Parramatta light rail

[gascoyne]

...

Extending the light rail line from Carlingford to Epping is no longer an option, if in fact it ever was, as it is not feasible because of cost and engineering challenges, already conceded by the government. If they had bothered to take note of Parramatta Council's feasibility study, they would understand why and saved themselves the trouble of having to keep back-tracking on their plans. They haven't thought things through and it's just planning on the run, which inevitably will come back to bite you. Even now, despite all the hype, there's no certainty that their Stage 2 light rail plan will proceed.

....

Regrettably, current transport planning seems to be more focussed on redevelopment opportunities, rather than to satisfy a need for improved public transport to established communities which are not adequately serviced.

The extension has to be to Epping, because that's where the Metro connection is. Resurrect it! And go via Carlingford Court - routes should connect major generators not bypass them on the pretext they're not major enough.

[Transtopic]

...

Extending the light rail line from Carlingford to Epping is no longer an option, if in fact it ever was, as it is not feasible because of cost and engineering challenges, already conceded by the government. If they had bothered to take note of Parramatta Council's feasibility study, they would understand why and saved themselves the trouble of having to keep back-tracking on their plans. They haven't thought things through and it's just planning on the run, which inevitably will come back to bite you. Even now, despite all the hype, there's no certainty that their Stage 2 light rail plan will proceed.

....

Regrettably, current transport planning seems to be more focussed on redevelopment opportunities, rather than to satisfy a need for improved public transport to established communities which are not adequately serviced.

The extension has to be to Epping, because that's where the Metro connection is. Resurrect it! And go via Carlingford Court - routes should connect major generators not bypass them on the pretext they're not major enough.

It's not going to happen. Any extension to Epping has quietly slipped off the radar and hasn't been heard of further for a couple of years. I live there, so I know what I'm talking about. Think it through and you'll understand why.

There are two options to extend the light rail from Carlingford to Epping and not even to Macquarie Park. One is to build a tunnel from the current terminus at Carlingford Station to Carlingford Court shopping centre and then continue on the surface along Carlingford Rd to Epping, which is totally impracticable, as it's a major arterial road and only 4 lanes wide for most of its length. It would require expensive property resumptions for widening along Carlingford Rd and cause massive disruption to traffic during construction. The location of a terminus in the Epping Town Centre to allow interchange to the Sydney Trains' and metro lines is problematic.

The other option is to extend the line completely in tunnel from Carlingford to Epping, which would be horrendously expensive for a light rail line. You might as well build it as a metro, but that option is also questionable with the Carlingford Line now being converted to light rail. Again, the location of an underground terminus in the Epping Town Centre is problematic, particularly now that major developments are proposed on potential sites. It's no doubt the reason why the government has dropped the idea.

If the original preferred proposal by Parramatta Council for the light rail route from Westmead to Macquarie University (Macquarie Centre) via Eastwood had been adopted, it would still have connected with the metro at Macquarie University Station, on a more direct route, as well as the Northern Line at Eastwood, similar to Epping. The overwhelming ongoing interchange would be towards the Macquarie Park, Lower North Shore and CBD destinations. There would be negligible interchange in the reverse direction towards Parramatta from the North West to the light rail line at either Epping or Macquarie University.

Are you suggesting that Eastwood wouldn't be a major traffic generator? Parramatta Council's feasibility study suggested otherwise. It's already a much larger retail/commercial centre than either Epping or Carlingford and potentially would outstrip them combined if its outdated planning controls were upgraded to also allow higher density residential development. It's the elephant in the room and I'm continually perplexed why it is treated like a black hole, when it is located on the most direct route between Parramatta and Macquarie Park.

[swtt]

Are you suggesting that Eastwood wouldn't be a major traffic generator? Parramatta Council's feasibility study suggested otherwise. It's already a much larger retail/commercial centre than either Epping or Carlingford and potentially would outstrip them combined if its outdated planning controls were upgraded to also allow higher density residential development. It's the elephant in the room and I'm continually perplexed why it is treated like a black hole, when it is located on the most direct route between Parramatta and Macquarie Park.

Probably no different to Burwood when compared to Strathfield. Difference being, Burwood has now received/is receiving the high density residential development treatment.

I suspect Eastwood will have its day, starting in the next year or so:
https://www.afr.com/property/residentia ... 809-p52fpm

[gascoyne]

Are you suggesting that Eastwood wouldn't be a major traffic generator? Parramatta Council's feasibility study suggested otherwise. It's already a much larger retail/commercial centre than either Epping or Carlingford and potentially would outstrip them combined if its outdated planning controls were upgraded to also allow higher density residential development. It's the elephant in the room and I'm continually perplexed why it is treated like a black hole, when it is located on the most direct route between Parramatta and Macquarie Park.

No I'm not. Eastwood is going up and good luck to it. But the PRL/ECRL/Metro/whatever is at Epping and that's where a connection should be if you want a decent city-wide transport network for people to make longer trips on.

[Swift]

Some human beings want preppy Epping to become the spoilt child getting all the presents at Christmas when there is a more deserving kid next door who hasn't received anything for the last several Christmases.
Epping is a traffic sewer surrounded with a smattering of shops while Eastwood is situated among pedestrian friendly streets with diverse retail (It was even better in the early 1980s) and situated where the crow flies Fein Parra to Maccas Uni/ctr. If anything, Eastwood merits a Metro Stn far more than Epping ever did where it would actually be a destination worth going to like Castle Hill and Macquarie Centre, instead of a mere exchange port like Epping and Wolli Creek is. Just imagine Castle Hill and Eastwood being an 11 minute ride between each other. A missed dream.
We just need to fix Eastwood's diversity problem. We need more blondes and red heads!!

[Transtopic]

Are you suggesting that Eastwood wouldn't be a major traffic generator? Parramatta Council's feasibility study suggested otherwise. It's already a much larger retail/commercial centre than either Epping or Carlingford and potentially would outstrip them combined if its outdated planning controls were upgraded to also allow higher density residential development. It's the elephant in the room and I'm continually perplexed why it is treated like a black hole, when it is located on the most direct route between Parramatta and Macquarie Park.

No I'm not. Eastwood is going up and good luck to it. But the PRL/ECRL/Metro/whatever is at Epping and that's where a connection should be if you want a decent city-wide transport network for people to make longer trips on.

As I've already stated, the light rail, or even a future metro from Parramatta for that matter, doesn't need to go to Epping to connect with Metro Northwest. Either transport option could connect directly with Macquarie University Station on a more direct and faster alignment via Eastwood, rather than a circuitous and slower route via Carlingford and Epping. The major trip generators will be Parramatta and Macquarie University, so the primary focus should be on providing the most direct and fastest route between these centres, which just happens to be via Eastwood, which is a significant centre in itself. A direct link between Parramatta and Macquarie University, whether by light rail or metro, would avoid the need to interchange at Epping. In terms of light rail, a wide surface road corridor from the Carlingford Line at Dundas to Macquarie Park already exists, being Kissing Point Rd and the Eastwood County Road reservation, so why not make use of it?

Let's face it, if the Carlingford Line didn't already exist, then logic would have prevailed and the most direct route would have been chosen. However, there was obviously an agenda to maximise the use for the Carlingford Line between the major strategic centres of Parramatta and Macquarie Park, allegedly to save costs, even though it involved a slow meandering route via Carlingford and Epping. It's little wonder that the former Labor Transport Minister, Michael Costa, cancelled the Parramatta to Epping section (PERL) of the original Parramatta to Chatswood Rail Link, which later morphed into the North West Rail Link. The originally proposed route was flawed from the start and the current government is repeating that mistake in its plans for light rail and any possible future metro connection.

The Eastwood route option provides the same, if not enhanced connectivity, with the Northern Line and Metro Northwest (at Macquarie University) as Epping. It could even lead to the reinstatement of Eastwood as a stop for CCN Intercity services, allowing interchange to a light rail or future metro line connecting to Parramatta. There is ample room on either side of Eastwood Station to construct a light rail or underground metro interchange directly to the existing platforms without impacting on adjoining traffic routes.

[Campbelltown busboy]

Let's face it, if the Carlingford Line didn't already exist, then logic would have prevailed and the most direct route would have been chosen. However, there was obviously an agenda to maximise the use for the Carlingford Line between the major strategic centres of Parramatta and Macquarie Park, allegedly to save costs, even though it involved a slow meandering route via Carlingford and Epping. It's little wonder that the former Labor Transport Minister, Michael Costa, cancelled the Parramatta to Epping section (PERL) of the original Parramatta to Chatswood Rail Link, which later morphed into the North West Rail Link. The originally proposed route was flawed from the start and the current government is repeating that mistake in its plans for light rail and any possible future metro connection.

Your forgetting about the forgotten federally funded Epping-Parramatta rail link that was one of the NSW based promises made by Julia Gillard during the 2010 federal campaign witch nobody knew the about the proposal or the layout of the line

[Transtopic]

Your forgetting about the forgotten federally funded Epping-Parramatta rail link that was one of the NSW based promises made by Julia Gillard during the 2010 federal campaign witch nobody knew the about the proposal or the layout of the line

No, I haven't forgotten about that. It was nothing more than an opportunistic election bribe to help Labor win the Federal seat of Parramatta. It came completely out of left field and wasn't even being considered by Infrastructure Australia. It was totally unjustified at the time, when other projects warranted greater priority.

[neilrex]

Eastwood shops is never going to progress much. It was more important in the 1960's than it is now ! With Macquarie Centre, Carlingford, Castle Hill and more recently Top Ryde redevelopment, there will not be the demand. It is awkwardly located relative to Epping, has lost its express services to the CBD, it is quite unattractive as a residential location in my opinion.

[Fleet Lists]

Your forgetting about the forgotten federally funded Epping-Parramatta rail link that was one of the NSW based promises made by Julia Gillard during the 2010 federal campaign witch nobody knew the about the proposal or the layout of the line

No, I haven't forgotten about that. It was nothing more than an opportunistic election bribe to help Labor win the Federal seat of Parramatta. It came completely out of left field and wasn't even being considered by Infrastructure Australia. It was totally unjustified at the time, when other projects warranted greater priority.

I dont think that is quite correct - see https://web.archive.org/web/20040906035 ... r1_prl.pdf

[Transtopic]

No, I haven't forgotten about that. It was nothing more than an opportunistic election bribe to help Labor win the Federal seat of Parramatta. It came completely out of left field and wasn't even being considered by Infrastructure Australia. It was totally unjustified at the time, when other projects warranted greater priority.

I dont think that is quite correct - see https://web.archive.org/web/20040906035 ... r1_prl.pdf

With respect Fleet Lists, that report referred to the approval for the original Parramatta Rail Link (Parramatta to Chatswood) in 2002. As we know, it was truncated to an Epping to Chatswood Rail Link (ECRL) when Michael Costa, the then Transport Minister, cancelled the section between Parramatta and Epping, later to become known as the PERL, because of low passenger forecasts.

The PERL was never raised again, until brought up by Julia Gillard out of the blue in the 2010 election campaign to shore up Labor's prospects of holding onto the crucial seat of Parramatta, which they managed to do in spite of a large swing to the Liberals. Tellingly, Labor lost the adjoining seat of Bennelong (John Howard's former seat) back to the Liberals, which covers the Eastwood/Epping/Ryde area. By this stage, the focus had shifted to extending the ECRL to the North West and the PERL was low on the list of priorities. Early designs for the NWRL extension from Epping had proposed taking over the then existing stubs, which were originally intended for the PERL, and constructing new stubs for a possible future link to Parramatta. However, the new stubs were subsequently eliminated, which makes a future metro link with Parramatta problematic.

[Campbelltown busboy]

The PERL was never raised again, until brought up by Julia Gillard out of the blue in the 2010 election campaign to shore up Labor's prospects of holding onto the crucial seat of Parramatta, which they managed to do in spite of a large swing to the Liberals. Tellingly, Labor lost the adjoining seat of Bennelong (John Howard's former seat) back to the Liberals, which covers the Eastwood/Epping/Ryde area. By this stage, the focus had shifted to extending the ECRL to the North West and the PERL was low on the list of priorities. Early designs for the NWRL extension from Epping had proposed taking over the then existing stubs, which were originally intended for the PERL, and constructing new stubs for a possible future link to Parramatta. However, the new stubs were subsequently eliminated, which makes a future metro link with Parramatta problematic.

That Gillard Epping-Parramatta rail link promise was made in the same 2010 campaign that led into that hung federal parliament

[Transtopic]

Eastwood shops is never going to progress much. It was more important in the 1960's than it is now ! With Macquarie Centre, Carlingford, Castle Hill and more recently Top Ryde redevelopment, there will not be the demand. It is awkwardly located relative to Epping, has lost its express services to the CBD, it is quite unattractive as a residential location in my opinion.

Is the recently approved $300 million redevelopment of the Eastwood Centre big enough for you? That's only just scratching the surface of what lies beneath. It includes 7 residential apartment buildings with 409 apartments up to 13 storeys and 15,000 sq m of retail/commercial space. If that's not called progress, then I don't know what is. It's redevelopment generally has been inhibited by an outdated Town Centre Master Plan, now 20 years old, which has a height limit restriction of 10 storeys and no floor space ratio controls. Because of the high value and demand for the existing retail/commercial sites, it's uneconomic to redevelop under the current planning controls.

Much of the fault can be laid at the feet of Ryde Council, which wants Eastwood to retain its "village" atmosphere. What a joke! It's actually a miracle that the YUHU redevelopment was approved under the current planning controls, after several attempts by previous owners over the last couple of decades. Ryde Council doesn't give a stuff about Eastwood, when its focus has been on Macquarie Park and Top Ryde. It's even now prioritising the rejuvenation of West Ryde over Eastwood.

In spite of its shortcomings compared with redevelopment in other surrounding centres, it's still an extremely busy retail/commercial centre. There aren't very many vacant shops, if any. Although it lacks a major regional shopping centre, it makes up for it in terms of its total strip retail shopping area, which is significant compared with any of the other centres, including the likes of Epping, Carlingford and West Ryde. I live in Epping, but I do most of my business in Eastwood on a daily basis. In spite of all of the residential redevelopment in Epping, the Town Centre itself is dying, because most of the previous commercial office space has been redeveloped for residential use, which affects the economic viability of the remaining retail businesses during the day. This is a by-product of the focus on residential development to feed the metro. I'm afraid that Epping is destined to become nothing more than a dormitory residential suburb and hardly warrants its status as a strategic centre. In the immortal words of Kerry Packer after his death defying revival from the other side, there's nothing f*****g there. It's a rail junction, like Strathfield or Granville, nothing more, when significantly larger retail/commercial centres are nearby.

Rather than Eastwood being awkwardly located relative to Epping, I suggest It's the other way round. It depends on which direction you're headed in. In terms of connection with Macquarie Park, Epping is logically located on the North/West axis to Castle Hill and the North West region and Eastwood on the South/West axis to Parramatta and the Greater Western and South Western regions. Which do you think would deserve greater priority? Although Eastwood has recently lost its longstanding CCN express services, it doesn't mean that it couldn't be reinstated if a light rail, or dare I say, a future metro link between Macquarie Park and Parramatta via Eastwood was implemented.

As for your last comment that Eastwood isn't an attractive residential location, it defies logic and doesn't even warrant a response.

[Transtopic]

The PERL was never raised again, until brought up by Julia Gillard out of the blue in the 2010 election campaign to shore up Labor's prospects of holding onto the crucial seat of Parramatta, which they managed to do in spite of a large swing to the Liberals. Tellingly, Labor lost the adjoining seat of Bennelong (John Howard's former seat) back to the Liberals, which covers the Eastwood/Epping/Ryde area. By this stage, the focus had shifted to extending the ECRL to the North West and the PERL was low on the list of priorities. Early designs for the NWRL extension from Epping had proposed taking over the then existing stubs, which were originally intended for the PERL, and constructing new stubs for a possible future link to Parramatta. However, the new stubs were subsequently eliminated, which makes a future metro link with Parramatta problematic.

That Gillard Epping-Parramatta rail link promise was made in the same 2010 campaign that led into that hung federal parliament

Yes, but I doubt if the Epping-Parramatta (PERL) committment was solely responsible for that outcome.

[boronia]

From SMH 27/04/2020: http://todayspaper.smedia.com.au/smh/default.aspx?

Support for light rail project on the rise

Matt O’Sullivan
City editor

Public support for the second stage of Parramatta’s new light rail line has grown strongly, internal state polling shows, leading to calls for the Berejiklian government to remove uncertainty and reveal whether it will proceed with the project or dump it.

A ‘‘sensitive’’ report in December for the state’s transport agency by Newgate Research into public attitudes towards the Parramatta light rail line shows sentiment improved the most for the second stage of the project, rising by 10 percentage points in 12 months to 66 per cent.

The number of people who said they were likely to use the second stage of the line from Camellia to Olympic Park, if it was built, also jumped to 67 per cent, from 54 per cent in 2018. While major construction on the first stage from Westmead to Carlingford is under way, the government is yet to commit to extending the line at Homebush despite it receiving the final business case for the second stage at least nine months ago.

David Borger, the western Sydney director of the Sydney Business Chamber, said a 10 per cent rise in support for the nine-kilometre second stage was remarkable given the government had been ‘‘trying to walk away from the project’’.

‘‘The future of Parramatta light rail stage two has been unclear for more [than] 12 months now. It’s time for the NSW government to tell the people of western Sydney, ‘are they going to build this project or scrap it’?’’ he said.

Transport Minister Andrew Constance sidestepped questions about the second stage, saying the focus was on ‘‘building Parramatta light rail and Metro West’’, a mostly underground rail line between Sydney’s CBD and Westmead. He has repeatedly said in recent months he is considering operating trackless trams along the route of the second stage, instead of laying a new light rail line. He has also named as a priority a new bridge over the Parramatta River between Wentworth Point and Melrose Park.

But Sydney Olympic Park Business Association chief executive Allison Taylor said the internal polling confirmed the more local communities knew about the light rail project, the more they liked it and wanted the government to provide better transport. ‘‘Better public transport connections from Sydney Olympic Park to its surrounding and growing residential suburbs is one of the most important issues holding the area back,’’ she said.

The internal report was released after the association requested it under freedom of information laws.

Despite controversy over Sydney’s other light rail project from the CBD to the eastern suburbs, polling shows the positive public sentiment towards the entire Parramatta project rose to 72 per cent last year, from 66 per cent in 2018.

[swtt]

Sydneysiders always love light rail - until construction kicks in and it disrupts their lives. Irrespective of the extent you believe the CSELR was bungled in its construction process or otherwise.

[tonyp]

Sydneysiders always love light rail - until construction kicks in and it disrupts their lives. Irrespective of the extent you believe the CSELR was bungled in its construction process or otherwise.

Following the social media right through the CSELR project, a constant theme in many public comments was welcoming the return of trams and asking why on earth the previous system was closed. So there's no lack of public desire for trams. This optimism even weathered the protracted and painful construction process. However, it has turned to disappointed bemusement when it dawned on people that it is slow and not looking like getting any better. I've always said that the loss of expertise with the closure of the previous system was as much a disaster as physically losing the system itself. One reason why it's a bad idea to destroy such systems. You can't easily replace those years of knowledge and experience.

Unfortunately the Parramatta operation has been given to the same operators.

[Swift]

Just watch any driver's eye view video of the Gold Coast system and then watch the Sydney L2 and L3 lines. It'll feel like someone changed the playback speed setting!

[Fleet Lists]

What does this have to with Parramatta Light Rail?

[Linto63]

Following the social media right through the CSELR project, a constant theme in many public comments was welcoming the return of trams and asking why on earth the previous system was closed.

Like most comments on social media, probably written by armchair experts with no knowledge of the subject matter, in this case why the network was binned in the 1950s.

I've always said that the loss of expertise with the closure of the previous system was as much a disaster as physically losing the system itself.

So we should have kept people on the books on the off-chance that trams were reintroduced? Of course not, bit like keeping steam train drivers just in case.

[rogf24]

We still have steam train drivers

[Linto63]

We still have steam train drivers

A handful.

[boronia]

I've always said that the loss of expertise with the closure of the previous system was as much a disaster as physically losing the system itself.

So we should have kept people on the books on the off-chance that trams were reintroduced? Of course not, bit like keeping steam train drivers just in case.

He wasn't suggesting it at all. The problem is that they didn't seek out people from elsewhere who might have had equivalent experience in a modern context.

[Linto63]

If any organisation ceases to be involved in a sector, then of course its knowledge base will over time disappear, that can't be avoided.

[Swift]

What does this have to with Parramatta Light Rail?

What makes you think Parra LR will be run any differently?