. How much extra money will it generate in terms of land sale and rates? How much money will it save on not having to build extra or wider roads?

You are making a terrible assumption here. People use these roads; you think people will use light rail? That’s an awfully big gamble to take. We have a bus system that in its own struggling way at least covers the geographically disperse city that is Canberra and which has enormous ongoing cost and low levels of utilisation. Canberra is not the Gold Coast or a tight little European city. Whether we like it or not, it’s a car oriented city and will be for the forseeable future. Most of us ratepayers have configured our lives around it, the schools we choose, the daycare, our workplaces our real estate selection. The tram cannot cater for this in the near term, it simply can’t. Even if we spent the $9878billion and built the tracks seen in the diagram, people still wouldn’t use it as they would still have to drive and park at a tram station…that’s the kind of city Canberra is.

Personally, I’d love to see fractions of that money spent on better cycling infrastructure than we have now. But I’m also realistic (unlike tram people) and accept that the choice of cycling (or trams) is not acceptable to many Canberrans.

Thanks for your comment JC.

You make some great points, and it’s hard to argue with the figures you present.

The only issue is (perhaps) while roadways do from time to time require maintenance … light rail will require on-going running costs.

While I am actually a fan of this infrastructure, I personally believe we should wait at least another five or so years and could better spend the money in health and schools.

Light Rail long term is certainly a good idea, however if we rush into it over the next few years I hope we don’t have an expensive white elephant siphoning rate payers $$.

Going to ignore most of your post, but cost lets put this into perspective for a second.

$780m sounds like a lot and it is a lot, it works out to be $65m/km. Over the 10 year cost cylce it also works out to be $228 per person per year, so maybe not so bad.

But also lets look at some road projects.

Gundaroo Drive duplication, 1km from Gungahlin Drive to Mirrabi Drive, $31m, so $31m/km.

Majura Parkway, 12km, $244m, $20.3m/km, also put that cost over 10 years and it turns out that every vehicle that drives on that road is costing $2 in direct cost.

Do you hear any uproar about the costs of these roads, nope what you hear is whinging they should have been done earlier, but when they do get done earlier (John Gorton Drive in Molongolo for example) people whinge that money has been built on roads to nowhere. But I digress.

Now these road projects are 1/2rd to 1/3rd the cost of light rail, but total construction cost is not the complete story. Take Majura parkway for a second. Yes each vehicle driving on that road is costing $2, based on cost along you could argue it should be a toll road, but no look at the bigger picture and that road is saving money elsewhere, so very much a worth while and affordable project.

Gundaroo drive duplication, yeah could argue it is needed, but economically, maybe not.

Light rail, yeah high direct cost, but what is the full economic picture. How much extra money will it generate in terms of land sale and rates? How much money will it save on not having to build extra or wider roads?

Daily Digest

Want the best Canberra news delivered daily? Every day we package the most popular Riotact stories and send them straight to your inbox. Sign-up now for trusted local news that will never be behind a paywall.

By submitting your email address you are agreeing to Region Group's terms and conditions and privacy policy.