Diversion of some AM peak Harbour Bridge buses via the Cahill Expressway

As of Monday 18th February, 2013, selected M2 routes (620, 642, 650, 652) will enter the CBD in the morning via the Cahill Expressway, Transport for NSW has announced.

This is a several years overdue move.  Anecdotal evidence is that this has made an impact on the queues leading in to the York St bottleneck.

The inference I read from this is that these routes will not be removed after the NWRL is implemented.  Given that they would not feed an NWRL station anyway, more like Pennant Hills and Beecroft they are planned to stay and hence a solution needs to be found for them.

So what of the other routes in the North West?  Why would they become feeder routes?

Clover Moore now wants the Light Rail to be in a tunnel through Surry Hills

According to an article from The Telegraph, it seems that Clover Moore is now calling for a tunnel under Devonshire St to prevent the Light Rail from having to go past a few people's houses.

Honestly, if the Light Rail was ever to be built it had to go past someone's house and not all of those people are going to be happy about it.  Surely she should have thought about this before spending more than a decade calling for it.  Putting it in a tunnel also appears to make it not provide any service for the people it is bypassing which is an interesting outcome.

All this really shows is that Clover Moore is only interested in scoring political points.  Time she wasn't listened to at all any more.

Airport Line buyout?

According to the SMH today, the Tourism and Transport Forum has again called for a more reasonable charge for services to or from the Airport.  They quote a paper from the NSW government in 2011 which put the value of Airport Link Company at $276 million.  Unfortunately, this price would be increased due to the 70% patronage increase at Green Square and Mascot after the surcharge was removed as one of the last acts of the last state government.  That should add around $56 million to the price, for $332 million plus inflation, less a couple of years life left in the asset.

If it can actually be bought at this price, they should absolutely go for it.  Even Infrastructure NSW can see the need for lower fares to the Airport, in their "First things first" report.  Why they aren't doing so requires a detailed explanation.

MyZone tickets valid on Moore Park-Central event shuttles

In what is a positive move announced a few months ago, people heading to Moore Park can use their MyZone tickets.  Unfortunately, the overpriced tickets for the shuttles are still to be sold.

Ideally they would just make these shuttles free, which is what would happen in Qld or WA.  In the Qld case they would send the bill for the services to the promoter.  Making the shuttles free for everyone would be an equitable outcome and nearly everyone is paying a fare to reach Central anyway.  It is dubious why people who happen to hold a MyMulti ticket should receive free travel on these services - it is very unlikely these services would cause a tipping point to make it worthwhile to purchase a MyMulti.  Fare integration would make such trips of negligible cost anyway.

Making them free would save hassle with selling the tickets as well as hassle for the intending commuters.

In short, while it is a positive move that an anomaly is being reduced, this change isn't going far enough.

Light Rail green lighted to return to George St

Rail returning to George St is a very strange idea if you ask me.  Even the Sydney's Light Rail Future document states that the capacity of Light Rail is 9000 people per hour.  The current bus services along George St already carry more than this.  The document does go on to suggest that buses may be re-directed to Sussex St and Elizabeth St.  It is not clear how they will reach Sussex St along the amber dotted line without interacting with the Light Rail but it is clear that to reach Elizabeth St they will interact with the Light Rail on Eddy Ave, potentially reducing the capacity.

What is worse, is that it seems that some of the passengers who currently access Elizabeth St on bus services are going to be expected to take this sluggish and indirect light rail service, using up some of its capacity.

This is going to be very inconvenient for most.  Sussex St is not near to many places of employment.  Elizabeth St is better, but not nearly as central as George St had been in the past.  Others will have to interchange, probably requiring a separate fare.

So far, they have failed to remove taxis from the bus lane (by making it a "Bus Only Lane") between Market St and Hunter St, but it is OK to remove the buses from this area.

Basically this whole plan is to solve bus congestion by reducing the roads they can access.  Even Labor didn't do anything this stupid.

Parking space levy only allowed to be used for parking?

According to the Auditor-General, the parking space levy is the major funding source for "the Commuter Car Park and Interchange Program (now the Transport Access Program)".

This seems to mean that all this money ($104 million in 2011/12) is only allowed to be used for car park programs, among the worst bang for buck in the industry.

If true, time this policy was reversed and the money put into services which people can actually use.

Cabinet decision on Light Rail to UNSW due soon

According to a recent Telegraph article a cabinet decision is due this coming week.  In my opinion, this idea is purely ideologically based.  Currently, the bus services in the region have flows in both directions in both peaks.  This system will take out the counter peak flows on the 891 and 895 bus services while leaving the peak direction flows largely on buses.  This may be different with fare integration as you could carve out the via Central bits of bus routes 339, 374, 376, 391 and remove the 372, 393 and 395 services.  However, most of the advantages could be had with just fare integration.  Why is it being seriously considered?  Mostly because the 891 doesn't really achieve.  I proposed a number of solutions to that here.  Indeed, it's not necessarily clear that the trams will solve the problem.

According to this SMH article, this is yet to be approved by cabinet.  From the article:

"A spokesman for Action for Public Transport, Jim Donovan, said he had been told by a senior public transport bureaucrat that a proposal to integrate fares in Sydney had been put to the cabinet but not yet signed"

This is absurd and unacceptable, and should be a major focus for fixing transport in Sydney but it isn't.