How does the Project fit with the State Infrastructure Strategy, Future Transport Strategy, Greater Cities Commission’s strategic plan, Infrastructure Australia plan and other planning frameworks for Western Sydney?

The types of questions that students are encouraged to consider include:
• Does the project have a clear rationale?
• What problem is it trying to solve?
• How does the Project fit with the State Infrastructure Strategy, Future Transport
Strategy, Greater Cities Commission’s strategic plan, Infrastructure Australia
plan and other planning frameworks for Western Sydney?
• How will the project link with Parramatta Light Rail Stage One, Sydney Metro
West and other parts of the public transport network?
• Why should the project be progressed now?
• Is the project justified economically?
• What benefits will be delivered by the project?
• What alternatives should be considered which may also achieve the projects
strategic objectives?
• What consideration is made for assessment of wider economic benefits?
• What are the key considerations in developing a proposed packaging and
contracting strategy for the project?
• How can the project be disaggregated into package components and how are
interface issues best managed?
• Does the private sector have the capability to deliver the project and what
preferences around project and transaction structuring are needing to be
considered in developing a delivery model that will attract sufficient market
appetite?
• Does the public sector have the required skills and experience to manage the
implementation of the project?
• Does the private sector have the potential to deliver a value for money solution
and what are the potential value for money drivers?
• What contractual mechanisms can be applied to incentivise performance?
• How will the project be funded and financed? What use can be made of value
capture? How can the funding/financing roles be shared between the private
sector, State Government and Federal Government?
• Who are the key stakeholders and what approach to stakeholder consultation
and community engagement is recommended?
• What are the key project risks and how are these to be mitigated and allocated?
• What public interest issues have been considered and how has the public
responded?
• What other recent precedent projects can be identified and what lessons can be
drawn from those projects and applied in this case?
• Does the project sponsor have suitable decision making and governance
structures to support the procurement and delivery of the project?
2
• Stage One is already in procurement and will result in an incumbent operator
running light rail vehicles; how does this affect the procurement of Stage Two?
Relevant issues are the need for interoperability and the augmentation
framework developed for Sydney Metro and other light rail projects.
• What were the reasons impacting the determination of the delivery strategy for
Stage One? Will the same issues influence the determination of the strategy for
Stage Two? Relevant issues include consideration of utility relocation works,
contamination, interface risks.
• The project is challenged by the market capacity constraints and shortage of
skilled labour; how is this being addressed?
• What are the lessons of experience from the previous stage of Parramatta Light
Rail, Sydney Light Rail and other relevant projects? Extensive information on
other projects is readily available representing the more advanced stages of
delivery. For example, information on business cases, procurement strategy, risk
allocation, governance can be used to illustrate how similar issues facing PRL2
can be addressed.
The recommended approach is to identify and address the key and contentious issues
for the project that need to be considered in the business case. Where information is
not readily available, students should propose what they believe is the correct
approach. Do not spend time unnecessarily paraphrasing the case study or simply
restating the project description. It is recommended that students spend time
researching the following projects and relevant guidance material; a list of reference
material is provided below.
In order to provide guidance on how to approach the assignment, some time will be
allocated for discussion on similar case studies including:
• Sydney Metro
• Melbourne Metro
• Sydney Light Rail
• Gold Coast Light Rail
Students will be expected to complete assignments with a guideline of 2,500 to 3,000
words for the body of the report. Additional material can be attached as appendices,
which are not included in the word count. Exceeding the word count will not be
rigidly penalised but is not advisable.
The Due Date for the assignment is 18 May 2023.
The completed report must be uploaded on Canvas by the due date in either PDF or
Word format. The front page must contain the following information: course code
and name, student IDs, assignment name, and date of submission.
A written assignment is a means of communication. You should structure it so that it
is easy for the reader to understand, using paragraphs to separate points and sub-
3
4
headings to highlight subject matter. Given the practical nature of this course, use of
charts, tables and bullets are advised.
The final written report should include:
• An executive summary covering the key issues to be addressed, and main
findings and recommendations;
• The main body of the assignment, clearly addressing each section in turn.
• A conclusion which draws all previous discussions together.
• Recommendations
• References and bibliography (Harvard style).
• Appendices of material or data used within the assignment.
Common problems in previous years which cause students to lose marks include:
• Poor referencing (quantity, quality and style)
• Not relating the risks to the project in question (being too general)
• Missing obvious risks (not thinking deeply)
• Not backing up your arguments with evidence (eg. Don’t just say “the regulations
could change and affect our project” – you must say how and why and provide
evidence to back this up)
• Making the report too “wordy”. Try to use tables, diagrams and bullets as far as
possible.Students are to assess the merits of proceeding with Parramatta Light Rail Stage
Two.
The types of questions that students are encouraged to consider include:
• Does the project have a clear rationale?
• What problem is it trying to solve?
• How does the Project fit with the State Infrastructure Strategy, Future Transport
Strategy, Greater Cities Commission’s strategic plan, Infrastructure Australia
plan and other planning frameworks for Western Sydney?
• How will the project link with Parramatta Light Rail Stage One, Sydney Metro
West and other parts of the public transport network?
• Why should the project be progressed now?
• Is the project justified economically?
• What benefits will be delivered by the project?
• What alternatives should be considered which may also achieve the projects
strategic objectives?
• What consideration is made for assessment of wider economic benefits?
• What are the key considerations in developing a proposed packaging and
contracting strategy for the project?
• How can the project be disaggregated into package components and how are
interface issues best managed?
• Does the private sector have the capability to deliver the project and what
preferences around project and transaction structuring are needing to be
considered in developing a delivery model that will attract sufficient market
appetite?
• Does the public sector have the required skills and experience to manage the
implementation of the project?
• Does the private sector have the potential to deliver a value for money solution
and what are the potential value for money drivers?
• What contractual mechanisms can be applied to incentivise performance?
• How will the project be funded and financed? What use can be made of value
capture? How can the funding/financing roles be shared between the private
sector, State Government and Federal Government?
• Who are the key stakeholders and what approach to stakeholder consultation
and community engagement is recommended?
• What are the key project risks and how are these to be mitigated and allocated?
• What public interest issues have been considered and how has the public
responded?
• What other recent precedent projects can be identified and what lessons can be
drawn from those projects and applied in this case?
• Does the project sponsor have suitable decision making and governance
structures to support the procurement and delivery of the project?
2
• Stage One is already in procurement and will result in an incumbent operator
running light rail vehicles; how does this affect the procurement of Stage Two?
Relevant issues are the need for interoperability and the augmentation
framework developed for Sydney Metro and other light rail projects.
• What were the reasons impacting the determination of the delivery strategy for
Stage One? Will the same issues influence the determination of the strategy for
Stage Two? Relevant issues include consideration of utility relocation works,
contamination, interface risks.
• The project is challenged by the market capacity constraints and shortage of
skilled labour; how is this being addressed?
• What are the lessons of experience from the previous stage of Parramatta Light
Rail, Sydney Light Rail and other relevant projects? Extensive information on
other projects is readily available representing the more advanced stages of
delivery. For example, information on business cases, procurement strategy, risk
allocation, governance can be used to illustrate how similar issues facing PRL2
can be addressed.
The recommended approach is to identify and address the key and contentious issues
for the project that need to be considered in the business case. Where information is
not readily available, students should propose what they believe is the correct
approach. Do not spend time unnecessarily paraphrasing the case study or simply
restating the project description. It is recommended that students spend time
researching the following projects and relevant guidance material; a list of reference
material is provided below.
In order to provide guidance on how to approach the assignment, some time will be
allocated for discussion on similar case studies including:
• Sydney Metro
• Melbourne Metro
• Sydney Light Rail
• Gold Coast Light Rail
Students will be expected to complete assignments with a guideline of 2,500 to 3,000
words for the body of the report. Additional material can be attached as appendices,
which are not included in the word count. Exceeding the word count will not be
rigidly penalised but is not advisable.
The Due Date for the assignment is 18 May 2023.
The completed report must be uploaded on Canvas by the due date in either PDF or
Word format. The front page must contain the following information: course code
and name, student IDs, assignment name, and date of submission.
A written assignment is a means of communication. You should structure it so that it
is easy for the reader to understand, using paragraphs to separate points and sub-
3
4
headings to highlight subject matter. Given the practical nature of this course, use of
charts, tables and bullets are advised.
The final written report should include:
• An executive summary covering the key issues to be addressed, and main
findings and recommendations;
• The main body of the assignment, clearly addressing each section in turn.
• A conclusion which draws all previous discussions together.
• Recommendations
• References and bibliography (Harvard style).
• Appendices of material or data used within the assignment.
Common problems in previous years which cause students to lose marks include:
• Poor referencing (quantity, quality and style)
• Not relating the risks to the project in question (being too general)
• Missing obvious risks (not thinking deeply)
• Not backing up your arguments with evidence (eg. Don’t just say “the regulations
could change and affect our project” – you must say how and why and provide
evidence to back this up)
• Making the report too “wordy”. Try to use tables, diagrams and bullets as far as
possible.