RAIL - Back On Track Forum

Re: Landsborough, I wouldn't regard it as a priority. It has relatively low amount of traffic compared to suburban lines (being only single track) and doesn't appear in the list of breast misses above which I assume means < 10. I think it should be constructed as part of duplication.

Quote from: achiruel on August 06, 2021, 16:24:16 PM
Re: Landsborough, I wouldn't regard it as a priority. It has relatively low amount of traffic compared to suburban lines (being only single track) and doesn't appear in the list of breast misses above which I assume means < 10. I think it should be constructed as part of duplication.

Yes, agreed.  Many other higher priorities at present, and Landsborough is really part of the B2N upgrade plan. It would be great if was done but until something concrete happens with B2N  it will no doubt remain as it is.

In Queensland --> How level crossings stop traffic for 90 minutes during the morning rush

https://www.parliament.qld.gov.au/documents/hansard/2021/2021_08_10_EstimatesTRC.pdf

Page 42

Mr MINNIKIN: Mr Easy, are you aware of any analysis completed by Queensland Rail and others
about the impact of increased service frequency in relation to key open level crossings across the rail
network—so the impact of open level crossings in relation to increased service frequency?

Mr Easy: Ultimately, that impact will be determined by the service plan. The service plan, as
outlined in response to your previous question, is a matter that is under development and will be worked
through with both the delivery authority and Transport and Main Roads, and that will be published prior
to commissioning of the project. That is obviously over four years away, so there is some time to develop
the service plan.

CHAIR: Member, did you want the director-general to add to that?

Mr MINNIKIN: Yes, if he can. I would appreciate that.

Mr Scales: Thank you for the direction. To the member for Chatsworth's point on level crossings,
we are looking at removing those at Beams Road, Carseldine; Boundary Road, Coopers Plains; and
Lindum station. We have been very successful on Telegraph Road in taking the road over the rail.

These are complicated projects because they need all three levels of government acting in
concert. If you take Beams Road, for example, the road is owned by BCC. The rail is in the control of
Mr Easy. Because of the 25,000-volt AC overhead lines, the road has to go quite a distance to have
safe passage. Those three individual crossings have support from all levels of government—from the
local authority, from the state and also from our federal colleagues. If that helps, there is work on that.
Just to further amplify that point, the department has looked at 65 level crossings. We are looking
at how we might ameliorate the effects of the barriers being down. Also, on the Kuraby to Beenleigh
and Beerburrum to Nambour lines, there are level crossings on those two lines. Once we have
enhanced those two lines we will look at what we can do with those level crossings as well.
There is a plan. We have taken the three major ones first—Beams Road, Boundary Road and
Lindum station. All three levels of government are acting in concert. That is just to amplify what Mr Easy
was saying. The other point is that when Cross River Rail opens the plan will be available at that point
in time.

Mr MINNIKIN: Mr Scales, in last year's QTRIP, there was a project listed called 'rail level
crossing planning funding commitment', with $2 million to be spent in 2021-22. What is the status of
that as we sit here today?

Mr Scales: This is the 65 level crossings that we have assessed. The next stage of the program
is to say which ones can be taken out easily—obviously low-hanging fruit first. That is in addition to
those three major projects I have already mentioned and also in addition to the Kuraby to Beenleigh
and Beerburrum to Nambour lines.

Mr MINNIKIN: Why has it been removed from this year's QTRIP as a line item?

Mr Scales: I think we are concentrating on those three major ones first—Beams Road, Boundary
Road and Lindum. Because they are very complicated, we are concentrating on those first.

CHAIR: We will now go to government questions.

====

So, essentially there's no plan for:

Warrigal Rd, Runcorn
South Pine Rd, Alderley
Cavendish Rd, Coorparoo

Or many other of the numerous level crossing around SEQ to be removed.

Why do overbridges need to go so high over due the 25kV lines? Can't we start using conductor bar instead?

Quote from: Gazza on August 15, 2021, 15:20:35 PM
Why do overbridges need to go so high over due the 25kV lines? Can't we start using conductor bar instead?

I think for Warrigal Road, Skyrail is the way to go. Skyrail from South of Altandi right through to Compton road, eliminates the Bonemill, Nathan and Beenleigh road crossings all in one go! And you could Quad track it while you're there .

I know of course I'm dreaming...

Sent from my SM-G780F using Tapatalk

Abc News---> Why does Queensland still have so many level crossings?

Apparently these are the ones that have been identified for immediate removal by the RACQ and other research sources.

Boundary Road, Coopers Plains
South Pine Road, Alderley
Cavendish Road, Coorparoo
Warrigal Road, Runcorn
Kianawah/Lindum Road, Lindum
Beams Road, Carseldine
Wacol Station Road, Wacol

Quote from: verbatim9 on August 23, 2021, 09:50:27 AM
Apparently these are the ones that have been identified for immediate removal by the RACQ and other research sources.

Boundary Road, Coopers Plains
South Pine Road, Alderley
Cavendish Road, Coorparoo
Warrigal Road, Runcorn
Kianawah/Lindum Road, Lindum
Beams Road, Carseldine
Wacol Station Road, Wacol

Alderley is rather dependant on what the proposal is for NWTC connections with the FG Line.

Quote from: ozbob on March 07, 2021, 04:39:39 AM
LX suggested for priority removal:

Boundary Road, Coopers Plains (business case underway)
Cavendish Road, Coorparoo
Beams Road, Carseldine (business case underway)
South Pine Road, Alderley
Wacol Station Road, Wacol
Kianawah Rd / Lindum Rd, Hemmant (precinct upgrade which does not include removal of LX)
Warrigal Rd in Fruitgrove,
Old Beaudesert Rd in Salisbury
Trinder Crossing at Trinder Park,
Stones Rd in Sunnybank

Response to Queensland Parliament E-Petition

https://www.parliament.qld.gov.au/Work-of-the-Assembly/Petitions/Petition-Details?id=3507

BUILD TRAFFIC OVERPASS NEAR LINDUM RAIL STATION 25 March 2021

>>  https://documents.parliament.qld.gov.au/TableOffice/TabledPapers/2021/5721T1620.pdf

https://twitter.com/railbotforum/status/1446974039172337666

Queensland Parliament E-Petition

https://www.parliament.qld.gov.au/Work-of-the-Assembly/Petitions/Petition-Details?id=3646

NO MONEY FOR DANGEROUS LEVEL CROSSING BUT MILLIONS FOR UNNECESSARY BRIDGE

TO: The Honourable the Speaker and Members of the Legislative Assembly of Queensland
Queensland residents draw to the attention of the House that every year people are injured at level crossings but the elimination of level crossings does not appear to be a government priority.

In January 2020 Queensland Rail announced the closure of the Frederick Street Bridge Alderley because it was unsafe, low use and within 450 metres of the Alderley Avenue Bridge.

Five months after that announcement, Cr Andrew Wines, Jimmy Sullivan MP and Mark Bailey MP agreed to re-build the bridge despite safety concerns that have been raised for years about the Wilston Road Newmarket level crossing (800 metres south of the Frederick Street Bridge) that remain unaddressed. This level crossing can be closed because there are two bridges and one underpass within 1.5 km and Wilston Road is signposted "Local Traffic Only".

The decision to spend millions of dollars rebuilding the bridge is a failure of both local and state governments to follow due process and has put Queenslanders in harm's way.

The Queensland Level Crossing Safety Strategy 2012-2021 states that TMR will explore opportunities to eliminate level crossings where appropriate, but no level crossings have been eliminated over the past 10 years.

Your petitioners, therefore, request the House to call on the Minister for Transport and Main Roads to make public safety his first priority by working with local governments to identify and eliminate at least 10 level crossings on the SEQ network and to make those plans public.

https://twitter.com/railbotforum/status/1461529288562204673

How did Victoria fund this? Didn't they sell some assets?

^ no.  Just out of their budget. 

====

https://twitter.com/railbotforum/status/1462278421216522244

I think they funded it by privatising the Land Titles office, which released 2.86 billion into the Victorian State Budget.

Victoria gets $2.86 billion in 'outstanding deal' to privatise Land Titles and Registry office
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-08-27/victoria-privatises-its-land-titles-and-registry-office/10169056

Quote from: #Metro on November 21, 2021, 16:37:42 PM
I think they funded it by privatising the Land Titles office, which released 2.86 billion into the Victorian State Budget.

Victoria gets $2.86 billion in 'outstanding deal' to privatise Land Titles and Registry office
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-08-27/victoria-privatises-its-land-titles-and-registry-office/10169056

Not directly.  It all feeds into the budget.  As did that sale of the Port of Melbourne.

Facebook ...

https://twitter.com/railbotforum/status/1462519067336531972

QuoteNot directly.  It all feeds into the budget.  As did that sale of the Port of Melbourne.

This is the usual case - everything must go into consolidated revenue first.
Same with NSW as well, I think they offloaded as well to fund the Sydney metro.

Level Crossings removed since 2015:

Melbourne 54 (fifty four) 
85 to be removed by 2025 ...

Brisbane 0 (zero)



Meanwhile in banana-land ..  < dancing bananas,
not much in the way of level crossing removals ..

Unfortunately in Brisbane /QLD this is seen as a traffic problem not a rail opportunity.  All solutions are "road over rail" with significant land resumptions and over engineered freeway style designs.   Sky-rail where possible and trenching (where not in flood zone) should be the preference.  Lets create communities not "road spaces".

If I were to slightly dream here, sky rail would be perfect for the Ferny Grove line to eliminate the 4 crossings in Mitchelton. As the track slopes downwards coming outbound just before Prospect Rd, it would be very easy to lift it up here and sky rail all the way to the western side of Glen Holm St (again, where the elevation nicely meets where the rail line will come back to the ground).

This would eliminate the 4 crossings at Prospect, Obsborne, Blackwood and Glen Holm and completely open up that space for the community through open space, parklands and commercial for business and recreational uses (as well as a new shared path for commuters and recreational users). It would also allow for a new seamless bus interchange at Mitchelton (the current set up is ok, but it does take a good 3 mins or so with unprotected sections from the weather to get between the 2). Moving Gaythorne to the northern side of Pickering could also be undertaken in conjunction with this project.

Edit: look at what skyrail has done to the communities lining the Dandenong/Cranbourne Lines- completely opened up that space for people and given it a second life.

Buranda to Norman Park the same.  Many places where rail cuts through low lying areas has stations on either end that are elevated.  The public space created underneath is worth millions itself. 

My only concern with trenches and skyrail is in places where rail traffic growth is expected to require more tracks for express trains etc. I've seen a number of people complaining about some areas of (particularly trench) grade sep where no thoughts of future rail expansion have been gkven on busy corridors. Building a trench capable of holding only 2 tracks means there will only ever be 2 tracks there. That's where road over rail can sometimes be better as it is generally much easier to add extra tracks, as the road bridges are generally built with enough room underneath for that purpose.
A line like Ferny Grove would have no issues,  as there is no requirement, even in the distant future, of track expansion (Trouts Rd really should go straight to Normanby via Alderly on a new alignment). However, something like the Cleveland line would definitely require some future proofing if skyrail/trenches are built.

As long as the Gov has some future foresight and allows for future expansion (or even builds some of that expansion while they're there!), i've got no issues with it of course.

Agreed Jonno and Cazza.

Been pushing for years now on this.  They really do need to tap into the expertise in Victoria with level crossing removals.

We need a Level Crossing Removal authority (division what ever) in Queensland that just focusses on the task ahead.

The LXRA can be given the proper authority to over rule local government, and state government in effect to get something really happening.

Whilst we are dealing with petty polyticks in silos of mediocrity it will be in 2025  .....

Level Crossings removed since 2015:

Melbourne 85 (eighty five)

Brisbane 0 (zero)

Just need a TMR that has it head outside of freeway brochures!!!

How many times has there been an election pledge to remove Coopers Plains and Lindum at Council State and Federal elections. I believe two or three election cycles.

Quote from: ozbob on September 14, 2012, 16:53:55 PM
Hot topic ...

REPORT
St Vincents Road Open Level Crossing
Preliminary Investigation
Stage One Consultation
February 2008

--> http://www.northgateward.org/news/banyo%20rail%20consultation.pdf

No longer an active web site, but using the Wayback machine (Internet Archive) was able to find a copy:

https://web.archive.org/web/20080718203530/http://www.northgateward.org/news/banyo%20rail%20consultation.pdf

Couriermail --> Government breaking promises, not ground, in major traffic-busting project $

QuoteConstruction on a major congestion-busting project on Brisbane's north is yet to begin despite a pre-election promise from the Palaszczuk government that shovels would hit the ground by the end of 2021.

The business case for the Beams Road level crossing removal still has not been finished – pushing back the project's construction start time beyond what the government promised.

The government has defended the blowout on their timing pledge, by accusing the council of hampering the project's business case and planning process.

But Brisbane's deputy mayor Krista Adams has insisted both levels of government have been working productively on the project's "complicated engineering issues". ...

https://twitter.com/ozbob13/status/1475833927637950471

https://twitter.com/ozbob13/status/1475836785355722756

Level Crossings removed since 2015:

Melbourne 56 (fifty six) 
85 to be removed by 2025 ...

Brisbane 0 (zero)

Queensland Parliament

https://documents.parliament.qld.gov.au/tableOffice/questionsAnswers/2021/1498-2021.pdf

Question on Notice

No. 1498

Asked on 18 November 2021

MR J LISTER ASKED MINISTER FOR TRANSPORT AND MAIN ROADS (HON M BAILEY)

QUESTION:

Will the Minister advise if all necessary land resumptions have been finalised for the Beams Road
and Boundary Road rail open level crossing removal projects?

ANSWER:

I thank the Member for Southern Downs for the question.

The Palaszczuk Government is delivering its sixth record transport and roads infrastructure
program in a row, outlining $27.5 billion in investment over the next four years and estimated to
support an average of 24,000 direct jobs.

The Department of Transport and Main Roads (TMR) is currently finalising the business case for
both the Beams Road and Boundary Road rail level crossing removal projects.

Property requirements are dependent on the business case outcomes, which are still subject to
Brisbane City Council final approvals.

TMR will engage with potentially impacted property and business owners as this process
continues.

Queensland's world-leading pandemic response has made it the place to be and, to support the
State's population boom, significant road upgrades are being delivered as part of Queensland's
COVID-19 Economic Recovery Plan. With the Brisbane 2032 Olympics and Paralympics on the
horizon, these upgrades provide immediate economic benefits, support more jobs and deliver
ongoing benefits of vital infrastructure for years to come.

Couriermail Quest --> Peak-hour chaos fears after near miss at dangerous Kuraby level crossing $

QuoteA notorious southside level crossing is rising as one of the most dangerous in the state after a truck collided with the boom gates in peak-hour traffic on Wednesday.

The crossing, on Beenleigh Rd at Kuraby, has made Queensland Rail's alert list after more than 110 collisions and near misses since 2011, with 16 boom gate hits in the past two years.

Although nobody was injured in this week's early morning incident, it alarmed authorities who said there had already been three other boom gate strikes this year.

It also slowed traffic through Kuraby and delayed trains on the Gold Coast and Beenleigh lines by up to 30 minutes.

Last year, Queensland Rail recorded 123 boom arm strikes across the entire network, up from 111 in 2020. ...

Realistically, I don't think we can expect any action on LXs between Kuraby & Beenleigh prior to the Logan & Gold Coast (cough) "faster" rail project. It would be irrational to work on LX removals now when this project is only a handful of years away.

^ yep, exactly one of the points I made to the journalist.  But this article again highlights the lack of progress generally in SEQ with LX removal. The petty politics, Council and State, and throw in a bumbling TMR, Queensland seems incapable of progressing much at all. No LX removed since 2015 in SEQ (Victoria has now removed 56 since 2015).

It is going to become an increasingly major issue as problems with the LXs mount.

We really do need a proper authority with the means to drive these things. 

' Olympic City '   ha ha ... fantasy world of fast rail and everyone using public transport !

And the last two bcc came to the party because they had a benefit/incentive for them to do so (telegraph road had state pay for some of the road upgrade and Robinson road also had road upgrade priority, service upgrades and land ownership transfers). Other level crossings don't really have that same appeal to bcc hence their reluctance in throwing money around.

https://twitter.com/ozbob13/status/1495408203106254857