Sydney’s Monorail Potentially Getting The Chop

Gizmodo AU

Many Sydney-siders believe that the only good thing about the city’s monorail system is the fact it offers a small column of shade while crossing Pyrmont Bridge. The state government isn’t too fussed on it either, telling developers to not let the monorail constrain their thinking when it comes to redeveloping the Convention Centre side of Darling Harbour.

The SMH reports that Infrastructure NSW is currently in discussions with three different consortiums to redevelop the Sydney Convention Centre area. Apparently part of the brief is that they won’t be disappointed if the monorail is dismantled and taken out of the equation.

Conversely though, Sydney’s light rail is considered crucial, with plans to expand it potentially as early as 2015. There is even the possibility of the light rail running down George Street, while the removal of the monorail station on Pitt street would open it up to take the two-way traffic displaced by a light rail track down the city’s main thoroughfare.

Would any Sydney siders be saddened to lose the monorail? I mean, that Lanley guy who sold it to us was charismatic and all, but then he skipped town with all our money…

[SMH]
Image: Wikimedia Commons

Discuss

(44 Comments)
Go to : 1 2
  • [–]

    Rob H

    Tuesday, January 10, 2012 at 9:45 AM

    It’s a quirky feature of Sydney for sure (doesn’t mean it would be missed); A monorail is an excellent idea for a city that is already built up like Sydney, you can build it without majorly impacting traffic flow, it is easy to locate when walking the streets and you get good views riding it – its just a shame that it has been totally neglected since construction, either it needs its reach expanded (and ticketing integrated with the normal City Rail or Bus system), or it needs to be shutdown :(

    ps: don’t block city roads while you tear it down either…!

  • [–]

    Dan Miller

    Tuesday, January 10, 2012 at 9:47 AM

    Taking away the Sydney monorail is like killing off Mickey Mouse.

    • [–]

      Jackson Bison

      Tuesday, January 10, 2012 at 10:12 AM

      Probably more akin to killing of that far lesser know Disney character that no-one liked.

      You know, what’s-his-name

      • [–]

        Ed

        Tuesday, January 10, 2012 at 10:26 AM

        Darkwing Duck?

        • [–]

          deadnotsleeping

          Tuesday, January 10, 2012 at 11:56 AM

          When there’s trouble you call DW

      • [–]

        par3182

        Tuesday, January 10, 2012 at 4:06 PM

        Poochie.

  • [–]

    Craig

    Tuesday, January 10, 2012 at 9:58 AM

    I think they’ve got it ass about face. They should be investing in it and expanding it instead of consuming road space with light rail, which will cause all sorts of new congestion.

  • [–]

    cayal

    Tuesday, January 10, 2012 at 10:06 AM

    damn I was going to post the Monorail song.

  • [–]

    Sean C

    Tuesday, January 10, 2012 at 10:06 AM

    Loving the Simpsons reference :)

    I call the big one Bitey.

  • [–]

    Sam

    Tuesday, January 10, 2012 at 10:10 AM

    Ultimately, while the monorail is offer something unique to Sydney, it’s not something that offers much practical value. The route taken largely eliminates how useful it is to tourists (seeing that the closest it meets the rail system is nearby Town Hall/Wynyard, and for someone who doesn’t know their way around is difficult to find). The fares are overpriced for the service offered too. Will removal affect public transport? Hardly. Will it affect the city’s image? Potentially, but not irreparably.

    One thing I am curious about those is the comment of ”…the removal of the monorail station on Pitt street would open it up to take … two-way traffic…”. Isn’t the whole point of monorails in an urban environment that they offer additional public transport without negative impact on traffic flow? The vast majority of support pylons are build into the sidewalk (though I’m not familiar with the location of them on Pitt Street, so I’m happy to be educated on this); so unless they’re suggesting closing Pitt Street off for pedestrian traffic too, I don’t really understand how the removal of the monorail will affect traffic flow at all..

    • [–]

      Jakobi

      Tuesday, January 10, 2012 at 1:35 PM

      The plan is to increase the width of Pitt Street. So removing the pylons would help.

  • [–]

    Roachless

    Tuesday, January 10, 2012 at 10:10 AM

    Its too small to be worth the money.. it goes only over a fraction of sydney.. expand it, take it to other districts and then you might have soemthing worth keeping.

    • [–]

      MotorMouth

      Tuesday, January 10, 2012 at 12:00 PM

      Yeah, I’ve been driving in Sydney since 1975 and Pitt St has always been one-way. It also feeds into Market St, which is also one-way and always chock-a-block, so going from two lanes to three won’t help traffic. The best you could hope for would be one or two extra parking spaces.

  • [–]

    EMH

    Tuesday, January 10, 2012 at 10:12 AM

    The state government only wants to remove the monorail because it was built during a Labor governments term. Admittedly it was a Labor government that made the great mistake of getting rid o Sydney’s trams many years ago.

    The monorail does no harm, is popular with tourists and some locals and gets in no one’s way, except for developers and we all know about them.

    The existence of the monorail is no impediment to the reintroduction of trams to Sydney but any trams that may be reintroduced need to be faster than the current and very limited tramway. And rather than George street it seems to me that a better route for starting to put the trams back would be from the city rail stations to UNSW; the right of way still exists and is separate to the roads for a good part of its route. And there is a built in market.

    • [–]

      Ed

      Tuesday, January 10, 2012 at 10:21 AM

      Cmon, it’s useless. No one in Sydney actually rids the monorail more than once. However I don’t agree with spending millions getting rid of it when we could use the cash else where. Architects are a smart mob, and could easily incorporate the Monorail or move it.

      • [–]

        MotorMouth

        Tuesday, January 10, 2012 at 12:06 PM

        I often ride the monorail because it connects cheap parking on the other side of Darling Harbour with the city. I think it would really hurt businesses in Ultimo if it went away.

  • [–]

    Ed

    Tuesday, January 10, 2012 at 10:14 AM

    The monorail is an over priced tourist trap that takes you from darling harbour to Pitt st via 1/2 dozen stops that have nothing more than a souvenir shop, it is useless.

  • [–]

    Heisenburg

    Tuesday, January 10, 2012 at 10:19 AM

    I think Craig has got the right idea.

  • [–]

    Philip B

    Tuesday, January 10, 2012 at 10:24 AM

    As it stands now, it is nothing more than a novelty. It either needs to be expanded and the tickets made cheaper, or it should be removed

  • [–]

    Tim

    Tuesday, January 10, 2012 at 10:40 AM

    Just a thought: If it was free I’d use it. Buy a few more cars, schedule them every 2 minutes and you’ve got a piece of infrastructure the whole of Sydney might actually use.

  • [–]

    Antonia

    Tuesday, January 10, 2012 at 10:52 AM

    Anything to discourage or limit car usage should be encouraged.

  • [–]

    olearymo

    Tuesday, January 10, 2012 at 10:56 AM

    MONO…

    D’oh!

    • [–]

      Pmac

      Tuesday, January 10, 2012 at 1:51 PM

      Would you prefer a VGA-rail?

    • [–]

      Sally

      Tuesday, January 10, 2012 at 11:50 PM

      I have only been on the monorail once, it should go, we should never have gotten rid of the trams, the tram network needs to expand significantly.

      BTW, I take the stereorail almost every weekday to work.

  • [–]

    Michael

    Tuesday, January 10, 2012 at 10:56 AM

    The only useful thing they cuold do with the monorail is extend it to Central at one end, and Circular Quay at the other, then make it free and get rid of the busses that crawl up and down George St.

  • [–]

    Brad H.

    Tuesday, January 10, 2012 at 11:11 AM

    I don’t think an extension of the Sydney monorail system is feasible, as there are the normal complexities and added-cost to deciding how and where to extend the loop and also how to switch (for example the Osaka monorail uses a segmented switch, and the H-Bahn uses a pivot switch).

    But yeah, there are problems with light rail too. All you have to do is hear the cries in Melbourne about a whole street getting dug up for years.

    That’s why I’m unsure about light rail in Perth. Announced but barely going through the planning stage, it will take 30 years rather than the 20 the WA Government reckons.

    Build bus rapid now and if electrification is needed then build that infrastructure and add trolleybuses. However light rail could still be developed because the right-of-way system and associated infrastructure has been implemented for bus rapid. No city in Australia can wait even ten years for public transport expansion.

    • [–]

      Christian

      Tuesday, January 10, 2012 at 2:33 PM

      Huh? No crying here in melb, I don’t get what you mean..?

      • [–]

        smurfydog

        Tuesday, January 10, 2012 at 10:47 PM

        @Christian – Agreed. Lightrail works pretty well here.

      • [–]

        Brad H.

        Wednesday, January 11, 2012 at 2:27 AM

        In terms of line maintenance, extensions, and addition of superstops.

  • [–]

    Mark

    Tuesday, January 10, 2012 at 11:19 AM

    I would rather the government invest some more money into the monorail, get rid of a few of the existing stops and add a few new stops. The actual cars are pretty old though. In fact, one of the monorails is being harvested for parts for all of the other monorails. The price should also be reduced, though I cannot see this happening.

    “Recent studies[12] by a Sydney newspaper show that the Monorail is now one of the most expensive public transport systems in the world, with a $5 charge to travel a mere 150 metres between two stops in Pitt Street. When measured per kilometre, a journey on the monorail is more than a luxury cabin on the Orient Express from London to Venice.” – Wikipedia

  • [–]

    MDolley

    Tuesday, January 10, 2012 at 11:27 AM

    They only built it because Lanley said it was more of a Melbourne idea.

  • [–]

    jrad

    Tuesday, January 10, 2012 at 11:50 AM

    Can it outrun The Flash?

  • [–]

    amy

    Tuesday, January 10, 2012 at 11:50 AM

    No one’s mentioned added noise pollution from the monorail. I say good riddance!

  • [–]

    MotorMouth

    Tuesday, January 10, 2012 at 12:51 PM

    One vitally important fact about the monorail has been omitted from every story I’ve read about this over the past few days. Originally the monorail was supposed to connect the established tourist areas of Circular Quay and the Rocks with the then brand new Darling Harbour redevelopment. At the time, the only objections to it seemed to revolve around monorail passengers being able to see into 1st floor offices as it zipped by. However, Nick Greiner was swept to power and one of his promises was to do everything in his power to curtail the monorail. The contract was signed so he couldn’t cancel it but he was able to exploit a loophole to cripple it by changing the route so that it didn’t actually go anywhere. So all the commentary that points out that it has struggled to meet even half it’s passenger targets need to understand that those targets were based on the original route, which would have been a goldmine for the operator and a real icon for our city. That they have done as well as they have under the circumstances is a real credit to the operators.

    Rather than tear it down, I’d like to see it extended all the way to the Quay, as per the original proposal. If done sensibly, it would be easy to create a train interchange with Circular Quay station. It could also be extended to go to the casino without adding much time to a full loop. Make it useful, update the whole system and it would be a surefire success.

    OTOH, light rail sucks. It competes with cars, busses, motorbikes and bicycles for street space and is very dangerous for both kinds of bikes. Sydney streets are just too narrow to accommodate it and both the infrastructure and trams themselves are ugly. Light rail only makes sense to me on a dedicated route, like normal rail. Everywhere else it blows goats.

    A third alternative might be another kind of elevated train. Bangkok has an excellent elevated system that is a really good way to get around. Taipei’s is also very good and it’s trains basically run on rubber tyres in an elevated concrete ditch. I imagine it is done like that so that it is cheap and lightweight but it seems very effective. The advantages of any kind of elevated train is that it takes far less ground space away from existing transport systems and can be put in place much more quickly. The original monorail went up in no time.

    I’ve often thought a monorail would be a great thing to have running across Spit Bridge, then looping down to Manly and around to Brookvale/Warringah Mall, where a big bus interchange would take passengers further north. It could easily start from somewhere north of the bridge, maybe Milsons Point or Nth Sydney, where an interchange with the Nth Shore line could make it easy to get to from the city. Of course, sections of a system like that would need to be two-way, but I’m sure stronger pylons could be built to carry two rails, whilst still fitting on a normal median strip. Of course, the nimbys would hate it but its about time we started to tell those sheeple to shut up.

  • [–]

    light487

    Tuesday, January 10, 2012 at 1:20 PM

    The monorail in other cities of the world, such as Taipei works because it is connected directly into the subway and main rail network. It’s just another way to get around, albeit above the roads/buildings instead of below them. Taipei’s monorail system works very well… but then so do most public transport system in that part of the world.

    • [–]

      MotorMouth

      Tuesday, January 10, 2012 at 11:06 PM

      Taipei doesn’t have a monorail, it just has an elevated train system. As I said above, it actually runs on pneumatic rubber tyres.

      • [–]

        Brad H.

        Wednesday, January 11, 2012 at 2:41 AM

        Try Chongqing Rail Transit.

  • [–]

    Wok

    Tuesday, January 10, 2012 at 1:26 PM

    People in Pyrmont and Ultimo use it alot when it rains. heh.

    I actually quite like it… just wish it went to Circular Quay and was quiter and better maintained.

  • [–]

    Pmac

    Tuesday, January 10, 2012 at 1:46 PM

    Speaking of which – why on earth have they not put any shade along Pyrmont Bridge? and a bike line for Pete’s sake.

    The only thing that changes on that bloody bridge are the flags. NO ONE CARES ABOUT YOUR FLAGS.

  • [–]

    Erebus

    Tuesday, January 10, 2012 at 3:40 PM

    The monorail put us on the map!

Go to : 1 2

Join The Discussion