For real, I used to live only 6km from Central and if it had been possible I would have cycled to work easy, but because Parra road is such a pain I rarely did it because it was just awful. It would be absolutely transformative to have a proper Light Rail, some tree shade and a proper Amsterdam-style bike lane all the way down parramatta road, I reckon you would get tens of thousands of people on trams and bikes and visiting those businesses.
A light rail along Parramatta Road would be the most patronised line of all. Stops at Norton Street, the University of Sydney, RPA Hospital, Glebe Point Road would all have huge patronage. This is long overdue. Especially with the interchanges at Taverner's Hill, Railway Square, Crown Street and Green Square. It's the line that Sydney needs most.
Agree.. I have been thinking perhaps it just needs a better end point.. perhaps going to the new Five Dock Metro Station as part of the proposal would make it busy route at both ends? What do you think?
Actually the following bus corridors all have significantly more current bus patronage than the inner west down Parramatta road does, and that’s before Metro West opens which will take bus patronage away: -Military Road -Anzac Parade -Victoria Road -M2 busway Source: (page 39) www.infrastructureaustralia.gov.au/sites/default/files/2019-08/Transport%20Modelling%20Report%20for%20Sydney.pdf
Yeah, that's the one thing I don't like about the proposal, the way it trails off in Taverners Hill. The interchange with L1 (and the short walk to Lewisham station) is okay but not great. Is there any way to squeeze a better interchange with the heavy rail into the local geometry? Barring that, your idea of extending it to the Five Dock metro station looks like a great alternative.
@@Nalehw Taverners Hill would only be the end of the first stage to get the thing off the ground, going any further would cost hundreds of millions more and put the project into the too-hard basket. The IW Greenway will be built within a few years so you would be able to walk down the greenway for T2 interchange, also you could build a new entrance to Lewisham station on Old Canterbury Road to make it better. I have previously called for Lewisham station to be completely rebuilt & moved closer to the L1 for a better interchange because Lewisham station floods and it causes Railway Terrace to be too narrow plus is still not accessible, but heritage people would lose their minds.
As long as they don’t pull a Newcastle and remove on street parking to “not lose a lane”. Note that outside clearway and bus lane times people are parked in the bus lanes so no, removing the bus lane only benefits peak, outside that there’ll only be one lane instead of two usable
Sydney was right to decommission the inefficient and obsolete tram network in the 1950s. Sydney would have become utterly diabolical if the trams persisted into the new millennium as cars quickly became the primary mode of transport after the war. What Melbourne does or does not do is irrelevant as the residents of the other capital city are too full of nostalgia and rather backward.
Yes if Sydney had have kept is trams I do think the network would have had to evolve quite substantially - with a focus on lines going down major road corridors further out into the suburbs - rather than the inner centric network it was (of course Sydney was much smaller back then). Parramatta Road would have been one line I as sure they would have kept.. along with ANZAC Parade, Oxford Street, Victoria Road to Ryde, maybe Princess Highway to Rockdale etc.
That is true and also well-known but there are clear disadvantages - Melbourne is stuck with shorter trams and many existing trams there are not accessible. Every tram in Sydney can be used by the disabled and the coupled trams on L2 and L3 hold more than 400 people. Melbourne shouldn't crow that much about its network. With only 580 trams it is the largest network only because of what other cities got rid of, not because of what Melbourne built. Sydney's old network was larger and accomodated almost 1,600 trams at its peak.
Why it is labour they are more interested in providing benefits, borrowing to fund refugees and trying to eradicate all history associated with the foundation of the Australian nation
@@gorgu08 You spelt it right for the United Kingdom, hence why you should take up your complaints with Mr. Starmer. Not sure what any of what you’ve mentioned has to do with an Australian transport related channel.
I think the Eastern suburbs railway line extension is the better option first up because you then relieve the roads and Bondi junction too, thereby creating the space for a better surface option. The eastern suburbs railway line has the most spare capacity going to waste of any rail line in Australia and is totally under-utilized, the railway extension could therefore also continue on to north Bondi and Dover so you open up even more areas to increased housing. Purely hypothetically it would be pretty unpopular but if you kept going to Rose Bay you could deal with a bunch of the New South Head Rd traffic too. I have even heard it suggested that the line could go under the Harbour all the way to manly but that would be an insanely difficult expensive tunneling project and would be slower than a more direct northern beaches line via North Sydney.
@@phamnguyenductin it's a nice thought but take the walk one day from coogee to bondi and you'll see why that is impossible. the topography is too hilly - if not too cliffy. you'd never get a tram from coogee to bondi.
@@karlcx I mean extending the current Randwick line to Coogee or Bondi, not to link between the two beaches (which is already a walkable distance). The largest obstacle to building a line to Bondi or Coogee isn't the geography, but the NIMBYism.
sure bloody hope so, considering theres currently 1/10th the track length and 1/20th as many units as the old tram network that was ripped up not to mention the industry needs to be continuously working on projects, not just bursts of big projects. because thats how you improve and get cheaper at building infrastructure
It will be about 20% as big as the former system once the parramatta lines are up and running soon, and an extension of L3vdown the rest of Anzac Parade which will be cheap would bring it to 25%. Conversion of the NW and SW busways would double it.
I would love to see this happen as light rail is the best option for Parra Rd. However, there are A LOT of technical and operational challenges in bringing modern light rail vehicles to Parramatta Road and Green Square. The pedestrian bridge you mentioned would have to go, but that is the least of the issues. The document mentions the grades on Parra Rd being at the upper limits of the vehicle's design; there are no stops envisaged along the incline east of Taveners Hill. You wouldn't have a direct interchange with the L1 at Tavener's Hill either because of the grade and existing light rail bridge. The document proposes disappointingly long headways, with a maximum 1 vehicle every 5 mins in peak which is crazy for Parra Road. They would need massive areas for new stabling yards: the best option is in Moore Park. It will also require lots of substations. The route from Central to Green Square is going to be slow due to all the sharp turns (one option to save the historic chimney would be to have a short single track section at this intersection). It is difficult to imagine a successful interchange between buses and light rail on Parra Rd due to physical constraints. The government needs to seriously consider restricting through traffic along Parra Rd to make this work: you should not be able to travel the full length of Parra Rd in a car. My suggestion would be to connect Parra Rd light rail to the L1 line (although the radius from George to Hay may be tricky). Green Square line should terminate at Central - the area will likely be served by a future extension of the metro.
Given the budget crunch and the huge pipeline of projects still being finished off (Airport, Metro South West conversion, Metro West, 2nd harbour tunnel, Parramatta Light Rail etc), I can understand them not jumping straight away. But after a few years of stabilisation we should hit the button and go for it. Start construction about 2027-28 and open in 2032.
Agree. so much going on right now.. my thought is what is now in the long term pipeline beyond that.. this (or any new big project) does need to start planning now before someone starts digging.. would take 5 years I guess to get to a point where design is completed and contractors to build are appointed?
As a Melbournian & ex-Bendigoian I would love to see Sydney light rail projects in Vic. For example a route from Box Hill to Donacaster & even extending up to Eltham would be great & probably a lot cheaper than a full Doncaster heavy rail line. I could also see this as a great way to make a suburban rail like system for smaller cities as they don’t need the capacity & don’t warrant the higher level of spending heavy rail requires. For example Bendigo could build a light rail use some of their current tram tracks, going from Weeroona to Bendigo Station (using current tracks to Alexandra Fountain) then going to Kennington Reservoir via La Trobe University
yes I agree, Light Rail actually probably has more applicability in smaller cities.. where it can run on city streets in the CBD and then on reservations into the suburbs.. Adelaide, Hobart, Darwin spring to mind. Places where not quite big enough for Heavy Rail to all suburbs but not big enough to re-build / build a light rail network.
the overpass at elswick st can be removed once the tramway is under construction. the overpass is to ensure school kids cross the road safely (or can cross the road), and besides, the new tram stop will require traffic lights anyways to get onto the platforms.
5:06 Moore Park SupaCenta used to contain an IKEA store on the ground floor until 2006. IKEA Rhodes, the effective replacement store, opened in December 2004.
@@vintageradio3404 IKEA Moore Park was merely a modest 1990s suburban branch which was meant for an earlier and simpler time. IKEA Moore Park was cramped and instantly became obsolete in the 2000s when the modern, relevant and spacious IKEA Rhodes opened in 2004. However, IKEA Tempe which did not open for another 7 years after IKEA Rhodes in November 2011, is totally on another level as the Tempe store serves as the flagship location for IKEA Australia, is the largest store in the Southern Hemisphere and also houses the Australian corporate company headquarters.
IKEA Moore Park was merely a modest 1990s suburban branch which was meant for an earlier and simpler time. IKEA Moore Park was cramped and instantly became obsolete in the 2000s when the modern, relevant and spacious IKEA Rhodes opened in 2004. However, IKEA Tempe which did not open for another 7 years after IKEA Rhodes in November 2011, is on another total level as the Tempe store serves as the flagship location for IKEA Australia, is the largest store in the Southern Hemisphere and also houses the Australian company headquarters.
the routing looks pretty nice, lot of interconnects and good stops honestly i think paramatta road losing 2 lanes would be a benefit, it has too many lanes for businesses along it to function correctly
Yes they have put some good thought into it, and having gone along the route.. i actually think the Green Square end of the line makes the most sense of the two ends.. as already high density areas and I think a lot of people without cars there - and not really close to railway lines.
Lose 4 lanes for all I care - they're under the ground now, and tolled user-pays like every other choice. Turn them into café tables and cycle lanes - you want to save money? Cycleways cost 99% less per kilometre, whether it's building or upkeep.
@@whophd yes exactly, thankyou on your point regarding cycle lanes. Proper Dutch-Style cycle lanes taking over a traffic lane down Parramatta Road and Oxford Street especially (but also King Street, Botany Road, Military Road, Pacific Highway and all these big arterial roads) would totally transform traffic in the inner-city completely in addition to light rail.
Parramatta Road corridor is in serious need of change. Sydney house crisis? Busy stroad? Ugly shops? Dilapidated shops? Slow business? Aging granny flats? The solution for all of them is here: 6th Light Rail along Parramatta Road. It will rejuvenate much needed area with mixed residential-commercial, lots of pedestrian road, new tram line, less buses, less traffics.
Especially with Westconnex in the future, why not toll the people who go via the surface road instead and redirect all traffic to the tunnels? Trucks must definitely use the tunnels rather than local streets else be charged.
I was just in paramatta for a furry con last weekend. I talked to a lot of businesses in the area. Some are fine with it but the others who relied on delivery services are failing because the tram line has taken up roads and car-parks that would of had cars stop in an out for short moments.
That is a big challenge eh - especially with food providers. In making this video I was astounded by how many delivery riders there were in the Waterloo area. I 100% agree you can't have a light rail only corridor in the suburbs.
they should definitely build this, though i dont like it in its current form. the tracks should run along the sides of parra road, like the existing bus lanes, not the middle. with widened footpaths this will create a nice barrier between the shops and the traffic, even making outdoor dining a potential option. im fine with sacrificing vehicle lanes if needed, we should be pushing people to use the new tram, not keep driving, and if you think youre above using public transport with the rest of us, you can either sit in traffic or pay for the west connex.
I am sure Town Planners have a point of view on merits of Light Rail down middle of road vs side of road... we have some in Sydney - near Randwick Racecourse - for example. I think it works well. And as Parramatta Road is not always wide enough to have 2 lanes of traffic, 2 tram tracks, and stations.. having on the side means at least one platform can be on the existing footpath. But then pedestrian issues.. Gosh.. lucky I am not building the line just making TH-cams on it :)
Wonderful video and personally I think this would be a good thing. Not sure how easy it would be for people to access the trams on Parramatta Rd if it's really busy. But I'm sure solutions exist out there.
Parramatta Road is run down and the street front stores are failing. We also have a housing crisis, so the big picture would involve rebuilding along the Parramatta Road where ugly old street shops could be rebuilt in a cosmopolitan design where people live above. More housing is required. Creating these homes and a light rail which should meet with buses, would help the economy while tackling housing. Australia can afford this if we stop throwing stacks of public money to those who are wealthy and instead, tax them.
Would need to remove the tolls on the M4 to carry the current Parramatta road traffic. It's very underutilised, and if we didn't, all the backstreets around parammatta would grind to a complete halt.
Hi Marty, thanks for another excellent video. just of interest, I was born in Stanmore and my grandparents lived in Petersham and the trams used to pass their front door in Fort Street. It would be amazing to see trams running once again in Parramatta Road, if this planned new line goes ahead. Other light rail tram routes that I would like to see become a reality include extending the Randwick or Kingsford lines to La Perouse and Moroubra along Anzac Parade, using the reserved area once used by the original trams. Also, taking back the two eastern traffic lanes on the Sydney Harbour Bridge, converting them to light rail, running from North Sydney to Wynyard (Platforms 1 & 2), following the original tram route. This ram route could be run as a regular shuttle service and should greatly reduce road traffic on the bridge. Anyway, wishing you the very best. Rob in Melbourne Australia.
Thanks for watching. Great thoughts.. yes that Anzac Parade corridor is crying out for an extension to the existing line. I know there are some thoughts about extending to Maroubra Junction but an option could be to go further around to Westfields Pagewood. And would be great to see Trams back on the Harbour Bridge.. but that would be a hard sell to drivers to take two lanes of that bridge I guess.. Cheers M
Some years back, I contacted the local council in the La Perouse area and suggested the need of light rail there and they completely agreed. However, without the government helping, it is impossible to make it a reality. With the Harbour Bridge, road traffic can now use the under harbour tunnel, which should be able to function with some extra traffic. Also, with light rail trams running a shuttle service between North Sydney and Wynyard, maybe at even two minute intervals, cars could be parked at North Sydney and the car drivers could change to the trams to get to the city. This would greatly lessen road traffic crossing the Harbour Bridge. Also, just a note of interest, the Harbour Bridge was oringinally built perfectly balanced with train/tram rails each side of the bridge and road placed in the middle. Ever since the extra traffic lanes were installed, the bridge has been slightly tilted to the east, due to incorrect weight distribution. I often worry about New Year's fireworks there each year, especially if the bridge suddenly fell into the harbour with all the explosions.
Just an extra thought, if the Cahill Expressway is causing any problems over the tram tunnel, that end just needs to be slightly diverted to the western direction to allow easy entrance to the tram tunnel.
Trams down Parramatta Road is something I've been hearing about my entire life as someone who grew up in Leichhardt just off the Parramatta Road end of Norton Street. People who live near the road definitely want it very much. Parramatta Road is just miserable to live near, and I can't think of any other good solutions. I think as long as state governments continue to look at urban planning with a pro public transport lens it will happen eventually. Not any time soon - with the amount of transport projects already happening, I doubt anything on top of that will be happening in NSW in the near future, certainly not in Sydney, at least (as a current Newcastle resident I may be foolishly holding out hope for anything at a up here...). But eventually. In the next 10-20 years, hopefully.
I say its a good idea.Not only in connecting up two seperate sydney based tram networks together with possibilities for branching off further afield later but also would be great patronage with the university/tafe nearby the route and the connections between the other tramlines. Also, Parramatta road can finally begin getting a much needed fixing up
you mentioned spotting an old tram track... i used to live on city road just up from the Landsdowne hotel, late one night road crews were out with heavy jackhammers mounted on excavators... when all of a sudden the din of concrete being hammered became a dull "tonk, tonk, tonk" apparently heavy hydraulic jack hammers don't work that well in wooden sleepers!! i looked out the window to see the whole crew staring at wooden sleepers and tram tracks.. they ended up having to hand dig out the entire 40+ metre section!!🤣🤣
Thanks for watching and thanks for sharing the memories. I can imagine those workers were not very happy that their job got way more complex and they first thought.
Thanks. I have settled on calling the network / the line / the stops as "Light Rail".. but I call the vehicles that run along them Trams - mainly because most people still call them Trams and its much shorter to say than Light Rail Vehicle :) I was thinking about Melbourne's trams - and lines like Route 96 are in effect light rail.. hardly different from our L1, L2, L3.. and people there just call them all trams.. so get how some raise questions why we call it Light Rail in Sydney.
Thanks Ryan. The proposal doesn't really detail how it would get from the end of Zetland Ave to Defries Street as they are not connected by public road at this point.. but agree... appartments would certainly be part of any development along here...
Yes Light Rail works best when combined with other transport.. so feeder lines to major transport hubs / railway stations along busy corridors makes sense.
Yes, agree. the map isn’t super detailed as proposed by ALTRAC our but from what I saw while there neither stop Is that close to the L1 Taverners Hill station.
5:02 Less than 12 months before final closure of the first Sydney tram system, the NSW Government found that it actually had no tenure over the land that Dowling Street Depot sat on. Thus it would have to hand the land over to the Moore Park Trust after the System's closure, instead of being flogged off to commercial development. Panic stations ensued and the Government swiftly acted to resume the land "for transport services". Needless to say, it did indeed get eventually flogged off. Re the tram track on O'Dea Avenue Zetland, it was still in place until very recently, as late as 2014 I think, until it was pulled up to allow large drainage pipes to be laid under O'Dea Avenue to resolve a chronic drainage problem.
Thanks. Great history. Maybe why Brambles (a transport company) used the Dowling Street Depot for many years afterward? I grew up on the south side of Sydney so went past that site as a kid for many years and didn't realise until later in life it was a former tram shed.. wish I had have filmed it.. although kids didn't have cameras then anyway.
And thanks for the O'Dea insight.. I had in my mind from years ago there was tram tracks still there.. a few years back I went to film and just missed them... bugger!
yes, and in America even Tyre companies got involved.. but while I was born many years after all of this.. i can understand why trams at this time in history were seen as 'the past' and cars 'the future'.. we can only take solace that we have learned that mistake.. but what of others from the time..
This is not true. In many countries, trams were replaced first by electric trolley buses, which discounts the idea that oil companies were involved. The real reasons are complicated and depends on every city or country. In most cases the old tram networks were ageing and required huge amounts of money to update and modernise. Trolleys could use the overhead wires, but didn't require updating the tracks and then diesel buses were seen as more flexible and cheaper than trolleys, so many governments replaced them with what they saw was cheaper, more modern systems. In the US it is true that GM bought up many of the tram lines just to close them down, but not because of oil companies or even cars, but again to replace by buses as that was cheaper (and GM made buses, not trams) - and the US had entirely private tram networks owned by property developers that were often created for the sole purpose of selling properties. Once the properties were sold, the loss-making trams had no purpose any more. Australia was very different in this case and followed much closer to the UK system where councils or local governments owned and operated the networks. In all cases, cars became a big thing. By the 1950s, most people wanted a private car. It was drivers who called for trams to be scrapped as they saw them blocking their roads and causing them congestion. Drivers voted and councils or local governments listened to them and shut down the ageing and expensive tram networks It really is much more complicated than just blaming oil companies.
@@joc6516 Exactly. The buses were much more flexible and reliable when they first took over. People just love the story about perceived government mistakes.
They didn't bother ripping it all up because that would have been too disruptive. They just removed the catenary, and eventually paved over the rails. Here and there they come to light again when they scrape and repave the roads.
This line should one day be built but it is fair to predict it'll never happen under a Labor government. Every tram on the rails in Sydney at the moment is only there because of Coalition governments. Even Stage 2 of the Parramatta Light Rail was Coalition policy and the only reason Labor kept it on the table was because it is in their heartland of Western Sydney. If that line was proposed for the Nthn Beaches it would have been scrapped by Jo Haylen like a blown light globe.
That’s not entirely true, the L1 to Lilyfield was done by Labor then a lot of the work to Dulwich Hill was done, Gladys (then transport minister) designed a pretty poor Dulwich Hill Extension in the end with an awful terminus and interchange configuration limiting frequency and requiring a ridiculously long walk up to the dulwich hill bridge and back down to the station.
@@BigBlueMan118 The L1 was originally devised and built by the Fahey Government in the min 1990s but opened under Labor in 1997. Labor extended the line in the last year of the Keneally Government but in Labor's infinite wisdom they expected only six trams (the original Adtranz Variotrams) to service a 12km line. It took the O'Farrell Government to replace those trams with the CAF Urbos 3's which are on the line now plus the extra 4 ordered later on, which have recently entered service. Instead of 6 trams, there are now 16 with some surplus Alstom X05s used during peak periods.
@@vintageradio3404 Forgetting the *Lilyfield extension*? That's what I referred to in my comment, and it was exactly as long (3.6km) as the original Wentworth Park-Hay Street section built under Fahey plus had a bigger new depot. The Wentworth Park-Lilyfield extension was built 1997-2000 and also opened under Carr. Dulwich Hill from Lilyfield was begun under Keneally and much of the work done, correct. There were *7* variotrams originally though, one was scrapped following a hefty collision in 2013 after LNP had already taken over. The line's popularity absolutely skyrocketed after Labor were already gone and all the projections for the line were smashed, between 2011 and 2015 patronage tripled. The CAFs are a total disaster, I wouldn't be too proud with them. Don't get me wrong I think the LNP have been far better on this issue, but it isn't as one-sided as your comments would like to frame it.
What I had liked generally about State Governments in NSW was there seemed to be less 'ideology' when it comes to big future public infrastructure.. but the discussion above has got me thinking a but more about it..... thanks...
I think one problem is that the current buses don't just use Parramatta Road only. They branch and feed from the suburbs along the road. So is the plan that people will get off the buses when they hit Parramatta Road (e.g. going into the city) and transition to the tram? I can only see the plan working if there are major changes to the bus routes all along Parramatta road because it would be chaos to have the buses share only two lanes with cars.
Exactly - good point. Would bus routes now feed into the Light Rail stops instead of heading into the city directly? And would that be quicker for bus travellers overall?
And I think people can forget turning right to get off Parramatta Road (after trams are implemented). Can't see "hook" turns working by cars waiting in the left-hand lane to turn right? The tram is going to take away the many current right-hand turn temporary lanes.
@@AndrewJens there are plenty of roads in Germany or Austria with much busier combined bus+tram corridors than Parramatta Road would be, you can have buses share the space with trams. There are plenty of options. First thing to note too is there will be less demand coming from west of Taverners Hill by 2032, as the bus network will be reconfigred to feed bus traffic into the new Metro West stations (North Strathfield, Burwood North, Five Dock, The Bays, Pyrmont). The options as I see them are 1) buses and trams could share dedicated transit lanes as they do in Germany, here Altrac were only suggesting a moderate tram frequency even in peak. 2) buses can all just run express on Parra Road and leave stopping for trams. 3) buses are reconfigured to run north-south feeding the light rail rather than branching off a Parramatta Road Trunk as they do now.
@@AndrewJens Gosh, could you imagine Sydneysiders working out how to do Hook Turns.. i am a Sydneysider and still cant get my head around them and I have driven through them a few times in Melbourne when travelling there...
I feel like they should experiment with having local buses running using the tram lanes and stopping at the tram stops. They already have some tram stops with a platform for buses on L2/L3. Plus, the buses could then be shown on the digital signs.
why? you can already get a train to the airport. we need to be smart with the resources we have and not build the same infrastructure over and over to the same places.
My personal opinion is that a line down parramatta road off the current L2/3 makes perfect sense. Green Square can wait as it already has a heavy rail option.
Any road with busy bus service is begging for an upgrade to rail. The L6 proposal is great. All I can disagree with, is that Sydney's light rail tends to wander off into the suburbs, where it feels unused.
I’ve driven buses along Parramatta road at all times and in all wether conditions and believe me it is a congested traffic sewer. Anything to improve the travel environment and amenities in this area has to be a plus. One thing that saddens me is why the ( L4 ) line wasn’t extended from the Carlingford terminus through to Epping and even MacQuarie Park. The biggest downside to the Carlingford rail line was it not serving any areas it was desperately needed. Passenger numbers were alway scant due to the gruelling change of trains at Clyde and its low catchment through Dundas and Carlingford. As we know, the original proposal to extend the line through to Epping was cancelled and in my opinion a vital opportunity to make this new light rail line extremely relevant to future population growth has been missed by not extending it through to Epping/MacQuarie Park. I live in the Ryde area and the high rise developments going on in the MacQuarie area are astonishing. True, the Metro extension to Sydenham will prove itself undoubtedly, but the growth of multi story residential going on now between Carlingford and MacQuarie Park will have only the present bus network to serve it, which by its nature will be unreliable due to the ever increasing traffic problems on the Pennant Hills, Carlingford Road and Epping Road corridors.
Whilst the Sydney LR network can be described as a success in terms of exceeding patronage expectations and transforming the city in a positive sense especially George Street and the area around UNSW, there are some *big* flaws that need to be pointed out. -The L1 alignment from Glebe to the city is just bonkers, way too slow -The L1 terminus at dulwich hill being single-track despite having space for two tracks is a massive fail -The L1 should have been built with a cycleway from day 1 -The trams on L1 are junk and should be moved to Newcastle or sold to Canberra ASAP and some Melbourne G-Class trams ordered -The arrangement of the L2/L3 at Moore Park is attrocious for large crowds, should have been a balloon loop away from the main stop and another balloon loop built at Central or in the city for events tram specials -L2/L3 in my opinion should have been a viaduct with a shared path across from Surry Hills to Anzac Parade, which would have been faster and removed all conflicts with traffic plus you could have had a better Moore Park station -L2/L3 APS system is awful and should be ditched -L2/L3 should be 25kmh or 30kmh on George Street -L2/L3 Chinatown stop is a terrible design -L2/L3 speeds should be significantly higher and the track speeds shouldn't keep varying -L3 should have gone as far as Maroubra Junction as part of stage 1, this would be far smoother for bus ridership in the SE and increased the amount of land able to densify -Maintenance across the network is awful (too many TSRs last forever) -Having the bike lanes alongside L2/L3 through Chalmers Street is a disaster and causing so many unecessary conflicts into the Central station entrance, should have put the bike lanes down Elizabeth St. -Long-term the L2/L3 lines should move to Elizabeth Street and the Parramatta Road LR should take over the George Street lines. L2/L3 on Elizabeth Street would remove the conflict with the L1 lines, remove the dog-leg via Haymarket, has a wider prifle and could have 40kmh speeds with less stops so it would be more useful for SE journeys. -Carlingford line L4 should have been extended up to Carlingford Court either as part of stage 1 or begin immediately after construction on stage 1 finished. -L4 from Camelia to Parramatta has at least 2 completely unecessary turns that will slow the alignment down forever and should have been eliminated.
Agree... I was nodding along to every point above... I 100% agree with your point that long term L2/L3 should run up Elizabeth Street. Also builds in redundancy to the CBD end of the network if there are disruptions on George Street - especially outside Town Hall with events / protests etc... I actually think the GREEN SQUARE end of the line should connect with the DULWICH HILL line with shorter trams running on those lines.. Would like to build your thoughts into other ideas for future improvements to the network.
You forgot: specifying the right type of trams to run your lines in the first place. Fixed-bogie trams as deployed on Sydney's routes require 25m minimum turning radii on curves. Parra Rd & GreenSquare proposal see's the heritage chimney at Porter St in Waterloo demolished just so the vehicles can make that turn. Also is why the Parramatta stage 2 line won't directly access Olympic Park ferry wharf. Too tight of a turn radius for these types of vehicles. If they had initially specified all lines to run trams with swivelling bogies, planners wouldn't have to propose such drastic route alterations just to accomodate them. Suit the vehicles to the chosen alignment, not the other way around. But we're now going to have to live with these vehicles crawling themselves around curves in the meantime.
@@joshporter5422 Agree with the CAF point, I have updated my comment with the following line: -The trams on L1 are junk and should be moved to Newcastle or sold to Canberra ASAP and some Melbourne G-Class trams ordered. The L2/L3 trams get a pass because they don't have tight curves on the alignments and they have a ton of doors. But swivelling bogeys should absolutely be the standard and it is SO FRUSTRATING they didn't just go and have a meeting with Melbourne Tramways and ask them their thoughts - I would set up the meeting if they listened to me!
Neil Forbes keeps refering these are trams but they're not. A classical streetcar/tram/trolley runs completely or mostly on streets. A light rail system runs partly or completely independent from other traffic, for example in tunnels or on a separate right of way.
Question to people who are really into this stuff. I think to Anzac Prd which is not as busy as Parramatta Rd and the Light Rail doesn't have the patronage I expect this would have. How do you ensure pedestrian safety around these stops? Sure lights and stuff, but those are for the majority - jaywalking will occur and at times it will coincide with speeding. Thoughts? :)))
Great questions.. has to be considered for sure.. I have no facts to back this up, but I would guess less pedestrians have injured over in George Street since the light rail was put in.. but good to hear over points of view..
Unlike Melbourne Sydney and Adelaide, Brisbane is still yet to revive the trams with many politicians still trying to defend removing them in the first place
Good point. While I think many would wish that trams maybe one day will return to Brisbane - the topography - the hills, the river, the tight streets - doesn't naturally fit with modern light rail systems. And if not for the Paddington Depot fire.. I think most would say trams would still be running in Brisbane today.
@@backtracks.channelI agree with this. Additionally, if trams were to run through Brisbane's CBD, they'd have to make cars and trams share the roads, as most of the city's roads are 2? 3? lanes. So they'd kinda have to do Melbourne-style stops. Of course, if they do open a light rail/tram line.
They need a tram line west from Central through Newtown then Sydenham then Wolli Creek . The journey on the train to central via the Airport takes too long .
Thanks. And like how you link the timing in your note. Need to learn how to do that. I actually made that map using Motion so I can animate it if needed.
Light rail works well in the CBD but Parramatta road is the main and only way for traffic to enter the city, not a great idea to constrict by losing 2 laneways for Light rail that don't use the same lanes like Melbourne's trams
Yes we need more metros. Agree. I guess the question is why not do both? Altrac are offering to build this one 'for free' - and then get paid to run it in return.
Thanks. I just looked the definition up myself as was a good question. I guess all these lines are ultimately owned by the NSW Government and would appear on the Sydney Transport Network Map / are part of the Opal Network. So they are 'connected' in that way so one may say a Network. but up to personal view if network or not. Cheers.
If they wanted trams on Parramatta Rd why did they end the M4 tunnel Haberfield? 🤦♂️Its should of continued on till Broadway/Syd uni campus to get more cars off Parramatta rd
I seem to recall at one point they were thinking about an entry / exit at Camperdown - where the worksite was for the Westconnex was situated - now just a big empty block.
Theres NO way they will fit tram lines in Zetlland and Alexandria. Roads are too narrow and the area is too car dependant in high dense area and still has many small local business...,it will kill them off like it has in Kingsford
i really don't think so. green sq, waterloo and redfern and the city already have rail, and the other end is pretty close to either existing light rail or the inner west line. resources spent on this would be better used by either extending the eastern suburbs line to bondi (and further?) or extending the L3 further south to la perouse etc.
I know right.. hard to know what is the priority. But I guess for the NSW government right now no company is offering to build a new railway line to Bondi for free.. But yes ALTRAC is offering to build this one for free (well in return for running it.. and that does cost the government).. And ALTRAC could be offering to extend one of their existing lines.. L3 to La Perouse or L2 down to Coogee
Green square is the densest area in Australia and the station only serves the western potion of it. The buses going along the proposed route are already always full. It really needs more PT.
@@tobyb6248 the area directly north of green square is waterloo, which is just about to get a metro station. it was already within walking distance of redfern. there are areas of greater need, imo.
One can only dream! Sydney is currently about 10% the track length of Melbourne.. but if when these new lines open I think I worked out it would get to about 20%.. Cheers and thanks for watching.
NSW Labor being NSW Labor? You'd be crazy to reject this. The road bypass is finally finished (WestConnex) and they want to LEAVE this garbage 6-lane monster as it is? Why should road users be the only ones who don't have to pay. They contribute the least for the most costs. Meanwhile the locals who actually LIVE there, don't need a highway down the middle of an inner-suburban shopping strip.
Yes what is surprising for me the government is saying to No to ALTRAC when ALTRAC is saying they will build it 'for free' and get paid back by running the line.. I would be saying 'thanks' go for it..
@@MaxS-hn8we Yeah that's the problem though. We build motorways for a reason. Parramatta Road is too busy for the shops to be shops, and for the locals who want to use the shops.
You know I would have some CRAZY ideas for Light Rail, but it's that or alternatively Metro. But my idea is thus; I've seen in places how Light Rail systems some of them easily transition from regular runs on track bits to street level or such. I kinda wish they would do an extension from Circular Quay terminal to out under the harbor with a tunnel set up to take trams to the Northern Beaches side namely to around Manly somewhere. I know it's a crazy idea haha, they are in Manly planning to demolish the old Sea World Aquarium entirely and thus there will be some land freed up after many years. Anyways the reason I suggested a tunnel also is a tram could go full speed in a tunnel set up(whatever maximum speed they can hit)` Because usually on street level they do 40 kmph for safety reasons on average. Also to build a full on train line or metro it takes so much more to establish for full on train systems overall.
I'll bet that Sydney gets a 6th, 7th and probably even an 8th LR line before the government extends the useless little 2.3km LR line in Newcastle to the suburbs.
The Labor party will not do it, all the projects that are happening now, are from the previous government, I just wish all governments would wake up and put more money into public transport and that is not just buses
Thanks. Good debate. I have settled on calling the network / the line / the stops as "Light Rail".. but I call the vehicles that run along them Trams - mainly because most people still call them Trams and its much shorter to say than Light Rail Vehicle :) At the same time, I do consider how Melbourne's trams - and lines like Route 96 are in effect light rail.. hardly different from our L1, L2, L3.. and people there just call them all trams.. So understand how questions come about why some call it Light Rail in Sydney.
Good question.. I was working on the assumption that the Stage 2 of the Parramatta Light Rail will be called L5 - being the 5th line in Sydney.. but it's not confirmed.. only my speculation. Backtracks made a video on this, if you are interested. Cheers M th-cam.com/video/TvS6xR1bkA0/w-d-xo.html
@@greenstumpymonsterVID777 Newcastle is a toy system slash failed experiment moving like 2000 people per day, it can't be taken seriously until they install overhead, increase the speeds and extend it to connect to more useful destinations. Newcastle once had a very useful and successful tram network until the 1950s, alot of those corridors would be super useful again if the system was done right not by American consultants designing lazy tracks and giving poor advice for fat pay-outs and greedy companies pushing useless proprietary tech.
Nothing but a land grab by the Spanish consortium that will result in bus route cancellations and slower public transit times along the Parramatta Rd section. 20 bus routes were cancelled and a further 25 modified when the L2 opened with journey times to the city Increasing significantly. Not to mention it was a disaster for local businesses.
light rails to unsw have been a nighmare in 2024. Frequent system outages due to industrial action, frequent overcrowding due to reduced timetables (due to industrial action), etc.
@@lachd2261 Yeah no doubt about that. But it's just astonishing that the light rail network went from perfectly fine at the start of 2024 to having frequent disruptions every second day just a few months later.
Horrible proposal, it will end up like the poor line in the eastern suburbs which killed business, bus transport and driving all in one swoop. The light rail should be a metro underground and out of sight.
Agree there is a heap of space underground.. and with Sydney's ideal sandstone geology we the city can build tunnels more efficiently, safely and at times more cost effectively than other cities around the world. But at same time building the same length of track is 3-4x per KM more expensive than above ground.. so calculations need to be done I guess?
While making this video I actually realised how hard it would be to name a stop.. as so many locations they have put in the proposal could have different names - the Green Square end is a bit easier.. but along Parramatta Road.. do they go the suburb (and the suburb can be different on the north or south side) or the cross street (which less people will be familiar with)... it is easier for train stations as they generally stop in the middle of a large suburb..
6:03 Most Crystal St residents do not have cars. The artist’s depiction says it all. Too woke. However, the channel host does drive, as he is a realist. Speaking of cars, as an aside, can the channel host make a little diversion video about the merits, efficiencies and benefits of EVs? The level of stupidity and hostility towards EVs on social media is truly staggering, even from graduates who really ought to know better. This EV video would definitely increase channel viewership! Perhaps Sky News will pick up on it. 🤣
@@user-kc1tf7zm3b The old tramway ran through the streets, sharing space with cars, lorries, buses, etc. and there were reserved tram-only areas as well. This matches up *EXACTLY* with today's tramways.
@@neilforbes416 Narrowly defined *it has rolling stock that is similar to a traditional tram, while it operates at a higher capacity and speed and often on an exclusive right-of-way.* In broader use, light rail transit includes tram-like operations mostly on street
While I use Tram and Lightrail together, i reckon the benefit of calling it a lightrail is they can put L on all thr maps and signs. One of the best features of Sydneys transport networks is how clear, connected and easy to understand it is, not something to take for granted.
@@createdforthemoment6740 As I mentioned there is a difference between light rail and a tram if you put two of them side by side you can see the difference straight away.
Light rail is a blight on society. Track vehicles and cars don’t mix. We’ve spend decades removing every single rail/road crossing and replacing them with under/over passes due that simple fact. The fact that they are removing traffic lanes to make way for light rail only increases congestion.
A good debate. Yes removing lanes for traffic seems in counter intuitive if we want to reduce congestion. But light rail can work.. At one point in my life I caught the 339 from Circular Quay To Clovelly.. and I could take over 30 mins to get along George Street on a Friday. George St is much better for everyone since Light Rail. And Parramatta Road could only be considering light rail after Westconnex added in effect 6 additional lanes of vehicle traffic along the corridor. But agree one could see increased congestion around certain parts of the route..
In the end, our goal is to make Parramatta Road some type of shopping street with only two lanes for cars as well as congestion charging. It'll end up being a bit like George St.
Thanks. All part of the debate. I think most viewers of this channel and public transport generally would say the debate is cars vs public transport.. and what public transport.. we should do what is fit for purpose.. I live in a part of sydney without rail or light rail.. and to be honest I think it would be bonkers to build either of these to our part of Sydney. Buses (and Ferries) are working just fine.
Thanks for watching. Anyone's guess if this will be built so no wasted time or money at this stage. But good to have debate about what should come next for Sydney's transport.
Every time I visit Sydney I shudder at how awful Parramatta Road is. It is the spine of the Inner West, but it's in traction!
For real, I used to live only 6km from Central and if it had been possible I would have cycled to work easy, but because Parra road is such a pain I rarely did it because it was just awful. It would be absolutely transformative to have a proper Light Rail, some tree shade and a proper Amsterdam-style bike lane all the way down parramatta road, I reckon you would get tens of thousands of people on trams and bikes and visiting those businesses.
Yep - its a classic stroad and it needs Light Rail to revitalise it!
@@arthurlongshanks only make it worse
A light rail along Parramatta Road would be the most patronised line of all. Stops at Norton Street, the University of Sydney, RPA Hospital, Glebe Point Road would all have huge patronage. This is long overdue. Especially with the interchanges at Taverner's Hill, Railway Square, Crown Street and Green Square. It's the line that Sydney needs most.
Agree.. I have been thinking perhaps it just needs a better end point.. perhaps going to the new Five Dock Metro Station as part of the proposal would make it busy route at both ends? What do you think?
Actually the following bus corridors all have significantly more current bus patronage than the inner west down Parramatta road does, and that’s before Metro West opens which will take bus patronage away:
-Military Road
-Anzac Parade
-Victoria Road
-M2 busway
Source: (page 39)
www.infrastructureaustralia.gov.au/sites/default/files/2019-08/Transport%20Modelling%20Report%20for%20Sydney.pdf
Yeah, that's the one thing I don't like about the proposal, the way it trails off in Taverners Hill. The interchange with L1 (and the short walk to Lewisham station) is okay but not great. Is there any way to squeeze a better interchange with the heavy rail into the local geometry? Barring that, your idea of extending it to the Five Dock metro station looks like a great alternative.
@@Nalehw Taverners Hill would only be the end of the first stage to get the thing off the ground, going any further would cost hundreds of millions more and put the project into the too-hard basket.
The IW Greenway will be built within a few years so you would be able to walk down the greenway for T2 interchange, also you could build a new entrance to Lewisham station on Old Canterbury Road to make it better. I have previously called for Lewisham station to be completely rebuilt & moved closer to the L1 for a better interchange because Lewisham station floods and it causes Railway Terrace to be too narrow plus is still not accessible, but heritage people would lose their minds.
As long as they don’t pull a Newcastle and remove on street parking to “not lose a lane”. Note that outside clearway and bus lane times people are parked in the bus lanes so no, removing the bus lane only benefits peak, outside that there’ll only be one lane instead of two usable
Melbourne was the only Australian city that had sense and kept their trams while all others closed them in the early sixties
Sydney was right to decommission the inefficient and obsolete tram network in the 1950s. Sydney would have become utterly diabolical if the trams persisted into the new millennium as cars quickly became the primary mode of transport after the war. What Melbourne does or does not do is irrelevant as the residents of the other capital city are too full of nostalgia and rather backward.
Yes if Sydney had have kept is trams I do think the network would have had to evolve quite substantially - with a focus on lines going down major road corridors further out into the suburbs - rather than the inner centric network it was (of course Sydney was much smaller back then). Parramatta Road would have been one line I as sure they would have kept.. along with ANZAC Parade, Oxford Street, Victoria Road to Ryde, maybe Princess Highway to Rockdale etc.
@@user-kc1tf7zm3bCars devolved Sydney and made it worse.
That is true and also well-known but there are clear disadvantages - Melbourne is stuck with shorter trams and many existing trams there are not accessible. Every tram in Sydney can be used by the disabled and the coupled trams on L2 and L3 hold more than 400 people.
Melbourne shouldn't crow that much about its network. With only 580 trams it is the largest network only because of what other cities got rid of, not because of what Melbourne built. Sydney's old network was larger and accomodated almost 1,600 trams at its peak.
@@kennylee8936 you think "user-kc1-blah-blah-blah" is a real commenter? :D
I wish L6 does come to fruition! It would be so very convenient for me!!
Brilliant proposal! We all need to email the NSW Transport minister: Jo Haylen.
Why it is labour they are more interested in providing benefits, borrowing to fund refugees and trying to eradicate all history associated with the foundation of the Australian nation
Already did when the proposal first dropped. Now we need to step our game up. Protest the decision to reject it. Occupy Minns’ office.
@@gorgu08Ask Kier Starmer as he’s the leader of the Labour Party.
@@reez1728 sorry just spelt it right ;-) unless you are American ofcourse
@@gorgu08 You spelt it right for the United Kingdom, hence why you should take up your complaints with Mr. Starmer.
Not sure what any of what you’ve mentioned has to do with an Australian transport related channel.
A tram line down to Bondi Beach (or extend the Eastern suburbs rail line) and a tram line to La Perouse are urgently needed.
Yes Bondi Beach could certainly do with rail based transport.
I think the Eastern suburbs railway line extension is the better option first up because you then relieve the roads and Bondi junction too, thereby creating the space for a better surface option. The eastern suburbs railway line has the most spare capacity going to waste of any rail line in Australia and is totally under-utilized, the railway extension could therefore also continue on to north Bondi and Dover so you open up even more areas to increased housing.
Purely hypothetically it would be pretty unpopular but if you kept going to Rose Bay you could deal with a bunch of the New South Head Rd traffic too. I have even heard it suggested that the line could go under the Harbour all the way to manly but that would be an insanely difficult expensive tunneling project and would be slower than a more direct northern beaches line via North Sydney.
L2 should be extended to Bondi/Coogee and L3 to La Perouse.
@@phamnguyenductin it's a nice thought but take the walk one day from coogee to bondi and you'll see why that is impossible. the topography is too hilly - if not too cliffy. you'd never get a tram from coogee to bondi.
@@karlcx I mean extending the current Randwick line to Coogee or Bondi, not to link between the two beaches (which is already a walkable distance).
The largest obstacle to building a line to Bondi or Coogee isn't the geography, but the NIMBYism.
sure bloody hope so, considering theres currently 1/10th the track length and 1/20th as many units as the old tram network that was ripped up
not to mention the industry needs to be continuously working on projects, not just bursts of big projects. because thats how you improve and get cheaper at building infrastructure
It will be about 20% as big as the former system once the parramatta lines are up and running soon, and an extension of L3vdown the rest of Anzac Parade which will be cheap would bring it to 25%. Conversion of the NW and SW busways would double it.
I would love to see this happen as light rail is the best option for Parra Rd. However, there are A LOT of technical and operational challenges in bringing modern light rail vehicles to Parramatta Road and Green Square.
The pedestrian bridge you mentioned would have to go, but that is the least of the issues.
The document mentions the grades on Parra Rd being at the upper limits of the vehicle's design; there are no stops envisaged along the incline east of Taveners Hill. You wouldn't have a direct interchange with the L1 at Tavener's Hill either because of the grade and existing light rail bridge.
The document proposes disappointingly long headways, with a maximum 1 vehicle every 5 mins in peak which is crazy for Parra Road.
They would need massive areas for new stabling yards: the best option is in Moore Park. It will also require lots of substations.
The route from Central to Green Square is going to be slow due to all the sharp turns (one option to save the historic chimney would be to have a short single track section at this intersection).
It is difficult to imagine a successful interchange between buses and light rail on Parra Rd due to physical constraints.
The government needs to seriously consider restricting through traffic along Parra Rd to make this work: you should not be able to travel the full length of Parra Rd in a car.
My suggestion would be to connect Parra Rd light rail to the L1 line (although the radius from George to Hay may be tricky). Green Square line should terminate at Central - the area will likely be served by a future extension of the metro.
Splendid! I had no idea Sydney had such a large and growing tram system.
Thanks. yes is growing.. but right now only 10% the size of Melbourne. Will be 20% the size when Parramatta opens.
Given the budget crunch and the huge pipeline of projects still being finished off (Airport, Metro South West conversion, Metro West, 2nd harbour tunnel, Parramatta Light Rail etc), I can understand them not jumping straight away. But after a few years of stabilisation we should hit the button and go for it. Start construction about 2027-28 and open in 2032.
Agree. so much going on right now.. my thought is what is now in the long term pipeline beyond that.. this (or any new big project) does need to start planning now before someone starts digging.. would take 5 years I guess to get to a point where design is completed and contractors to build are appointed?
Once metro and L4 are both opened I think they should go for it. That's two big projects down, hopefully both in August.
Awesome content, nice to see local Aussie public transport information. Thanks for the effort, keep it up
Thanks, will do!
As a Melbournian & ex-Bendigoian I would love to see Sydney light rail projects in Vic. For example a route from Box Hill to Donacaster & even extending up to Eltham would be great & probably a lot cheaper than a full Doncaster heavy rail line.
I could also see this as a great way to make a suburban rail like system for smaller cities as they don’t need the capacity & don’t warrant the higher level of spending heavy rail requires. For example Bendigo could build a light rail use some of their current tram tracks, going from Weeroona to Bendigo Station (using current tracks to Alexandra Fountain) then going to Kennington Reservoir via La Trobe University
yes I agree, Light Rail actually probably has more applicability in smaller cities.. where it can run on city streets in the CBD and then on reservations into the suburbs.. Adelaide, Hobart, Darwin spring to mind. Places where not quite big enough for Heavy Rail to all suburbs but not big enough to re-build / build a light rail network.
Very well researched and loved watching this, thanks man
Glad you enjoyed it!
I's a must Parramatta Rd has been crying out for a light rail line since the M4 wast was built, not to merntion Sydney University and the RPA
the overpass at elswick st can be removed once the tramway is under construction. the overpass is to ensure school kids cross the road safely (or can cross the road), and besides, the new tram stop will require traffic lights anyways to get onto the platforms.
That's a good point! Thanks for watching. Cheers.
5:06 Moore Park SupaCenta used to contain an IKEA store on the ground floor until 2006. IKEA Rhodes, the effective replacement store, opened in December 2004.
The closest Ikea to Moore Park is now at Tempe. A ten minute drive.
I remember shopping there.. I recall was on the parking level basically at ground level? Was that right... what is there now?
@@vintageradio3404 IKEA Moore Park was merely a modest 1990s suburban branch which was meant for an earlier and simpler time. IKEA Moore Park was cramped and instantly became obsolete in the 2000s when the modern, relevant and spacious IKEA Rhodes opened in 2004.
However, IKEA Tempe which did not open for another 7 years after IKEA Rhodes in November 2011, is totally on another level as the Tempe store serves as the flagship location for IKEA Australia, is the largest store in the Southern Hemisphere and also houses the Australian corporate company headquarters.
IKEA Moore Park was merely a modest 1990s suburban branch which was meant for an earlier and simpler time. IKEA Moore Park was cramped and instantly became obsolete in the 2000s when the modern, relevant and spacious IKEA Rhodes opened in 2004.
However, IKEA Tempe which did not open for another 7 years after IKEA Rhodes in November 2011, is on another total level as the Tempe store serves as the flagship location for IKEA Australia, is the largest store in the Southern Hemisphere and also houses the Australian company headquarters.
the routing looks pretty nice, lot of interconnects and good stops
honestly i think paramatta road losing 2 lanes would be a benefit, it has too many lanes for businesses along it to function correctly
Yes they have put some good thought into it, and having gone along the route.. i actually think the Green Square end of the line makes the most sense of the two ends.. as already high density areas and I think a lot of people without cars there - and not really close to railway lines.
Lose 4 lanes for all I care - they're under the ground now, and tolled user-pays like every other choice. Turn them into café tables and cycle lanes - you want to save money? Cycleways cost 99% less per kilometre, whether it's building or upkeep.
@@whophd yes exactly, thankyou on your point regarding cycle lanes. Proper Dutch-Style cycle lanes taking over a traffic lane down Parramatta Road and Oxford Street especially (but also King Street, Botany Road, Military Road, Pacific Highway and all these big arterial roads) would totally transform traffic in the inner-city completely in addition to light rail.
Parramatta Road corridor is in serious need of change. Sydney house crisis? Busy stroad? Ugly shops? Dilapidated shops? Slow business? Aging granny flats? The solution for all of them is here: 6th Light Rail along Parramatta Road. It will rejuvenate much needed area with mixed residential-commercial, lots of pedestrian road, new tram line, less buses, less traffics.
Especially with Westconnex in the future, why not toll the people who go via the surface road instead and redirect all traffic to the tunnels? Trucks must definitely use the tunnels rather than local streets else be charged.
Melbourne is great and all but, I wish it had more of this kind of density.
I was just in paramatta for a furry con last weekend. I talked to a lot of businesses in the area. Some are fine with it but the others who relied on delivery services are failing because the tram line has taken up roads and car-parks that would of had cars stop in an out for short moments.
That is a big challenge eh - especially with food providers. In making this video I was astounded by how many delivery riders there were in the Waterloo area. I 100% agree you can't have a light rail only corridor in the suburbs.
Thanks for a great video. The Sydney city council has been buying properties for some years to enable construction.
Thanks for the info! I didn't know that.. if you have it, point me in that direction of the info. could make for a future video. thanks.
they should definitely build this, though i dont like it in its current form. the tracks should run along the sides of parra road, like the existing bus lanes, not the middle. with widened footpaths this will create a nice barrier between the shops and the traffic, even making outdoor dining a potential option. im fine with sacrificing vehicle lanes if needed, we should be pushing people to use the new tram, not keep driving, and if you think youre above using public transport with the rest of us, you can either sit in traffic or pay for the west connex.
I am sure Town Planners have a point of view on merits of Light Rail down middle of road vs side of road... we have some in Sydney - near Randwick Racecourse - for example. I think it works well. And as Parramatta Road is not always wide enough to have 2 lanes of traffic, 2 tram tracks, and stations.. having on the side means at least one platform can be on the existing footpath. But then pedestrian issues.. Gosh.. lucky I am not building the line just making TH-cams on it :)
Wonderful video and personally I think this would be a good thing. Not sure how easy it would be for people to access the trams on Parramatta Rd if it's really busy. But I'm sure solutions exist out there.
Great idea and definitely needed along Parramatta Rd……
Parramatta Road is run down and the street front stores are failing. We also have a housing crisis, so the big picture would involve rebuilding along the Parramatta Road where ugly old street shops could be rebuilt in a cosmopolitan design where people live above. More housing is required. Creating these homes and a light rail which should meet with buses, would help the economy while tackling housing.
Australia can afford this if we stop throwing stacks of public money to those who are wealthy and instead, tax them.
Love the idea
Would need to remove the tolls on the M4 to carry the current Parramatta road traffic. It's very underutilised, and if we didn't, all the backstreets around parammatta would grind to a complete halt.
Why would the politicians tax their mates and donors?
I would build a branch line that turns off at King st and runs to Newtown Station
Hi Marty, thanks for another excellent video. just of interest, I was born in Stanmore and my grandparents lived in Petersham and the trams used to pass their front door in Fort Street. It would be amazing to see trams running once again in Parramatta Road, if this planned new line goes ahead. Other light rail tram routes that I would like to see become a reality include extending the Randwick or Kingsford lines to La Perouse and Moroubra along Anzac Parade, using the reserved area once used by the original trams. Also, taking back the two eastern traffic lanes on the Sydney Harbour Bridge, converting them to light rail, running from North Sydney to Wynyard (Platforms 1 & 2), following the original tram route. This ram route could be run as a regular shuttle service and should greatly reduce road traffic on the bridge. Anyway, wishing you the very best. Rob in Melbourne Australia.
Thanks for watching. Great thoughts.. yes that Anzac Parade corridor is crying out for an extension to the existing line. I know there are some thoughts about extending to Maroubra Junction but an option could be to go further around to Westfields Pagewood.
And would be great to see Trams back on the Harbour Bridge.. but that would be a hard sell to drivers to take two lanes of that bridge I guess.. Cheers M
Some years back, I contacted the local council in the La Perouse area and suggested the need of light rail there and they completely agreed. However, without the government helping, it is impossible to make it a reality. With the Harbour Bridge, road traffic can now use the under harbour tunnel, which should be able to function with some extra traffic. Also, with light rail trams running a shuttle service between North Sydney and Wynyard, maybe at even two minute intervals, cars could be parked at North Sydney and the car drivers could change to the trams to get to the city. This would greatly lessen road traffic crossing the Harbour Bridge. Also, just a note of interest, the Harbour Bridge was oringinally built perfectly balanced with train/tram rails each side of the bridge and road placed in the middle. Ever since the extra traffic lanes were installed, the bridge has been slightly tilted to the east, due to incorrect weight distribution. I often worry about New Year's fireworks there each year, especially if the bridge suddenly fell into the harbour with all the explosions.
Just an extra thought, if the Cahill Expressway is causing any problems over the tram tunnel, that end just needs to be slightly diverted to the western direction to allow easy entrance to the tram tunnel.
Trams down Parramatta Road is something I've been hearing about my entire life as someone who grew up in Leichhardt just off the Parramatta Road end of Norton Street. People who live near the road definitely want it very much. Parramatta Road is just miserable to live near, and I can't think of any other good solutions. I think as long as state governments continue to look at urban planning with a pro public transport lens it will happen eventually. Not any time soon - with the amount of transport projects already happening, I doubt anything on top of that will be happening in NSW in the near future, certainly not in Sydney, at least (as a current Newcastle resident I may be foolishly holding out hope for anything at a up here...). But eventually. In the next 10-20 years, hopefully.
Yes one thing I always think is (since the 1970s) has anyone said 'oh I wish we had not built that public transport project'...
7:00 They should just rip off the road and use the old tracks to save some money 😂
This would make my uni commute an absolute dream
I say its a good idea.Not only in connecting up two seperate sydney based tram networks together with possibilities for branching off further afield later but also would be great patronage with the university/tafe nearby the route and the connections between the other tramlines. Also, Parramatta road can finally begin getting a much needed fixing up
you mentioned spotting an old tram track...
i used to live on city road just up from the Landsdowne hotel, late one night road crews were out with heavy jackhammers mounted on excavators...
when all of a sudden the din of concrete being hammered became a dull "tonk, tonk, tonk" apparently heavy hydraulic jack hammers don't work that well in wooden sleepers!! i looked out the window to see the whole crew staring at wooden sleepers and tram tracks..
they ended up having to hand dig out the entire 40+ metre section!!🤣🤣
Thanks for watching and thanks for sharing the memories. I can imagine those workers were not very happy that their job got way more complex and they first thought.
And gosh, I saw a lot of great bands at the Lansdowne in its Day
i'm sure Neil Forbes would disaprove the term light rail but there is a lot of difference between a tram and light rail
Thanks. I have settled on calling the network / the line / the stops as "Light Rail".. but I call the vehicles that run along them Trams - mainly because most people still call them Trams and its much shorter to say than Light Rail Vehicle :)
I was thinking about Melbourne's trams - and lines like Route 96 are in effect light rail.. hardly different from our L1, L2, L3.. and people there just call them all trams.. so get how some raise questions why we call it Light Rail in Sydney.
In Green Square the line does not go along the Ausgrid site. It would use Zetland Avenue. The Ausgrid site will be developed into apartments.
Thanks Ryan. The proposal doesn't really detail how it would get from the end of Zetland Ave to Defries Street as they are not connected by public road at this point.. but agree... appartments would certainly be part of any development along here...
Richmond Road from Blacktown CBD to Marsden Park needs light rail right up the middle or on top of the wide road.
Yes Light Rail works best when combined with other transport.. so feeder lines to major transport hubs / railway stations along busy corridors makes sense.
There’s no interchange at Taverners Hill. There’s 500m between the proposed stop and the L1 stop. The proposed stop needs to move to the bridge.
Yes, agree. the map isn’t super detailed as proposed by ALTRAC our but from what I saw while there neither stop Is that close to the L1 Taverners Hill station.
5:02 Less than 12 months before final closure of the first Sydney tram system, the NSW Government found that it actually had no tenure over the land that Dowling Street Depot sat on. Thus it would have to hand the land over to the Moore Park Trust after the System's closure, instead of being flogged off to commercial development. Panic stations ensued and the Government swiftly acted to resume the land "for transport services". Needless to say, it did indeed get eventually flogged off.
Re the tram track on O'Dea Avenue Zetland, it was still in place until very recently, as late as 2014 I think, until it was pulled up to allow large drainage pipes to be laid under O'Dea Avenue to resolve a chronic drainage problem.
Thanks. Great history. Maybe why Brambles (a transport company) used the Dowling Street Depot for many years afterward? I grew up on the south side of Sydney so went past that site as a kid for many years and didn't realise until later in life it was a former tram shed.. wish I had have filmed it.. although kids didn't have cameras then anyway.
And thanks for the O'Dea insight.. I had in my mind from years ago there was tram tracks still there.. a few years back I went to film and just missed them... bugger!
Last time I was on a Sydney train was a steam train from Goulburn to Central
The real reason cities got rid of trams and went to buses was the oil companies offering incentives to goverments to do so.
yes, and in America even Tyre companies got involved.. but while I was born many years after all of this.. i can understand why trams at this time in history were seen as 'the past' and cars 'the future'.. we can only take solace that we have learned that mistake.. but what of others from the time..
The inner west has zero emissions buses now so it’s gone full circle
This is not true. In many countries, trams were replaced first by electric trolley buses, which discounts the idea that oil companies were involved. The real reasons are complicated and depends on every city or country. In most cases the old tram networks were ageing and required huge amounts of money to update and modernise. Trolleys could use the overhead wires, but didn't require updating the tracks and then diesel buses were seen as more flexible and cheaper than trolleys, so many governments replaced them with what they saw was cheaper, more modern systems.
In the US it is true that GM bought up many of the tram lines just to close them down, but not because of oil companies or even cars, but again to replace by buses as that was cheaper (and GM made buses, not trams) - and the US had entirely private tram networks owned by property developers that were often created for the sole purpose of selling properties. Once the properties were sold, the loss-making trams had no purpose any more.
Australia was very different in this case and followed much closer to the UK system where councils or local governments owned and operated the networks.
In all cases, cars became a big thing. By the 1950s, most people wanted a private car. It was drivers who called for trams to be scrapped as they saw them blocking their roads and causing them congestion. Drivers voted and councils or local governments listened to them and shut down the ageing and expensive tram networks
It really is much more complicated than just blaming oil companies.
@@joc6516 Exactly. The buses were much more flexible and reliable when they first took over. People just love the story about perceived government mistakes.
They didn't bother ripping it all up because that would have been too disruptive. They just removed the catenary, and eventually paved over the rails. Here and there they come to light again when they scrape and repave the roads.
What needs to be done first is to continue the Carlingford light rail line to join at Epping.
So many dead ends and spur lines on Sydney's network!
Yes that was a big miss not to include in Stage 1 of Parramatta light rail.
This line should one day be built but it is fair to predict it'll never happen under a Labor government. Every tram on the rails in Sydney at the moment is only there because of Coalition governments. Even Stage 2 of the Parramatta Light Rail was Coalition policy and the only reason Labor kept it on the table was because it is in their heartland of Western Sydney. If that line was proposed for the Nthn Beaches it would have been scrapped by Jo Haylen like a blown light globe.
That’s not entirely true, the L1 to Lilyfield was done by Labor then a lot of the work to Dulwich Hill was done, Gladys (then transport minister) designed a pretty poor Dulwich Hill Extension in the end with an awful terminus and interchange configuration limiting frequency and requiring a ridiculously long walk up to the dulwich hill bridge and back down to the station.
@@BigBlueMan118 The L1 was originally devised and built by the Fahey Government in the min 1990s but opened under Labor in 1997. Labor extended the line in the last year of the Keneally Government but in Labor's infinite wisdom they expected only six trams (the original Adtranz Variotrams) to service a 12km line.
It took the O'Farrell Government to replace those trams with the CAF Urbos 3's which are on the line now plus the extra 4 ordered later on, which have recently entered service. Instead of 6 trams, there are now 16 with some surplus Alstom X05s used during peak periods.
@@vintageradio3404 Forgetting the *Lilyfield extension*? That's what I referred to in my comment, and it was exactly as long (3.6km) as the original Wentworth Park-Hay Street section built under Fahey plus had a bigger new depot. The Wentworth Park-Lilyfield extension was built 1997-2000 and also opened under Carr.
Dulwich Hill from Lilyfield was begun under Keneally and much of the work done, correct. There were *7* variotrams originally though, one was scrapped following a hefty collision in 2013 after LNP had already taken over. The line's popularity absolutely skyrocketed after Labor were already gone and all the projections for the line were smashed, between 2011 and 2015 patronage tripled. The CAFs are a total disaster, I wouldn't be too proud with them.
Don't get me wrong I think the LNP have been far better on this issue, but it isn't as one-sided as your comments would like to frame it.
What I had liked generally about State Governments in NSW was there seemed to be less 'ideology' when it comes to big future public infrastructure.. but the discussion above has got me thinking a but more about it..... thanks...
I think one problem is that the current buses don't just use Parramatta Road only. They branch and feed from the suburbs along the road. So is the plan that people will get off the buses when they hit Parramatta Road (e.g. going into the city) and transition to the tram? I can only see the plan working if there are major changes to the bus routes all along Parramatta road because it would be chaos to have the buses share only two lanes with cars.
Exactly - good point. Would bus routes now feed into the Light Rail stops instead of heading into the city directly? And would that be quicker for bus travellers overall?
And I think people can forget turning right to get off Parramatta Road (after trams are implemented). Can't see "hook" turns working by cars waiting in the left-hand lane to turn right? The tram is going to take away the many current right-hand turn temporary lanes.
@@AndrewJens there are plenty of roads in Germany or Austria with much busier combined bus+tram corridors than Parramatta Road would be, you can have buses share the space with trams. There are plenty of options. First thing to note too is there will be less demand coming from west of Taverners Hill by 2032, as the bus network will be reconfigred to feed bus traffic into the new Metro West stations (North Strathfield, Burwood North, Five Dock, The Bays, Pyrmont).
The options as I see them are 1) buses and trams could share dedicated transit lanes as they do in Germany, here Altrac were only suggesting a moderate tram frequency even in peak. 2) buses can all just run express on Parra Road and leave stopping for trams. 3) buses are reconfigured to run north-south feeding the light rail rather than branching off a Parramatta Road Trunk as they do now.
@@AndrewJens Gosh, could you imagine Sydneysiders working out how to do Hook Turns.. i am a Sydneysider and still cant get my head around them and I have driven through them a few times in Melbourne when travelling there...
I feel like they should experiment with having local buses running using the tram lanes and stopping at the tram stops. They already have some tram stops with a platform for buses on L2/L3. Plus, the buses could then be shown on the digital signs.
They should run the light rail to the existing airport.
Good thought.. It's not that far away from Green Square...
I imaginw though they'd need to make new trams. The current ones I feel aren't built to carry large amounts of luggage.
I see what you did there. They will charge an extra $10 for stopping there though.
why? you can already get a train to the airport. we need to be smart with the resources we have and not build the same infrastructure over and over to the same places.
@@karlcx No, the absolute fee for $20/person is ridiculous considering there are whole families going to the airport.
My personal opinion is that a line down parramatta road off the current L2/3 makes perfect sense. Green Square can wait as it already has a heavy rail option.
Good debate. The more I am thinking about it, the more I think the line could be split in two.. I don't see the same 'ridership' at both ends..
Any road with busy bus service is begging for an upgrade to rail. The L6 proposal is great. All I can disagree with, is that Sydney's light rail tends to wander off into the suburbs, where it feels unused.
I’ve driven buses along Parramatta road at all times and in all wether conditions and believe me it is a congested traffic sewer. Anything to improve the travel environment and amenities in this area has to be a plus.
One thing that saddens me is why the ( L4 ) line wasn’t extended from the Carlingford terminus through to Epping and even MacQuarie Park. The biggest downside to the Carlingford rail line was it not serving any areas it was desperately needed. Passenger numbers were alway scant due to the gruelling change of trains at Clyde and its low catchment through Dundas and Carlingford. As we know, the original proposal to extend the line through to Epping was cancelled and in my opinion a vital opportunity to make this new light rail line extremely relevant to future population growth has been missed by not extending it through to Epping/MacQuarie Park.
I live in the Ryde area and the high rise developments going on in the MacQuarie area are astonishing. True, the Metro extension to Sydenham will prove itself undoubtedly, but the growth of multi story residential going on now between Carlingford and MacQuarie Park will have only the present bus network to serve it, which by its nature will be unreliable due to the ever increasing traffic problems on the Pennant Hills, Carlingford Road and Epping Road corridors.
Thanks for the insight. Appreciate it.
Agree, the lack of connection to Epping and Macquarie Park really makes the line 'incomplete'.
Great video, the Libs need to make this an election issue!
Whilst the Sydney LR network can be described as a success in terms of exceeding patronage expectations and transforming the city in a positive sense especially George Street and the area around UNSW, there are some *big* flaws that need to be pointed out.
-The L1 alignment from Glebe to the city is just bonkers, way too slow
-The L1 terminus at dulwich hill being single-track despite having space for two tracks is a massive fail
-The L1 should have been built with a cycleway from day 1
-The trams on L1 are junk and should be moved to Newcastle or sold to Canberra ASAP and some Melbourne G-Class trams ordered
-The arrangement of the L2/L3 at Moore Park is attrocious for large crowds, should have been a balloon loop away from the main stop and another balloon loop built at Central or in the city for events tram specials
-L2/L3 in my opinion should have been a viaduct with a shared path across from Surry Hills to Anzac Parade, which would have been faster and removed all conflicts with traffic plus you could have had a better Moore Park station
-L2/L3 APS system is awful and should be ditched
-L2/L3 should be 25kmh or 30kmh on George Street
-L2/L3 Chinatown stop is a terrible design
-L2/L3 speeds should be significantly higher and the track speeds shouldn't keep varying
-L3 should have gone as far as Maroubra Junction as part of stage 1, this would be far smoother for bus ridership in the SE and increased the amount of land able to densify
-Maintenance across the network is awful (too many TSRs last forever)
-Having the bike lanes alongside L2/L3 through Chalmers Street is a disaster and causing so many unecessary conflicts into the Central station entrance, should have put the bike lanes down Elizabeth St.
-Long-term the L2/L3 lines should move to Elizabeth Street and the Parramatta Road LR should take over the George Street lines. L2/L3 on Elizabeth Street would remove the conflict with the L1 lines, remove the dog-leg via Haymarket, has a wider prifle and could have 40kmh speeds with less stops so it would be more useful for SE journeys.
-Carlingford line L4 should have been extended up to Carlingford Court either as part of stage 1 or begin immediately after construction on stage 1 finished.
-L4 from Camelia to Parramatta has at least 2 completely unecessary turns that will slow the alignment down forever and should have been eliminated.
Agree... I was nodding along to every point above... I 100% agree with your point that long term L2/L3 should run up Elizabeth Street. Also builds in redundancy to the CBD end of the network if there are disruptions on George Street - especially outside Town Hall with events / protests etc...
I actually think the GREEN SQUARE end of the line should connect with the DULWICH HILL line with shorter trams running on those lines..
Would like to build your thoughts into other ideas for future improvements to the network.
You forgot: specifying the right type of trams to run your lines in the first place. Fixed-bogie trams as deployed on Sydney's routes require 25m minimum turning radii on curves. Parra Rd & GreenSquare proposal see's the heritage chimney at Porter St in Waterloo demolished just so the vehicles can make that turn. Also is why the Parramatta stage 2 line won't directly access Olympic Park ferry wharf. Too tight of a turn radius for these types of vehicles.
If they had initially specified all lines to run trams with swivelling bogies, planners wouldn't have to propose such drastic route alterations just to accomodate them. Suit the vehicles to the chosen alignment, not the other way around. But we're now going to have to live with these vehicles crawling themselves around curves in the meantime.
@@joshporter5422 Agree with the CAF point, I have updated my comment with the following line:
-The trams on L1 are junk and should be moved to Newcastle or sold to Canberra ASAP and some Melbourne G-Class trams ordered.
The L2/L3 trams get a pass because they don't have tight curves on the alignments and they have a ton of doors. But swivelling bogeys should absolutely be the standard and it is SO FRUSTRATING they didn't just go and have a meeting with Melbourne Tramways and ask them their thoughts - I would set up the meeting if they listened to me!
Neil Forbes keeps refering these are trams but they're not. A classical streetcar/tram/trolley runs completely or mostly on streets. A light rail system runs partly or completely independent from other traffic, for example in tunnels or on a separate right of way.
Thanks. Yes that is a additional difference. Cheers M
Question to people who are really into this stuff. I think to Anzac Prd which is not as busy as Parramatta Rd and the Light Rail doesn't have the patronage I expect this would have. How do you ensure pedestrian safety around these stops? Sure lights and stuff, but those are for the majority - jaywalking will occur and at times it will coincide with speeding.
Thoughts? :)))
Great questions.. has to be considered for sure.. I have no facts to back this up, but I would guess less pedestrians have injured over in George Street since the light rail was put in.. but good to hear over points of view..
Unlike Melbourne Sydney and Adelaide, Brisbane is still yet to revive the trams with many politicians still trying to defend removing them in the first place
Good point. While I think many would wish that trams maybe one day will return to Brisbane - the topography - the hills, the river, the tight streets - doesn't naturally fit with modern light rail systems. And if not for the Paddington Depot fire.. I think most would say trams would still be running in Brisbane today.
@@backtracks.channelI agree with this. Additionally, if trams were to run through Brisbane's CBD, they'd have to make cars and trams share the roads, as most of the city's roads are 2? 3? lanes. So they'd kinda have to do Melbourne-style stops. Of course, if they do open a light rail/tram line.
So basically we're just rebuilding all the trams we demolished 70 years ago? Good job Sydney! We'll get it back to how it should be.
11:07 It won't get greenlit while the Union is in government. That archaic bus statement says volumes.
Moving the Crystal St station one block over to Bourke st would make more sense. Less likely to cut into public space for pedestrians and parkland
I like that idea. Something they should consider. Cheers M
Are modern trams ok with the slope of Tavernders hill?
Yes good question. I read that the incline is 6.5% and a light rail vehicle can go to a maximum of 7%. So just.
It will only be a shadow of it's former glory thanks Marty.🍺☕🍩
Lucky if its done in 15yrs.
They need a tram line west from Central through Newtown then Sydenham then Wolli Creek . The journey on the train to central via the Airport takes too long .
Where does the map shown at 1:04 come from
Thanks. And like how you link the timing in your note. Need to learn how to do that. I actually made that map using Motion so I can animate it if needed.
Bring in high dens living along Liechardt and Stanmore, the government will have really look at that line being implemented.
No shot this ever happens. But wow, it would be great.
Light rail works well in the CBD but Parramatta road is the main and only way for traffic to enter the city, not a great idea to constrict by losing 2 laneways for Light rail that don't use the same lanes like Melbourne's trams
Parramatta is not the main road going into the city form the west. It is the A4/M4 that carries many more cars than Parra Road.
I hope not, they are so painfully slow. I'd rather invest in Metros & improving the Sydney S-Bahn.
Yes we need more metros. Agree. I guess the question is why not do both? Altrac are offering to build this one 'for free' - and then get paid to run it in return.
Do 3 separate and unconnected lines constitute a "network"??
Thanks. I just looked the definition up myself as was a good question. I guess all these lines are ultimately owned by the NSW Government and would appear on the Sydney Transport Network Map / are part of the Opal Network. So they are 'connected' in that way so one may say a Network. but up to personal view if network or not. Cheers.
If they wanted trams on Parramatta Rd why did they end the M4 tunnel Haberfield? 🤦♂️Its should of continued on till Broadway/Syd uni campus to get more cars off Parramatta rd
I seem to recall at one point they were thinking about an entry / exit at Camperdown - where the worksite was for the Westconnex was situated - now just a big empty block.
Theres NO way they will fit tram lines in Zetlland and Alexandria. Roads are too narrow and the area is too car dependant in high dense area and still has many small local business...,it will kill them off like it has in Kingsford
I agree its pretty tight in parts of Zetland.
Look at how L2/L3 transformed George St corridor to Circular Quay, it was a big win despite the street admittedly not being that wide.
i really don't think so. green sq, waterloo and redfern and the city already have rail, and the other end is pretty close to either existing light rail or the inner west line. resources spent on this would be better used by either extending the eastern suburbs line to bondi (and further?) or extending the L3 further south to la perouse etc.
I know right.. hard to know what is the priority. But I guess for the NSW government right now no company is offering to build a new railway line to Bondi for free.. But yes ALTRAC is offering to build this one for free (well in return for running it.. and that does cost the government).. And ALTRAC could be offering to extend one of their existing lines.. L3 to La Perouse or L2 down to Coogee
Green square is the densest area in Australia and the station only serves the western potion of it. The buses going along the proposed route are already always full. It really needs more PT.
@@tobyb6248 the area directly north of green square is waterloo, which is just about to get a metro station. it was already within walking distance of redfern. there are areas of greater need, imo.
@@karlcx The Waterloo station is over a 20 min walk from the higher density parts of Waterloo.
Sydneys going to have a better tram network than Melbourne soon!
One can only dream! Sydney is currently about 10% the track length of Melbourne.. but if when these new lines open I think I worked out it would get to about 20%.. Cheers and thanks for watching.
NSW Labor being NSW Labor? You'd be crazy to reject this. The road bypass is finally finished (WestConnex) and they want to LEAVE this garbage 6-lane monster as it is? Why should road users be the only ones who don't have to pay. They contribute the least for the most costs. Meanwhile the locals who actually LIVE there, don't need a highway down the middle of an inner-suburban shopping strip.
Yes what is surprising for me the government is saying to No to ALTRAC when ALTRAC is saying they will build it 'for free' and get paid back by running the line.. I would be saying 'thanks' go for it..
Did you even watch the video to see how busy Parramatta road still is?! 😂
@@MaxS-hn8we Yeah that's the problem though. We build motorways for a reason. Parramatta Road is too busy for the shops to be shops, and for the locals who want to use the shops.
why do need to pander to the city so much. it gets to a point
You know I would have some CRAZY ideas for Light Rail, but it's that or alternatively Metro.
But my idea is thus;
I've seen in places how Light Rail systems some of them easily transition from regular runs on track bits to street level or such.
I kinda wish they would do an extension from Circular Quay terminal to out under the harbor with a tunnel set up to take trams to the Northern Beaches side namely to around Manly somewhere.
I know it's a crazy idea haha, they are in Manly planning to demolish the old Sea World Aquarium entirely and thus there will be some land freed up after many years.
Anyways the reason I suggested a tunnel also is a tram could go full speed in a tunnel set up(whatever maximum speed they can hit)`
Because usually on street level they do 40 kmph for safety reasons on average.
Also to build a full on train line or metro it takes so much more to establish for full on train systems overall.
Not sure if you saw my first videos (when I was a newby youtuber) but I live on the Northern Beaches.. so 100% supporting ideas like yours! Thanks...
I'll bet that Sydney gets a 6th, 7th and probably even an 8th LR line before the government extends the useless little 2.3km LR line in Newcastle to the suburbs.
Not going to happen as chris minns and Jo Haylen are already opposed to it
I think you could be on the money...
The Labor party will not do it, all the projects that are happening now, are from the previous government,
I just wish all governments would wake up and put more money into public transport and that is not just buses
thre is a big difference between light rail and a tram
Thanks. Good debate.
I have settled on calling the network / the line / the stops as "Light Rail".. but I call the vehicles that run along them Trams - mainly because most people still call them Trams and its much shorter to say than Light Rail Vehicle :)
At the same time, I do consider how Melbourne's trams - and lines like Route 96 are in effect light rail.. hardly different from our L1, L2, L3.. and people there just call them all trams..
So understand how questions come about why some call it Light Rail in Sydney.
Where is our 5th light rail line?
Good question.. I was working on the assumption that the Stage 2 of the Parramatta Light Rail will be called L5 - being the 5th line in Sydney.. but it's not confirmed.. only my speculation.
Backtracks made a video on this, if you are interested. Cheers M
th-cam.com/video/TvS6xR1bkA0/w-d-xo.html
Olympic Park to Parramatta, should be open later this decade.
I'm pretty sure Newcastle Line also counts as a line.
@@greenstumpymonsterVID777 Newcastle is a toy system slash failed experiment moving like 2000 people per day, it can't be taken seriously until they install overhead, increase the speeds and extend it to connect to more useful destinations. Newcastle once had a very useful and successful tram network until the 1950s, alot of those corridors would be super useful again if the system was done right not by American consultants designing lazy tracks and giving poor advice for fat pay-outs and greedy companies pushing useless proprietary tech.
with that fund, better replace all buses first.
Nothing but a land grab by the Spanish consortium that will result in bus route cancellations and slower public transit times along the Parramatta Rd section. 20 bus routes were cancelled and a further 25 modified when the L2 opened with journey times to the city Increasing significantly. Not to mention it was a disaster for local businesses.
The older i get, the more I question things... so agree we have to challenge any big public proposal..lets keep the discussion going...
Sydney needs less crack addicts and an education system that is at least 4 times better.
Forget the trains..
When you realise the education system in the rest of Australia...🤔
They need more trams so they can get rid of some buses.
And then we look over to Hobart. Oh the glorious backward clusterfuck.
light rails to unsw have been a nighmare in 2024. Frequent system outages due to industrial action, frequent overcrowding due to reduced timetables (due to industrial action), etc.
It’s still a million times better than the old 891 buses used to be.
@@lachd2261 Yeah no doubt about that. But it's just astonishing that the light rail network went from perfectly fine at the start of 2024 to having frequent disruptions every second day just a few months later.
Horrible proposal, it will end up like the poor line in the eastern suburbs which killed business, bus transport and driving all in one swoop. The light rail should be a metro underground and out of sight.
Agree there is a heap of space underground.. and with Sydney's ideal sandstone geology we the city can build tunnels more efficiently, safely and at times more cost effectively than other cities around the world. But at same time building the same length of track is 3-4x per KM more expensive than above ground.. so calculations need to be done I guess?
!
Not light on cost.
While expensive in themselves they are comparatively less expensive than roads due to the people that are now off the road
I bet bikies made a healthy profit from these ridiculously long projects.
I'd say they would use Aboriginal names for these stops.
While making this video I actually realised how hard it would be to name a stop.. as so many locations they have put in the proposal could have different names - the Green Square end is a bit easier.. but along Parramatta Road.. do they go the suburb (and the suburb can be different on the north or south side) or the cross street (which less people will be familiar with)... it is easier for train stations as they generally stop in the middle of a large suburb..
Nookdashiddole
6:03 Most Crystal St residents do not have cars. The artist’s depiction says it all. Too woke. However, the channel host does drive, as he is a realist.
Speaking of cars, as an aside, can the channel host make a little diversion video about the merits, efficiencies and benefits of EVs? The level of stupidity and hostility towards EVs on social media is truly staggering, even from graduates who really ought to know better. This EV video would definitely increase channel viewership! Perhaps Sky News will pick up on it. 🤣
Ha, yes no light rail or trains near where I live... couldn't get about without a car in my part of the world... EV or otherwise.. :)
Sydney, Australia's *TRAMWAY* network, that should read! "Light Rail" is a *pretentious BULLSHIT* term.
Tram and light rail are *not* the same. The resemblance between the two systems is only superficial.
@@user-kc1tf7zm3b The old tramway ran through the streets, sharing space with cars, lorries, buses, etc. and there were reserved tram-only areas as well. This matches up *EXACTLY* with today's tramways.
@@neilforbes416 Narrowly defined *it has rolling stock that is similar to a traditional tram, while it operates at a higher capacity and speed and often on an exclusive right-of-way.* In broader use, light rail transit includes tram-like operations mostly on street
While I use Tram and Lightrail together, i reckon the benefit of calling it a lightrail is they can put L on all thr maps and signs. One of the best features of Sydneys transport networks is how clear, connected and easy to understand it is, not something to take for granted.
@@createdforthemoment6740 As I mentioned there is a difference between light rail and a tram if you put two of them side by side you can see the difference straight away.
Light rail is a blight on society. Track vehicles and cars don’t mix. We’ve spend decades removing every single rail/road crossing and replacing them with under/over passes due that simple fact. The fact that they are removing traffic lanes to make way for light rail only increases congestion.
A good debate. Yes removing lanes for traffic seems in counter intuitive if we want to reduce congestion. But light rail can work.. At one point in my life I caught the 339 from Circular Quay To Clovelly.. and I could take over 30 mins to get along George Street on a Friday. George St is much better for everyone since Light Rail.
And Parramatta Road could only be considering light rail after Westconnex added in effect 6 additional lanes of vehicle traffic along the corridor. But agree one could see increased congestion around certain parts of the route..
In the end, our goal is to make Parramatta Road some type of shopping street with only two lanes for cars as well as congestion charging. It'll end up being a bit like George St.
Trams are garbage like the mono rail pointless waste of money. Should've put funds into existing bus and rail network
Thanks. All part of the debate. I think most viewers of this channel and public transport generally would say the debate is cars vs public transport.. and what public transport.. we should do what is fit for purpose.. I live in a part of sydney without rail or light rail.. and to be honest I think it would be bonkers to build either of these to our part of Sydney. Buses (and Ferries) are working just fine.
An absolute waste of time and money. Bloody rubbish..
Thanks for watching. Anyone's guess if this will be built so no wasted time or money at this stage. But good to have debate about what should come next for Sydney's transport.
Trams become light rail. 🙄🫤
Yes and it only cost $3.5b.. :(