Article: Port of Brisbane may hold key for bypass success

[ozbob]

From the Toowoomba Telegraph 16th February 2013 page 1

Port of Brisbane may hold key for bypass success

From the Toowoomba Telegraph 16th February 2013 page 1
Port of Brisbane may hold key for bypass success
By Chris Leslight

THE Port of Brisbane has emerged as one of the keys to the second Range crossing ever being built in Toowoomba.

A number of key stake-holders - including Infrastructure Australia's national infrastructure co-ordinator Michael Deegan alluded at last week's Seal the Deal forum that for the business case for building the second Range crossing to succeed,it needed to support the needs of the Port of Brisbane.

During his presentation Mr Deegan, who is the Prime Minister's advisor on infrastructure, said: "The Port of Brisbane is a very important factor that I think is overlooked by Range (bypass) proponents."

"In a strategic context, Toowoomba ticks a lot of the boxes, but in my honest advice you need to do a lot more work on the business case," he said.

"I am keen to work with you, but there needs to be hard numbers and work around what comes out of the Surat Basin in terms of agricultural, mining and other products."

Port of Brisbane chief executive officer Russell Smith described the port as "the fundamental engine of Queensland international trade", handling trade annually valued at around 20 per cent of Queensland's gross state product.

"It is not a well-known fact, but 40 to 50 per cent of the volume going through the port of the Brisbane is from Toowoomba and further west," Mr Smith said. "This is a very significant number for Queensland, that can't be neglected going forward."

"A Range bypass is essential," he said.

Mr Smith also believes that Toowoomba has the potential to become an intermodal transport hub by adding rail to the mix. "There's been a lack of focus on freight rail development in south-east Queensland for the last 30 years, with the majority of investment having been in road access to the port,"

"Our road network is adequate heading west until we hit the foot of the Range; but we have a rail system which frankly is a drag on our state's performance," he said. "It was built in the 1880s and despite some small modifications it is fundamentally the same route."

"This must change. If we don't address this situation quickly, we as a population of the South-East will suffer from increasing levels of truck congestion with related road safety and general liveability issues arising.

"We need to design a modem intermodal system feeding out of and into the Port of Brisbane which adequately mixes rail, road and coastal shipping. The port has plenty of room to expand. We have just passed one million tons; with our projections showing we will quickly double to two million teus and four million teus in less than 25 years ... we are quickly heading towards a debacle if a dedicated freight rail solution for the south-east to service the port is not implemented quickly."

[ozbob]

... we are quickly heading towards a debacle if a dedicated freight rail solution for the south-east to service the port is not implemented quickly."

debacle is here ...

[Mozz]

Can anyone please explain what the benefits of a second range crossing would be .... apart from providing an alternate route when the inevitable crash occurs on the down section of the range (generally due to human error). Thanks.

[somebody]

Can anyone please explain what the benefits of a second range crossing would be .... apart from providing an alternate route when the inevitable crash occurs on the down section of the range (generally due to human error). Thanks.

Pretty sure that they mean a "new rail range crossing".  Would allow longer trains and probably with less power per unit weight being pulled.  And faster transit times.

[Mozz]

Ahh thanks for that, here is me thinking it's a road crossing 

[Stillwater]

Michael Deegan: "In a strategic context, Toowoomba ticks a lot of the boxes, but in my honest advice you need to do a lot more work on the business case."

Business case not up to scratch and is undercooked.  'Shovel ready' projects with completed business case still at the top of the list.

Question:  Has a business case being prepared for the revised Brisbane Inner Rail Solution?

If it has no business case, the business case for full-strength CRR project no longer applies and the Toowoomba Second Range Crossing needs 'a lot more work', are we in a situation where Queensland now has no business cases before IA, in the form that IA feels confident to make a recommendation for federal funding towards a major infrastructure project in Queensland?

Has Queensland shot itself in the foot and now wishes to cover up with some manufactured stouch about feds versus state on funding?

[somebody]

Ahh thanks for that, here is me thinking it's a road crossing 

That is something they want too.  coliinw has posted that it would allow a Twba bypass.  Perhaps it would be safer, although it's not clear how that would be achieved.

[petey3801]

Can anyone please explain what the benefits of a second range crossing would be .... apart from providing an alternate route when the inevitable crash occurs on the down section of the range (generally due to human error). Thanks.

Pretty sure that they mean a "new rail range crossing".  Would allow longer trains and probably with less power per unit weight being pulled.  And faster transit times.

As I understand it, it is mostly a new road range crossing. The last half of that article is basically saying the Government(s) and other people involved need to also look at a new rail range crossing, or face more and more gridlock and less money in exports etc.

But, as far as I am aware, the main project is a road crossing of the Range.

[ozbob]

From the Couriermail 25th May 2013 page 24

Rail freight route in plan

[Golliwog]

Any idea how that stacks up time-wise with the existing shared freight-passenger route?

Providing dedicated freight tracks is good, and as I understand it, the Rosewood-Kagaru section already has a reserved corridor (?) but it just looks like a bit of a large detour to the south to then head north again.

I guess though, planning to run it along next to the Centenary Motorway, then along the Logan Motorway then onto the Gateway section would be politically unpalatable as I can't imagine the locals at Springfield (or the developers at Ripley) being particularly fond of the idea.

[Jonno]

The route makes more sense when the Large Freight Hub at Bromelton is added.  Can play a Dry-Port role with ships unloaded direct to train the to inland port for redistribution. Means no stacking of containers at Wet Port.

[mufreight]

The concept was originaly proposed about the same time that the connection between the Logan Motorway and the Gateway was built.  The original proposal was if I remember correctly a stand gauge only link so it predated the proposal to dual gauge between Acacia Ridge and Bromelton.

[SteelPan]

Ahh thanks for that, here is me thinking it's a road crossing 

YES, the 2nd Range Crossing is, in theory, intended to be BOTH a new road and a new rail crossing.  Both, particularly the rail, are in urgent need of improvement - the reality is, either is likely still 10yrs away, even with "progressive" will toward them.