Centenary RAIL

[Gazza]

deviations add time,

1 minute, given the extra distance, but a crapload of extra pax compared to going Via toowong.

add cost (1.5 km tunnel = 400 million or so?),

Once the TBM is actually in the ground, addding a bit more tunnel is of marginal ocst.

and there already is a busway there, something that Centenary suburbs don't have and one can use buses.

The centenary suburbs don't have a busway to UQ though, and think about it long term.
The line will be there for 100 years. UQ is going to be there for 100 years too.
Over that time period, consider the cost of running all the buses to UQ, particularly 412s/402s. And compare that to the capital cost of swinging the line over.
Also consider that a direct rail connection will still be more attractive than T2 lanes.

Lets think about deviations this way.
The Boggo Rd busway.

From park road, the busway could have been a very short 400m tunnel to connect with the SEB near Henry St Wooloongabba, skipping the PA.

Instead, it does a 900m route to serve the PA hospital, which in the end totals a 1.6km total deviation compared to the 'short' route, due to having to trace back along the SEB.

Now obviously, this deviation costs travel time and money, and it is a bit indirect, but the advantage is serving the PA hospital.
Would you say we should have had a separate branch for the PA, or skip it all together?

On the other hand, deviating an underground line via UQ is much less "loopy", you still are heading in a reasonably straight line, and really is just a kink in the scheme of things you wouldn't notice.

The Red Line subway in LA is another example,
http://www.metro.net/riding_metro/bikes/images/la_bike_map.gif
it does a bit of an L shape, which looks indirect on the map, but it is very quick between stations, and if it didn't do the bend it would completley miss out on servicing hollywood.

I  think it is also more than fair to expect maps of proposals,

Its swinging the line to go via UQ, not some complicated bus route along 20 streets that needs to be mapped. Didn't really need to do a map, but I did anyway.

rather than by deviating a longer commuter route.

But I think its a very strong 1-2 punch to have the western suburbs able to hit the two biggest trip generators (CBD and UQ) on one line.

[#Metro]

Well I suggest you make your own enquiries if you are so curious pf@pf.uq.edu.au , but I'm sure it is around 50% or thereabouts.
http://jacdigital.com.au/2012/09/uq-parking-premium-infuriates-students-and-staff/

However, while the facilities — not carparks — may attract people to UQ, a 2011 survey conducted by the Queensland Centre for Population Research (QCPR), found that cars are the most common mode of transport, accounting for more than two-fifths of all movements.

Car is still the dominant mode it seems. 2/5 = 40%
Buses 1/3 = 30%, rest is bicycle and walk.

With mode shares like this, how much more room is there in the PT market if a train station was added?

[#Metro]

Instead, it does a 900m route to serve the PA hospital, which in the end totals a 1.6km total deviation compared to the 'short' route, due to having to trace back along the SEB.

Now obviously, this deviation costs travel time and money, and it is a bit indirect, but the advantage is serving the PA hospital.
Would you say we should have had a separate branch for the PA, or skip it all together?

Yeah, but I notice the SE Busway doesn't deviate from Buranda and the Eastern/Boggo Road busway is a separate branch off the main busway. Just saying....

But I think its a very strong 1-2 punch to have the western suburbs able to hit the two biggest trip generators (CBD and UQ) on one line

I'm divided in my thoughts on this. Like I said, I'm happy to have both proposal and alternatives go forward.

[#Metro]

ICRCS Phase 2 from TMR website

[Gazza]

Where the hell is that line going? The Gap 

Yeah, but I notice the SE Busway doesn't deviate from Buranda and the Eastern/Boggo Road busway is a separate branch off the main busway. Just saying...

But we're talking in the context of a line that is being overlaid on an existing network. Not greenfield.
And the SEB was really just a project to get BRT done as easily as possible, which is why it follows the freeway.

If the SEB were a subway, you can guarantee it would be a bit different. I imagine it would have say gone garden city, griffith, then north to the commercial bit of holland park west, then run under logan road, to Greenslopes hospital, annerley central, PA hospital, Gabba, CBD...or something.
LOL im foaming now.

In terms of rail, an example of a good deviation is the way the Clarkson line exits and reenters the Mitchell Freeway in order to service the Joondalup central area.

If it were wasting an extra 5/10 mins to service UQ, I'd be with you that it should be a separate line, but if its only an extra minute, and the line is still heading east/north the whole time, then it's fine IMO.
With an underground line you can swing around a bit more and not really hurt travel times...See the London Underground Jubilee line extension for instance.

The results put the Campus population at almost 22,000

Need to be careful though, the population is not static for the whole day. You might have some people who come for the morning and go home at lunch, some there all day, some just for the arvo/evening lectures.

22,000 population =/= 22,000 came there on a given day. It would be higher due to some people leaving, but other people taking their place, all of which bumps up the number of trips being generated.

It's like how a restaurant might seat 100 at a time, but it doesnt just cater to 100 per day.

The real figure needed is the number that "pass through" UQ on a given day.

Also, with the Indro station, why not just build it lengthways under station Rd, with exits at each end of the platform, perpendicular to the existing centre.
The Western exit would have a concourse up to the shopping centre and bus interchange. the Eastern exit would have a short moving walkway up to the existing heavy rail station.

And the escalators would be rising up diagonally. so with a 160m platform plus say 60m linear length of escalators coming from each end that makes the whole complex long enough to bridge between both the station and shopping center.

And its all underground, so no hill 

That allows rail-rail connections for those heading to Toowong and Milton, and the whole station is still called Indooroopilly.

[ozbob]

Sent to all outlets:

8th April 2013

Rail for the Centenary Suburbs?

Greetings,


http://i998.photobucket.com/albums/af104/tramtrain/CTR_title_1_zps9415923e.jpg


A very interesting discussion on the possibility of extending heavy rail to the Centenary Suburbs ---> http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=9824.0 as part of upgrades recommended in the Inner City Rail Capacity Study.

The Inner City Rail Capacity Study was the precursor study for Cross River Rail which recommended a phase 1 tunnel from the southside (Cross River Rail) and a second tunnel in 2026 from the Ipswich line via West End (phase 2). This opens up the possibility to separate the Springfield line from the rest of the rail network and run it like a metro system, with high frequency services all day.

The possibility also exists to include The University of Queensland, a major trip generator after the Brisbane CBD.

The Centenary Suburbs are some of Brisbane's worst public transport "no go zones" despite having 10 bus routes go to the suburbs. All are low frequency, low span and are generally useless for the ordinary person to use. The possibility of heavy rail being extended into the Centenary Suburbs is an exciting possibility to change this. It should be included in future transport planning considerations.

A bridge from Moggill to Riverhills, potentially a green bridge, would also be needed to get buses across.

Best wishes
Robert

Robert Dow
Administration
admin@backontrack.org
RAIL Back On Track http://backontrack.org


References:

1. Inner City Rail Capacity Study
http://www.tmr.qld.gov.au/projects/name/i/inner-city-rail-capacity-study.aspx

2. Centenary Suburbs Rail
http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=9824.0

[somebody]

From park road, the busway could have been a very short 400m tunnel to connect with the SEB near Henry St Wooloongabba, skipping the PA.

Instead, it does a 900m route to serve the PA hospital, which in the end totals a 1.6km total deviation compared to the 'short' route, due to having to trace back along the SEB.

Whoa there.  Just because that would have been shorter doesn't mean it would have been cheaper to build.  You'd need a much lower level station at Park Rd to get under the railway line, and you'd need to resume quite a number of properties to build the cut and cover tunnel - it's hardly going to be deep enough to do a driven tunnel and leave the surface undisturbed.

Then there is no advantage for the majority of passengers, who are on the 139/169/209 services.  You miss out on having any sort of interchange with Ipswich Rd services and on having the new portal to O'Keefe St that is used by the 77 and should be used by others.

I don't think this possibility is realistic.

[somebody]

All the states have these grandiose pie in the sky mega transport plans, not hard to do. What they lack is the method to fund them with sticking their hands out to the feds for up to 80% of the project which is completely un reasonable. Feds (both sides) have provided funds to upgrade the interstate and a few other core routes, but how much should we expect them to fund commuter rail? The states need to find other ways that don't involve bankruptcy.

I find that position illogical, given the so called "vertical fiscal imbalance", i.e. the fact that the Federal Government has the majority of revenue raising capability, but the State Governments are called on to provide most of the on-the-ground services.

What you are supporting is a continuation of the system of funding & responsibilities that has resulted in the basket-case situation we now find ourselves in.

Well put.

Lapdog, when I asked for a source, I meant for the 50% by car claim. The article you linked to (http://www.gpem.uq.edu.au/green-transport-infrastructure-143214) also stated,

It was discovered that more than 10,000 people, many of whom would have previously traveled to campus by car, now cross the Eleanor Schonell Bridge each weekday by bus, on foot, or by bike.

So that's nearly half the uni population there, without even looking at those who get to campus via the Chancellor's Place buses, or the Citycat, or walking/cycling from anywhere other than across the Green Bridge. I struggle to believe the 50% get to UQ via car.

If you look at this image: http://chartingtransport.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/bris-dest-pt.gif
Shows that only 27% of St Lucia workers use PT.  Although 16% use active transport: http://chartingtransport.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/bris-dest-active.gif

I guess that isn't too far from the 50% claim.  I imagine that students have a higher sustainable transport share than staff.

[SurfRail]

My preferred approach these days would be to effectively convert Route 209 to light rail, dive at UQ Lakes into a driven tunnel towards Chancellors' Place and then to Toowong or Indooropilly, depending on what delivers the best bang for buck.

South-East Busway alignment (planned and existing) from Hyperdome to the City, corridor through the city and Northern Busway to at least Chermside to be converted to a light metro using light-weight high-capacity automated rollingstock (eg like the DLR).

[SteelPan]

Please forgive the "double-dip" - I posted my rant below in the WA forum earlier, but I do believe it's really relevant to this discussion.  The issue is not really what brand govt we have, it's not really whether we should build a rail line to this area or that area, the REAL issue is finding the money to build the infrastructure, find the money and we're half way there - then you've just got to find a politician with vision beyond the next 24hrs - I suspect here we may have serious problems. 



THE ONLY way Australia - every part of it - is going to meet its massive infrastructure backlog over the next generation, is by putting in place legislation that makes infrastructure investment attractive to this nations HUGE superannuation sector, the most intelligent thing Australia ever embraced and led by the Hawk/Keating administrations.

To Jo Public, it is irrelevant as to who "owns" the actual rail corridor/rolling stock or the busway or the ferry etc what s/he wants is affordable frequent services to actually BE AVAILABLE instead of sitting, forever, in "Public Transit Fantasy Report 2050" or some similar piece of "huff and puff".

- put in place legislation to make infrastructure investment viable
+
- put in place legislation to protect community service standards and price fairness
= Infrastructure/Service Delivery!

Example of many potential ones:
For all I care the King of Mook-Mook Land could own a Brisbane Underground Metro - what matters is we'd get to actually have it!

Ps. people do actually realise, that under many of these types of arrangements, not only does someone else deliver the infrastructure (ie, pay for it) which the community benefits from, but after an agree period, say 99yrs, ownership reverts back to the state   

[somebody]

What about walk up and those living on campus?

Refer to my post above.

[somebody]

 

There's nothing else to say.

[Old Northern Road]

A Darra – Hamilton metro was included in one of Brisbane City Council's transport plans (maybe the same plan that had Cleveland solution?). Their plan had the line running via UQ and terminating at Darra and serving Newstead instead of New Farm. It would be stupid not having the line serve UQ.

Darra (Darra station would need to be moved further west if you want to have the trains continue to Springfield)
Mount Ommaney
Jindalee
Kenmore (Kenmore Village or further east)
Indooroopilly
UQ
West End (Intersection of Boundary St and Vulture St)
South Brisbane
Albert Street
Eagle Street
Fortitude Valley
Newstead (Skyring Tce)
Bulimba

At Bulimba the line should split in two with one line heading north to Hamilton and possibly continuing to Eagle Junction via the Doomben line (obviously could only happen if there is no freight) and the other connecting with the Cleveland line at either Morningside or Cannon Hill.

[Old Northern Road]

Putting aside my grumbling above, I like the way you're thinking, particularly at the Bulimba - Hamilton/Doomben end of things as it kills off the huge detour to get to Doomben.  I presume you're thinking this would result in closure of Eagle Jct - Doomben, or at least it becoming a freight-only route as I cannot see a service via the legacy route being useful if something like you propose was built.

A while ago I made a spreadsheet which plotted the length, timing, number of stations, etc, of all Australian suburban & interurban routes that I could find sufficient data for.  The Doomben came in at the bottom of the table - slowest average speed of any urban rail service in Australia. Even some Melbourne tram routes are faster across the distance.

Although with the number of river crossings, shouldn't this be called cross-cross-cross-cross-cross-cross-river-rail (or CCCCCCRR). 

I'm pretty sure that I worked out that Sydney's Eastern Suburbs line was the slowest. The Doomben line had an average speed of 30km/h which was the same as a few lines in Melbourne and the Eastern Suburbs line was the only line in the country with an average speed less than 30km/h. I'd be surprised if any tram lines in Melbourne had an average speed of more than 30km/h.

[somebody]

I'm pretty sure that I worked out that Sydney's Eastern Suburbs line was the slowest. The Doomben line had an average speed of 30km/h which was the same as a few lines in Melbourne and the Eastern Suburbs line was the only line in the country with an average speed less than 30km/h. I'd be surprised if any tram lines in Melbourne had an average speed of more than 30km/h.

How do you figure?  Central-Bondi Junction is 6.76km rail distance covered in 13 minutes = 31.2km/h
Doomben: Central-Doobmen 9.9km rail distance covered in 21 minutes = 28.3km/h

[colinw]

Actually Old Northern Road is correct. I just looked at my spreadsheet again, and I have mis-remembered.

ESR = 6.8km in 14 minutes = 28.97 km/h
Doomben = 9.9km in 20 minutes = 29.7 km/h

Those are the only two suburban heavy rail routes in Australia that fall below the 30 km/h mark.

[somebody]

There's some trips done in 13 minutes.  I can now see others done in 14 minutes.

But then there's trips on the Doomben line in 19 minutes as well as ones done in 21 minutes.

[Old Northern Road]

Most outbound trips are 19mins and most inbound trips are 20mins although there are some that take 22mins. I wouldn't be surprised if all trips are increased to 22min when the timetable is introduced.