Skip to content Skip to main navigation

Light rail development application approved

By Charlotte Harper 22 December 2015 62

light rail

The ACT Environment and Planning Directorate has approved development applications for light rail links between Gungahlin and the City and from the City to Russell.

Minister for Capital Metro Simon Corbell said the development applications were open for public consultation for 15 working days during which 22 submissions were received.

“These approvals are an important milestone for Capital Metro and a big step toward the start of construction next year on Canberra’s first light rail route,” Mr Corbell said.

“Through public consultation the Environment and Planning Directorate received submissions from the community, government agencies and utility providers, raising points to be considered in the assessment of the development applications. The directorate has considered all submissions in making their decision to approve the DAs.”

The development application for the optional Russell extension, which was submitted at the same time as the development application for the City to Gungahlin route, was also approved today as part of the process.

“Obtaining DA approval for the optional Russell Extension is a prudent measure that puts the ACT Government in the best position to proceed with the extension to Russell should that decision be made,” Mr Corbell said.

The optional Russell extension for phase one of Capital Metro is expected to increase light rail patronage by more than 30 percent if it goes ahead. It would also provide a CBD link to thousands of employees working on Constitution Avenue and in the defence precinct.

“From Russell we would be perfectly placed to extend the Light Rail Network to other key parts of our city, including the airport, the parliamentary triangle and other destinations south of the lake,” Mr Corbell said.

Environment and Planning Directorate development application approval will allow construction to begin next year on territory land. Approval for parts of the project on land that falls under the National Capital Plan, such as parts of Northbourne Avenue and Constitution Avenue, will be lodged with the National Capital Authority in coming months.


What’s Your opinion?


Please login to post your comments, or connect with
62 Responses to
Light rail development application approved
Filter
Showing only Website comments
Order
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newest
rommeldog56 6:43 pm 02 Feb 16

rubaiyat said :

It is when you have to either pay for it or climb over it.

As far as wild exaggerations go, rather the pot calling the kettle black. I’d have to be totally making everything up just to come within cooee of the endless absurd claims made here by the anti-tram hysterics.

My suspicions are they are all air-conditioning salesmen looking forward to the Global Warming that they publically deny, but secretly relish. Particularly as the AC will add to the temperature rise, just as it does in Hong Kong in a vicious circle of “bugger you!”.

Blah….blah…..blah….. same old, same old “its my way or the highway” comments to anyone who has a different opinion to yours.

rubaiyat 12:18 pm 02 Feb 16

miz said :

It’s disingenuous to expect obesity to go down simply because of public transport use.

The only disingenuity here is claiming that I expect it to change “SIMPLY because of public transport use”. Your words not mine.

Like with your diet you expect a big red button to make all your problems go away, without having to get out of whatever you happen to be sitting in, either your car or your Lazyboy.

As much as you stubbornly resist it, the change of lifestyle necessary is many things that add up to to stopping all the bad habits you have grown into.

But I was in advertising, the “simplistic” search for instant fads that do nothing but give you permission to continue with your bad habits, makes a lot of money for basically the same people who got you in trouble in the first place.

The trainer’s slogan should be “No complain, No gain”.

The louder you oppose it, the more certain it is that it is the right course.

rubaiyat 12:02 pm 02 Feb 16

miz said :

It’s disingenuous to expect obesity to go down simply because of public transport use. Most obesity / type II Diabetes these days is a result of the stupidity of nutritionists who since the 1970s pushed a ‘less fat and protein, more carbs’ message.
I personally was borderline Type II but this completely resolved after switching permanently (on doctor’s advice) to higher protein, good fats and minimal carbs. No extra exercise or public transport use was required!
I therefore call the obesity aspect as totally irrelevant to the light rail debate.

I’d find that hilarious if the subject was not so serious.

It is quite clear from the comments on the almost 100% junk food articles in these columns, that the vast majority of the readers are not just ignorant of basic nutrition, which is not hard to follow, but hooked on their own dismal version of it.

rubaiyat 11:54 am 02 Feb 16

wildturkeycanoe said :

rubaiyat said :

Cars are certainly not the solution, they are the problem. Public transport is (literally) a step in the right direction.

Public transport involves considerable exercise and standing up. Sitting being the big killer.

Freeways, the great offender, actually cut up our cities and make it impossible to cross them without huge diversions, driving people into even more car use.

Public transport may require some exercise aspect but for someone living on the outskirts of Gunners the tram will make that less of a chore. It will be too far to walk to get to the tram so they will either A) drive to the tram park n ride facility, or B) catch a connecting bus to the tram station. Walking required shall be only 100 meters or so in the Gungahlin car park or even less if they get a bus to the tram stop. With a car, they will have to park at the multi storey car park and then walk around 500m or more to get to the civic center, the tram will eliminate that need and drop them off pretty much right next door. How is this encouraging exercise when it makes the walking distance less?
Standing up? Are they not going to put seats in the tram? I’m sure the obese people are going to love to have to stand for the entire trip, blocking the aisle with their wide girth and making the experience so much easier for everybody else.

As for the second comment about freeways, how much more difficult will it be to cross the path of the tram, when barriers are erected for the safety of the public? Sure, we will get plenty more exercise by having to walk all the way to the nearest crossingAt least with the current layout you can stroll across the verge at any point and enjoy the greenery of Northbourne’s majestic eucalypts.

Well lets not do any research on that! Lets just conjecture!

Oh wait, the CSIRO and Melbourne University have done it already!

And heaven forbid you do your own, seeing just about everybody has a Fitbit or equivalent now.

It’s bleedin’ obvious that nobody has a tram or bus parked in their garage with a door into their lounge room.

You complain endlessly that the light rail doesn’t go directly to where you want to go but when it suits you, you claim it goes right to the front door!

As for the rest more of the same blah, blah, blah. Glad they are building the system faster, the whining seems to stop once the thing exists and the nonsense is exposed for what it is.

rubaiyat 11:44 am 02 Feb 16

rommeldog56 said :

rubaiyat said :

If safety is your concern then where at your demands for the enormously expensive eyesore endless 4m high concrete walls lining the roads that seem to be invisible when you are looking for complaints against transport “solutions”?

I recently saw an artists impression of the tram that showed a low fence along the tram track – next to the tram station.

So, its ok for pedestrians to risk there lives by dodging 6 lanes of Northborne Ave traffic + 2 lanes of tram track. That surely adds to the risk of crossing Northborne.

In any event, once again your wild exaggerations – this time of “endless 4m high concrete walls lining the roads”. There is some for safety and some for noise reduction – its hardly “endless”.

It is when you have to either pay for it or climb over it.

As far as wild exaggerations go, rather the pot calling the kettle black. I’d have to be totally making everything up just to come within cooee of the endless absurd claims made here by the anti-tram hysterics.

My suspicions are they are all air-conditioning salesmen looking forward to the Global Warming that they publically deny, but secretly relish. Particularly as the AC will add to the temperature rise, just as it does in Hong Kong in a vicious circle of “bugger you!”.

wildturkeycanoe 7:59 am 02 Feb 16

rubaiyat said :

Cars are certainly not the solution, they are the problem. Public transport is (literally) a step in the right direction.

Public transport involves considerable exercise and standing up. Sitting being the big killer.

Freeways, the great offender, actually cut up our cities and make it impossible to cross them without huge diversions, driving people into even more car use.

Public transport may require some exercise aspect but for someone living on the outskirts of Gunners the tram will make that less of a chore. It will be too far to walk to get to the tram so they will either A) drive to the tram park n ride facility, or B) catch a connecting bus to the tram station. Walking required shall be only 100 meters or so in the Gungahlin car park or even less if they get a bus to the tram stop. With a car, they will have to park at the multi storey car park and then walk around 500m or more to get to the civic center, the tram will eliminate that need and drop them off pretty much right next door. How is this encouraging exercise when it makes the walking distance less?
Standing up? Are they not going to put seats in the tram? I’m sure the obese people are going to love to have to stand for the entire trip, blocking the aisle with their wide girth and making the experience so much easier for everybody else.

As for the second comment about freeways, how much more difficult will it be to cross the path of the tram, when barriers are erected for the safety of the public? Sure, we will get plenty more exercise by having to walk all the way to the nearest crossingAt least with the current layout you can stroll across the verge at any point and enjoy the greenery of Northbourne’s majestic eucalypts.

rommeldog56 7:23 am 02 Feb 16

rubaiyat said :

If safety is your concern then where at your demands for the enormously expensive eyesore endless 4m high concrete walls lining the roads that seem to be invisible when you are looking for complaints against transport “solutions”?

I recently saw an artists impression of the tram that showed a low fence along the tram track – next to the tram station.

So, its ok for pedestrians to risk there lives by dodging 6 lanes of Northborne Ave traffic + 2 lanes of tram track. That surely adds to the risk of crossing Northborne.

In any event, once again your wild exaggerations – this time of “endless 4m high concrete walls lining the roads”. There is some for safety and some for noise reduction – its hardly “endless”.

dungfungus 5:53 pm 01 Feb 16

Its just been announced that the John Holland consortium has been chosen to deliver the Gungahlin to Canberra city light rail.

rubaiyat 2:05 pm 27 Jan 16

dungfungus said :

Something rubaiyat and the Capital Metro Agency should study closely:
https://www.minnpost.com/cityscape/2016/01/psychology-light-rail-safety

This is right up there with your “Light Rail Crimewave” in Sacramento! Smoking and cussin’ wasn’t it?

The fact that the author found it unusual that any accidents were happening speaks volumes.

Also that you have entirely ignored all the car deaths in the same place and time. “Too many” to either mention or think unusual. Unlike the Too Few and unusual tram accidents.

You are amazing in what you “notice”. (actually scour the Internet for) and don’t notice (actually totally ignore) eg a first fleet of armed sailing boats full of marines in another post.

None so blind as those with selective vision.

rubaiyat 1:45 pm 27 Jan 16

rommeldog56 said :

dungfungus said :

Something rubaiyat and the Capital Metro Agency should study closely:
https://www.minnpost.com/cityscape/2016/01/psychology-light-rail-safety

Hmmmm…..something that the “artists impressions” of the tram don’t show.

I’ve seen many pedestrians cut across one side of Northborne Ave to the other – across the currently vacant wide medium strip.

Post tram, as a safety issue, I assume that there will be some sort of fence alongside both sides of the tram track to prevent pedestrian access across the Northborne Ave medium strip ???

Not all pedestrians can be expected to walk to the lights at the nearest intersection to cross more safely.

Post tram , will there be regular pedestrian under passes/over passes across Northborne Ave – other than those which will be provided at the 3 tram stops between Dickson and Civic ????

The tram only comes every now and then and is hardly the hazard that the almost nonstop stream of cars (with no passengers) that you have no objection to.

There is an almost identical tram line in Victoria Parade Melbourne that runs up the middle of the green verge, and must I remind you the entire Melbourne tram system averages one fatality a year. Unlike all the “safe” cars and trucks. Even that one you think makes an incoherent case against LR in The States where the truck driver drove into the tram whilst making an illegal turn.

If safety is your concern then where at your demands for the enormously expensive eyesore endless 4m high concrete walls lining the roads that seem to be invisible when you are looking for complaints against transport “solutions”?

miz 1:38 pm 27 Jan 16

Re ‘significant work’ on Tharwa Drive, it was remedial work after it was discovered the road would collapse if they tried to put in pipes underneath (having been built shoddily in the first place). The pipes were, ironically, for the ‘new’ emergency services building Which was really only replacing previous services that had passed their use by date (eg calwell ambulance). No net gain for Tuggeranong there, and the location of the new building is highly questionable, for example if there is a bushfire.
It would be nice if Lanyon was more of a public transport focus, being the ‘other’ far flung area of Canberra.

miz 1:23 pm 27 Jan 16

It’s disingenuous to expect obesity to go down simply because of public transport use. Most obesity / type II Diabetes these days is a result of the stupidity of nutritionists who since the 1970s pushed a ‘less fat and protein, more carbs’ message.
I personally was borderline Type II but this completely resolved after switching permanently (on doctor’s advice) to higher protein, good fats and minimal carbs. No extra exercise or public transport use was required!
I therefore call the obesity aspect as totally irrelevant to the light rail debate.

dungfungus 11:27 am 27 Jan 16

rommeldog56 said :

dungfungus said :

Something rubaiyat and the Capital Metro Agency should study closely:
https://www.minnpost.com/cityscape/2016/01/psychology-light-rail-safety

Hmmmm…..something that the “artists impressions” of the tram don’t show.

I’ve seen many pedestrians cut across one side of Northborne Ave to the other – across the currently vacant wide medium strip.

Post tram, as a safety issue, I assume that there will be some sort of fence alongside both sides of the tram track to prevent pedestrian access across the Northborne Ave medium strip ???

Not all pedestrians can be expected to walk to the lights at the nearest intersection to cross more safely.

Post tram , will there be regular pedestrian under passes/over passes across Northborne Ave – other than those which will be provided at the 3 tram stops between Dickson and Civic ????

I feel another vision coming on, rainbow coloured pedestrian crossings to levitate people safely across Northbourne Avenue.
They will probably also put in those ugly Armco barriers (like the ones on the median strip outside TCH). These will compliment the ugly rails, stanchions, substations and overhead wires. There will be more concrete and steel than grass and trees, that is for sure.
Speaking of artists’ impressions I see the one in this thread still shows the “trolley bus” two wire catenary.
Is the agency running this light rail side show really serious about what they propose to give us?
Damien, where are you on this?

rommeldog56 7:32 am 27 Jan 16

dungfungus said :

Something rubaiyat and the Capital Metro Agency should study closely:
https://www.minnpost.com/cityscape/2016/01/psychology-light-rail-safety

Hmmmm…..something that the “artists impressions” of the tram don’t show.

I’ve seen many pedestrians cut across one side of Northborne Ave to the other – across the currently vacant wide medium strip.

Post tram, as a safety issue, I assume that there will be some sort of fence alongside both sides of the tram track to prevent pedestrian access across the Northborne Ave medium strip ???

Not all pedestrians can be expected to walk to the lights at the nearest intersection to cross more safely.

Post tram , will there be regular pedestrian under passes/over passes across Northborne Ave – other than those which will be provided at the 3 tram stops between Dickson and Civic ????

dungfungus 10:21 am 22 Jan 16

Something rubaiyat and the Capital Metro Agency should study closely:
https://www.minnpost.com/cityscape/2016/01/psychology-light-rail-safety

dungfungus 8:54 pm 05 Jan 16

The following was spotted in today’s Sourceable Industry News and Analysis (Melbourne):
“In the ACT, there’s $52 million allocated to progress Stage 1 of the Capital Metro Light Rail Project, for which the successful consortium for delivery and operation is likely to be awarded early next year. The City to the Lake project is also progressing following submission of a Works Application to the NCA for the West Basin Waterfront.”
Well, that’s news to me and probably a lot of other Canberrans also.

dungfungus 9:17 pm 04 Jan 16

rubaiyat said :

We don’t need Public Transport, we have Uber!

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-01-02/uber-price-surges-on-new-years-eve-spark-criticism/7064530

I noted the attached Twit from:

“Michael Bell @Xtrackka
Is the “problem” with Uber surge pricing the fact that people a) can’t read, b) can’t do arithmetic, or c) can’t admit to being clueless?”

The three observable basics of how most people come to the conclusions they do. Not just on Transportation.

Are you suggesting Uber run the trams also?

rubaiyat 2:01 pm 04 Jan 16

OpenYourMind said :

Building a ridiculous tram that won’t be used aint gonna help things.

The LNP mayor of the Gold Coast had the decency to say AFTER the Light Rail was built that he didn’t know what he was talking about, and that the “Reality Study” was over, it’s a “No-Brainer, just build the rest”.

Obviously public transport is ridiculous to YOU, and YOU are not going to use it which is as far as you have thought about it.

Pity you weren’t there to offer profound advice when the politicians looked at the sheep paddock that was to become Canberra:

“We’ll all be rooned,” said Hanrahan, “Before the year is out.”

rubaiyat 1:44 pm 04 Jan 16

wildturkeycanoe said :

rubaiyat said :

OpenYourMind said :

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?”

How many more will succumb to the steadily growing epidemic of morbid obesity, diabetes and circulatory diseases from lack of exercise directly due to the bad lifestyle of driving everywhere, because “I have to”?

http://www.aihw.gov.au/overweight-and-obesity/

http://www.aihw.gov.au/diabetes/

http://www.aihw.gov.au/diabetes-indicators/overweight-and-obesity/

http://www.aihw.gov.au/national-health-priority-areas/

http://www.aihw.gov.au/deaths/

Last night I attended a New Years Eve celebration which had a noticeable number of extremely obese older attendees. Particularly notable was the families. It wasn’t just grandma, it was her daughter and their children and possibly the children’s children. But that is visible everywhere to the point we have reality TV shows based around the outcomes of bad life choices.

The medical system is groaning under the weight of inmates with chronic life style choice problems.

They haven’t gone away just because the doctors can keep you on life support almost indefinitely, propping up your mistaken interpretation of the statistics.

The tram will eliminate obesity how exactly? All it does is put all the overweight people into one moving vehicle instead of a hundred. The walk from the tram station to the shop/workplace/home will be pretty much the same as it was when they parked their car in the multi-storey. Oh, actually it won’t be, because the tram promises to get them closer to the amenities so they don’t have to walk so far.
If the bus connections in the suburbs aren’t convenient enough that they have to walk a few hundred meters from their homes, those fat people will simply park’n’ride, effectively walking less than presently thanks to the “cheaper” and “healthier” alternative of the tram.

Cars are certainly not the solution, they are the problem. Public transport is (literally) a step in the right direction.

Public transport involves considerable exercise and standing up. Sitting being the big killer.

Freeways, the great offender, actually cut up our cities and make it impossible to cross them without huge diversions, driving people into even more car use.

The lazy unthinking people who are addicted to cars to the point they can’t walk to their local shops, schools or any destinations because it is “too inconvenient”, “too dangerous”, “involves being outdoors”, “someone might see me” are unsurprisingly overweight, with bad backs, bad diets (I see them in Manuka’s Macdonalds Drive Through every evening), have circulatory problems and diabetes that leads to problems with lower limbs, so instead of rectifying any of the causes, they turn to mobility scooters with even more obesity, circulation problems etc. etc. The long slow downward spiral.

If you are onto a really bad life style choice the principle is not to let go, just work on increasingly more unbelievable excuses to keep on putting yourself in harms way.

There are reasons why the people who live to extremely healthy old age live in hilly locations and don’t have cars, or avoid them. My father who had a couple of heart attacks, has moved to the Northern Beaches and is now fitter, slimmer and healthier since he sold his car, has to negotiate a steep hill every day to catch a bus to the local village where he walks around doing his shopping.

Obesity is a particular problem in country towns where people are so wedded to their cars they drive to park straight outside where they want to go and get back in the car just to move down the street a bit. A few years ago my wife and I caught the train to Ballarat to see Sovereign Hill. I wasn’t quite sure of the directions so popped into a local “Beauty Parlour” to ask. I couldn’t help noticing the workers were not a good advertisement for the shop’s theme and were really overweight. When I asked directions to walk to Sovereign Hill they were aghast, “too far to walk, get a taxi”. I knew they were wrong and ignored them. It was a pleasant 20 minute walk through pretty old houses and gardens, but unthinkable to the locals.

The sheer horror and abject fear at the thought of getting OUT of our cars is killing us, and driving up our health budget to astronomic heights. Which is a constant theme here. The fear is that this could be the thing that could change things and take away the ready excuse that the present bad habits, planning and transport “Are the way things are and we can never change them”.

SidneyReilly 2:00 pm 03 Jan 16

Two problems as I see it
1) if the Libs rip up the contracts its going to cost a lot of money which we dont have.
2) if the project goes ahead then where is the money going to come from?
That was a rehtorical question I know its going to come out of the saving that are made when they catch the last welfare cheat…..
They should have gone for trams and not light rail (yes there is a distinction) it may have saved a lot of money but people dont like trams, they do like light rail…

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

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

Search across the site