Re: Carls' double announcements [Re: More promises...]

[dbromage@fang.omni.com.au (David Bromage)]

rffergus@socs.uts.edu.au wrote:
> Scully is quoted as saying that he'll consider alternatives to standard heavy
> rail (including busways, light rail and high speed rail) in a corridor that
> is so obviously suited to full integration with the CityRail network; at the
> same time he is refusing to consider either heavy or light rail for the
> Parramatta - Hoxton Park link where either of the two modes (esp. light rail)
> would provide a better facility than the busways.

The Transitway is being designed such that it can be converted to light
rail or heavy rail at a later date. This actually makes a lot of sense.
There is obviously enough traffic to justify SOME sort of new corridor,
hence the dedicated busway. There isn't enough to justify spending over 
$1 billion on heavy rail, but if the reservation is already there in the
form of a busway then it won't cost as much in the future. This sort of
incremental approach does have merits, and I suspect the Cumberland Line
may have been an experiment to test the waters for this sort of project.

If the Transitway was built as light rail at the outset, it becomes
politically difficult to change to heavy rail in the future (although
technically quite easy).

Cheers
David