Is it time to complete the original proposed ESR?

[rtt_rules]

ESR, originally proposed to run to Bondi and Kingsford and never happened due to numerous poltical and union issues.

There has been talk of LR down Anzac Ave, whats wrong with building the railway? Cost will probably be not far off? Agree LR has more collection points and easier walk on and off, but railway runs under the traffic. The line is relatively short so stations should not exceed 1km apart, more "metro standard" which is
- Nth Fork} Bondi and Bondi Beach/Nth Bondi
- Sth Fork} Charing Cross, Frenchmans Rd, Randwick, Uni, Kingsford and I also propose one further stop at Maruobra.

Is it time to complete the line to its original terminii?

Is it viable?

Regards
Shane

[SurfRail]

Probably need a mud-map - there should be some sketches floating around somewhere (maybe on Rolfeworld)?

[SurfRail]

I'm not convinced its the best way to go.  Line following ANZAC Pde would be more direct.

Don't get me wrong - I think this could quite easily happen in future and would be well patronised.  But the more pressing need is to replace large numbers of radial bus routes and putting a line straight down the ANZAC corridor would be a better option.  I'd go full-blown metro for that on the basis it would probably be cheaper to build (and would be much cheaper to run...)

Interchange would be at Randwick somewhere (probably UNSW).

[colinw]

Not a fan of forking the line at all, but an emphatic YES to extension to Bondi beach.

Now, who is going to back me in calling for reinstatement of the Watson's Bay tram? 

[#Metro]

I'd like to see the whole Sydney bus network reviewed, there is HUGE waste. BRT could be rolled out very quickly on major corridors as a precursor to LRT and while LRT funding and plans are drawn up.

[ozbob]

Not a fan of forking the line at all, but an emphatic YES to extension to Bondi beach.

Now, who is going to back me in calling for reinstatement of the Watson's Bay tram? 

http://nla.gov.au/nla.pic-vn4778551-v

Clinging room only on the Watson's Bay tram, off to observe the American Fleet, Sydney, 1908

[johnnigh]

Clinging room only on the Watson's Bay tram, off to observe the American Fleet, Sydney, 1908

That crowd makes it hard to 'shoot through like a Bondi tram'!
As a Boy Scout, 'me and me mates' used to climb up the embankment where the overheads were anchored, so as the tram came down the cutting to Balmoral Beach we'd hang onto the anchor line and shake: the pole would always come off. The old trams had much more romance about them than the new LRs etc!

[somebody]

Not a fan of forking the line at all, but an emphatic YES to extension to Bondi beach.

Why not?  373/377 take 20 minutes or so from Martin Place to Belmore Rd, Randwick.  I think the forked line would be faster than that.  Beyond there it is so indirect that the buses are faster, but still serves a cross town function.  (Currently 8 minutes Martin Place-Bondi Junction.)

I guess the rail options do look worse from Town Hall and Central, but still, Charring Cross and Frenchmans Rd stations seem to have merit.

[colinw]

I don't mind a simple extension to Bondi Beach, but I don't want to make CityRail any more complex with yet another junction and set of service patterns.  Would rather keep the ESR to a simple spur, and do the light rail thing down Anzac PDE.

Although arguably you could make the ESR & Illawarra pairing work well with two spurs of the ESR, e.g. by running two service patterns: Cronulla to Bondi Jct and Waterfall to Kingsford.

I just think there is more value to be extracted from LRT up Anzac Pde than yet another megabuck$ CityRail tunnel-fest.

If we really must go building tunnels out toward Kingsford & Maroubra, maybe it is time to start thinking about smaller profile tunnels & driverless light metro.

[somebody]

I see where you are coming from.  I was thinking about making the track from Bondi Jct a bit more utilised.

You can argue the same thing re:LR.  We could just run a few more bus services, particularly off peak.

Off peak a train every 20min, agree not ideal but I'm sure thats just timetabling that could resolve. You would assume there would be more users with another 6 stations or so in medium to high density areas and catchments such as Bondi Beach and NSW Uni to help justify.

Or just add 2 more trains per hour, which is needed anyway to give a clockface 15 minute service to Cronulla.  The extra 2 trains may need to terminate at Hurstville (all to Sydenham) if freight is an issue.

I would assume a grade separated junction if there is to be a fork, though.

[SurfRail]

Just run all Cronulla services to Kingsford and all services from further south (Waterfall/Wollongong/Kiama) to Bondi Beach.

Metro should come first though.  Would involve virtually as much tunnelling and you would need additional rollingstock for both (and the metro stuff should be cheaper). 

I'd run my metro line virtually along Anzac Pde (except probably running via Randwick instead of Kingsford).  Once hitting Moore Park I'd send it to interchange at Central, then continue north.  It would be designed to be able to allow a future CityRail corridor (eg something like the Christie report line from Chatswood/St Leonards to Redfern) use the eastern lanes on the Harbour Bridge and head up towards Mona Vale.

The second line then would be the CityRail core expansion, and the third line would be something very similar to the cancelled West and Northwest Metros. Add in the NWRL and SWRL and you would then have good rail access virtually everywhere

[SurfRail]

We all know how the cattle especially irregular users love to change modes especially to a bus.

It works if it is made to work.  Doesn't in Sydney because the ticketing sucks, the coordination is non-existent, frequency is usually bad outside the near-CBD area (for bus and rail) and there are too many different stakeholders (even now after the restructuring of TfNSW).

Perth does not have those issues (except for lower frequencies on some suburban bus routes) and it has a very healthy transferring culture going.  Gold Coast Rapid Transit, unless they get this right here as well, will be a lemon.

[somebody]

Metro should come first though.  Would involve virtually as much tunnelling and you would need additional rollingstock for both (and the metro stuff should be cheaper). 

Huh?

So take up one of the two reserved corridors in the CBD for a Metro?  Why, and as Shane says, where would it go on the other side of the CBD?  I'd also echo Shane's comments about $.  Sydney imminently needs CBD capacity expansion for Cityrail, any big ticket project should be directed that way.

Please no one tell me this line will not be popular, especially for the growing city resisdents? We all know how the cattle especially irregular users love to change modes especially to a bus.

It will attract some incredibly loud NIMBYs, who definitely don't want to see more people reaching Bondi Beach.

[somebody]

It will attract some incredibly loud NIMBYs, who definitely don't want to see more people reaching Bondi Beach.

Yeah, but they are everywhere, maybe exception here is that they have more money. Wait for a downfall in economy and watch the small business owners in the area run down to Macquarie Street and praise the govt.

Some are louder than others.

[SurfRail]

Huh?

So take up one of the two reserved corridors in the CBD for a Metro?  Why, and as Shane says, where would it go on the other side of the CBD?  I'd also echo Shane's comments about $.  Sydney imminently needs CBD capacity expansion for Cityrail, any big ticket project should be directed that way.

Yep, one of 2 corridors.  The other would be the north-south cross-harbour CityRail link.  After that is built and the ultimate extension of the NWRL (connection to the Richmond line) and SWRL (Bringelly) happen, there would be no need to continue focusing on CityRail corridors through the CBD - it would be time for metros.  (I've always found it fascinating how you really can tell where Sydney "stops" from the air - clearly heavy rail won't be going any further than these places.)

I would prefer to keep the MetroWest option for the metro, and the MetroPitt alignment for the new CityRail line. MetroWest should allow the metro to use the Harbour Bridge if possible - the CityRail corridor does not matter as much because it would be underground as far as the lower North Shore.

The other metro line (west to northwest) could be routed via Railway Square, Museum, Martin Place/MetroPitt alignment station, Wynyard and Barangaroo, in an inverse "C", without compromising the 2 north-south corridors (subject to geology, depth etc).  Would not need to be a cross-harbour line so the same issues do not apply to it.

[SurfRail]

I suppose the difference here is that by the time I get off the train walk up to the bus and the bus departs, had the line run through to BB, I'd be walking on the sand bird watching. rail-bus interchange is viable for longer and more spread out bus runs to lower density areas. the bus interchange would remain for other areas.

I do agree with a Bondi extension - the demand, short distance and surface congestion militate against just throwing more buses at it.  But I would be moving the rest of the eastern suburbs as far as possible to a trunk and feeder system based on feeding the ESR and the ANZAC Metro out to Malabar.  Buses would mainly become orbital routes between the 2 and extending north from the ESR and west from the metro, with only limited direct-to-city routes remaining if appropriate (mainly from closer in).