Light Rail for Brisbane!!

[ozbob]

Greetings,

Some great news!!

The Sunday Mail has an interesting story today.  http://www.news.com.au/sundaymail/story/0,23739,22074554-3102,00.html

The matter of interest is a plan for Light Rail in Brisbane,  Yay!!  To be integrated with QR and Bus.

The piece on the Light Rail is not online.  But I have scanned in map for your reading pleasure.


Light rail piece ---> http://backontrack.org/docs/SundayMailBrisbane15thJuly2007p10v2.pdf

RAIL Back On Track has been lobbying hard for light rail. 

I met with the Chairperson of BCC Transport last year and raised this as the best option.  Whether or not that had an impact we will never know, but by raising it as the sustainable solution at every opportunity it keeps momentum towards the best outcomes for the community.

I heard a whisper late last week that is was going to break over the weekend. I would expect some Premier/Ministerial statements later today.

Regards
Ozbob

[ozbob]

The Smart Cities: rethinking the city centre report presents a vision for planning Brisbane as a centrepiece for the Smart State. It focuses on planning the city centre around existing creative, cultural, education and research precincts and aims to improve the connections across the city centre for the Brisbane community.

--> http://www.smartstate.qld.gov.au/partnerships/ss_councilreports.shtm


Word version and a PDF available there.

-----------------------
Smart State Council

--> http://www.smartstate.qld.gov.au/partnerships/ss_council.shtm

[ozbob]

Here it is!

Joint Statement:

Premier and Minister for Trade
The Honourable Peter Beattie

Deputy Premier, Treasurer and Minister for Infrastructure
The Honourable Anna Bligh
15/07/2007

BEATTIE'S SMART STATE VISION FOR AUSTRALIA'S KNOWLEDGE CITY

Premier Peter Beattie today unveiled his vision to turn the Smart State capital into Australia's Knowledge City, with a network of precincts linked by a series of pedestrian bridges, making Brisbane one of the most pedestrian-friendly cities in the world.

The vision centres on linking South Bank and the CBD with Kelvin Grove and Bulimba through four cross-river pedestrian bridges, inner-city pedestrian links and a light rail network that would stretch from South Brisbane to New Farm and possibly Bowen Hills.

Mr Beattie said a new report - Smart Cities: rethinking the city centre - produced by the Smart State Council highlighted the need for the current fragmented approach to planning the future shape of the CBD and the inner-city to end.

"Great cities don't have dead ends. My vision is to establish a Knowledge Corridor that will bring Brisbane's world-class learning and cultural facilities closer to the people of the city," Mr Beattie said.

"The Smart State Council, which I established to provide high level external advice to Government on Smart State issues and trends, has produced a detailed report on how we can enhance the State's capital and connect the lifestyle hubs of the city.

"The central part of the strategy is a series of three pedestrian 'spines' that will link areas of high-density residential development and the major workplace centres with educational, cultural, shopping, lifestyle and entertainment facilities," he said.

Deputy Premier Anna Bligh said a new pedestrian bridge would be built between the burgeoning Bulimba and New Farm precincts. Another would link Kangaroo Point and New Farm, complementing plans for the Tank St Bridge and the proposed link between the CBD and Kangaroo Point.

"These spines will make recreation a central part of city life by linking Brisbane's three major parks, the Botanic Gardens, New Farm Park and Roma St Parkland with an open space network through the city centre," Ms Bligh said.

"It will also link some of the city's most popular shopping and dining precincts, including Oxford Street, James Street and Fortitude Valley, the city, South Bank, West End and Paddington.

"Together with existing facilities such as South Bank and the New Farm Riverwalk, this plan will transform Brisbane into one of the world's great walking and cycling cities and reflect our sub-tropical, health-orientated lifestyle."

The Government will spend $3.5 million over three years drawing up a Smart City Master Plan, which will better coordinate around 30 separate city planning projects by delivering a single, integrated plan for the state's capital.

The Government will also establish a high-level body of planning, architectural and urban design experts to advise on the design of major infrastructure recommended by the master plan, which the Government plans to implement over the next 10-15 years.

"The development of the Master Plan will be done in consultation with the Brisbane City Council and we will continue to actively consult the community on our vision for the Knowledge City," she said.

Mr Beattie urged Brisbane residents to provide feedback on the Smart City vision.

"The Deputy Premier and I will take this proposal back to Cabinet at the end of August and I urge people to have their say on the concept.

"The Knowledge City will be a fitting capital for our Smart State," he said.

To access an electronic copy of the Smart Cities: rethinking the city centre report, or to provide feedback visit www.smartstate.qld.gov.au

Hard copies of the report are available by calling 1800 021 818.

Community submissions will close Monday, 13 August 2007.

ENDS

[CNsylvester]

Ding Ding, time to start brushing off the CV for Tram Driver .......

[ozbob]

TRAMS will return to Brisbane streets as part of the biggest overhaul of the city and its transport network yet, the Courier Mail story goes. 

More --> Courier Mail article here!

Regards
Ozbob

[ozbob]

Published letter to editor Courier Mail 17 July 2007

Light rail way to go

I refer to the plans by the State Government-appointed Smart State Council to revitalise Brisbane by improving transport options and making it pedestrian friendly. (C-M, July 16).

Included in that is a plan for light rail with a network connecting New Farm West End South Brisbane with a loop through Bowen Hills. This is to be applauded.

Light rail (modern tram) is well suited to high density mass transit solutions. Environmentally friendly, non polluting, affordable and sustainable it will help to make Brisbane one of the most liveable cities in the world. The Mass Transit Consultation Forum being conducted by the Brisbane City Council has had overwhelming feedback on the suitability of light rail for Brisbane. Now the experts agree.

[ozbob]

The Brisbane times has a poll and blog on Light rail for Brisbane CBD?

Click here to go to Brisbanetimes!

RAIL Back On Track (http://backontrack.org) supports strongly the introduction of light rail for Brisbane as detailed in the Smart Start Councils Plan.  The light rail network needs to be  properly integrated with heavy rail and bus/ferry, and will be a great step forward for Brisbane, and in making Brisbane into a liveable city!  Returning the CBD to a pedestrian friendly environment is important.

This is the comment (above) that I posted on the brisbanetimes blog.

Regards
Ozbob

[ozbob]

The Courier Mail has an article on Light Rail in Brisbane today (21st July).  Well worth a read on pages 56-57.  I can't locate it online (if anyone does please email me the url to admin@backontrack.org).

Regards
Ozbob

[ozbob]

Brisbanetimes has an interesting story on  Greens proposal to further extend the light rail

Details here!

Regards
Ozbob

[ozbob]

And another addition to the Greens' plan.  Details click here for Brisbanetimes story.

For the Australian Greens media releases click here!

[Gazza]

I'll post in here considering the topic has come up elsewhere.

But obviously there has been debate on the need for light rail or a metro from West end to New Farm...Some thoughts on the matter.

Priority
It will need to be done in the longer term, but at the moment I think PT rail projects in SEQ have greater priority.

-CRR
-Sunshine Coast capacity improvements and CAMCOS
-Removing all other single track sections (Barring Airtrain since that probably wont need to be ridded of that single track for a little while) and other capacity constraints (Eg extending the 3rd track on the Beenleigh line)
-Coolangatta extension..
-Getting rail built to the 3 new growth cities before car use becomes ingrained, eg along the interstate corridor to Greenbank.
-Softer stuff, such as making more of the bus network BUZ standard.

I think all of these should be done before any LRT is built New Farm - West End.

This dovetails into wether we should be pressing politcians about New Farm -West End LRT, I'd say no we shouldn't, because the project wont be started in the next 3 years. Can't ask for too much!

-Furthermore, the adequacy of the current service is quite good at the moment. When they get to the stage that the 199 and Cityglider are running artics every 5 minutes all day, fully loaded, then the case for a change of mode along the corridor becomes justified. At the moment, there are still only buses every 15 minutes off peak, so the case perhaps isn't there yet. To quote HumanTransit, you use LRT when you need a really big bus.

LRT versus Metro
I'm throwing my support on a Metro instead of light rail for a number of reasons. I am aware the metro would be more expensive.

-Long Term. If we build a metro, we wont ever have to do any other upgrades to the infrastructure of the route (not in our lifetimes anyway)... I feel LRT would suffer the same problems as the Busways....They're great and all, but they've hit capacity very quickly, and I feel the same would happen to a light rail line eventually.
With the metro, we'd be set for the next 100 years basically.

-Faster and less liable to surface level disruptions. Not much else needs to be said.

-Lower running costs. LRT needs drivers.
A metro doesn't need skilled labour, it drives itself and only needs someone on board to operate the doors and supervise. This makes running at high frequency a cheaper affair since staffing costs are lower.

-CBD street space. In the future there will still be lots of buses coming into the CBD. Having lots of people underground frees up the street space for the buses from areas that will probably never get rail services (Think of places like Paddington) The metro is in its own right of way, so its an actual major increase in cross city transport capacity, not merely juggling around the allocation of existing lanes.

[#Metro]

I would like to see an LRT proposal go forward and not be gagged or pre-judged.
It has come up time and again and again. It is a permanent feature of elections.
New Farm-West End is already carrying a huge load, and I feel an LRT would get more passengers
due to higher quality or ride and image. BRT can do this but that's already what we have.
We already have bunched buses along Melbourne Street.

As a person familiar and regular user of the CityGlider and 199 BUZ, we really need bigger buses now.
While that is being done, for heavens sake, get LRT down here. I'm not waiting for a metro.

Again the right of way is being conflated with vehicle.
LRT can also run in tunnels, separate from traffic if need be, just like a metro. (Just put it in Class A right of way).
You can get automated LRT as well. (Again Class A Right of way).

Neither automation nor the ability to run separate from traffic is an inherent feature of a metro.
Both of these features can and do operate on LRT. The strength of LRT is that you can also run it in
Class B (surface in priority lanes) and Class C (mixed traffic). Metros only operate in Class A (and therefore have the highest costs).

[Gazza]

LRT can also run in tunnels, separate from traffic if need be, just like a metro.
You can get automated LRT as well.

Fair enough, but if it is a choice between a "thingy that runs in tunnels and is driverless" and a "thingy that is on the suface, running in streets", I'll take the first thingy  

strength of LRT is that you can also run it in
Class B (surface in priority lanes) and Class C (mixed traffic). Metros only operate in Class A (and therefore have the highest costs).

This is what I'd rather not see. I value speed very highly.

New Farm-West End is already carrying a huge load, and I feel an LRT would get more passengers
due to higher quality or ride and image. BRT can do this but that's already what we have.
We already have bunched buses along Melbourne Street.

Before I post any further, are you familiar with the concept of "opportunity cost"?

[#Metro]

Gazza, you are conflating a vehicle operating in Class A ROW with one operating in Class B ROW.
LRT can run in either Class A or Class B or both.
A metro can only operate in Class A.



If that's your choice fair enough.  My choice is LRT on surface streets from West End/New Farm.
It will give the street a nice European feel IMHO.  

[#Metro]

This is what I'd rather not see. I value speed very highly.

There will always be a need for surface transport. If we are going short distances around the city, I don't think it would be a big deal.
You would only start looking at metro systems between New Farm-CBD-West End when there are around 10 000+ pphd. There is nowhere near this capacity required.

Before I post any further, are you familiar with the concept of "opportunity cost"?

Are you familiar with the concept "resident's views matter?"

[Gazza]

A metro can only operate in Class A.

So if its going to be running through what will inevitably be the most dense (both in terms of jobs and population) parts of Brisbane in the future (Think 50 years time), then isn't class A the best choice for the long term, irrespective of touchy feely stuff like a "European Feel".

On the Busways, what part is the bit that gets jammed up worst? The bit from South Brisbane to KGS...Why? Because its the one part of the system that isn't class A.

This is why I don't think LRT is the right choice for Inner Brisbane, because it will get tangled up with other buses etc, have to stop for other cross traffic, go at 40km/h for the pedestrians etc.

You would only start looking at metro systems between New Farm-CBD-West End when there are around 10 000+ pphd. There is nowhere near this capacity required.

Bear in mind that proposed metro is supposed to jump the river to Toowong.

The opportunity cost question was a serious one.

[#Metro]

On the Busway? maybe that is justified. It meets the pphd test. I will leave that to others to think about. People seem to start going pale when the idea of putting rails in the busway is mentioned.
But New Farm-CBD-West End? Surface LRT IMHO. That's my opinion. Many cities also have LRT tunnels in the CBD.
I understand you have a different opinion to mine, and I don't mind that. But I want to clarify my position.

So if its going to be running through what will inevitably be the most dense (both in terms of jobs and population) parts of Brisbane in the future (Think 50 years time), then isn't class A the best choice for the long term, irrespective of touchy feely stuff like a "European Feel".

I don't know how they managed to justify it on that grounds. The Brisbane CBD is quite compact. It also contains a significant proportion of character housing and Queenslanders which, to the local community, is sacred and untouchable. So how these massive density increases are going to happen, I wonder.

I feel that a metro that is only justified at 10 000 pphd+.
To use your bus analogy, a metro is what you need when you need a really big tram (and the trams get quite big!)
I take your point about underground, and speed, but consider my points about cost and matching mode with capacity needs.
By all means, let's ask for a feasibility study that looks at all options.

In 50 years time when we can justify something like that, yes. But not now along this alignment.
I find it hard to believe that LRT "should not not go ahead because it won't be started in the next 3 years" but a metro which won't be justified to at least 2026, should. Why not build an interchange at Indooroopilly to take buses taken of the street. The latest draft
will put in 5 trains at peak hour, at crush load (1000/train) that is 5000 pax capacity added, probably enough capacity to take every single bus off Coronation Drive if you wanted to. (1 bus/minute = 60 buses per hour x 65 = 3900pax).

The mode (Metro) is separate from the class of right of way (Class A). If you want a Class A right of way (full separation), that could be any of a busway (15000 pphd +, can run in tunnels), LRT (25 000 pphd+, can run in tunnels), Light Metro (30 000 pphd+, can run in tunnels) or True Metro (50 000+ pphd, can run in tunnels).

If there is a bridge, or a tunnel Toowong-West End, I do not see why LRT could not cross it.
If you want a metro, and think it is a great idea, that's fine. But I just think that we have quite a lot of underused heavy rail infrastructure lying around that could do with a fix-up for all the cash that will be thrown at it and still have something left over for capacity increases for surface transport where required (LRT).

We have heaps of rail infrastructure in Brisbane. About time it was fixed and actually used!

[Gazza]

I don't know how they managed to justify it on that grounds. The Brisbane CBD is quite compact. It also contains a significant proportion of character housing and Queenslanders which, to the local community, is sacred and untouchable. So how these massive density increases are going to happen, I wonder.

At the same time, much of the West End river front is currently industrial, and that will inevitably undergo gentrification. Plus in 50 years time, a lot of "new" buildings today (And definitely ones built in the 70s/80s) will be ready for replacement, and I can imagine height limits will be significantly higher in 50 years time.

The mode (Metro) is separate from the class of right of way (Class A). If you want a Class A right of way (full separation), that could be any of a busway (15000 pphd +, can run in tunnels), LRT (25 000 pphd+, can run in tunnels), Light Metro (30 000 pphd+, can run in tunnels) or True Metro (50 000+ pphd, can run in tunnels).

My point is, build it right the first time. Building an LRT system, and then having to go back in XX years time to build a metro to cope with passenger demand would cost more than just building the metro in the first place.
The metro would be cheaper to run in the long term too, since it doesn't need drivers.

The Busways are what, 10 years old or so, and they've managed to hit capacity in that time. And LRT, whilst higher capacity, is going to do that too, though it might take a bit longer. A metro could take a lifetime before it starts getting uncomfortable. But you have to admire systems like the Underground. They were built more than 100 years ago, and still manage to do the job with the same sized tunnels etc. This is the sort of legacy Brisbane would have if went with the metro option.

I find it hard to believe that LRT "should not not go ahead because it won't be started in the next 3 years" but a metro which won't be justified to at least 2026, should. Huh?

Sorry, but you've completley misunderstood where I was coming from.

I guess this originally stems from the issue of "What should we be asking the politicians about" in the Members forum. The fact is, we cant ask for everything at once, and if we're out campaigning for LRT West End - New Farm at this election, its taking focus away from other Rail/PT projects that should take precedence.
What I'm saying is, more important stuff, like CRR, Sunshine Coast capacity improvements & CAMCOS, bottleneck removals on existing lines (And GC LRT stage 2 to Helensvale is another project I forgot) etc should be well underway before we start saying "What's next?".
Fact is, nothing along the West End - New Farm corridor is going to be started in the next term of government (Or the one after for that matter) the CityGlider still only a few months old, so what's the point of asking for it if it's at the "back of the queue". That list of projects alone would take resources for a few years.
So to conclude, I never said we should be pushing for the metro yet at all, because I don't see it as a priority.

And to dot point all the above concisely in two simple statements.

-West End - New Farm transport coridoor upgrades are not a high priority compared to other proposed projects.

-When it does come time to do something along the corridor, metro would be the best choice.

[#Metro]

We are not waiting 50 years for a metro!
There has been a lot of local opposition to towering structures up there; I can see why metro might be an option in 50 years but there needs to be a solution NOW about transport in this area. It is well within LRT capacity.

My point is, build it right the first time. Building an LRT system, and then having to go back in XX years time to build a metro to cope with passenger demand would cost more than just building the metro in the first place.
The metro would be cheaper to run in the long term too, since it doesn't need drivers.

This is a weak argument purely on cost-benefit grounds. A metro that will incur large capital costs now, and have no better benefit than the alternatives until 50 years later is a poor investment IMHO. The discounting rate will see to that. That decision would be best taken in 50 years time when more information on the on-the-ground realities is available. In the meantime, there is a need for something bigger than the bus.

The Busways are what, 10 years old or so, and they've managed to hit capacity in that time. And LRT, whilst higher capacity, is going to do that too, though it might take a bit longer. A metro could take a lifetime before it starts getting uncomfortable. But you have to admire systems like the Underground. They were built more than 100 years ago, and still manage to do the job with the same sized tunnels etc. This is the sort of legacy Brisbane would have if went with the metro option.

My point of disagreement is based on the fact that I am not aware of any city in the world that has phased out or done away with the need for surface transport, and put everything underground. Even cities that do have metros often also have high capacity surface transport options that are above that of bus (they might have high capacity trolleybuses, or arctics, or LRT, or whatever).

I note that you referenced Jarret Walker, I provide this reference: http://www.humantransit.org/2010/04/australia-the-pitfalls-of-metroenvy.html

For a variety of political and cultural reasons, many of these opportunities have not been pursued.  Instead, in Sydney and Melbourne especially, we've been encouraged to long for something called a "metro."  Many Australians have been to Europe and often to some of the East Asian megacities, and the word "metro" is meant to refer to the high-frequency, high-capacity rail transit, usually underground, that laces the dense cores of those cities.

It's been easy to jump from those desires to the notion that since Australia doesn't have metros now, it needs to build them.  But Bowen's work in Melbourne (and our own work on the Sydney Morning Herald inquiry) are pointing out that our cities already have a network of grade-separated rail lines covering the areas of European density, and that the quickest way to get a "metro" level of mobility is simply to run these lines much more frequently.

We could have a "metro" or RRT as I have termed it, sooner than anyone thinks if we spent some money getting rid of single track etc.

The problem with transport in Brisbane is that we have all this rail infrastructure and it is not being used. It is scandalous. What concerns me is that we spend money on something very costly when there are other options available, and that locks up considerable funds for fixing up the heavy rail network, which could be upgraded to RRT standards.

I guess this originally stems from the issue of "What should we be asking the politicians about" in the Members forum. The fact is, we cant ask for everything at once, and if we're out campaigning for LRT West End - New Farm, its taking focus away from other Rail/PT projects that should take precedence.
What I'm saying is, more important stuff, like CRR, Sunshine Coast capacity improvements & CAMCOS, bottleneck removals on existing lines (And GC LRT stage 2 to Helensvale is another project I forgot) etc should be well underway before we start saying "What's next?".
Fact is, nothing along the West End - New Farm corridor is going to be started in the next term of government (Or the one after for that matter) the CityGlider still only a few months old, so what's the point of asking for it if it's at the "back of the queue". That list of projects alone would take resources for a few years.
So to conclude, I never said we should be pushing for the metro yet at all, because I don't see it as a priority.

And to dot point all the above concisely in two simple statements.

-West End - New Farm transport coridoor upgrades are not a high priority compared to other proposed projects.

-When it does come time to do something along the corridor, metro would be the best choice.

Well, I'm going ask. I'm put forward that question as a resident of the area, I think I am entitled to do it.
Anything less would be a gag and a dis-service to the community in my area.

[Gazza]

We are not waiting 50 years for a metro!

Well, connecting SEQ has the "Brisbane Subway" mooted within its plan, so it could only be 20 years off.

I never said wait 50 years for a Metro. What I was getting at was that in 50 years time, a metro/LRT would have existed for many years (At least 30 if SEQ2031 somehow gets done!) Except the LRT would be overcrowded and reaching capacity, but the metro would be going strong.

but there needs to be a solution NOW about transport in this area.

But the area already has two high frequency bus routes that still are only running every 15 minutes. Why jump straight to LRT in the short term when they haven't even got to the stage of using artics, buses every 7.5 minutes (or every 5 minutes etc)...You could triple the amount of passengers carried without laying a single meter of track (For the time being)
There are many parts of SEQ without Rail or BUZ, yet the two frequent bus routes in West End are somehow not good enough at the present time?

The problem with transport in Brisbane is that we have all this rail infrastructure and it is not being used. It is scandalous. What concerns me is that we spend money on something very costly when there are other options available, and that locks up considerable funds for fixing up the heavy rail network, which could be upgraded to RRT standards.

Despite the negative outlook at the moment, I think its pretty safe to say the existing rail network will be very well utilised in 20 years time.

My point of disagreement is based on the fact that I am not aware of any city in the world that has phased out or done away with the need for surface transport, and put everything underground.

My vision is that the surface transport task would continue to be done by buses, and buses would feed into the metro stations (Since the transfer penalty would be absolutely negligible with a metro)

[#Metro]

I never said wait 50 years for a Metro. What I was getting at was that in 50 years time, a metro/LRT would have existed for many years (At least 30 if SEQ2031 somehow gets done!) Except the LRT would be overcrowded and reaching capacity, but the metro would be going strong.

A benefit now is worth more than a benefit in 20 or 50 years. The discounting rate would kill the benefits of a metro taken any earlier than this. I am not even convinced this area would be generating anywhere near 10 000 pphd+ even in 20 years.

But the area already has two high frequency bus routes that still are only running every 15 minutes. Why jump straight to LRT in the short term when they haven't even got to the stage of using artics, buses every 7.5 minutes (or every 5 minutes etc)...You could triple the amount of passengers carried without laying a single meter of track (For the time being)
There are many parts of SEQ without Rail or BUZ, yet the two frequent bus routes in West End are somehow not good enough at the present time?

It's actually (much) more frequent than this. This is Brisbane's busiest bus route! Its heading to 4 million passengers per year and there are bunchups during peak hour. Peak hour capacity requirements is what planners plan for don't they? The 199 is every ~5 minutes in peak hour, it is time to look for something much bigger. Same on New Farm IMHO.

Despite the negative outlook at the moment, I think its pretty safe to say the existing rail network will be very well utilised in 20 years time.

There is plenty of capacity on the rail network off peak and more will be unlocked once CRR passes through. Building metros for the sake of building metros...

My vision is that the surface transport task would continue to be done by buses, and buses would feed into the metro stations (Since the transfer penalty would be absolutely negligible with a metro)

There is also significant heavy rail infrastructure that could be fed now and with upgraded infrastructure (e.g. 3 door trains, signalling, single track out) could take more passengers.

That's not our vision in West End. Even if metro was coming in 30 years or whatever...that's going to be an awfully short bus route!
And I would argue that the transfer penalty has more to do with the quality of the connection than the vehicle. Things like frequency, ease of walk etc.

How many times does LRT proposals have to come flooding in from the community 5 times now, perhaps 10 more proposals need to land on the planners desk before they sit up and take notice.

[Gazza]

I'm sorry. Its actually more frequent than this. This is Brisbane's busiest bus route! Its heading to 4 million passengers per year and there are bunchups during peak hour. Peak hour capacity requirements is what planners plan for don't they? The 199 is every ~5 minutes in peak hour, it is time to look for something much bigger. Same on New Farm IMHO.

And the 199 is the only bus route in Brisbane that gets busy / bunches up in peak hour?

Building metros for the sake of building metros...

It would service areas not on the rail network....

How many times does LRT proposals have to come flooding in from the community 5 times now, perhaps 10 more proposals need to land on the planners desk before they sit up and take notice.

Couple of questions then...

-Why is LRT the best solution for the corridor in the long term?

-In what sort of time frame should the LRT be built?

-Relating to the previous question, where in the "order of projects" would the LRT sit. Which would you do first, which would you do after?

[#Metro]

And the 199 is the only bus route in Brisbane that gets busy / bunches up in peak hour?

This bus route has the highest annual patronage in Brisbane.

It would service areas not on the rail network....

There are very few places in Brisbane that are not within reach of a busway station or a QR rail station.
Upgrade those before re-inventing the wheel. Where there are pockets like West End, LRT is a good fit for
the area IMHO.

-Why is LRT the best solution for the corridor in the long term?

Define "long term".

[Gazza]

^Lets say 20 years, since that's what current planning is based around.

LRT is a good fit for
the area IMHO.

Cool, but why is it a good fit?

Edit: And off the top of my head, here are the current infrastructure projects that could also be done. I'll leave BUZing out of it, since that will just happen whenever. We'll also assume CRR is the first thing to be done. Note, these projects are in no particular order.

-Sunshine Coast line bottleneck removal
-CAMCOS
-GC LRT to Helenvale, and the Southern stages to Coolongatta.
-Gold Coast line to Ellanora & Coolangatta  (+ Coomera River bridge duplication)
-Trouts Rd
-Ripley Valley Line (Springfield Ipswich)
-Greenbank Line (Interstate Corridor)
-Northern Busway Completion
-Eastern Busway Completion
-Beenleigh Line triplication
-Cleveland Line duplication
-Shorncliffe Line duplication
-Doomben Line Upgrade + North Shore

Think that's all of them. Where would the West End - New Farm LRT sit?

[#Metro]

It depends on the project chosen. There are many types of LRT project- from say, a Melbourne style tram running in Class C (the cheapest and fastest) to LRT running in Class A like the Sydney LRT (most expensive but highest capacity). I note Sydney has chosen to extend its LRT rather than build a metro (which it had to cut back and stub due to costs), and then eventually cancel).

To clarify, I am not against a metro system, though I feel along this alignment, LRT is a better choice.

1. We need a bigger bus- much bigger, because that is not going to hold for 15-20 years.
2. It's many times cheaper than a metro and moves a very large number of people
3. Unlike all of the projects in the list, could be funded by BCC and State (BCC is never going to fund a metro, it goes pale thinking about KSD/Doomben Line)
4. Faster to construct than a metro, nowhere near as disruptive (would metro use cut and cover tunnel and dig up the main street?)
5. Local community support for it
6. Matches demand task to mode and also supports the development in the area
7. Can be extended to take 12 000 pphd+ in Class B ROW (300 - 500 pax every 2 minutes)
8. Low impact regarding land acquisition for stations
9. You can have 2+ LRT lines with superior coverage of this Suburban area, you would not build 2 separate metro lines due to cost.
10. Better coverage of the area (metro stations are very expensive, so you might only get 2 in the West End area), LRT you can have many stops along the route 500m - 800 m apart.)
11. Can also run in Class A ROW, so if a tunnel was ever put in the CBD, it could use that.

For your second task, I think this requires a feasibility study on the particular route, engineering requirements and staging as that will
affect the costs and BCR (e.g., Class C would be cheaper than Class A, so that will affect the costs/time/feasibility). I note that it may come out cheaper than any of those projects listed and also could use BCC funds unlike almost all the other projects which are state projects. It will be a political decision as to when or what priority is given, and that is why it should go forward.

I also note that there is a possibility ICRCS (CRR2) may pass through this area, so a metro is not inevitable.
Melbourne has trams (not LRT) but hasn't felt the need to start constructing metros, and that is a city far far larger
than Brisbane. Its tram (not LRT) system carried 181 million journeys recently, IMHO the Brisbane tram system at its height
carried 140 million pax (maybe Ozbob can correct me on the figures here) more than trains or buses today. So it is like a
workhorse big bus system.

This is what happens when you take LRT and place it in Class A ROW- it acts just like a metro, although it has the added flexibility of going up into surface streets if you want it to. A true metro could also replace the LRT in the tunnel section over time (but not on surface streets, metro can only run in Class A, surface streets are Class B or Class C). I don't think this will be required for this corridor, but just so people know:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanover_Stadtbahn


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Hannover-Lightrail-Network-2006.png

[#Metro]

Let's see a proper study identifying corridors in Brisbane and with proper costs for this metro system, which hasn't been costed so far.
That can go down as another question "will you do a study into LRT/Metro in Brisbane".
It may turn out that some corridors are better than others for particular modes.

[Gazza]

For your second task, I think this requires a feasibility study on the particular route, engineering requirements and staging as that will
affect the costs and BCR (e.g., Class C would be cheaper than Class A, so that will affect the costs/time/feasibility). I note that it may come out cheaper than any of those projects listed and also could use BCC funds unlike almost all the other projects which are state projects. It will be a political decision as to when or what priority is given, and that is why it should go forward.

Ok, but again, getting back to my original question, roughly in what sort of time frame would you want the light rail built, and where should it sit in the hierarchy of projects?

The BCC could very well fund it all, but it's unlikely it would be built without state (And even federal) funds, so that immediately ...Other BCC projects like Legacy Way have gotten funding from other levels of government.

[#Metro]

Brisbane City Council is more than capable of funding LRT, instead they have decided better use of those funds was to spend $770 million on Clem 7 and $1.7 billion (??) on Legacy way and even more on KSD and Go between Bridge.

Go figure!  

[Gazza]

So in what sort of time frame would you want the light rail built?

[#Metro]

Good question. But why just ask me?-- lets ask around.
I would think within 5 years. It will take that long to plan.
Some larger developments going around, enough to support LRT,
199/CityGlider/196/197/198/195/192 operate in this area, apart from 198 and 191/192, the others have very good loads
approaching 4 million/year for BUZ 199, 1 million +/year for cityglider and over 1 million for 196. (Figures for 197 not available)

http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=5471.0

[Gazza]

Good question. But why just ask me?

Because you're the one pushing for it as a shorter/medium term project.

[#Metro]

There's no harm in asking, survey is now up.

http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=5471.0