Nambour - North Corridor

[Fares_Fair]

Hello All,

Nambour - North Corridor (Nambour to Gympie North)

I propose that preliminary studies and forward planning begin now for the land corridor acquisition and rail duplication works from Nambour up to Gympie North.
Further I propose that this corridor allows for track duplication, with an allowance for an additional 2 future tracks as per the Landsborough to Nambour corridor.

Train stabling facilities also need to be established, possibly at Yandina, to facilitate the growth that the Sunshine Coast will achieve over the next 20 years, starting at 2011, 60% is predicted by 2031.

I note that the projected population increases for the Gold and Sunshine Coast's are (from Table 2) of Qld Gov't Population Projections 2011 Edition :-

Year                  2006          2031

Gold Coast          466,400      798,400    an increase of 71.18% (2.85% p.a.)
Sunshine Coast    295,100      508,200    an increase of 72.21% (2.90% p.a.)

It is time to set the standard of forward planning now and not in 20 years time.

Regards,
Fares_Fair.

[mufreight]

Hello All,

Nambour - North Corridor (Nambour to Gympie North)

I propose that preliminary studies and forward planning begin now for the land corridor acquisition and rail duplication works from Nambour up to Gympie North.
Further I propose that this corridor allows for track duplication, with an allowance for an additional 2 future tracks as per the Landsborough to Nambour corridor.

Train stabling facilities also need to be established, possibly at Yandina, to facilitate the growth that the Sunshine Coast will achieve over the next 20 years, 60% is predicted by 2031.

It is time to set the standard of forward planning now and not in 20 years time.

Regards,
Fares_Fair.

Love the thinking but unfortunately it is difficult to convince the seat polishers working for the government as planners.

[Stillwater]

Certainly the published strategic documentation supports this concept.

This from the AusLink Brisbane-Cairns corridor strategy endorsed by the commonwealth and state governments:

"The main challenge for the rail system is to ensure that the infrastructure of the North Coast Railway Line can support the provision of competitive rail services, particularly freight services, by rail operators. In the longer-term, additional rail capacity may be required to meet potential growth in north-south rail freight activity."

In consideration of the seven major strategic issues facing the Brisbane-Cairns corridor, the governments list 'the competitiveness of the North Coast Line and its capacity to handle long-term growth in freight.'

This from the QR submission to COAG national infrastructure audit:

"Queensland's East Coast will grow rapidly over the next 20 years, particularly at the southern end of the corridor and in major regional centres. Rapid growth in demand for travel and movement of freight, and the need to support the transport needs of major export industries, will result in road and rail congestion and inefficiencies. Freight services from the North Coast line via the inner city are anticipated to increase by between 81% and 165%, equivalent to an additional 100 to 200 services per week.  (There is a need) to improve the productivity and efficiency of freight movements along Queensland's East Coast corridor and the North Coast Line, and provide capacity for freight volumes on the North Coast Line out of Brisbane anticipated to increase from 3.18 mtpa in 2003 to 4.5 mtpa in 2013 and 5.5 mtpa in 2020, if rail capacity is provided.

"Freight operations are severely constrained due to conflict with passenger services and poor track alignment, particularly between Brisbane and Nambour. In addition, the NCL is limited to catering for train lengths of 650m, which could impact on the potential growth in rail freight transport on the corridor."

The need to look at the track upgrade from the perspective of cost-of-living imposts has been raised in a submission to the National Freight Strategy inquiry, of which this is an extract:

"Further upgrading of the Queensland North Coast line including track straightening from Landsborough to at least Maryborough West is now needed. Such an investment would reduce operating costs, fuel use, greenhouse gas emissions and external costs and help keep the cost of living down in Central and Far North Queensland."

In other words, investment in the track south of Maryborough has positive consequences up the track to Cairns.

Only about 10 per cent of the NCL beyond Nambour is double-track railway and the NCL is thereby impacted significantly by the single-track capacity constraint. Loop lengths are short by interstate standards at around 650m. Rail performance is impacted by congestion, especially in the Brisbane metro area and the single track between Caboolture and
Nambour and rail capacity constraints in Brisbane with limited commercially attractive train paths available due to passenger train conflicts.

Current NCL track performance is below the Australian Transport Council interstate network targets.

Current NCL infrastructure may not enable rail freight to grow at the same rate (3%
per year), thereby resulting in the freight growth over 3% per annum 'spilling over' to road transport.

Investing in the North Coast Line relieves pressure on paying for upgrades of the Bruce Highway.

[colinw]

Even with a couple of 1990s deviations in place, the line between Nambour & Gympie still has some of the worst curves on the entire NCL.  Curves so tight they have a 40 km/h speed board have no place on a main line in the 21st century.

Upgrades through to Maryborough would knock out some of the worst bits of the NCL, although there is still the crossing loop length problem to be addressed the length of the line.  The major benefit is for freight, with passenger services an additional bonus.

Warning - foaming follows.

If it led to a Victorian standard intercity service to Gympie & Maryborough being viable then all the better.  I would love to see the day come when a few intercity trains a day to/from Maryborough use that lovely town centre station (rather than Maryborough West out in the sticks).  Likewise would like to see the wires up right into Gympie via the Banks Pocket route from the north.

Yeah, I'm dreaming about better regional passenger services to the north, but really any upgrade of the NCL is as much or more about freight, and should be a national priority.  It is not just the State Government being negligent in its duty here.

[somebody]

It is not just the State Government being negligent in its duty here.

I have some trouble with that concept.  Why should the feds pay to upgrade a line which (a) is not owned or leased by them and (b) does not allow trains to continue onto the standard gauge network.

I also have a problem with Federal meddling in numerous other things as well.  These lines need to be drawn much better than they currently are.  It is easy to see the problems having two levels of government involved in the bus system as well.  Then there's the health system.

[colinw]

It is not just the State Government being negligent in its duty here.

I have some trouble with that concept.  Why should the feds pay to upgrade a line which (a) is not owned or leased by them and (b) does not allow trains to continue onto the standard gauge network.

I also have a problem with Federal meddling in numerous other things as well.  These lines need to be drawn much better than they currently are.  It is easy to see the problems having two levels of government involved in the bus system as well.  Then there's the health system.

I have no trouble with the concept because the North Coast line is important not just for State but for National productivity, and has been recognised as such in numerous reports at that level.  Furthermore it has been thrown open as an open access line primarily as a result of Federal Government policies..

Furthermore the adjacent Bruce Highway has been recipient of quite a lot of Federal money for upgrading.

Are you really saying that intrastate transport & issues are no business of the feds?  If that were the case, then Brisbane's electric rail system would not be, as without Federal funding back in the 1970s the project would not have gotten off the ground.  For that matter, the Adelaide electrification and the Gold Coast Light Rail both have good chunks of Federal money in them, so why should NCL be exempt when it has a critical transport role to fill?

[somebody]

That pretty much is what I am saying.

Although I do agree with your point that without Federal funding little can be achieved.  I have a problem with that.  That's why I was so disappointed in the Rudd plan to only take over 60% of the Health funding.  It needed to be 100%, but that would give states the financial ability to manage their own affairs without asking the feds for money.

You left out Legacy Way which apparently also has Federal funding.

[Stillwater]

This map may help, Simon.  It shows the rail network that the Federal Government says it accepts, together with the state, as being part of the National Land Transport Network.  Generally, these are Queensland's major rail freight corridors north-south and the line to the Port of Brisbane.

http://www.nationbuildingprogram.gov.au/whatis/network/images/National_Land_Transport_Network_Rail_Corridors_QLD.pdf

Under a funding agreement with the Federal Government, Queensland can request that the Federal Government contribute to track improvements that address freight efficiency and capacity (but not things like station buildings).

By declaring the North Coast Line part of the National Land Transport Network, the commonwealth is saying that it accepts part funding responsibility for track realignment and augmentation.  The question is whether the state government has prepared and put a costed proposition to Infrastructure Australia for evaluation?  There is a very real possibility that, should it do so, Queensland may be able to win some funds from the federal government for Sunshine Coast or North Coast improvements that indirectly benefit passenger transport.  That would be very handy at a time when the state government is strapped for cash.
 

[somebody]

I suppose we don't exactly have the ideal system for Federal/State politics.

I take col's point to some degree.  The NCL duplications have been submitted to IA haven't they?  AIUI understand it a decision is still pending.

[Fares_Fair]

I suppose we don't exactly have the ideal system for Federal/State politics.

I take col's point to some degree.  The NCL duplications have been submitted to IA haven't they?  AIUI understand it a decision is still pending.

I put in a submission to IA on the National Land Freight Strategy- with a very strong case for the North Coast Line infrastructure.
I am not aware of any active consideration of the submission, it is merely now publicly available.

Regards,
Fares_Fair.

[Stillwater]

Here is the latest I have seen:

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/budgets/nation-building-funding-at-a-crawl/story-fn8gf1nz-1226054966475

[Golliwog]

http://www.nationbuildingprogram.gov.au/whatis/network/images/National_Land_Transport_Network_Rail_Corridors_QLD.pdf 

Interesting. That map has the Merivale bridge alignment as the key freight route, despite the vast majority (according to the inner city rail capacity study?) not taking that route and being run around via Tennyson.

[Stillwater]

You make a very interesting observation, Golli.  If the CRR, as planned, is deemed to be too costly -- and the business case now under review would show this -- the state could start to look around for alternatives.  These would need to be alternatives that would include the justification for the federal government to also contribute construction funds.  The Commonwealth would be obliged to do so on the network it has declared to be the National Land Transport Network.  As you, point out, Golli, this includes the Merivale Bridge.

And, as it happens, the feasibility of this alternative for increasing cross-river rail capacity has been discussed here:

http://www.tmr.qld.gov.au/~/media/5540da99-026b-49d5-a015-5996dc889a9e/pdf_icrcs_stage_3_technical_pre_feasibility_chapter_8.pdf

It would be interesting to see if duplication of the Merivale Bridge has any currency at the moment, within the broader context of the CRR project.

[Golliwog]

I'm not sure. But even post-CRR I still see it as a bottleneck. While easily manageable for a while, its eventually going to have issues with 2 lines (Cleveland and Inner Beenleigh) feeding into one pair of tracks.

Actually, I don't see that as the main thing that needs to be fixed up around there. That junction (south of the river) would be no worse than where Doomben/Airport trains merge with Shorncliffe trains. No, the main issue I see is that those tracks don't allow full use of the Ipswich line quad tracks. I would put six tracks between Roma St and the Merivale bridge duplication high on the list, and if serious thought is being given to an eventual Merivale bridge duplication, reservation of enough space to add in an extra two tracks on top of that if possible. I see no point duplicating the bridge though if its still going to have the same track arrangements north of the river.

[O_128]

I'm not sure. But even post-CRR I still see it as a bottleneck. While easily manageable for a while, its eventually going to have issues with 2 lines (Cleveland and Inner Beenleigh) feeding into one pair of tracks.

Actually, I don't see that as the main thing that needs to be fixed up around there. That junction (south of the river) would be no worse than where Doomben/Airport trains merge with Shorncliffe trains. No, the main issue I see is that those tracks don't allow full use of the Ipswich line quad tracks. I would put six tracks between Roma St and the Merivale bridge duplication high on the list, and if serious thought is being given to an eventual Merivale bridge duplication, reservation of enough space to add in an extra two tracks on top of that if possible. I see no point duplicating the bridge though if its still going to have the same track arrangements north of the river.

Even duplicating the Bridge inst necessary its adding the 2 more tracks to stop the conflicts with the ipswich line. Looking at The area it is possible to squeeze the tracks in.

[somebody]

I see no point duplicating the bridge though if its still going to have the same track arrangements north of the river.

Of course.

I think you have cracked the code on why the tunnel option was selected.  Those amplifications would not come cheap, and we would be left with an alignment no faster than the present one, and city stations no more convenient than the present stations.

[Fares_Fair]

Certainly the published strategic documentation supports this concept.

This from the AusLink Brisbane-Cairns corridor strategy endorsed by the commonwealth and state governments:

"The main challenge for the rail system is to ensure that the infrastructure of the North Coast Railway Line can support the provision of competitive rail services, particularly freight services, by rail operators. In the longer-term, additional rail capacity may be required to meet potential growth in north-south rail freight activity."

In consideration of the seven major strategic issues facing the Brisbane-Cairns corridor, the governments list 'the competitiveness of the North Coast Line and its capacity to handle long-term growth in freight.'

This from the QR submission to COAG national infrastructure audit:

"Queensland's East Coast will grow rapidly over the next 20 years, particularly at the southern end of the corridor and in major regional centres. Rapid growth in demand for travel and movement of freight, and the need to support the transport needs of major export industries, will result in road and rail congestion and inefficiencies. Freight services from the North Coast line via the inner city are anticipated to increase by between 81% and 165%, equivalent to an additional 100 to 200 services per week.  (There is a need) to improve the productivity and efficiency of freight movements along Queensland's East Coast corridor and the North Coast Line, and provide capacity for freight volumes on the North Coast Line out of Brisbane anticipated to increase from 3.18 mtpa in 2003 to 4.5 mtpa in 2013 and 5.5 mtpa in 2020, if rail capacity is provided.

"Freight operations are severely constrained due to conflict with passenger services and poor track alignment, particularly between Brisbane and Nambour. In addition, the NCL is limited to catering for train lengths of 650m, which could impact on the potential growth in rail freight transport on the corridor."

The need to look at the track upgrade from the perspective of cost-of-living imposts has been raised in a submission to the National Freight Strategy inquiry, of which this is an extract:

"Further upgrading of the Queensland North Coast line including track straightening from Landsborough to at least Maryborough West is now needed. Such an investment would reduce operating costs, fuel use, greenhouse gas emissions and external costs and help keep the cost of living down in Central and Far North Queensland."

In other words, investment in the track south of Maryborough has positive consequences up the track to Cairns.

Only about 10 per cent of the NCL beyond Nambour is double-track railway and the NCL is thereby impacted significantly by the single-track capacity constraint. Loop lengths are short by interstate standards at around 650m. Rail performance is impacted by congestion, especially in the Brisbane metro area and the single track between Caboolture and
Nambour and rail capacity constraints in Brisbane with limited commercially attractive train paths available due to passenger train conflicts.

Current NCL track performance is below the Australian Transport Council interstate network targets.

Current NCL infrastructure may not enable rail freight to grow at the same rate (3%
per year), thereby resulting in the freight growth over 3% per annum 'spilling over' to road transport.

Investing in the North Coast Line relieves pressure on paying for upgrades of the Bruce Highway.

Stillwater has hit the nail on the head with this post.
For the Sunshine Coast commuter, freight is the key to our passneger service improvements.

Regards,
Fares_Fair.

[Golliwog]

Even duplicating the Bridge inst necessary its adding the 2 more tracks to stop the conflicts with the ipswich line. Looking at The area it is possible to squeeze the tracks in.

I'd tend to agree with that but the contructability of it would be a bit tight. You wouldn't have much in the way of access roads, and would probably need a number of track closures to get most of the earthworks, etc done.

[Stillwater]

It will be an uphill battle to have the government focus on planning for a Nambour-Gympie upgrade.  Just as we have waiting lists to go on a waiting list for non life threatening surgery in the public health system, it appears there is planning for planning of the North Coast Line.

On April 7, Peter Wellington (Independent, Nicklin) asked this question of the Transport Minister, Ms Anna Palaszczuk, in the parliament: "With reference to the upgrade and duplication of the railway line between Nambour and Gympie, when will planning commence on the identification of the proposed corridor for the upgraded railway line?"

The minister replied: "Planning has not yet identified a need for an upgrade of the rail line between Nambour and Gympie as being a priority within the 2031 planning horizon."

The minister's reply to Mr Wellington is illuminating because an inference can be drawn that even duplication to Nambour by 2031 can in no way be assured.  Planning for a Nambour-Gympie upgrade won't be contemplated before then (2031) by this government.

The minister's choice of words is most interesting (especially the reference to priority) for, while it is true there are higher priorities, 20 years of 'non-planning' would lead to the same situation as occurred in the towns south of Nambour when it came time to plan the railway upgrade there.  Palmwoods and Mooloolah are prime examples where this has occurred.  Finalisation of the Palmwoods town centre plan by the Sunshine Coast Regional Council is being held up and a supermarket development there is stalled because of uncertainties relating to the railway upgrade.

Sadly, Ms Palaszczuk's reply also indicates that this state government will plan only when such action becomes a 'priority'.  Only when circumstances force this government to act, it will do so.

Again, using the health comparison, the situation is analogous to this government not doing something about someone presenting to a hospital with a badly gashed leg and not doing anything about it while other priority cases are dealt with.  Meanwhile, the injured leg becomes gangrenous – and, therefore, is elevated to the priority list – and the only treatment option available then is to amputate the leg.

All for the want of some simple treatment when the patient first presented.

The government has not learned from its experiences during the Landsborough-Nambour track planning process and it's doubtful that rail freight operators will tolerate a situation where the current poor track and alignment between Nambour and Maryborough West won't even be looked at for an appropriate remedy before 2031, and probably after.

On that timetable, actual start of construction is 30 years away.  How wide will the Bruce Highway have to be in 2041 to accommodate all the freight that will switch from rail to road over time?

[Stillwater]

The fact that the state government has produced a Bruce Highway Upgrade Strategy document, and plans highway duplication (four lanes) to Bundaberg sums up government thinking - road improvements over rail improvements south of Bundaberg.

[somebody]

What's the cost of the Bruce upgrade?  Can't imagine it is cheap.

[ozbob]

What's the cost of the Bruce upgrade?  Can't imagine it is cheap.

Main Roads, Fisheries and Marine Infrastructure
The Honourable Craig Wallace
14/07/2011

Bruce Highway gets $370 million for disaster repairs in CQ, NQ and FNQ

Nearly $370 million is being spent to fix 116 Bruce Highway sites between Rockhampton and Cairns damaged by recent natural disasters, Main Roads Minister Craig Wallace announced in the Queensland Parliament today.

Mr Wallace said the Gillard and Bligh governments were doing massive work to repair the Bruce after damage done by cyclones and flooding.

He said the Gillard Government was providing 75 per cent of the funding, while the Bligh Government provided 25 per cent.

The three-year repair program is in addition to nearly $2 billion of other work being done along the 1600 kilometre national highway over the next four years.

It follows the announcement earlier this week by Premier Anna Bligh of a 20-year masterplan to upgrade the Bruce Highway.

"Queensland thanks the Gillard Government for its part of the funding required to repair the Bruce," Mr Wallace said.

"The Bruce Highway was heavily damaged by recent cyclones and floodin g along much of its length.

"However, from the moment Yasi's winds started to die down and the floodwaters began to recede, our crews were out there working tirelessly to reopen roads and get traffic moving.

"This massive funding injection will now enable them to get on with the job of restoring and improving access for regional communities from Rockhampton to Cairns."

Mr Wallace said the regional breakdown of Bruce Highway repair works was:
• FNQ $60m 9 sites
• Townsville $19.5m 5 sites
• Mackay $42m 75 sites
• Fitzroy $248m 27 sites
• Total $370m 116 sites

Announcements of flood-repair funding for other parts of the Bruce will be made in coming weeks.

An estimated 1200 direct and indirect jobs will be created by the work.

"There will be more than enough work for local companies, regional companies and state-wide Queensland companies on this massive task - we need them all to g et this important job done."

"The repaired Bruce Highway will be better than before," Mr Wallace said.

"We will be rebuilding the Bruce to current engineering standards, using improved technology and with thicker road surfaces."

Statewide, up to 14,000 jobs will be sustained through the flood-recovery works.

Mr Wallace said the Bligh Government was also getting on with the job of upgrading the entire route.

"Over the next four years we're spending $2 billion on 140 projects up and down the length of the Bruce Highway.

"That includes $980 million to complete major projects underway and $1.03 billion for projects yet to start.

"We know Queenslanders are have been unhappy with the Bruce Highway and so have we. We're doing something about it."

==============================================================

[ozbob]

$2billion to be torn to pieces by trucks, trucks and trucks ...

[somebody]

It doesn't look like the $2bn will achieve the 4 lanes to Bundaberg either.

[Stillwater]

The Mary Valley Rattler is seeing fewer passenger numbers, as people cut back on their discretionary spending.  The venture is doing it tough financially.

http://www.gympietimes.com.au/story/2011/07/30/how-railway-will-survive-mary-valley-rattler/

Perhaps QR could run hybrid passenger rail to Gympie Station via Banks Pocket and contract MVHR to issue tickets.  There is plenty of space on the station to run passenger trains from the eastern end of the Gympie platform.

One day .....