Gungahlin to City Transport corridor

[Barry Drive]

In accordance with their timeline, this project has released its first "update".

Background:
http://www.transport.act.gov.au/studies_projects/northbourne_study.html

PDF document with concept drawings:
http://www.transport.act.gov.au/studies_projects/2011%20-%20City%20to%20Gungahlin%20transit%20corridor%20-%20FA.pdf

Without necessarily committing to anything, the update suggests that the Northbourne Ave corridor will use the outside lanes for light rail/BRT (i.e. bus lane) rather than the median - without explaining the reasoning; whereas Flemington Road would use the median (without giving any detail about how the Mitchell/Lyneham part of Flemington would be serviced or how the two parts will be joined up).

"Detailed investigations and analysis" is scheduled for Jan-Feb 2012 with a "Concept design for public information" to be released in March 2012 (with a 6-8 week feedback period).

[smitho]

Good write-up on this in today's CT.

[Sir]

One of there ideas is making the tram way and bus lane the same thing. WHO IDEA WAS THAT! that is beyond stupid, that would just make it worse. It's simple. Keep things as they are, but the tram line in the middle and re-do the foot paths so bike riders actually use them rather than causing accidents.  Done, now go buy some track and some trams!

PS:Really like the idea of the gungalin stop, looks just like Melbourne.

[Barry Drive]

Wait for the more detailed report, but I'd be fairly certain that they will not recommend either light rail or bus lane down the median of Northbourne. A cycle lane is possible, bit that's all.

Anyway, a combined bus/light rail lane can work (depending on how they're scheduled) provided bus stops are indented into the verge so that LRVs can pass buses at stops.

Besides, we're never getting Light Rail anyway.

[route56]

Good write-up on this in today's CT.

Not really, its a rehash of the media release.

CT journos are usually pretty lazy, with a few exceptions.

[route56]

Wait for the more detailed report, but I'd be fairly certain that they will not recommend either light rail or bus lane down the median of Northbourne. A cycle lane is possible, bit that's all.

(stuff snipped)

Besides, we're never getting Light Rail anyway.

Sadly, I agree with you. read the FAQ for the study - it clearly states that until there is 5000 pax per hour, that they wont recommend light rail.

ACT Light Rails response http://www.actlightrail.info/2011/12/light-rail-on-northbourne-avenue-from.html

[smitho]

Getting trams and buses to share the same right of way is not rocket science.

I've seen trams (light rail) and articulated trolley buses sharing the same right of way and overhead power infrastructure in Switzerland...

[route56]

Getting trams and buses to share the same right of way is not rocket science.

I've seen trams (light rail) and articulated trolley buses sharing the same right of way and overhead power infrastructure in Switzerland...

Ive also seen buses drive up the tram/light rail tracks on Plenty Road in Melbourne when tram services were out (track work near the depot or something).

I cant see any reason why it couldnt work, its important to integrate buses into any network with light rail. partial route sharing fits into that. hey, its part of the 'flexibility' of buses.

[Sir Pompously]

Just to add in to the debate on LRT and BRT using the same corridor, in Calgary C Train and buses both use the 7th Street transitway. The LRT stops are regular rail height, and the buses pull into bus stops usually before the LRT stops. This way buses can move out of the way of LRT vehicles when they come through. I believe at traffic lights buses can also move aside to prevent any clash with LRT vehicles. Other than that, they drive on the same path as the trains (In this case Calgary's Light Rail uses proper U Bahn (I think, either U or S Bahn) trains rather than trams as Australia uses.

[Barry Drive]

Report update #2 has been released. http://www.transport.act.gov.au/studies_projects/City%20to%20Gungahlin%20transit%20Update%202.pdf Don't think much has changed since the last time, other than providing some costings.

Community Information sessions will be held over the next month and there is a survey available.

More info here: http://www.transport.act.gov.au/studies_projects/northbourne_study.html

[Bus 400]

I still don't get the Woden to City sector isn't the first to get light rail. This is an section that needs more capacity & on the Albert Hall to Woden section a fair bit of speed could be picked up on the trams. It was pointed out when I discussed this with someone that the proposed stops on Adelaide Avenue/Yarra Glen would work better with trams. These stops could be on request only as per a sector in Adelaide.

Also the 160 & 162 could become Xpresso runs & continue up the Tuggeranong Parkway. The 161 & 770 could continue along Sulwood Drive & up the Tuggeranong Parkway. It was also suggested that the original Redex from City-Russel-Barton-Woden could then be implemented. If this runs at a 15 minute frequency, this would take around 5-6 buses out of the Woden to City sector an hour. These 5-6 buses could be added to the Network either on the Gungahlin to City sector as it grows or somewhere else.

By the time to Woden-City-Belconnen sectors had had light rail up & running. The Gungahlin region should have the demand as Belconnen & Woden/Tuggeranong. You could then move onto the Molonglo Region.

But if you want to improve the Gungahlin to City sector, why not convert the far right lane into a bus lane from the pedestrian lights opposite the Dickson Ambulance Station to Mort Street. With all buses that run from Gungahlin & Belconnen running non stop from Dickson to Civic. If anyone wishes to get off along the route a new route could run up & down Northbourne Avenue at a 10-15 frequency.

By implementing all of this you could help out most ACTION bus users & give a clear lane along Northbourne Avenue which could encourage more to the buses. But of course the light rail installation would need to be continuous.

[smitho]

Tend to agree with the light rail loibby that these latest "costings" seem loaded against the case for light rail. To be fair, need to 'unpack' them to see how they  were estimated.

I think the reason the Civic-Gungahlin corridor was chosen rather than Civic-Woden is that the latter has relatively good road links whereas Gungahlin does not. Gungahlin is the only 'new town' that was not provided with major new road(s) to link it with Civic...although the GDE does this somewhat indirectly.

[Bonnerbus]

I think you will find that the Gungahlin - City route was selected as Flemington road (and Northbourne once they start getting rid of all the smacky flats) is going to be lined with high density housing which will make the route more viable for light rail than the Woden to City route which doesnt have the same high density population between the two centres.

We need to remember that this high density housing is being built and as such need to plan (and build) the infrastructure for that now. Building a Rapid Bus lane is only a short term fix with designating one lane of Northboune being an even shorter term fix. However that being said, I still feel that while the Gungahlin - City route is in need of light rail (and dont get me wrong, the ACT Government will build it wrong with only one track or the wrong vehicle) the City - Belco route should follow soon after or at the same time.

[belcodriver]

I think you will find that the Gungahlin - City route was selected as Flemington road (and Northbourne once they start getting rid of all the smacky flats) is going to be lined with high density housing which will make the route more viable for light rail than the Woden to City route which doesnt have the same high density population between the two centres.

Speaking of higher density housing I wonder why most of the flats along Flemington Rd are only 3 stories. Why didn't they go for 8-10?

[route56]

I might FOI the costings. Looking through the concept report, it seems that a lot of the money would be spent on construction of the road surface of Northbourne Avenue, specifically the proposals to have the rails/bus lanes on the edge (where the bike paths are). If you read through the concept report, its a recurring theme, instead of the obvious - which is run it up the middle. 

[belcodriver]

I might FOI the costings. Looking through the concept report, it seems that a lot of the money would be spent on construction of the road surface of Northbourne Avenue, specifically the proposals to have the rails/bus lanes on the edge (where the bike paths are). If you read through the concept report, its a recurring theme, instead of the obvious - which is run it up the middle.

There are clearly problems with running transport up the Northbourne median strip such as what happens to the trees, what happens to the pipes underneath it and how will people cross 3 lanes of traffic to board a bus or tram.

[Barry Drive]

I'm not certain there are "costings" at this stage, just estimates (aka guesses).

The Light Rail option mentions stations at City and Dickson, but nothing about actual stops along Northbourne. So by using the outside lane, it becomes a dual LR track and bus lane. I'm unconvinced that Light Rail is appropriate for Northbourne Ave (or that Northbourne Ave is appropriate for Light Rail) - but building it as a non-stop service is the second best way to do it. (The best way being to build a direct line along the Monash Drive corridor.)

[Bus 400]

In the following traffic report from the extension of The Valley Way, http://203.9.249.2/e-registers/pubnote/pdf/TRAFFICREPORT-201425189-GTCERTECHNOTE-01.pdf
It mentions that as a part of this work, Hibberson Street is to become transit only (bus/light rail) from Kate Crace Street to Gozzard Street.

For some strange reason, it looks like they are going to simulate the traffic light sequence for light rail before work starts (I may of read it incorrectly).