Hans Lovejoy
Like libraries and other public services, it’s well established that public transport will never turn a profit.
And while rail is essential public infrastructure, our railway lines locally have sat abandoned for ten years.
State government policy since 2004 has indicated that roads should be this region’s priority, not rail.
Yet despite the apparent ‘roads’ agenda, the Northern Rivers Rail Trail (NRRT) not-for-profit community group say converting the tracks to a trail will strengthen the economy through tourism diversification and ‘link and help unite the region’s villages and towns.’
But for that to happen it is likely that the lines will need to be removed, something that proponents say is needed anyway due to their deteriorating condition.
Geoff Meers is a NRRT board member and former director of transport programs for the QLD government.
He says he was responsible for the program management of public transport and cycling infrastructure development in southeast QLD.
Mr Meers elaborated on a discussion we had last week, where he said that while there are no NSW rail-trails yet, there are 12 rail trail projects currently being developed throughout the state.
You previously said that light rail for this region would require new tracks because of the weight of light rail, yet in contrast, the light rail being proposed by Brian Flannery from his North Byron Beach Resort site into Byron Bay will not require new tracks owing to it being lighter in weight.
Given that, why isn’t very, very light rail appropriate for this track? Couldn’t the Shire’s towns be linked by this, considering the flat terrain and few small bridges?
The North Byron railmotor will be restricted to travel at 25km/h. In addition, there is only one slight bend between Bayshore Drive and Byron Bay Station.
This means the railmotor can operate safely without too much work on the rails. The bridge over Belongil Creek however requires substantial work in the order of $1 million dollars to cope with the weight of the railmotor.
From Byron Bay to Mullumbimby, the terrain is flat and there are few curves.
There are a number of structures (culverts and embankments).
If the railmotor was restricted to 25km/h it may be possible for it to operate safely without too much additional work. But the cost would still run into millions, rather than thousands; and who would catch a train that took 45 minutes to get to Byron?
In addition, the operational cost of the railmotor would still have to be met as would the maintenance of the track – who would pay for that?
You agreed with me that government reports can have a tendency to be written in favour of outcomes wanted by those in government, yet you said that in your experience there are limits to how far a report can be weighted.
Do you consider that the 2013 rail report for this region pushed those boundaries to favour the outcome they wanted?
The 2013 report that came up with the $900 million reinstatement cost looked reasonable to me. The cost factors used also seem to me to be industry standard.
The 2014 rail-trail report, by ARUP, provides a similar industry-standard approach to the evaluation. I do not consider either of those reports to have pushed the envelope in their cost calculations.
I recall you saying that apart from the lack of public transport demand in the region, rail would be better built in the growth areas such as Tweed and Ballina.
Again, isn’t this a matter of being influenced by weighted reports and studies wanting specific outcomes?
There is abundant evidence of the huge pressure on Byron’s traffic and housing needs, for example.
I agree there are pressures on Byron’s traffic and housing needs. I do not see the reinstatement of rail as part of the answer.
Regional transport studies show the main transport routes are Lismore–Ballina and Ballina–Byron; this is where the traffic demand is.
There are already seven bus services daily each way between Mullumbimby and Byron Bay. If they were crammed to overflowing, patrons would be demanding more services – they aren’t.
I don’t see how a report saying reinstating rail does not stack up influences the growth in Tweed and Ballina.
People are going where there is land and housing available at a reasonable price close to services. If we want light rail, we need Gold Coast housing densities in Byron Shire.
I don’t want high-rise towers stretching from Byron Bay to Mullumbimby and Bangalow and I don’t think most of Byron’s residents want that either.
I think we should focus on the problems we are trying to fix – more frequent, accessible public transport for those who need it and easing traffic congestion in Byron Bay.
The rail shuttle to Bayshore Drive may help, if people can be persuaded to use it.
Any further rail options would be a misuse of government funds, counter-productive and unhelpful.
You claim that you are unaware of any other example of light rail existing with a similar situation to this region. Why do you believe that is?
Light rail works best with patronage levels around 5,000 per hour – Byron would be lucky to generate a tenth of that. No-one will invest in light rail in areas with our low housing densities.
And finally, when comparing road to rail on economic and environment grounds, it would appear rail is superior.
Isn’t it a monumental failure in evolution that a 2014 society would consider repurposing rail infrastructure built in 1903?
Rail is only superior environmentally if it is running near full. Running almost empty diesel trains creates huge greenhouse gas loads, far more than the few cars.
Economically, rail is superior in large cities where construction of expensive passenger rail lines means less need for freeways.
Large expenditure on rail in a rural area where patronage demand has been shown to be low does nothing to avoid the need for road upgrades.
The roads are here, they are in reasonable condition (?), they are available for public transport.
Why should we ask the government to spend large amounts of our money on another public transport option that will not be well used and does not meet the transport needs of the community?
Arguments such as this, play to taxpayers’ ignorance of just how much roads and the vehicles that go on them cost in tax dollars, lives, health and environment. Many times what light rail, which runs on negligible rights of way, cost.
Roads COST and LOSE massive amounts of money. They cut broad deadly swathes through the countryside and towns that must be resumed and would be better used as anything else. Roads are much more expensive than rail on every measurable criteria. Once built the the users even more more to use them, in vehicles, fuel, insurance, lives and they can never be green.
Roads encourage more roads when they fail as transport options. It is the old gun lobby’s answer when guns lead to more deaths and increased criminal activity, buy more guns! The more people die on roads and the more damage they do, the answer is always more roads.
Linear town planning, which follows the coastal development makes sensible transport planning possible, which of course is why it is opposed by all the special interest groups who make money out of bad decisions.
Go ahead, sacrifice your children, wildlife and environment to the great God Car. There will be ample commercial propaganda telling you how clever you are, as you trash your local community and turn it into the urban mess you fled from.
For more information and statistics on rail trails,trains and buses go to the following Facebook sites.Some of the FB sites have government studies,Bus study info and also when trains are effective.
1: Murwillumbah to Casino Rail Trail supporters
2:Northern Rivers Rail Trail Supporters
3: Trains On Our Tracks
4: Northern Rivers Railway Action Group
From the links on these sites you can use your own initiative to see what is best for this region.
Geoff Meer may be a member of the Northern Rivers Rail Trail group but he speaks from experience and knowledge of what is required for a viable transport solution.
At last, a clear and easy to digest list of reasons, from a long-term professional’s viewpoint, that explains the unwarranted expense of refurbishing an 1890’s rail system that was designed for that era.
If anyone still has fixated views on reinstating trains on our corridor, just read this article again and again until it sinks in. You’ll help save this wonderful corridor from any sell-off into private hands, whilst keeping OUR future options wide open.
In the meantime, a Rail Trail is a proven economic no-brainer waiting to happen.
We can make it happen.
Fantastic article thank you for sharing it. Can’t wait to have a rail trail.
The rail lobby says roads should be the priority of this region. Wasting $75 million on a pathway is just stupid. That money should be placed into better public transport for the wider community, not just the select few who actually can ride a bike. Taxpayers will be sent broke over the amount of money that will be wasted on liability cover for the whole corridor (For when a accident happens on the trail).
The NRRT obviously don’t care at all about all the horror crashes that occur yearly on our roads; about 90% of witch always seriously injure or even kill 1 or more people. But the NRRT is far more interested in destroying safe Public Transport options in order for some tourism money, therefore putting the lives of more and more locals in jeopardy every day.
I have had people say to me before that a train service will destroy the rolling hills and replace them with a ‘sea of houses’ or something, but this is already happening because of our lousy roads. All you have to do to see this is go for a drive around Alstonville, Ballina, Knockrow and Newrybar, where trees and countryside are being Destroyed all just to quash our endless need for more roads.
I encourage everybody who believes in the respect of native animals and their habitats, the large disabled population, The environment, youth population and many more to start supporting Trains and therefore make tracks into a better world and future. Remember: We only get one Earth!
The Rail Trail is for anyone who can ride, walk, wheelchairs and mobility scooters so it would appear it covers most of the population.
As for the cost, the Canberra Light Rail “project will be determined by a competitive market process, however the estimated capital cost of the project is $610 million plus a $173 million contingency.” This is for 12 kms.
I am not sure how a 1970’s Diesel train that is proposed by the North Byron Beach Resort could claim to be light rail. As it is only proposed to run daylight hours on the weekend how is it going to solve any problems without creating more congestion in Byron.
We should all be pushing for a viable public transport system such as solar buses but unless it runs most of the day and passes close to where most people live it will do nothing to stem the road accidents.
Just to reinforce information to the new readers of the Echonet Daily I would suggest that you look at the whole Northern Rivers Train Line and think about the population corridor now and 100 years ahead.The growth is mainly along the coastal strip from Kingscliff to Ballina and across to Lismore.Do you spend $1B on the existing corridor that will only service a small populations?
Trains are brilliant in high population areas and if you live less than 1km from a train station ,buses are the best in lower population areas and pick up/drop offs are much more frequent and closer to your home or destination.
Between Billindugel and Murwillumbah or Bangalow and Lismore there is such a small population that a train would an economic liability on a huge scale.Between Lismore and Casino we have the same problem of very low population.
Would it not be the best outcome to look at least 50 years ahead and see what the population corridor and growth regions are?
I for one wouldn’t mind having my taxpayer dollars spent on a bus service in this area but I will be very upset if they use the 1890s designed railway corridor to take us into the next century.
Imagine if Friday Hut Rd was still the main highway like it was back in the early 1900s! Look at the public transport function for the whole of the Northern Rivers and for the next 100 years at least before saying the old snaking railway corridor will be feasible.
Well why not re open this line to service, then that would act as a catalyst for a track from say Lismore to Ballina then onto Lennox Head or something along those lines. Once this track is gone, its gone forever, and there will be 0% chance of getting it back even if the region depends on it.
just because it doesn’t go to popular growth centres doesn’t make it useless. The line can also be used for freight services as it did not so long ago if passenger services struggle.
The line goes to Byron Bay, a place screaming for better transport. Byron also hosts a number of annual festivals and is also a popular destination for tourists.
We shouldn’t just go down the tunnel visions of ‘The track designed in 1880 wont work’ or ‘the track doesn’t service major growth centres therefore it is useless’ – all of those statements are just rubbish excuses designed to get you somewhat convinced that trails are the way to go, but a trail isn’t the way to go if we want less car crashes, less pollution and more.
We must see the big picture here and not limit our thoughts down to just tiny intricate details.
The rail trailers think they can just go around removing, replacing removing, replacing and just have a play around with the track. The NSW Govt. can’t be bothered to build a new train track, that is why we must keep the existing line and NOT go around destroying it and then selling the infrastructure to other people. We cannot take our chances with this valuable track.
The historic tunnels will be trashed with graffiti and rubbish, and already are, therefore completely ruining their historic appeal. It would cost taxpayers thousands of dollars to be consistently cleaning this off, as this type of cleaning must occur on a weekly or even daily basis to ensure safety and visual appeal to the few who will actually use it, and all this will cost more and more as it continues to go on. However, this doesn’t occur with trains, as the track is classified as a fenced corridor (stated in the ARUP study) there is evendence of this as after the closure in 2004, later, in 2005, graffiti started arising in tunnels wich made them an eyesore to view. So if we really want to save these tunnels, I recommend you vote trains.