RAIL - Back On Track Forum

Quote

QuoteYou're not going to be building a TOD next to a highway.

Freeway should be removed/converted to public transport only and only then the TOD (or as I call them "a Neighbourhood) built.

It would be great to have a high capacity thoroughfare (i.e. public transport) along the M1/M3/busway. The big problem is that it's a trunk with a lot of car-centric branches. Mains Rd (and Beaudesert Rd by connection), Logan Road, Cornwall/Juliette Street and Ipswich Road are major connecting branches to that trunk that I'm most familiar with, that don't have great public transport. For example, getting from, say, Browns Plains to the PA Hospital could take 90 minutes on public transport end to end.

One idea could be to build big, convenient carparks at the end of some those roads so people can transfer onto high capacity public transport, I guess kind of like the Macgregor Multistory Park n Ride but bigger. This is very expensive (think $20k+ per carpark on a multistory). The other problem is that it dooms the outer 'burbs to car centricity due to sunk cost.

Another idea is building out really great, convenient public transport, like the Sunnybank to Browns Plains corridor, Annerley to Salisbury, Flagstone line, Logan Road to Mount Gravatt, Old Cleveland Road to Carindale/Capalaba, and all the routes that I inevitably missed. Also better active transport all round so people can walk, ride and scoot to their nearest station. Most of that would be dedicated BRT/LRT. I would think that would be the path to a "pie in the sky" freeway conversion, whatever that may look like.

Long post but the point was it would not be politically/socially palatable to build an R1 at least without way better connections.

Thanks for your thoughts andrewr. A redesign of the Logan buses would be a great idea if the R1 concept were to be investigated further.

Gold coast part of the line will be fed by the expanding Light Rail and extra stations as part of CRR.

The point of an R1 is not, I think, to replace the existing busway - but rather to provide a high-capacity express overlay for it.

Of course, building R1 would make LGCFR a bit redundant really. I see LGCFR as an admission that there's no plans for an R1 at state level, and rather that if there's to be a substantially faster corridor to the Gold Coast it will be as part of national HSR.

Top speed so far on NG in QLD is 210 km/hr, not compatible with the higher level speeds of HSR. So track gauge would very likely be different. Would HSR fit inside CRR given this?

The other thing is whether works to the Beenleigh line could ever bring it up to a standard where Gold coast trains could run at an average speed of 120 km/hr along it. It seems unlikely, even after LGCFR concludes.

That said, proper study would be able to answer that and the HSR question.

I think medium term, we get an "okay" GC line that serves as a sort of RER for logan and the GC.
 I've given up that a true fast service on the narrow gauge QR system will happen, but I think LGCFR might be able to do enough track slewing in the corridor to get some improvements to current speeds, as well as a better timetable that doesn't need to sandbag to match in with all stoppers.
There's just not enough detail in the plans yet.

And then longer term as part of a national HSR system you get a service that say stops at Brisbane, Yatala, Coomera, Robina only. The route that HSR takes into Brisbane is up for debate. Could follow the M1, could be a non stop tunnel. Who knows.

If that HSR happens, you could then probably add extra stops to the existing gold coast line and turn it into the local suburban service for the GC.

Want a faster journey to Brisbane? Change at Coomera or Robina.

Infrastructure Australia has put the Business Case on their website.
https://www.infrastructureaustralia.gov.au/sites/default/files/2022-10/Evaluation%20Summary%20-%20Logan%20and%20Gold%20Coast%20Faster%20Rail.pdf

So, the BCR was calculated at P50, which means the project has a 50% chance of coming in at a higher cost. At 7% its negative. At 4% it just breaks even. Any cost increase will likely wipe out the benefits. It is difficult to imagine the stations, ballast, signalling, rail etc all surviving in good order without all having been replaced before the given 57-year appraisal period.

IA also notes that as it is not a new corridor, it is unlikely to contribute much to mode shift (+3% by 2041). While level crossing removal is welcome, this does not seem to be a project that provides the quantum of benefits that will move the dial on mode share.

Quote from: IAIn 2022, both the Australian Government and Queensland Government committed a total of $1.3 billion each, for a total funding of $2.6 billion towards delivery of the project.

I got my voodoo dolls and magic mushroom powders out and got a completely different BCR!!!!  I also assessed a widening of the M1 and the BCR is 100 billion trillion % with traffic guaranteed to never be congested again...oh and it also saved 12 billion minutes of the daily commute.

Its all BS.

Just need to look out the window to know its all made up hokery pokery that created todays mess.

The road option offers the faster trip in the off-peak, which is why it is the preferred mode.
The M1 carries ~40 million trips per year, far higher than what the Gold Coast and Beenleigh lines carry combined.

If we want to change that, the time gap needs to be narrowed or closed.
Time-Equivalence. No conspiracy required.

Caution on the business case.  The evaluation date was September 2022, not sure if IA had been sorted out by then.  New Government was elected May 2022.  IA business case evaluation favours roads rather then other other transport options, been a lot of discussion about this.

Politics trumps the lot sadly. 

#justsaying

IA Favourable PT Business Case - Perth Morley-Ellenbrook Line

Quote from: Infrastructure AustraliaOn 7 April 2020, the METRONET: Morley-Ellenbrook Line Project was added to the Infrastructure Priority List as a Priority Project.

Here is IA's assessment of the Morley-Ellenbrook line in Perth. Shows a positive BCR and higher NPV at the 7% rate.
So good PT projects absolutely can pass through the IA process. Might be some debate about certain parameters (e.g. appropriate asset life), which I acknowledge.



How does TransPerth and the WA PTA manage to do this? I think it has to do with the very rigorous selection of the project and the mode against alternatives. What do we know about the LGFR project selection and analysis process from the Queensland Government? Not much it seems.




Source: https://www.infrastructureaustralia.gov.au/sites/default/files/2020-05/morley_ellenbrook_project_evaluation_summary.pdf

14th June 2023: Making tracks towards transforming the SEQ rail network

https://statements.qld.gov.au/statements/97950

QuoteThe QTRIP 2023-24 to 2026-27 includes rail infrastructure investments such as:

$4.869 billion Queensland Train Manufacturing Program 1804
$2.598 billion towards Logan and Gold Coast Faster Rail (jointly funded with the Australian Government) 2365067
$550.8 million Beerburrum to Nambour Rail Upgrade (Stage 1) (jointly funded with the Australian Government) 858087
$500 million New Gold Coast Stations (Pimpama, Hope Island, Merrimac) 2316082
QTRIP 2023-24 to 2026-27 also features a $4.3 billion investment led by Queensland Rail including close to $300 million towards continue the South-East Queensland Station Accessibility Upgrade Program.

If the Federal Labor Govt withdraws the funding for the K2B upgrade (unlikely) I am now confident the state will push on is my hunch. Just a pity it is shrouded in bulldust, as for most matters Queensland.

#Metro  the quality of business cases produced by Queensland are also substandard, particularly for rail projects.  Until we get the sort of organisational frameworks that work at a state level (eg. WA), it will remain substandard.

Quote from: Gazza on August 24, 2023, 16:51:37 PMI think medium term, we get an "okay" GC line that serves as a sort of RER for logan and the GC.
 I've given up that a true fast service on the narrow gauge QR system will happen, but I think LGCFR might be able to do enough track slewing in the corridor to get some improvements to current speeds, as well as a better timetable that doesn't need to sandbag to match in with all stoppers.
There's just not enough detail in the plans yet.

And then longer term as part of a national HSR system you get a service that say stops at Brisbane, Yatala, Coomera, Robina only. The route that HSR takes into Brisbane is up for debate. Could follow the M1, could be a non stop tunnel. Who knows.

If that HSR happens, you could then probably add extra stops to the existing gold coast line and turn it into the local suburban service for the GC.

Want a faster journey to Brisbane? Change at Coomera or Robina.

Curious as to why you'd have Coomera rather than Helensvale, considering the considerably higher interchange options at Helensvale (especially light rail).

^I figure by the time Australia gets HSR we would have more LR lines on the GC.

At the very least I would expect that Robina would be the "main" GC stop for long distance services, and the LR would be there by the late 2030s.

Was a rough notional list, but yeah Helensvale probably would make more sense.

https://statements.qld.gov.au/statements/98897

Exciting step forward for the Logan and Gold Coast Faster Rail project

11th October 2023

Minister for Transport and Main Roads and Minister for Digital Services
The Honourable Mark Bailey

Exciting step forward for the Logan and Gold Coast Faster Rail project

. The next phase of procurement for the Logan and Gold Coast Faster Rail project, including the Loganlea Station Relocation project, is ready to commence following strong interest from industry.

. The Logan and Gold Coast Faster Rail project will double the number of tracks between Kuraby and Beenleigh and connect growing communities with more frequent and reliable train services.

. Requests for Proposals will be released to accepted industry registrants this month and is a key step towards delivery of this major rail project.

The Logan and Gold Coast Faster Rail project is taking exciting steps forward with three major packages of work moving to the next phase of procurement.

Through the Registration of Interest process, the Department of Transport and Main Roads (TMR) received strong interest from industry and has multiple parties registered for each package.

TMR will soon release Requests for Proposals to accepted registrants for the Logan and Gold Coast Faster Rail Project Level Crossing Removal Package and Rail Package.

The Level Crossing Removal package will remove existing level crossings at Beenleigh Road at Kuraby station and Station Road at Bethania station and improve safety for these local communities. These works will be delivered through a collaborative design and construct contract.

The Rail package will deliver the major rail works between Kuraby and Beenleigh including duplicating the tracks from two to four, station upgrades, the remaining level crossing removals, local road works and active transport connections. The design and construction of this complex brownfield project will be delivered through an alliance contract.

TMR is also inviting Expressions of Interest from registrants for the Loganlea Station Relocation Project. This project will relocate and upgrade Loganlea train station and park 'n' ride to better connect customers with nearby health, education and community services – particularly Logan Hospital.

The Logan and Gold Coast Faster Rail and Loganlea Station Relocation projects are jointly funded by the Australian and Queensland and governments. The procurement and delivery timeframes for the project remain subject to further approvals by the Australian and Queensland governments.

Quotes attributable to Minister for Transport and Main Roads, Mark Bailey:

"Kickstarting the procurement process is an exciting milestone for industry and for customers and communities who will benefit from this major investment in rail.

"The Logan and Gold Coast Faster Rail and Loganlea Station Relocation projects remain a high priority for the Queensland Government to improve rail services between some of South East Queensland's fastest growing cities and deliver integrated transport outcomes for local communities.

"Currently, all services on the Gold Coast and Beenleigh lines are constrained by single tracks in each direction between Kuraby and Beenleigh.

"Once finalised, these projects will connect growing communities with more frequent and reliable train services between Brisbane, Logan and the Gold Coast.

"The projects will improve accessibility at stations, provide safer connections across the rail corridor for the community, and provide an improved active transport corridor and facilities for pedestrians and cyclists."

For further information about the Logan and Gold Coast Faster Rail and Loganlea Station Relocation projects please visit tmr.gov.au

ENDS

Am I the only one who thinks the relocated Loganlea station actually removes the opportunity to create a connection between a BRT or eventually Light Rail on Loganlea Rd..all for a bigger car park!!

Car brain is strong in TMR

https://www.tmr.qld.gov.au/_/media/projects/l/loganlea-station-relocation/loganlea-station-relocation-and-park-n-ride-expansion-project-september-2020.pdf?sc_lang=en

Quote from: Jonno on October 11, 2023, 19:01:50 PMAm I the only one who thinks the relocated Loganlea station actually removes the opportunity to create a connection between a BRT or eventually Light Rail on Loganlea Rd..all for a bigger car park!!

Car brain is strong in TMR

https://www.tmr.qld.gov.au/_/media/projects/l/loganlea-station-relocation/loganlea-station-relocation-and-park-n-ride-expansion-project-september-2020.pdf?sc_lang=en

I think you've missed several key points here.

• The current station isn't easily accessible from Loganlea Rd, due to the overpass design. I don't see the new location will change that much.
• The current station doesn't meet accessibility standards, so it needs to be rebuilt anyway.
• Even if it did meet accessibility standards, it would still need to be rebuilt to accommodate 4 platforms.
• Finally, this relocation improves walkability to two of the largest trip generators in the area, Logan Hospital and Loganlea TAFE. The other one is the university, but it's too far to comfortably walk either way.

It's not all about PnR, at all.

QuoteOnce finalised, these projects will connect growing communities with more frequent and reliable train services between Brisbane, Logan and the Gold Coast.

Anyone notice the missing word - speed?

 

Quote from: achiruel on October 11, 2023, 20:24:42 PM

Quote from: Jonno on October 11, 2023, 19:01:50 PMAm I the only one who thinks the relocated Loganlea station actually removes the opportunity to create a connection between a BRT or eventually Light Rail on Loganlea Rd..all for a bigger car park!!

Car brain is strong in TMR

https://www.tmr.qld.gov.au/_/media/projects/l/loganlea-station-relocation/loganlea-station-relocation-and-park-n-ride-expansion-project-september-2020.pdf?sc_lang=en

I think you've missed several key points here.

• The current station isn't easily accessible from Loganlea Rd, due to the overpass design. I don't see the new location will change that much.
• The current station doesn't meet accessibility standards, so it needs to be rebuilt anyway.
• Even if it did meet accessibility standards, it would still need to be rebuilt to accommodate 4 platforms.
• Finally, this relocation improves walkability to two of the largest trip generators in the area, Logan Hospital and Loganlea TAFE. The other one is the university, but it's too far to comfortably walk either way.

It's not all about PnR, at all.

it's a mute point since whole line from Loganlea to Beenleigh is in the wrong bloody place!

Quoteit's a mute point since whole line from Loganlea to Beenleigh is in the wrong bloody place!

And the alternative alignment is?

There is also this report which I have not seen published

QuoteThe Queensland government is working on two separate business cases for futuristic 160km/h Fast Rail links in the state's south-east.

^ Not the GCLFR project as that will only achieve an average speed of ~ 60 km/hr, so this proposal is a separate thing.

QuoteThe second $22 million business case examines a link between Brisbane and the Gold Coast.

Ticket to ride at 160km/h as Queensland works on two Fast Rail cases
https://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/national/queensland/ticket-to-ride-at-160km-h-as-queensland-works-on-two-fast-rail-cases-20200902-p55rst.html

The Sunshine Coast one got published at least, that was championed by Ted Obrien

Quote from: #Metro on October 11, 2023, 23:32:27 PM

Quoteit's a mute point since whole line from Loganlea to Beenleigh is in the wrong bloody place!

And the alternative alignment is? 

Anywhere that actually has stops adjacent to commerical centres and surrounded by residential development.   Doubling down on a bad alignment is poor value in my book. 

QuoteAnywhere that actually has stops adjacent to commerical centres and surrounded by residential development.  Doubling down on a bad alignment is poor value in my book.

I agree, hence R1 proposal.

That's a great concept, but we would need to go in with an actual view, as in a line on a map. This suggestion isn't quite there yet.

Do you have a line on a map suggestion?

I Think Jonno mentioned previously about swinging the line more to follow roughly Logan River Road to get it more centralised in the current mass of development instead of stations on the eastern edge near the river.
https://www.google.com/maps/@-27.7093848,153.1592245,3089m/data=!3m1!1e3?entry=ttu

The issue though is that road is quite undulating and goes up a huge hill, so it would be fairly deep underground...See streetview
https://www.google.com/maps/@-27.7112138,153.1632736,3a,43y,287.48h,91.25t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1saFg-0bXMuuTzeC182t1u-A!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DaFg-0bXMuuTzeC182t1u-A%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D70.030525%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu

So although the location is more central, its probably less walkable due to having a taxing walk to get up to the station.

I think at this point the planning is pretty well committed for quadding the current line and the thinking is more about frequency than speed sadly (But I think some improvements will come about through less sandbagging) and getting it working efficiently.

For ACTUAL fast rail, I think that should probably be a standard gauge line from Roma St to Robina initially, and can form part of a future national fast rail system.

Quote from: Gazza on October 12, 2023, 10:23:14 AMI Think Jonno mentioned previously about swinging the line more to follow roughly Logan River Road to get it more centralised in the current mass of development instead of stations on the eastern edge near the river.
https://www.google.com/maps/@-27.7093848,153.1592245,3089m/data=!3m1!1e3?entry=ttu

The issue though is that road is quite undulating and goes up a huge hill, so it would be fairly deep underground...See streetview
https://www.google.com/maps/@-27.7112138,153.1632736,3a,43y,287.48h,91.25t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1saFg-0bXMuuTzeC182t1u-A!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DaFg-0bXMuuTzeC182t1u-A%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D70.030525%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu

So although the location is more central, its probably less walkable due to having a taxing walk to get up to the station.

I think at this point the planning is pretty well committed for quadding the current line and the thinking is more about frequency than speed sadly (But I think some improvements will come about through less sandbagging) and getting it working efficiently.

For ACTUAL fast rail, I think that should probably be a standard gauge line from Roma St to Robina initially, and can form part of a future national fast rail system.

Quite a hill isn't it.  65-70m. Nothing is going to change I know that as TMR is not really interested nor know how to truly build public transport (no disrespect to the Translink team).  Sydney now gets it and is spending billions ro get it far better if not almost right.

Quote from: Jonno on October 11, 2023, 19:01:50 PMAm I the only one who thinks the relocated Loganlea station actually removes the opportunity to create a connection between a BRT or eventually Light Rail on Loganlea Rd..all for a bigger car park!!

A bit off topic, but I would not route any high frequency bus routes/BRT through Meadowbrook/Loganlea straight down Loganlea Road anyway.

On the Meadowbrook side of the rail line, firstly the various turning lanes between Edenlea Drive and the rail line (which include ones used to access Logan Hospital Emergency and Carpark areas) do not give you any opportunity to place sizeable stops in that area on solid ground. You could expand or duplicate the Loganlea Road overpass and located a station on the approach of that (taking out the new park LCC is currently building beside the approach), but that seems like it would be a very expensive option to pursue.

That aside, the current route around Edenlea Drive gives you stops at the front door of Logan Hospital, of Logan TAFE, along the residential area behind the hospital and TAFE, and also right at the front of one of the two planned private hospitals on the corner of Loganlea Road and Edenlea Drive. With the moving of Loganlea Station, you're consolidating the rail/bus interchange with the existing Hospital and TAFE bus stops, and also providing better access to Loganlea State High via the Station footbridge, a location the buses currently don't directly service - the nearest stop being the current train station stop 500m away.

South of the rail line through Loganlea, if you go down Loganlea Road, very much like the rail line, you have all your potential passengers on one side and many somewhat distant to the road, with largely flood-affected land on the other. This is why the 550, 562 and 560 all use some or all of Haig Road instead, as that runs down as close to the centre of that residential area as the road network allows (and also services the IGA Local Shopping Centre), and does somewhat service the Coles at Waterford, which is completely missed by going down Loganlea Road. 

Quote from: Jonno on October 11, 2023, 19:01:50 PMAm I the only one who thinks the relocated Loganlea station actually removes the opportunity to create a connection between a BRT or eventually Light Rail on Loganlea Rd..all for a bigger car park!!

Car brain is strong in TMR

https://www.tmr.qld.gov.au/_/media/projects/l/loganlea-station-relocation/loganlea-station-relocation-and-park-n-ride-expansion-project-september-2020.pdf?sc_lang=en

I think the bigger park'n'ride is a mistake and typical TMR thinking, but achiruel's right about the destinations nearby. The residential walk-up for a relocated Loganlea station will be worse, but it will be much more of a destination station. So I think that was the logic behind moving it. That, and the track is straighter.

It goes without saying that the size of what's currently the Logan Hospital car park is a joke, and there's a million other things they could (should) do with that space to improve connectivity to Loganlea Rd. There's also the old station carparks themselves - I don't want to use the term TOD for such a small area - but the world will not end if there's apartment buildings there. Meadowbrook in general is probably a lot more redevelopable than whatever's (not) going on in old-Loganlea.

Quote from: AnonymouslyBad on October 15, 2023, 14:04:20 PMIt goes without saying that the size of what's currently the Logan Hospital car park is a joke, and there's a million other things they could (should) do with that space to improve connectivity to Loganlea Rd.

Considering the carpark only opened in February last year, and at great expense, I think it's highly unlikely it anything will be replacing it any time soon.

https://documents.parliament.qld.gov.au/tableOffice/questionsAnswers/2023/1138-2023.pdf

Question on Notice
No. 1138
Asked on 14 September 2023

MR D CRISAFULLI ASKED MINISTER FOR TRANSPORT AND MAIN ROADS AND MINISTER FOR DIGITIAL SERVICES (HON M BAILEY)

QUESTION:

With reference to the Logan and Gold Coast Faster Rail project and advice provided at estimates
in 2022 that 'tenders for design and construction [are] expected to be released throughout 2023'
(Question on Notice No. 11)—
Will the Minister provide a list of design and construction tenders released this year, or to be
released this year, and for each (a) whether the contract is for design or construction, (b) the
deliverables for each contract and (c) the date that the contract was, or is planned, to be awarded?

ANSWER:

I thank the Member for Broadwater for the question.

The Logan and Gold Coast Faster Rail (LGC) project will improve rail services between some of
Australia's fastest growing cities by addressing track and rail system constraints towards Logan
and the Gold Coast. The LGC project involves key infrastructure investments to help Queensland
get ready for the Brisbane 2032 Olympic and Paralympic Games, while delivering integrated
transport outcomes for local communities.

The LGC project will double the number of tracks between Kuraby and Beenleigh and deliver
modernised rail systems, station upgrades, level crossing removals and signalling works to
support the growing population and rail patronage demand between Brisbane, Logan and the
Gold Coast. It will be delivered through multiple works packages to best draw on industry
capability and deliver benefits for customers and the community.

Following on from a Registration of Interest process in August 2023, the Palaszczuk Government
is progressing three major packages of work moving to the next phase of procurement. On
10 October 2023, the Department of Transport and Main Roads (TMR) released Requests for
Proposals to accepted registrants for the Logan and Gold Coast Faster Rail Project Level
Crossing Removal Package and Rail Package, as well as Expressions of Interest for the Loganlea
Station Relocation. These procurement activities are key steps towards delivery of this major rail
initiative, with delivery timeframes subject to further approvals by the Australian and Queensland
governments.

The Level Crossing Removal package will remove existing level crossings at Beenleigh Road at
Kuraby station and Station Road at Bethania station and improve safety for these local
communities. These works will be delivered through a collaborative design and construct
contract.
The rail package will deliver the major rail works between Kuraby and Beenleigh, including
duplicating the tracks from two to four, station upgrades, the remaining level crossing removals,
local road works and active transport connections. The design and construction of this complex
brownfield project will be delivered through an alliance contract.

TMR is also inviting Expressions of Interest from registrants for construction of the Loganlea
Station Relocation Project. This project will relocate and upgrade Loganlea train station and
park 'n' ride to better connect customers with nearby health, education and community services—
particularly Logan Hospital, Loganlea TAFE and Loganlea State High School.

Procurements of this nature generally take between 12 and 24 months from commencement to
contract execution.

Now that I have seen them progress so quickly on the Coomera Connector, has there been any work done on the Trinder Park section and the relocation of Loganlea station as yet?

Hasn't gone out to tender even, so nowhere near starting.

There has been a number of house acquisitions and demolitions between Kingston and Kuraby, which probably needs to continue before any other required works can commence.

Updated plans have been released! Beenleigh Station is being moved back to where it originally was.

https://www.yoursay-projects.tmr.qld.gov.au/logan-and-gold-coast-faster-rail

Definitely, a better option for Beenleigh.

They should fast track Loganlea and Beenleigh stations as well as the Trinder Park section to have to open in time for CRR commissioning. This can hopefully improve reliability, operations and decrease travel times.

Looking at Beenleigh specifically, it seems like they have a massive park n ride planned similar to that of Springfield.

And you get park n ride and you get a par k n ride everyone gets a park n ride. 1960,s transport planning

The drawings are just a sea of cars It so Out of Touch!!!!!!

And what is with the over-engineered pedestrian overpasses when a simple underpass will suffice!!!

They forgotten how to google?

Nice they put the station on Soudain street.

QuoteAnd you get park n ride and you get a par k n ride everyone gets a park n ride. 1960,s transport planning

The drawings are just a sea of cars It so Out of Touch!!!!!!

I am guessing some of this 'time saving' will be due to the station physically moving north then?

TOD seems like it is doable on the opposite side, would encourage you to submit feedback Jonno --->

Logan and Gold Coast Faster Rail
https://www.yoursay-projects.tmr.qld.gov.au/logan-and-gold-coast-faster-rail

Quote from: nathandavid88 on November 13, 2023, 18:22:26 PMUpdated plans have been released! Beenleigh Station is being moved back to where it originally was.

https://www.yoursay-projects.tmr.qld.gov.au/logan-and-gold-coast-faster-rail

That was one of the suggestions RBoT made in our submission.

> https://hdp-au-prod-app-qldtmr-yoursay-files.s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/4616/9940/7469/BeenleighStation_Factsheet_V10_accessibility.pdf

I think the bus station should be far closer to the station entrance.

Facebook ...