RAIL - Back On Track Forum

Track realignment investigations underway:

https://www.yoursay-projects.tmr.qld.gov.au/direct-sunshine-coast-rail-line/direct-sunshine-coast-rail-line-corridor-alignment

Proposed stations DSCRL

https://www.yoursay-projects.tmr.qld.gov.au/direct-sunshine-coast-rail-line/direct-sunshine-coast-rail-line-stations

Beerwah

Nirimba (Aura)

Caloundra

Aroona

Birtinya

Mountain Creek

Maroochydore

I think most of this is positive.

I must say I wasn't across CAMCOS only having been carried out on the basis of allowing for a single track.  That being the case (and the work having been done decades ago) it is only natural they should be revising the work.  It is still going to be substantially the same thing but it was never going to be exactly what they originally contemplated.

The Beerwah factsheet seems to show the "new" bit to the east of where the current line is, not sure how much to read into that. 

I think Beerwah should ideally have 2 island platforms, and there should be grade separation of the up (northbound) Maroochydore track over or under the NCL.  Sunshine Coast line services or through Nambour services on the outer 2 tracks, Beerwah to Nambour/Cooroy/Gympie North shuttles to a middle track with faces on both platform islands for cross-platform transfer to services headed to Maroochydore or Brisbane.

I'm not convinced the Mountain Creek (Mooloolaba) station will be very useful, but that might not be too much of an issue if there is a very frequent loop that just connects the eastern side (Goonawarra Dr / Amarina Ave) to the River Esplanade area.  It's only about 2km so it could run pretty often from first to last with minimal resources.  I'd resume 129-131 Amarina Avenue and put in a modest bus stop and turnaround for that route (which would also accommodate the 619 that goes past).

G'day SR,

That's news to me. It should be duplicated track.
Where does it mention it's just a single track?

Can they also release the travel times between each station and for the line as a whole?

We need to know what the average speed is to see just how competitive (or not) it will be vs car.

Quote from: #Metro on July 19, 2023, 18:28:24 PMCan they also release the travel times between each station and for the line as a whole?

We need to know what the average speed is to see just how competitive (or not) it will be vs car.

what car environment is that comparing to?  One where billions are spent continually widening roads or a city where active and public transport is prioritised, road space reduced, neighborhoods are walkable and streets safe for all users!

I actually think it is missing 4-5 infill stations just like the Gold Coast did and only now building.

Quote from: Jonnowhat car environment is that comparing to?  One where billions are spent continually widening roads or a city where active and public transport is prioritised, road space reduced, neighborhoods are walkable and streets safe for all users!

I actually think it is missing 4-5 infill stations just like the Gold Coast did and only now building.

(bold added)

Well, Rapid Transit is prioritising PT.

QuoteIt was the desire to compete with the car that resulted in the decision to provide for integration between feeder bus and rail and for large park and ride sites around these stations rather than provision for higher density suburbs providing walk-on patronage. The [Perth] railway planners argued that the target traveler's had a choice and preference for car use, and that this and the low density of development dictate that rail must minimize journey time to be competitive with the car (Ker & Ryan, 1994).

These requirements were key factors in route selection and station spacing. The railway was designed for higher speed rail with stations spaced 2–3 km apart (Table 2), a very different structure from the early railways where stations average 800-meter spacing. Martinovich and Lawrence (1998) argued for a station spacing of 3 km on the basis that this minimizes journey time and reduces rolling stock requirements. At 1 km spacing, rolling stock needs are almost double.

(bold added)

If this line is eventually extended to Noosa (heres hoping)  , wide station spacing will be ideal. Connecting buses or SC Mass Transit system could cover the areas in between. It is also easier to add a station later than build a station and then remove it.

Source: Curtis, Carey. (2008). Evolution of the transit-oriented development model for low-density cities: a case study of Perth's new railway corridor. Planning Practice and Research. 23 (3): pp. 285-302. https://rsa.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/02697450802423559

Stop spacing and express patterns are not intrinsically linked!!! Just needs to be designed like...checks notes...most of Europe and Japan.

It would appear from what has been released that DSCL will be dual track. Third platform at Beerwah .... would that be for changeovers to NCL leading to Nambour and Gympie North? It would be good to see some inkling re train frequencies Beerwah-Maroochydore and Beerwah-Nambour.

Wouldn't it be largely an extension of the existing Caboolture services (as well as redirecting the Nambour services) to Birtinya (SCUH).   Gympie North/Nambour to Beerwah shuttles operate during the off-peak/weekends.  Gympie North services (during peak at least) would remain as a through service via Northgate, alternatively it could run express Beerwah to Bowen Hills, stopping only at Caboolture, Petrie (Kippa Ring) and Eagle Junction (Shorncliffe, Airport and Doomben).

Caboolture would largely become a "short-runner" service during peak periods and late evenings (for stowing into the Elimbah yard).  The Eastern part of the Caboolture yard could be sold off or re-purposed, considering most trains would either be stowed at Elimbah or at Beerwah (south of the station past the overpass) and/or at a DSCL location.  The western part of the Caboolture yard would be retained for stowing for train/loco breakdowns or such, as well as 'preserving' the gateway towards the Wamuran (rail trail).

Thanks Arnz. Think a DSCL stabling yard is being considered east of Beerwah.

At the very least should be hourly to Nambour, 2 hourly to Cooroy and every 4h to Gympie North.

As for the proposed stations, a nice surprise that Caloundra would be elevated over the road.
A shame they didn't do this at Hope Island.

3rd platform at Beerwah is good too, hopefully it's set up in the middle to allow for cross platform interchange

Quote from: SurfRail on July 19, 2023, 16:46:25 PMI'm not convinced the Mountain Creek (Mooloolaba) station will be very useful, but that might not be too much of an issue if there is a very frequent loop that just connects the eastern side (Goonawarra Dr / Amarina Ave) to the River Esplanade area.  It's only about 2km so it could run pretty often from first to last with minimal resources.  I'd resume 129-131 Amarina Avenue and put in a modest bus stop and turnaround for that route (which would also accommodate the 619 that goes past).

Mountain Creek Station is basically next to the Schools and the TAFE Queensland campus (Mooloolaba and Nambour are the primary TAFE campuses on the SC region with satellite campuses in Birtinya and Noosa).  It'll see considerable use during the day and school pick-up hours as well.

Some comments, station by station.

QuoteBeerwah

No bus stop or interchange indicated on the map. There appears to be a bus stop existing there already.

QuoteNirimba (Aura)

Again, no bus stop or interchange indicated on the map.

QuoteCaloundra

Text says bus interchange under the station but not indicated in the concept map, no initial design given, no entry, or exit points for buses indicated. No indication of the size or scale of the interchange (e.g. how many bus bays).

QuoteAroona

Looks good, again would be great if the bus interchange was indicated.

QuoteBirtinya

Difficult site decision. Station could go near the hospital or near the adjacent Shopping Centre but not both. Where will the bus interchange and P&R fit? This is likely going to be a major station but it is next to protected bushland so this raises a lot of questions.

QuoteMountain Creek

'Active transport connection' insufficient. Road overpass or underpass of the motorway should be investigated. This is to allow buses to feed the station and then continue on a logical path to other destinations across the Sunshine Motorway. Not supplying road access would mean reduced P&R catchment, obstructed station access for buses, and permanent circuitous bus routing to approach the station.

QuoteMaroochydore

Terminus - no explanation or indication on the diagram of how the terminus might be extended and whether this design will obstruct or frustrate future rail extension across the Maroochy River. Will trains have to reverse out to continue? Now is a good time to work through that. Leaving this to be sorted out later - $$$.

A quarter of the catchment is also taken up by a landfill.

Another quarter is canal estates, another is Bushland.

Not really convinced about stations located next to high schools as a main drawcard since that's what Ormeau is, and Dakabin.

I wish there was a way to get some metal local road connections in that area because the freeway interchange in the middle of it is just going to ruin everything.

I think TMR needs to do some better integrated transport planning for this area, and perhaps even invest in a new busway and green link across to get it to work.

It does underpin the importance of getting light rail open as well since that will help like the gap if there is a good interchange at SCUH/Stockland

***
Re the terminus.
The intent has always been to have it terminate in the Maroochy CBD, with any line to the airport and Beyond as a separate line on a wye.
In other words, no resumption or tunnel through there.

Personally, if we are taking the polycentric approach to SEQ then Maroochydore is the CBD and all lines can terminate there (DSCRL, light rail, and a 3rd future airport/coolum line.

First newsletter:

https://hdp-au-prod-app-qldtmr-yoursay-files.s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/3416/8922/4734/23_001N_SCPT_DSC_Newsletter_8pp_A4_FA_3_WEB.pdf

Government  still in the preliminary stages:
"Timeframes for detailed design and construction will be determined after this planning is completed."

So, we are not about to begin the planning ... we are considering the future timeframes when that might happen.

  

TMR confirms that the track will be dual (CAMCOS was for a single track only, so some additional land acquisition may be necessary, TMR states.)

This is interesting: "Staging is being considered as part of the current planning. It is possible that not all stations will be constructed at the same time."

Stations built later (at more expense) but the MRI is over-engineered within an inch of its life!!!

Safety net not alternative transport mode!  1-2% mode share here we come!

Quote from: Jonno on July 24, 2023, 07:50:04 AMStations built later (at more expense) but the MRI is over-engineered within an inch of its life!!!

Safety net not alternative transport mode!  1-2% mode share here we come!

I think the station spacing is good so long as there is good last mile options (such as frequent bus routes). It needs to be somewhat competitive with driving.

https://hdp-au-prod-app-qldtmr-yoursay-files.s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/3416/8922/4734/23_001N_SCPT_DSC_Newsletter_8pp_A4_FA_3_WEB.pdf

Page 4

Facebook ...

https://twitter.com/railbotforum/status/1683244717914619904

Notation No. 6 is interesting:

"Reviewing alignment to allow for construction from Beerwah Station. The CAMCOS alignment began at the junction, not at Beerwah Station."

Representations of the CAMCOS/DSCL route in the past showed the line to the coast branching off the main line north of Beerwah Station. It seems new thinking is that the branching off point will be at the station proper, which would require new property acquisitions in the urban area of Beerwah east of the railway line.

The area is where some industrial properties are located now. And just how will the DSCL negotiate under/over Steve Urwin Way? 

https://twitter.com/Jeffrey_Addison/status/1686531179003199492

====
   
Draft ShapingSEQ 2023 Update

https://hdp-au-prod-app-dsdilgp-shapingseq-files.s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/9616/9089/8698/DRAFT_Shaping_SEQ_Regional_Plan_2023_Update.pdf

Page 102 reader (actual 202)

Went to the DSCL community engagement session at Beerwah today. I was told:

The destination of the DSCL (M'dore, Birtinya, or Caloundra) was being explored as part of the business case, but the intention is for it to go to Maroochydore, and then onto the SC Airport. A 'clever design' is being worked on for trains to run into Maroochydore and then reverse out for the airport.

The design speed of the new line (dual tracks) would be 160kph, with an operational speed of 140kph and would be 'faster than a car'.

Stations along the route would have a Sunny Coast 'look and feel' within the overall guidelines for Station Design. Investigations ongoing around TODs and integration of the station precincts with the surrounding suburban environment. This was especially so at Beerwah where the hope was not to have the railway station as a barrier to the rest of the town.

The planned third platform at Beerwah is to be a 'hold point' for the Tilts and freight trains. They will be held at Beerwah while passenger trains roll through to the Coast and to Nambour.

A future station could be built at Beerwah East some time in the future.

As to timetable, that has not been determined.

There will be no passenger transfers at Beerwah (shuttle movements). Trains from Nambour would run through to Brisbane. Trains heading to and from the Coast on the DSCL alignment would do so at a grade-separated junction north of Beerwah Station. A bridge will carry trains over Steve Irwin Way.

I was handed a brochure with ambiguous text that read: "This study (B2N Stage 2) will review the demand on the North Coast Line between Beerburrum and Nambour and refine the scope of Stage 2." When ambiguity exists, I always assume the worse. My thinking is that Stage 2 might not be continuous duplication to Nambour, but a series of longer passing loops on a single track.

North of Nambour is even more ambiguous.

It is a pity they are not all on the same page 

It is interesting that, after letting the DSCL languish in Limbo for ages, the project has come to the fore suddenly. TMR literature states:

"TMR has a blueprint, SEQ Rail Connect, for shaping the rail network to meet the future needs of the South-East Queensland Region... The DSC Rail Line is identified as a priority."

The vagueness of some of the words coming from TMR is cause for concern. For instance, the published documentation states: "In addition to connection to the Sunshine Coast Public Transport project, the DSCL project includes consideration of increased bus services and connections between transport modes, to ensure communities along the route have efficient connections to stations."

The impression conveyed (deliberately) is that the DSCL stations will have interchange facilities, when the only thing being promised is CONSIDERATION of increased bus services connecting to stations.

That consideration is limited: "All station facilities will have accessible parking and direct and efficient access within the station and to connecting modes."

The devil will be in the detail, presumably - when TMR releases the station design in detail, beyond the concept renders.

TMR directly states: Park 'n Ride car parks are currently proposed for Beerwah, Nirimba, Caloundra, Aroona, Birtinya and Mountain Creek. Kiss 'n Ride facilities and bicycle cages would also be provided at each station."

I hope I am very wrong Mr Stillwater.  But I  currently think the project business case will prioritise staging. 

The only stage possible to be completed by 2032 will be Beerwah to Caloundra, outside chance to Birtinya.

If neither Nambour or Caloundra/Birtinya are going to be shuttled (on the basis both get up and is constructed before 2032), then one or the other is going to have to run express from Beerwah to Caboolture, surely the later.  This would allow the former to stop all-stations to Caboolture before continuing south on a half-hourly frequency during peak and hourly outside of peak. 

On an ideal proper upgrade you'd quadruplicate the whole track from Petrie to Caboolture to allow DSCL passenger/Freights/Long Distance to run express without hitting red signals behind a local/Nambour interurban service. 

However, a more realistic target is likely to be triplication from Petrie to Caboolture, although it would NOT surprise me if they leave the Caboolture river bridge as two tracks, similar to the approach to Petrie when it was two tracks on the old bridge before MBRL was operational.

I think they might be shying away from mentioning shuttling, both to allow future operational flexibility, and to avoid community opposition.

I think one option could be to build an extra platform at Caboolture and remove one of the unneeded stabling roads.

DSCRL trains could run Express Beerwah to Caboolture

Nambour shuttles could Terminate at Caboolture, stopping all stations.

It doesn't make sense to have both DSCRL and Nambour services stopping at Glasshouse/Beerburrum/Elimbah, because none of those stations have enough patronage to benefit from the "combined" frequency.

Bit of a tight squeeze, but it might be doable even without the triple. 

Right now in AM peak we top out at 9tph from Caboolture-Nambour (minimum 6 minute headway and 4/9 trains start at Nambour). Then there's another 9tph from Redcliffe. And 2 spare slots for a total of 20.

The timing of running express trains through Petrie-Cabo is a bit tricky in core peak right now for this reason. The Gympie express saves 5 minutes over the all-stops - 1:15 per station. So trying to put it in the middle of a 6-minute all-stops service says we need triplication through and between Narangba and Burpengary stations because that's where the overtake would go. I'm assuming the "overtaken" train is peak-only. In any case we don't have spare capacity to run DSCRL on the mains through Central, so it's all moot.

With CRR we go to 24tph, so 2:30 slots. Now the express saving is equal to a multiple of the slot time.

If we take 1tph off Cabo and Redcliffe, we could have 4tph Nambour-Caboolture, 4tph Caboolture terminator, 8tph Redcliffe, and up to 8tph for DSCRL. I'll assume DSCRL runs express Beerwah-Caboolture-Petrie and then does whatever Caboolture services do south of there. 

I'll think about PM peak from here because it's easier, but AM peak is just the inverse.

If we keep two slots for recovery (so 6tph DSCRL), give Nambour an even 4tph and trade the others off to avoid two 15-minute gaps on DSCRL, our Northgate peak-hour timetable might look like:

Nbr, Red, DSC, Cab, Red, DSC, Nbr, Red, Cab, Red, DSC, spare, then repeat for the second half-hour.

The key feature here is that the DSCRL trains are always preceded by a Redcliffe train going out of Northgate. This means at Petrie, the DSCRL trains have a 5 minute gap in front of them. This is exactly what they need to catch the previous train, and hence they pass it at Caboolture. Having done that, there aren't enough stations between Caboolture and Beerwah that the DSCRL train would catch the previous Nambour service.

If we add an extra station between Caboolture and Petrie then obviously that timing goes out the window. And maybe the Caboolture overtake isn't possible without quadding the bridge.

edit: I'm a goose. The express would catch the all-stopper just north of Morayfield, and similarly just south of Dakabin in the morning. Still, it goes to show that we can pick and choose timing a bit to economise on track amplification in the short term.

https://twitter.com/ozbob13/status/1688571046730043392

It is definitely possible to have the line built to Maroochydore by early 2032, but we will need a highly experienced construction team (which is not a concern) and a Government with desire and want to get it built and stop f&$king about.

The latter is a massive concern as I have zero trust in that grub of a human and politician Bailey. Unfortunately I'm expecting more games.

Estimates Pre-hearing Question on Notice

https://documents.parliament.qld.gov.au/com/TRC-645B/C20232024-8423/Pre-hearing%20Question%20on%20Notice%20-%20Bailey.pdf

Question No. 1
Asked on 17 July 2023

The Transport and Resources Committee asked the Minister for Transport and Main Roads and
Minister for Digital Services (HON M BAILEY) —

QUESTION:

With reference to the Queensland Transport and Roads Investment Program (Q-TRIP)
mentioned on Page 8 of budget paper 3. Q-TRIP allocates $14 million additional funds towards
a detailed business case for the Direct Sunshine Coast Line. Can the Minister advise the
Committee why additional planning for the Direct Sunshine Coast line is necessary?

ANSWER:

I thank the Committee for the question.

The Direct Sunshine Coast Rail Line project proposes a 37km spur line between Beerwah and
Maroochydore that would provide a fast, reliable and environmentally sustainable heavy rail
connection between the Sunshine Coast, Moreton Bay and Brisbane regions.

The Queensland Government recognises the importance of this rail line which is why
$14 million was allocated to complete a detailed business case for the project. A detailed
business case is necessary, as it is the final stage of planning—under the Queensland
Government's Project Assessment Framework—before a funding decision can be made for
delivery of a major infrastructure project – a critical assessment step for major projects in
Queensland.

The Caboolture to Maroochydore Corridor Study (CAMCOS) protected the corridor based on a
single-track configuration in 2001. Since the CAMCOS study, Queensland's rail network has
changed, and the Sunshine Coast has experienced significant population growth with more than
half a million people expected to call it home by 2041. Detailed business case investigations are
underway based on a two-track configuration to provide reliable, faster and more frequent rail
services to meet this increased population and demand.

I am advised that the subsequent North-Coast Connect study was also based on a single track
proposal, which is why further planning is not only appropriate but necessary to inform an
investment decision.

Planning for 37km of new rail corridor is not a small task – careful consideration must be given
as to how this rail link will connect with the existing rail and broader public transport network.
This will involve consultation with the community and key stakeholders, and detailed planning
work which includes consideration of surrounding properties, and the surrounding road, bus and
active transport networks.

The detailed business case will consider modern rail design, safe rail operations, station
locations, train stabling, signalling and construction staging to provide detailed costings.
Pre-delivery work, such as environmental surveys and geotechnical investigations, are also
being brought forward into this business case stage.

The detailed business case will be completed in late 2023 with business case outcomes to be
considered by the Queensland and Australian governments in 2024. The business case is fully
funded by the Queensland Government.

Good to hear the progress and rationale.

Quote from: Fares_Fair on August 08, 2023, 14:37:01 PMGood to hear the progress and rationale.

Great to see traction on this project after decades of inactivity. I just hope he is not lying as is often the case!

I also hope corners are not cut (ie Trains to Caloundra only).

I will be talking to ABC Sunshine Coast radio about the Direct Sunshine Coast Line this morning at around 8:40am.

Quote from: Fares_Fair on August 09, 2023, 08:22:27 AMI will be talking to ABC Sunshine Coast radio about the Direct Sunshine Coast Line this morning at around 8:40am.

 

Quote from: Fares_Fair on August 09, 2023, 08:22:27 AMI will be talking to ABC Sunshine Coast radio about the Direct Sunshine Coast Line this morning at around 8:40am.

Now rescheduled to tomorrow at 8:40am for prime-time discussion.

Has there been any confirmation around building 9-car capable stations?

Even with CRR there aren't that many spare slots for DSCRL, so 9-car provision might be needed relatively soon if patronage takes off.

Quote from: aldonius on August 09, 2023, 09:30:52 AMHas there been any confirmation around building 9-car capable stations?

Even with CRR there aren't that many spare slots for DSCRL, so 9-car provision might be needed relatively soon if patronage takes off.

Not to my knowledge. That detail should be in the business case due by the end of this year.