The AECOM report is let's just say deficient. It included a recommendation for a route that went straight down the ski slope at the end of Bondi Rd without reference to gradient. The PB report at least recognised the "small issue" and recommended a route that went via the old one (Fletcher St). Basically the PB report just recommends further analysis of several options in a further report, which is what every good consultant should recommend, hoping of course that they get the contract for the further report.

This time around, the odds are against trams - just too many overwhelming issues in an environment like this corridor today. Heavy rail is overkill unless they develop Bondi Beach like Hong Kong. An articulated bus is just short of the former 15 metre rigid trams in capacity (though the latter were often coupled). The closest peak tram headway that I can determine from Keenan's timetable summaries was 5 minutes. In theory, they should be able to do it with all artics with the necessary priority measures to ensure they don't go skewiff in the traffic or get bunged up exchanging passengers as they do now. It's all down to the culture at TfNSW, which probably means it'll continue to be a mess with no solution.

Tony P
---InTramsDownUnder@..., <transitconsult@...> wrote :

From the Report:

"The Waverley Light Rail Report (AECOM, 2013) identified a light rail route via Bondi Road which incorporated: ?

An alignment at the eastern end of Bondi Road between Denham Street and Campbell Parade which has a significant gradient (greater
than 7%) that cannot be negotiated by conventional light rail vehicles ?

‘Drive-over’ light rail stops which require passengers to load and unload from the light rail vehicle across a self-managed traffic
lane (i.e. no dedicated passenger platform) ?

Absence of left and right turn lanes for general traffic along the alignment.

These three key light rail design considerations do not conform to TfNSW’s design guidance for new light rail schemes and therefore
have not been considered feasible in their current form."

There are three distinct gradient sections on the old tram route. The peak is at Paul St - the W corner of Waverley Park. From
there the line descended on a fairly even gradient to Ocean Street. The first steep section had gradients of one in 26, 22,21, 20,
21, 20, 25,19,18,19, 20, 25. The gradient was much less steep, eg, lengthy sections of as little as 1:155 and 1:106 to Imperial
Avenue. In the short distance east of Imperial Avenue the line again steepened, with gradients no worse than 1:21. There was then
a short rise before the track turned south into Denham Street. The gradient then increased in Denham Street and as the line turned
east into Fletcher Street. Steepest gradients were obtained from just before Glen Street. at 1: 26, 23, 20, 19, 15, 30, 20, 19, 18,
19, 20, 19, 18, 17. This latter was just after the intersection with Wilga Street. The line was then on Tramway Land, but known
now as Sandridge Street, after the line had turned back north to resume on Bondi Road. In those days the tramway land continued to
just short of Francis Street, which land is presumably now the inbound carriageway of Bondi Road. Assuming no overlap between the
diagrams, the gradients continued as 1: 18, 17, 18, 24, 27, 21, 18, 19, 15, 23, 21, 20, 18, 19, 21, 23, 33, 45, 426. By then the
line is n the near flat ground of Campbell Parade.

The horizontal scale is 1 mile = 81 twelfths of an inch. This means that one 12th of an inch represents very closely - for all
practical purposes, 1 chain.

On this basis, the first section steeper than 1:20 (19, 18, 19) is 6 chains. The gradient of 1:15 is one chain - the length of a
cricket pitch. As the adjacent gradient is 1: 30 - just a tad under one chain, the average gradient of these two together would be
about 1:21 or 22. Note that a gradient of 7% is 1:14.286 - so the worst gradient does not quite get to 7%, and a slight lifting of
the track here would have made the average gradient better than 5%. Over the 15 chain section where the gradient is 19, 18, 17,
18, 17, 18 the gradient is no worse than 5.88%, and the final section at 1:15 is no more than one chain.

So y using the old tramway route the gradient would not have been worse than 7%. It is possible that PB assumed the line would
continue straight down Bondi Road, in which case the gradient was probably worse than 7%, but this is why the NSWGTD took the route
around this. In any case, modern trams can manage gradients greater than 7%, and 10% is used on a short section in Sheffield.

Re the other two points, one can only say that if the new standards would prevent something being done that works successfully
elsewhere, then the standards are wrong and must be changed (echoes of Sally McManus!)

Regards

Dudley Horscroft