Museums, white elephants and white whales

You’ve missed the point here, that the transport system we had could have easily have been upgraded with electric buses to serve the entire population of Canberra at fair cost. It was better, more effective, less expensive, less damaging to Canberra’s green spaces and more sustainable than the cobbled together bits of the so called ‘system’ we have now which benefits only a small section of the population.

The entrenched ACT government has been unable to offer a mass public transport system despite 20+ years in power, instead focussing attention on narrow bits of Canberra in a pet project of limited utility and huge cost. Independents are doing well to hold this government to account for its many failures which have cost ratepayers dearly.

Independents are there to highlight problems and suggest how things could be done better, such as smarter contract design and management, less expensive options, not to mention projects that benefit the majority without bankrupting them.

With respect Psycho, it’s probably you that has missed the point. You’ve claimed that electric buses (rather than diesel or gas-powered) will somehow be a workable solution to getting Canberrans onto public transport. The obvious question is “How?” If people aren’t using the buses all that much now why would they suddenly start using them if they’re electric? That doesn’t make sense. With light rail however, more people use it. This is the case in other cities as well, not just Canberra. People just prefer light (or heavy) rail over buses. And, whilst buses have their uses and always will (whether gas-powered or electric) they don’t have the same appeal for major routes as rail. And the light rail network so far (Stage 1) isn’t a “narrow bit of Canberra”, Gungahlin to the City is a major route used not only by commuters in the inner north, with and Gunners, but also other areas of Canberra (connected by the Alinga St interchange.)

I still mourn some of the bus routes which disappeared as soon as light rail 1A began. Some think that it won’t happen when/if light rail eventually makes its way to Woden. Look at past experience- it will. Another point, buses have the advantage of being flexible in the planning of their routes. Light rail, as built in CBR, will never be able to do this.

Astro,
And you’ve missed the point that many people don’t use the current buses because of the woeful frequency and travel times rather than any inherent characteristic of buses. A bus network that’s actually gotten worse in functionality in recent years.

The question you have to ask yourself is how light rail is going to change that for anyone who doesn’t live near to a light rail station?

And that’s not even starting on the economics of it.

Rapids are mostly around every 9 minutes weekdays so frequency isn’t an issue there.

You make my argument for me, the current suburban buses feeding the rapids are woeful, which reduces public transport usage.
Replacing those Rapid buses with a light rail system won’t magically make the suburban buses better. So how exactly will light rail make public transport more accessible or attractive for anyone that doesn’t live close to a light rail stop?

Because it will be slower, it actually makes it worse.

Not sure what your argument is, so it’s difficult to help you out there Chewy. However I don’t think it’s a “bus versus light rail” argument; you’ve acknowledged the problems with buses. It seems to be how to incorporate the best of both types of transport into the future network. Clearly Light Rail Stage 1 is working well, popular, frequent and faster than the old bus system. When you refer to projected travel times for Stage 2 (which is I think what you’re referring to) the additional stops on the planned light rail stage 2 would increase the Woden to City time (currently between 17 to 22 minutes on the R4). However the additional stops would create better access around the parliamentary triangle and Adelaide Ave. Could be an argument to retain some peak hour express buses that don’t stop at all the new light rail stops and just go straight from Woden to the City for those commuters that want to do that trip. These would still obviously be impacted by motor vehicle traffic entering the City. Regarding your question about rail/bus connections, if you look at the number of routes that connect with light rail at Allinga St then it’s clear that the connection works very well there so you do’t have to live near a light rail stop to use light rail. (Just as you don’t have to live near Town hall, Wynyard, Circular Quay, St James or Museum stations to use the City Circle in Sydney).

Astro,
correct my argument is not a light rail vs bus argument and never has been.

It’s about how to make the most efficient future public transport that doesn’t need to be wedded to a specific mode.

“Clearly Light Rail Stage 1 is working well, popular, frequent and faster than the old bus system.”

It works reasonably well from a technical perspective in that it’s better than the previous buses but that isn’t a great feat. Patronage is also still lower than predicted in the government’s own business case despite higher population growth.
Nor does the above statement consider whether the same outcome could have been achieved for less money as the government’s own analysis showed.

“Could be an argument to retain some peak hour express buses that don’t stop at all the new light rail stops and just go straight from Woden to the City for those commuters that want to do that trip”

Doing so would simply reduce the already questionable economic viability of the light rail Stage 2, so is very unlikely to occur and just highlights the inflexibility of light rail for this route. Why spend billions to replace buses and then continue buses anyway.

“These would still obviously be impacted by motor vehicle traffic entering the City”

Not if given their own right of way exactly the same as light rail is going to receive.

“if you look at the number of routes that connect with light rail at Allinga St then it’s clear that the connection works very well there so you do’t have to live near a light rail stop to use light rail.”

Not sure what this is supposed to mean so difficult to help you. My point is around the functionality of the system as a whole. Very few people will transfer from bus to light rail unless the travel times and frequency are comparable with other modes. Which for people south of Woden, the light rail will make worse. So the only real beneficiaries are those who live close to a light rail stop.

Very few people transfer from bus to light rail at Alinga St, so I don’t know what metrics you are using to say it works well, although Stage 2 is a completely different situation so also hard to compare directly anyway.

As light rail stage 1 comprises 20% of all public transport journeys it’s been a very successful piece of kit (notwithstanding any dips in the Covid period and post-covid WFH arrangements) I don’t think anyone disputes that. The fact the services were increased to every 5 minutes in peak hour due to demand backs that up.
You don’t seem to have the number of transfers but given the 16.5 million pax trips over 5 years we can probably safely assume that that isn’t just people living close to the line. It’s pretty easy to see people getting off buses and transferring to light rail (and vice versa) on any given day of the week, morning or afternoon. It’s no different to people transferring from rail to bus in Sydney, happens all the time.
However as with any city, the further out you go into suburbia (e.g. Tuggers) the more difficult any type of public transport becomes, that’s not a Canberra-alone problem. Its certainly not an argument for not having a light rail system. Not disputing the R4 is a good service into the city and there could be some tinkering with blocking off lanes for bus-only however at some point they get stuck in traffic. It isn’t as feasible as a dedicated light rail track which is why Canberra is building one.

“As light rail stage 1 comprises 20% of all public transport journeys it’s been a very successful piece of kit (notwithstanding any dips in the Covid period and post-covid WFH arrangements) I don’t think anyone disputes that”

This is laughable government spin but understandable that you regurgitate it as a talking point.

The project was partially justified on a transport benefit based on predicted patronage numbers.

It is not meeting those numbers, despite the population growth in Canberra being higher than predicted.

You can attempt to excuse not meeting those targets but all that does is highlight the inflexibility of light rail to adapt to change.

I know that no one disputes that because it’s a fact using numbers supplied by the government itself.

“You don’t seem to have the number of transfers but given the 16.5 million pax trips over 5 years we can probably safely assume that that isn’t just people living close to the line”

We are talking about the benefits for people on Stage 2 who dont live close to a stop, they aren’t the same as for Stage 1.

Although it’s interesting to see you claim on one hand that buses aren’t used all that much, but that lots of people use buses to transfer to light rail within the same thread.

And although it is a different route, you can take some good reference out of the fact that for Stage 1, the suburban buses were all changed to be funnelled to the light rail to maximise efficiency and cost effectiveness. And you think this won’t happen for Stage 2?

“However as with any city, the further out you go into suburbia (e.g. Tuggers) the more difficult any type of public transport becomes, that’s not a Canberra-alone problem. Its certainly not an argument for not having a light rail system.”

It’s certainly an argument that people who live in those areas don’t benefit from installing a system that makes their public transport travel times longer. And that they will seek other transport modes because of it.

Which in this case outlines exactly how those who don’t live near a light rail stop won’t benefit from Stage 2.

“It isn’t as feasible as a dedicated light rail track which is why Canberra is building one.”

Oh, it isn’t as feasible? Perhaps you can link the options analysis and relative economic assessments showing that to be the case then.

Hi Chewy14, no, it’s not “government spin” it’s recorded numbers of people boarding. If the boarding numbers don’t match your perception then that’s too bad. Perhaps ask yourself why they had to increase frequency of light rail services.
I think we can agree that people in Tuggeranong are limited in their public transport options and always have been – buses haven’t helped. And that apparently goes back even before self-government.
It still doesn’t mean that you have to live on top of a rail line to benefit from light rail and that people are connecting from bus services at Alinga St.
If you think that there could be a dedicated road blocked off from other motor vehicle usage all the way from Woden to the City then it would be interesting to see what evidence you’ve based this thought on. I’ve never heard this put forward as a realistic proposal, and the Libs certainly haven’t put any technical feasibility studies.

Astro,
The patronage numbers don’t meet the stated success factors for the project that formed part of the government’s business case.

So yes it is about the recorded number of boardings and your personal perception of those numbers is irrelevant. The fact that you think the numbers are “high” or “good” is meaningless when discussing project success.

I’m happy to objectively use the government’s own figures.

By the logic you’re attempting to use, success of a transport project doesn’t need to consider prior and induced demand and that only the simple gross figures matter.

But that would also mean that the R4 bus is currently “successful”, taking over 10% of total public transport boardings, yet you’ve already claimed that people “aren’t using the buses all that much” and that route needs to be replaced.

Strange.

As for why they had to increase the peak time light rail frequency, it was always planned to increase they just brought it forward. The problem they were having being peak usage one way was causing significant delays for people trying to get to and from work. Highlighting another issue with the light rail inflexibility with very high peak demand (one way) but otherwise low utilisation through the day.

“If you think that there could be a dedicated road blocked off from other motor vehicle usage all the way from Woden to the City then it would be interesting to see what evidence you’ve based this thought on”

How exactly do you think the light rail is going to get from Civic to Woden?

Do you think it will fly?

A dedicated busway could use an almost identical route to the light rail, with the added benefit of being able to reuse far more existing infrastructure in numerous areas along the route.

The choice isn’t between only using current infrastructure and building light rail. Most sensible people are fully supportive of expenditure to improve the public transport network, they just aren’t wedded to one option.

Although thank you for admitting you haven’t seen any feasibility studies on other options.

It’s because the government hasn’t completed any, so the evidence for light rail’s future stages doesn’t exist.

You’re obviously enthusiastic about supposed patronage numbers being exactly as per the business case which were based on pre-Covid numbers. Obviously Covid impacted on numbers of passengers across all types of transport (particularly planes). Despite this transport-wide dip in numbers caused by Covid (which you probably need to be aware of) the frequency of light rail services was increased due to demand post-Covid.
Oddly you’ve said how happy you are to use the Government’s figures but in a previous post referred to them as “Government spin” so perhaps you need to make up your mind there.
Not sure what point you’re trying to make about the R4. I’ve never made any comments about the success or otherwise, of the R4. Perhaps you’re confusing me with someone else?
You’re not sure about how the light rail will get to Woden so perhaps refer to the information freely available on the Major Projects website as this should help you understand how light rail works.
Regarding your claim that most people aren’t “wedded to one option” well. yes, that’s exactly the point. Being wedded to “bus only” doesn’t make sense but a workable combination of bus and light rail network works very well already (Stage 1) and works well in other capital cities and regional centres. This was never about bus versus light rail as has been previously stated (many times).

Astro,
What a strange comment.

You’ve ignored the actual points made and gone off on some weird tangents that don’t relate to the actual discussion.

I know light rail zealots struggle with logical arguments but your word salad of a response makes it difficult to respond to that incoherent mess.

Seeing as you’re struggling with the most basic of concepts, I would ask some simple questions about light rail stage 1.

What level of patronage would equal a successful outcome and why.

What level would equal a failure and why?

And how do these relate to the traffic and public transport modelling that formed part of the government’s business case?

Then for stage 2, how would a bus option not be able to use a similar route to light rail?

Although i must thank you, your incomprehensible comment does provide a great example of how certain people can’t see beyond their support for light rail as the only option.

Chewy14, no mate the points were pretty clear and at this stage what is even more clear is that you’ll keep harping on about light rail through stages 1 to 4 despite its obvious popularity. And for that I feel sorry for you.

Astro,
So you’re unable to answer the most basic of questions. As expected, champ.

I get it, you don’t care about facts, your support of light rail is based on emotions because of the way you “feel” about it. Basic technical analysis is too hard for you. Unfortunately though, that’s not the way good infrastructure planning is done.

Those of us who are able to view the project objectively see the clear failings and wasteful expenditure that could have been used to provide a city wide improved public transport system.

You have been repeatedly asked detailed questions about the viability of light rail and been unable to answer them with anything more than meaningless and subjective platitudes.

It’s exactly the lack of thinking the government is relying on.

D.c. the cost of 2B is an unknown, because there hasn’t been a decision on it’s route and that won’t be determined until after the election. It’s also expected that 2B will be a lot more expensive than originally planned, due to design changes, general increases in construction costs and the completion of the project being pushed out well into the future. And yes, the cost of the project, it will be paid for one way or another by the tax payer.
So, if say, the existing candidates were to retain their seats, the cost of the project, even becomes immaterial, because the the Opposition wouldn’t have the numbers to stop the project.
And while “cost” of the project is important, it’s “value” is another question. Travel times via LR into the City are expected to be significantly longer than the existing bus service from Woden, and beyond which in my view, diminishes the “value” of the project.
When asked about travel time, the then Minister Steele said that the existing bus service would be retained, for those wanting a quicker trip. I think we all know that running a bus service on the same route as LR, wouldn’t make be viable. We only have to look at 1A. The government removed the competing buses.
I kinda like trains/trams/light rail, whatever you want to call it, but I just want to get from A to B in the quickest time and not to have my grandchildren paying for it.