Yeah - advocate for metro and tollroads instead while trousering the kickbacks from the promoters.
Tony
> On 26 Nov 2021, at 2:26 pm, Mark Skinner emessk@...> wrote:
>
> Mark will ask a rhetorical question:
>
> If a Department desired to deliberately frustrate the will of an elected government which had promised a tram extension, how would the Department do it?
>
> For Mark's rhetorical answer, he might say:
>
> Ignore any expert advice.
>
> Make it unnecessarily expensive. About three times too expensive should suffice.
>
> Make it as slow and inconvenient as possible. Slower than the trams of the 1950s is the target.
>
> Interrupt services as often as possible.
>
> Choose inappropriate vehicles. Preferably using principles that would have had FJ Sprague scoffing in 1899.
>
> Inconvenience as many people and businesses as possible during construction.
>
> Make track structures such as overhead support poles as ugly and obtrusive as possible.
>
> Is there anything missing?
>
> On Fri, 26 Nov 2021, 12:23 pm TP, historyworks@... mailto:historyworks@smartchat.net.au> wrote:
> DoT in the 2000s was still dominated by the bus people with the same mindset that they had in the 1950s. This "anything but trams" attitude was the genesis of the huge orders of artics that occurred during the 2000s. They were Labor's "trams" to deal with the emerging capacity problem.
>
> You give too little credit to the Liberals (of course!). Gladys Berejiklian's vision for trams was already worked out in detail (with input from Garry Glazebrook) before they even won office, so she hit the ground running with it in 2011. How was she to know that CAF trams are crap? She had to rely on her "expert" public servants, as any Minister does. Don't forget that it was a previous Liberal government that approved and supported the original joint federally-funded/private venture IWLR in the 1990s. The subsequent Labor government had no choice but to let it open, but kept it at arm's length for 15 years, opposing in particular, as you recall, a CBD extension.
>
> The hubris in that 1958 SMH report sounds exactly like the same a couple of years earlier when the North Sydney system closed - same big lie, another capacity disaster. And that was when the buses still loaded through all doors. When they turned down the British road with front door-only loading, it got far worse and any vestiges of efficiency and time-saving completely collapsed.
>
> In the 1980s I lived on the old Lilyfield line and in peaks the nominal ten minute bus headway turned into three bunched buses turning up every 30 minutes, the first two not stopping and the third one either picking up or being so far back in the queue that the driver couldn't see you and pulled out and overtook the other buses, leaving you another half hour wait for the next bunch. Most people I knew drove their car into Pyrmont, parked and walked to town, as did I before deciding I needed the exercise and walked all the way. Later I was to find the same in the eastern suburbs. The whole tram conversion was a complete disaster. Now they've managed to turn the return of trams into half a disaster. I guess Mark would question whether whether it was deliberate ploy by Transport.
>
> Tony P
>
>
>
> On Friday, 26 November 2021 at 12:16:24 UTC+11a...@... mailto:a...@aapt.net.au wrote:
> On 22 November 2008 I was at a meeting at Leichhardt town hall organised by the pre-forced merger Leichhardt Council in support of the Ecotransit campaign to extend the IWLR from Lilyfield to Dulwich Hill. it’s largely forgotten now how hard the fight for the Dulwich Hill extension was, until the CAFs failed many locals just took it for granted, but the resistance to it at the time was considerable and it took a spooked government fearful of losing an election to move on it, and the LNP at the time were silent but assumed hostile as they were still resentful of Tom Uren and Neville Wran killing off the surface freeways that would have destroyed many inner west neighbourhoods in the 70s.
>
> I addressed the meeting on the campaign, the high amount of support for the extension demonstrated by the number of signatures on our petition - over 50,000 by then, it got to 80,000+ eventually - and other issues such as the bullshit reasons concocted by the then state government’s bureaucratic liars as to why the extension “couldn’t be done”.
>
> At that time the Mungo Scott flour mill at Summer Hill was still operating, with a daily shunt of its siding, (it closed the following year) and a lot of freight rolling stock was stored at Rozelle yard, which was also used as an locomotive depot by Silverton Transportation, so the state government spin was use of the track between Wardell Rd Jct and Balmain Rd Jct by freight trains would “prohibit” trams from using it, according to the “experts”. The Rozelle metro plan, such as it was, also envisaged Rozelle yard as the site of the maintenance base and as the freight line was “needed” for spoil trains from the metro excavation, which would also prevent trams.
>
> Of course, this was self-evident crap, and public transport activists knew the roads bureaucracy had long coveted the Rozelle-Dulwich Hill r-o-w for a tollroad for trucks, so we knew if we didn’t secure the route for trams it would eventually become a four lane elevated road if the then Roads and Traffic Authority got its hooks into it. Something Duncan Gay, Andrew Constance and others in the incoming government favoured, but lost out on.
>
> At the meeting I pointed out it was being held on the 50th anniversary of the inner west Red Lines closure, something the organisers were unaware of, but it was acknowledged as a significant occasion by the meeting.
>
> Following this meeting the pressure on the state government increased to reverse their position, which happened after Kristina Keneally replaced Nathan Rees as premier, and the government was desperate to take a “shovel ready” (stupid expression) infrastructure project to the electorate, and the widespread opposition to both the M4 east tollroad and the Rozelle metro.
>
> Nathan Rees was the victim of the factional machinations of the corrupt Obeid-Tripodi falangists that still infect the NSW ALP (he tried to break their power and failed), I suspect that as the election approached and the ALP was so exposed on the public transport front after its incompetent handling of the NWRL issue and the widespread hatred and contempt for Michael Costa as transport minister, that even without the change in premier the IWLR extension would have been adopted in the run up to the 2011 election as there was nothing else available.
>
> I also think that one of the reasons the Greens are now firmly entrenched in state electorates like Balmain and Newtown is in part because of these issues, and remain in that position because of the westconnex abomination, the harbour poisoning western road tunnel and the push by criminal spiv property developers to fill the area with high density slums. The ALP thought they could ignore local issues because the area would “always” vote for them, the LNP always ignored the area because they knew there were no votes here for them, and still do. We continue to resist and oppose both.
>
> But that meeting 50 years after the 1958 closure set the stage for the extension to go ahead.
>
> Tony
>
>
>> On 26 Nov 2021, at 8:45 am, TP histor...@... <>> wrote:
>>
>
>> Attached - Railway Square 24/11/1958 following the George St conversion. From Fairfax archives via a Sydney history Facebook group.
>>
>> The big lie. The photo speaks volumes about why the conversion *wasn't* a success. The four tramcars on the right could carry as many passengers as seven of the eight buses lined up on the left. There was a loss of about 1/3 of capacity with the change to buses and the buses got tangled up in their own congestion. But cars could move a little quicker (for a few years at least), which was what it was really about.
>>
>> Sydney Morning Herald - 25 Nov 1958:
>>
>> FLOW OF TRAFFIC DOUBLED AS TRAMS TAKEN OFF
>> Tests by police traffic officers yesterday showed that the conversion to buses in George Street, city, enabled traffic to move twice as fast in peak periods as when the trams were running.
>>
>> The changeover began on Sunday, but the first real test was during the morning and evening peak periods yesterday.
>>
>> Traffic authorities agreed that despite a few "teething troubles" the scheme was a success.
>>
>> Further time checks will be made this week by officials of the Department of Government Transport.
>>
>> Police believe the traffic will flow even faster when a few modifications are put into effect tomorrow.
>>
>> The Assistant Superintendant of Traffic, Inspector B. Bertoli, supervised traffic operations yesterday.
>>
>> SOME CHANGES TOMORROW
>> His officers made their tests yesterday morning.
>>
>> They travelled from Wattle Street, Broadway, to the Quay in 12 minutes - which used to take between 25 and 30 minutes - and from the Quay to Railway Square in 10 minutes - which used to take 20 minutes.
>>
>> EIGHT BUSES EVERY MINUTE
>> The Commissioner for Government Transport, Mr A.A. Shoebridge, said that, generally, the conversion to buses was very successful.
>>
>> There were some minor bus delays caused by heavy loading, but passengers were soon picked up by following buses.
>>
>> About 440, or about eight every minute, passed in and out of the city through Railway Square during the morning and afternoon peak periods yesterday.
>>
>> The general secretary of the NRMA, Mr H. E. Richards, said traffic was certainly more flexible than when trams were running.
>>
>> However, special measures were needed at places like Railway Square to allow pedestrians to cross conveniently and safely.
>>
>> [Photo by Alan Kemp » Fairfax Archives]
>>
>> Tony P
>>
>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TramsDownUnder" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email totramsdownunde...@... <>.
>> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tramsdownunder/c16d1713-e2dc-49dc-8af0-cfa239b2400bn%40googlegroups.com https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tramsdownunder/c16d1713-e2dc-49dc-8af0-cfa239b2400bn%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer.
>> <241158.jpg>
>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TramsDownUnder" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email totramsdownunder+unsubscribe@... mailto:tramsdownunder+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tramsdownunder/c3a11502-d086-4052-b20b-0ac589448c92n%40googlegroups.com https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tramsdownunder/c3a11502-d086-4052-b20b-0ac589448c92n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer.
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TramsDownUnder" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email totramsdownunder+unsubscribe@... mailto:tramsdownunder+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tramsdownunder/CAPUC4X-p%3Dt2Ah4DvnZE0b5SYr54417EyDVTDB2FEHtW6eWCLsQ%40mail.gmail.com https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tramsdownunder/CAPUC4X-p%3Dt2Ah4DvnZE0b5SYr54417EyDVTDB2FEHtW6eWCLsQ%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer.