Other rail possibilties

[Nugget]

To add some further weight - TfNSW’s ‘South East Sydney Transport Strategy’ which was released last week:
https://future.transport.nsw.gov.au/pla ... t-strategy

A rail detail map released by TfNSW today:

Look at those dates, given past history you're probably looking at doubling the time so well into the next century. No one is going to be holding their breath.

[tonyp]

With the backup of Federal funding now on the scene, it's a different story from past years. I think it also depends somewhat on whether the present state government remains in office for a very long time. The important thing is that the planning strategy has bipartisan support so that it has a reasonable chance of proceeding into the future. Change of priorities with change of government can derail things.

[Linto63]

So we're talking at least 10 years before it gets anywhere near the top of the to-do list. Too much water to pass under the bridge before then for this to be considered anything more than a big of blue-sky thinking.

[Swift]

Did politicians in 1988 think of Sydney 2020? You were lucky they thought of Sydney 1991 back then. Why this ambitious long term thinking now?

[Linto63]

Why this ambitious long term thinking now?

Because there is nothing more that today's politician likes than an opportunity to don a hard hat and hi-viz jacket and announced a project, even if is unfunded.

[tonyp]

Did politicians in 1988 think of Sydney 2020? You were lucky they thought of Sydney 1991 back then. Why this ambitious long term thinking now?

It's not so much politicians as the planning agency (and the transport planning agency). What we see being presented in transport planning and its associated city planning now is the outcome of a process that began under the Greiner government. There has been planning for the long-term future since 1945, but the rejig of thinking to plan for a much larger population (part of the catalyst being a new wave of immigration) took place in the 80s and 90s. In terms of transport, the subsequent Labor government focussed on roads, the present government has taken more holistic action.

[Transtopic]

One of the major omissions in the rail network planning, conspicuous by its absence, is providing for a future rail link to the Northern Beaches, whereas the South-East will be well catered for. The Northern Beaches represents a significant chunk of the Sydney Region and together with the high density North Sydney to Mosman corridor and being relatively close to the Sydney CBD, it warrants a rail service.

The B-Line alone won't be enough, especially by the middle of the century. A rail service, apart from limiting the number of buses crossing the Harbour Bridge into the CBD, will create a greater incentive for commuters to switch from their cars, reducing traffic on Military Rd and the Harbour Bridge even further.

It's becoming apparent that the government is planning the new metro lines as stand alone rail links without branching, although I'd question whether some would ever fully utilize their latent capacity which would be wasteful. A potential Northern Beaches Rail Link would therefore require a new Harbour Tunnel, if in fact it is feasible with the limited number of under harbour crossing locations into the CBD. The only other alternative, if feasible, is to reclaim the eastern lanes of the Harbour Bridge for rail as I alluded to in an earlier post. It could be metro or an extension of the existing network, which in the latter case could dovetail with a possible City Relief Line at Wynyard. A metro would have to connect with some as yet unplanned metro from the south to provide a through link. Both options are worth investigating further.

[Transtopic]

Did politicians in 1988 think of Sydney 2020? You were lucky they thought of Sydney 1991 back then. Why this ambitious long term thinking now?

In terms of transport, the subsequent Labor government focussed on roads, the present government has taken more holistic action.

That's a bit harsh Tony. Labor governments after Greiner's Liberals weren't solely focused on roads. They did start work on the South West Rail Link, quadruplication of the East Hills Line, duplication of the Cronulla Line as well as the Parramatta to Chatswood Rail Link (truncated to Epping to Chatswood). Then there's the very successful Rail Clearways program which broke the rail network into sectors and simplified operations, although more needs to be done in this regard.

They also proposed the North West Rail Link, later morphing into the North West Metro and the ill-fated Central to Rozelle Metro. They even had a detailed plan for a West Metro from Central to Parramatta via Sydney University, which IMO was superior to the current proposal. The fact that some of these projects were never started is beside the point. They at least had a plan which wasn't just about roads and was just as holistic as the transport policies of the present government.

[tonyp]

The planning for a lot of Labor's ideas started in the 1980s and 1990s. They merely picked them up from Dept if Planning and ran with them or modified them.

The SE will have some three times the population of Manly Warringah because there is much more developable land, so it gets first priority for mass transit.

[Transtopic]

The planning for a lot of Labor's ideas started in the 1980s and 1990s. They merely picked them up from Dept if Planning and ran with them or modified them.

The SE will have some three times the population of Manly Warringah because there is much more developable land, so it gets first priority for mass transit.

That's a disingenuous remark. Many ideas have been picked up by both parties from past planning over the decades. You're really showing your political bias now.

The fact that the SE has a larger population than the Northern Beaches is irrelevant. It's not a question of it deserving priority, because the NB doesn't even have a long term proposal for a rail link, which is the point I was trying to make.

[tonyp]

That's a disingenuous remark. Many ideas have been picked up by both parties from past planning over the decades. You're really showing your political bias now.

The fact that the SE has a larger population than the Northern Beaches is irrelevant. It's not a question of it deserving priority, because the NB doesn't even have a long term proposal for a rail link, which is the point I was trying to make.

Maybe I had a view from the inside over a few decades that gave me some insight. I was responding to a post above that suggested that politicians themselves come up with these plans and don't look ahead. What we see at present is the outcome of thirty years of continuous evolutionary policy formation. Many different possible directions are explored during that process and the governments of the day work out their priorities. It's more bipartisan than people assume, a notable indicator being that Labor also supports metro.

The idea of a rail link to northern beaches has certainly been thought about for many years, it's just low on priority compared to all the other needs at the moment. It may come in the next planning cycle after 2056.