The Kenmore Rail Bypass

[Gazza]

And you will save costs by not building a somewhat redundant piece of capital infrastructure in the first place. It's all well and good to spend BILLIONS on shiny new infrastructure, but when all that is required is just a few MILLION for a bus network overhaul and bus priority across the region, it's hard to see this project stack up when you will be getting pretty similar value for 1/1000th of the cost.

Slap down some bus lanes on the Western Fwy with any future widening projects and Bob's your uncle.

So more of this? Would that bring similar value vs a train line? Similar passenger/patronage levels?



Bus improvements are fine - I just think they are a stop gap, not a more permanent solution.

What's the obsession with that freeway bus stop?
It's literally one bus stop in the whole western suburbs network.
Gets 1500 boardings a month, meanwhile the one in the actual middle of Kenmore gets 6500 per month.

Same goes for the roundabout stop at Mt Ommaney for that matter. That stop gets 800 boardings per month, meanwhile the one at the shopping center interchange (400m away) gets 13,000 a month.

So clearly a couple of ugly bus stops on the freeway are largely irrelevant to most users in the area.

Most passengers in that area are going to be boarding public transport at their local stop in suburbia.

[Cazza]

So more of this? Would that bring similar value vs a train line? Similar passenger/patronage levels?

Sorry, I should have been clearer.


Warringah Freeway, Sydney

Proper dedicated 24/7 bus lanes down the Western Fwy between the Legacy Way and Mt Ommaney with improved stations and pedestrian connections (as just raised by Tim).



Barclay Road Station, Sydney

Look, people waiting to catch a bus running on dedicated bus lanes along the freeway. Sure, it may not have the "train factor" that trains have, but at 1/1000th of the cost, it's a pretty good value for money I must say. Back to your point before, all those cars stuck in traffic will mean that...

all the buses rush by you can be reminded why you should have taken bus instead...

[#Metro]

-This is quoted as being $2-3b for a catchment of around 25,000 people.

Yes, but that is comparable to the stations built on the train line on the other side of the river, which are (2016 census):

Chelmer - 2,998 people
Graceville - 4634 people
Sherwood - 5,313 people
Corinda - 5,064 people
Oxley - 8,336 people
=====================
Total: 26,345 people
=====================

And those suburbs don't have a major shopping centre like Mt Ommaney. And if a bridge is built between Bellbowrie-Riverhills the catchment is larger still.

And I was thinking more along the lines of:

Very crude drawing of what i'd be thinking were something like this to go ahead. Would require a rebuild of the junctions around Darra to work though.
Would work similar to Wolli Creek. Red lines are rough guides of the platforms, with blue being the pedestrian connection between the two (very rough drawing).

Thanks for the feedback, makes sense though I think it might be better after the overpass. I'll amend/refine the concept further.

The drive structure near Indro also seems very difficult from an engineering perspective. Land in that area is expensive, and very densely built up, so resumptions would be costly if you wanted to run it at-grade approaching Indro.
Looking at your map, that whole northern section looks extremely difficult to pull off.

If anything I'd say the project would end up being more than $2b-$3b. Try $4b. Especially if you're now including a whole rebuild of Indro station, and a bus interchange.
On that note, how are you envisioning the Indro end of this to look? Does the new line dive north of the station, with underground platforms at Indro? (think the Eastern suburbs line in Sydney at Redfern). Or are you using the existing platforms and diving somewhere south of the station (good luck, there's a river in the way).

Thanks for the feedback, nothing is really easy when it comes to Priority A corridor infrastructure. I imagine though that it would be similar to the Merivale Bridge turn into Roma Street. I'm not a civil Engineer, but it would be good to see a feasibility study into the engineering of the portal.

I think the concept needs to come first, then that gets built on with engineering investigations.

[verbatim9]

They are likely to fix up that Figtree Pocket interchange when  the Fwy is widened to three lanes in each direction.

[#Metro]

Updated concept - Version 2

- Removed Kenmore (Gazza's Feedback), subsitute with Fig Tree Pocket station
- Moved Sumner Park (Two-level station) to connect with Ipswich Line

Updated Line Concept



Updated Sumner Park Station Concept

Bring this up again when you start seeing 5-storey apartments propping up in Mt Ommaney/Jamboree heights and maybe the huge cost of this proposal would be justified. Truthfully the terrain is probably the biggest issue. If the area north of the river was dead flat, and you didn't have 1-2 river crossing to contend with, maybe you'd have a better chance.

The Ipswich line isn't flat either. It has bridges that cross the river, and also a lot of the line is in a cutting due to hills (e.g. Taringa).

The hilliness is the reason why we have the narrow gauge not the standard gauge.

The M5 corridor has reserved land for expansion. Perhaps that could be used?

[timh]

-This is quoted as being $2-3b for a catchment of around 25,000 people.

Yes, but that is comparable to the stations built on the train line on the other side of the river, which are (2016 census):

Chelmer - 2,998 people
Graceville - 4634 people
Sherwood - 5,313 people
Corinda - 5,064 people
Oxley - 8,336 people
=====================
Total: 26,345 people
=====================

And those suburbs don't have a major shopping centre like Mt Ommaney. And if a bridge is built between Bellbowrie-Riverhills the catchment is larger still.

Yeah sure man, but that's not the point. The population of Gympie is only 50,000 yet it has a railway running all the way to it. All these stations though were built a LONG time ago. They're some of the oldest stations on the network, with Chelmer opening in 1876! We should be VERY grateful that our government has kept these old suburban lines running to the modern day, unlike many North American cities which abandoned many of their suburban passenger railway lines, and now have a difficult task of rebuilding their transit networks from the ground up. We are lucky to have a station at Chelmer/Graceville etc.

The point we are making here is that it is not worth the MONEY to construct, for the amount of POPULATION that it would serve. There are other parts of SEQ with higher population densities that need dedicated trunk corridors (rail, Busway, whatever) that either have a reserved corridor, or are going over Greenfield (Maroochydore line, Beaudesert line, Ripley Valley line), etc. This is where the money is better spent today

And I was thinking more along the lines of:

Again, I don't think the grades/alignment of the Western Freeway would suit this kind of situation unless you want your trains going really slow. The existing median is also not wide enough, so you would still need significant earthworks to widen the corridor.

Cazza's concepts are spot on. Dedicated buslanes, busway-esque stations. You could achieve a high quality, high capacity corridor this way at a fraction of the cost of rail.

Bring this up again when you start seeing 5-storey apartments propping up in Mt Ommaney/Jamboree heights and maybe the huge cost of this proposal would be justified. Truthfully the terrain is probably the biggest issue. If the area north of the river was dead flat, and you didn't have 1-2 river crossing to contend with, maybe you'd have a better chance.

I imagine though that it would be similar to the Merivale Bridge turn into Roma Street. I'm not a civil Engineer, but it would be good to see a feasibility study into the engineering of the portal.

I think the concept needs to come first, then that gets built on with engineering investigations.

You're going to have to be WAY more specific. Like the Merivale bridge?? So the line goes south from Indro on the existing quad and dives into a tunnel south of the river, somewhere north of Chelmer?



Sent from my SM-G780F using Tapatalk

[#Metro]

Cazza's concepts are spot on. Dedicated buslanes, busway-esque stations. You could achieve a high quality, high capacity corridor this way at a fraction of the cost of rail.

I'd actually like to see this alternative concept detailed in its own thread so we can properly evaluate it. 

Where are the stations going to be, which part will be dedicated, which part won't etc. Maps with stations.
Line/route frequencies, like I have here.

If it is a Priority A corridor busway then it will cost similar to rail as its the Priority Corridor that you're paying for.

We've seen this with the Eastern Busway where the Buranda-Stones corner section/ramp over the Creek cost $465 million, and that was what not even 1 km?

Will it have a bridge or will it be like the Northern Busway with compromised sections with mixed-traffic/congestion exposed bits in between?

[Cazza]

Cazza's concepts are spot on. Dedicated buslanes, busway-esque stations. You could achieve a high quality, high capacity corridor this way at a fraction of the cost of rail.

I'd actually like to see this alternative concept detailed in its own thread so we can properly evaluate it. 

If it is a Priority A corridor busway then it will cost similar to rail as its the Priority Corridor that you're paying for.

We've seen this with the Eastern Busway where the Buranda-Stones corner section/ramp over the Creek cost $465 million, and that was what not even 1 km?

Will it have a bridge or will it be like the Northern Busway with compromised sections in between?

Bus lanes not a busway, as provided in the images I posted above and outlined by Tim. The M5 is on TMRs list to be widened (for the better or for the worse) within coming years and it would be ideal to have some sort of bus lanes included (whether they be the inside or outside lanes). The days of the busways are pretty much over in my opinion (except for the connection between Truro and Federation Sts and following the M1 to Springwood).

Bus lanes and BRT can provide so many benefits at just a fraction of the cost. That's not to say that heavy rail and proper Metro shouldn't be looked at, because it certainly should where it is viable, but I am of the view that it simply isn't viable in this scenario and we are better off spending our time pushing for more achievable and suitable outcomes.

[#Metro]

Bus lanes not a busway, as provided in the images I posted above and outlined by Tim. The M5 is on TMRs list to be widened (for the better or for the worse) within coming years and it would be ideal to have some sort of bus lanes included (whether they be the inside or outside lanes). The days of the busways are pretty much over in my opinion (except for the connection between Truro and Federation Sts and following the M1 to Springwood).

I think the crux here is whether the value proposition is more for more or less for less (which is being represented as more for less, but its really not because Priority B & C =/= Priority A).

It would be helpful to have all the relevant detail. For example, will you retain the stop setup at Fig Tree Pocket Road? Would the buses continue to Coronation Drive or terminate at Indooroopilly? Would Indooroopilly be rebuilt or kept the same? Would there be a connection to Darra station and would that be Class A, B, or C? etc.

I agree the days of busways in Brisbane are over as its the capacity and route complexity of bus with the infrastructure cost of rail.

Bus lanes are easily removed, as they were on Coronation Drive. I don't favour Priority B Corridor for this reason and also it's a marginal improvement vs the motorway express buses already in this area IMHO. I also think it won't be resilient in wet weather when the road network clogs right up.

I would like to see Priority A PT Corridor in this area fully protected from car congestion. TMR thought twice before widening the SE Freeway and decided to put busway into a Priority A corridor, and that is to their credit. I would just hope that they reconsider similarly here when M5 expansion is on the cards.

In my view that's what will bring the patronage in.

[Gazza]

I think its a bit over the top to do a separate thread, its not as if having bus lanes and bus jumps is an alien concept and the idea has been kicking around on Rbot for as long as the idea of a Centenary BUZ has existed.

When coming up with these proposals, it does actually help to think about engineering up front, and make apples for apples comparisons.

Perth has a sucessful network of trains running in freeway medians because when the freeways were built, land was set aside and a larger than average median was built:
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Ellenbrook+WA/@-31.8718358,115.9170968,140m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x2a32b45c548eab5d:0x504f0b535df43e0!8m2!3d-31.7636232!4d115.9750082

(The ellenbrook line will run down here)

However saying "Use the freeway corridor" without checking a bit on streetview, qld topo map etc is fraught, because the amount of surgery needed, or the steepness of the road may well make using the corridor pointless compared to other options.


For example, there could well be a major cost differential between rail or bus. Here, you can see the steep hill climb up from the river on the Centenary highway. For a bus project, it's not really an issue, but for rail, you're going to need a cutting or tunnel.

To sort of echo Cazzas sentiments, if you are going to do rail in the area, wait and do it properly as part of a metro project rather than a crappy yet expensive branch line with only 2 good stations.

[timh]

Bus lanes not a busway, as provided in the images I posted above and outlined by Tim. The M5 is on TMRs list to be widened (for the better or for the worse) within coming years and it would be ideal to have some sort of bus lanes included (whether they be the inside or outside lanes). The days of the busways are pretty much over in my opinion (except for the connection between Truro and Federation Sts and following the M1 to Springwood).

It would be helpful to have all the relevant detail. For example, will you retain the stop setup at Fig Tree Pocket Road? Would the buses continue to Coronation Drive or terminate at Indooroopilly? Would Indooroopilly be rebuilt or kept the same? Would there be a connection to Darra station and would that be Class A, B, or C? etc.

I agree the days of busways in Brisbane are over as its the capacity and route complexity of bus with the infrastructure cost of rail.

Bus lanes are easily removed, as they were on Coronation Drive. I don't favour Priority B Corridor for this reason and also it's a marginal improvement vs the motorway express buses already in this area IMHO. I also think it won't be resilient in wet weather when the road network clogs right up.

I would like to see Priority A PT Corridor in this area fully protected from car congestion. TMR thought twice before widening the SE Freeway and decided to put busway into a Priority A corridor, and that is to their credit. I would just hope that they reconsider similarly here when M5 expansion is on the cards.

In my view that's what will bring the patronage in.

I can't draw to save my life, but here's some ideas. Working south from Legacy Way southern portal:

• Dedicated buslanes on the outside lanes of the M5 south until the Moggil Road overpass. You would somehow have to have the southbound exit designed in such a way that cars can still exit though. Idk, cars can enter the busway to exit? Like how they can enter the buslane to turn left onto Mains road from klumpp road? Idk. Or maybe they median run I have no idea, Cazza/Gazza are better at this stuff than me.
• At the Moggil road overpass, you could widen the existing bridge and add bus station stops on the outside. There's enough room inside the footprint of the existing interchange. Buses would just stop there. Imagine the busway station at Holland Park west where it's elevated and goes over the road, but with a 6-lane freeway in the middle. So you've got pedestrian stairs/elevators down to Moggil road. Alternatively if the buslanes median run, then its an island station and you widen the car lanes around it. Opportunities for a local bus interchange and/or park and ride by resuming the land currently used by Sci-Fleet Toyota at the south-western side of the interchange.
• Dedicated buslanes continue down the outside lane of the M5 until Fig Tree Pocket Road
• Improve the station at Fig Tree Pocket Road. Build pedestrian overpass linking the two stops across the highway, and a pedestrian overpass linking the stops to the surrounding street areas so that pax don't have to walk across a high-speed freeway onramp (lol). Spruce up the stops a little bit with some busway style iconography, bigger shelters, platforms, etc. Opportunity for a park n' ride/kiss n' ride/local bus interchange by resuming 144-150 Fig Tree Pocket Road.
• Continue dedicated buslanes down the M5, across the new bridge.
• at Jindalee, southbound buses take the Sinnamon Road exit, but you build a little off-line station/stop thing (like Fig Tree pocket Rd) just north of the Pillow Talk. Then you have a bus-only on ramp back to the freeway south. For north-bound buses, you could build a bus-only off ramp onto Seventeen-Mile Rocks road, and widen Seventeen Mile Rocks Road with a kerbside dedicated buslane along the edge of the golf club. Build your northbound station around there somewhere, again with the nice platform, signage etc. Very much like the Park Ridge station. The buses then hop on the M5 heading north from there at the Sinnamon Road onramp. Maybe you chuck a bus-jump lane in at the intersection.
• Continue dedicated buslanes down the M5 to Mount Ommaney roundabout interchange
• For Mount Ommaney, two options:
      - If you want to continue further south, build a highway-side elevated station in the middle of the roundabout (like I suggested with the Moggil Road interchange). Pedestrian overpass connecting to the Mount Ommaney complex near the Target. Buses then continue further south in the buslanes to the Sumners Road Interchange.
     - If you don't want to continue further south, just have the buses exit with the regular traffic and go into the interchange at Mount Ommaney centre. Maybe expand it by demolishing the library and Community centre, then rebuilding those over the top of the new interchange (think the Logan North library over the top of the pool carpark). This setup would be kinda like what Springwood is right now (pre-new busway).
  

If you want to go south to the Sumners Road interchange, I have no idea what you'd do there or where you go. But there's some ideas for the infrastructure required.

In terms of service patterns, idk man Cazza's good at that stuff. If you had infrastructure like this, you could basically use it like the busway, where some buses use the whole length, some hop on half way, some exit halfway. Depends on the route.

[verbatim9]

There is no need for bus lanes once the freeway is widened to 3 lanes in each direction. By having three lanes will allow for the Centenary Rockets to run smoothly. That's all Centenary needs as well as the Riverhills express to be extended to Darra 7  days from 6am to midnight.

[Cazza]

How smooth is smoothly?







Some of those are more than 3 lanes, yet the traffic is just as bad. Adding extra lanes may slightly increase capacity, but it also increases the number of vehicles and overall congestion at a greater rate. Induced demand and how human factors impact and cause congestion are very important concepts and ideas to look into

[#Metro]

How would running Springfield Line rail through the Centenary Suburbs impact bus services?

I was curious to see what could happen to the bus network if the Springfield Rail line went via Centenary.
Using a whole-of-bus network map of the Brisbane City Council bus network (2016) I was able to model this.

Results CLICK IMAGES TO ENLARGE
Here line width represents frequency. (Bus 60 min - thin green, 30 min - black; 15 min - red; peak-only - thin blue).

Without Rail


With Rail


The results are quite interesting. When the line haul task is taken away from BCC buses and given to rail, I found that:

(a) no buses in Centenary need to cross the Centenary Bridge or go to Indooroopilly
(b) no buses need to run on the Centenary Motorway or Moggill Road from the Centenary Suburbs
(c) no need for any BCC Rocket buses (e.g Rockets P455, P456, P457, P458, P459) to run to the CBD saving about 20 bus-km
   for each trip on each service. Route 445 Fig Tree Pocket can service Fig Tree Pocket Station and be terminated at Indooroopilly.
(d) no need for bus priority measures or pseudo-busways on arterial roads or motorways in the area given (a)-(c)
(d) Peak only local feeder bus service 451 Darra not required
(e) Route 460 Heathwood only required to Richlands Station (rather than run the whole 28 km into the Brisbane CBD)
(f) Simpler bus network that combines passengers going to different destinations on the same bus (Brisbane CBD, Springfield CBD, Ipswich CBD)
   This means fuller buses all day and thus improved bus service span, frequency and patronage due to Mohring Effect
(g) All-day bus connections to existing Ipswich Line stations improved greatly
(h) Major improvement to bus services in Sinnamon Park, Jindalee (East of M5 Motorway), and Seventeen Mile Rocks
(i) High-frequency bus connection every 10 minutes all day between Mt Ommanney Shopping Centre Rail Station and Darra Station
   formed from the overlap of three local feeder bus services (modified Route 452, 454, 467 on Glen Ross Rd Sinnamon Park)
(j) Probably optional to have Sumners Park station with a two-level rail interchange station. Passengers could just catch a 10-min frequent bus to Darra from Mount Ommaney Station.
(k) Rail is now much closer, and residents have many more options for travelling. For example, residents of Seventeen
   Mile Rocks, Sinnamon Park, and Jindalee can catch the bus in any direction and arrive at a train station.

The main all-day bus services in the local area would be:

- Route 452 (Modified) (Riverhills - Sumner Road - Mt Ommaney Station - Darra Rail)
- Route 454 (Modified) (Riverhills - Horizon Drive - Mt Ommaney Station - Darra Rail)
- Route 467 (Modified) (Oxley - Seventeen Mile Rocks - Jindalee Rail - Mt Ommaney Station - Sinammon Park - Darra Rail)

Easy future access to Mt Ommaney Shopping Centre and trains to the Brisbane or Springfield CBDs on Routes 452 and 454 if a Bridge
is constructed at Bellbowrie.

The models are accessible here
1. RBOT in-house model of BCC Bus Network (2016) HERE
2. Same as (1) but with Springfield Rail Line through Centenary HERE

Conclusions:

Most of the commentary has so far focused on speeding up buses with priority lanes. This focus overlooks the benefits that rail
has in re-organising the bus network by combining passengers with different destinations on the same local bus services. The
spreading of passengers across an array of competing bus services is a key reason why none of the individual bus services
in the Centenary area has the patronage to support all-day frequent services. Worse, the running of Brisbane City Council
bus services on the Centenary Motorway and Moggil Road exposes Centenary bus services to traffic congestion impacts and unreliability.

Significant bus operational savings would also be realised by not having to run an array of peak-hour rocket buses at all,
which are expensive to operate and are generally around 20 km in length to reach the Brisbane CBD. Regular services Route 453, 454 and 450
become local feeders so there is no need to run these all the way to the Brisbane CBD.

Giving the line-haul public transport task to rail results in a more effective and efficient local bus network and completely protected
from congestion on arterial roads. Such a bus network would be more useful and have the patronage to support all day decent bus service through combining passengers going to different destinations on the same local bus services. Due to this effect, feeder bus services to existing Ipswich line stations would be greatly improved (especially to Darra station, which would have at least 10-minute frequent bus service all day).

Note: The bus model needs slight updating (2016 bus network), but for this purpose is sufficient. Here it is assumed that TransLink chooses
a 30-minute basic frequency on local bus services, but this could be more frequent (not modelled).

[SteelPan]

Awesome Idea.....Chance of it happening in next say 50yrs in World Class Olympic City....Brissy.....ZIP!

Remember, no point really suggesting a RAIL project on a bus website!

[Gazza]

Awesome Idea.....Chance of it happening in next say 50yrs in World Class Olympic City....Brissy.....ZIP!

Remember, no point really suggesting a RAIL project on a bus website!

Why is this a bus website?

[ozbob]

Well one point Steelpan is spot on ... chance of this happening is zip.

There are far more pressing needs on the network.

[STB]

Metro, your ability to come up with foamy foam ideas is nonparallel, like others have said though, it's probably 50 years too early to even start thinking about this - keep in mind too that the demographics of the area have more higher wages than say in Darra, so you'd probably only capture even with rail a small portion of the total population out within the Cententary suburbs, purely because people who earn that sort of money generally are happier to drive, and will have 2 or 3 cars parked in their driveways.  Also the other thing that needs to be taken into consideration is that COVID is here to stay for quite a while, will become endemic, so that will likely put a dampener on public transport use for many years to come, unfortunately.

[#Metro]

Remember, no point really suggesting a RAIL project on a bus website!

As you know STB, the Swiss in Zurich are quite rich and yet Zurich has excellent PT.
The causes of low PT use were detailed in the previous post and have little to do with what car residents bought.

The rail option is now well defined, properly characterised, and justified. It will be "off the shelf" policy should anyone want to run with it.

I have to say I was surprised at comments advocating motorway expansion just so we can cling a little bit longer to the sinking BCC express peak hour bus philosophy.

Thanks for the comments, 🙂🙂

[timh]

The rail option is now well defined, properly characterised, and justified. It will be "off the shelf" policy should anyone want to run with it.

That is an incredibly inflated view of some posts from a random person on a forum, accompanied by some scribbles on Google Maps, which everyone else largely disagreed with.

I have to say I was surprised at comments advocating motorway expansion just so we can cling a little bit longer to the sinking BCC express peak hour bus philosophy.

You've managed to completely ignore everyone's valid criticisms (high cost vs pax capacity, difficult vertical alignment issues, etc), and also completely disregarded the fact that we've all been proposing more realistic, cost effective alternatives that are actually achievable in the real world. If you could magically make these issues go away then sure just build a giant Maglev tunnel as the crow flies straight from Roma Street to Kenmore!

Sent from my SM-G780F using Tapatalk

[#Metro]

Engineers have solutions.

They got a train over Sydney harbour and put one under the Brisbane river.

They connected Roma St to Central when there was the side of Spring Hill in the way.

They didn't sit back and think " hmm, not flat ground, too hard".

I expect interim bus solutions but the idea is now there for the rail option.

🙂🙂

[Gazza]

Hey aren't those features in a really significant location in the rail system?

Its not like Syd builds a dedicated tunneled line to a Kmart shopping centre.

I don't think anyone questioned if an engineer could get a rail line through that area. Strawmen don't help the argument.

The question is how effective such a line is at converting costs to benefits given we havd established its not a flat run.

CRR is $5.4b but is performing a pivotal role in terms of unlocking capacity, and having stations in fairly significant locations like Woolloongabba, and had a mildly positive CBR.

But if this is $2-3b as you stare, it's about half the cost of CRR, and it would get some additional passengers, but probably not $3b worth so might have a negative CBR.

You don't even need to do a formal study to understand that.

But if for example there was a broader metro project (actual rail) you might find the marginal cost of a direct tunnel extension from uq and indro, to mt Ommaney, coupled with a higher population at that point in the future, might generate a positive cbr

[#Metro]

A concept needs to be defined and refined and that is what I have done and detailed here.

If I wanted to do a bus concept I would have done that. Actually, maybe I already did with Centenary Glider which was adopted by both Red Team and Green team as official mayoral election policy.

It's Mt Omnaney not Mount Everest, and I don't think anyone should lose sleep over something that is a concept.

[Gazza]

Saying people are losing sleep is another strawman

[HappyTrainGuy]

Ummmm...

Your budget is very underestimated. MBRL was already on reserved land and land not yet developed. The LNP also removed gold plating from the project ie active transport links on the corridor (stations were to be similar with cycling/pedestrian links going under some stations/thru the corridor but now they go through the car parks) along with cheaper signalling being installed which has been a real pain in the ass.

Another problem. How do you get trains onto the line?? Are they coming from Richlands?? Are you building new stabling locations???

Overhead power supply feeder station location??? Your going to need power for those hills.

Rollingstock?? Is this factored into your underestimated budget??

Alignment. Trains aren't like cars when it comes to speed, curves and elevation. If you know the topography of the area you'll know the bit I'm referring too. You are also following a crappy freeway alignment. It will cost more but plow through the residential area where people actually live.

Stick to more realistic ideas and infrastructure that's actually needed. I would much like to see the couple billion you under estimated put towards more pressing and needed projects such as Doomben having a Sunday service or lines having 1 weekend timetable instead of sat only/sun only/hourly gaps/earlier weekend services. Hell. Spend the money and properly finish the quad to Darra to allow for full time express alignment where you can run the trains at higher speeds Milton to Darra.

[#Metro]

It's Mount Ommaney, not Mount Everest.

The entire Queensland Rail network features cuttings, embankments, river crossings, going over flood plains,
inclines, and dips. Much of it is not flat ground. These issues have been dealt with successfully by the Engineers
for over 150 years.

Ideally, commuter rail grades are kept below 3.5-4%, and proper engineering analysis of the corridor would be essential for the Kenmore Rail Bypass through Centenary. There are examples of some of the engineering strategies to deal with this across the network.

South Brisbane to Roma Street
The tracks of the Ipswich Line at Roma Street sit high on the side of a hill terrace.
From South Brisbane (elevation 9m) the train has to climb a viaduct, cross the Brisbane River
and then go up the side of this steep hill and perform a sharp right turn to reach Roma Street (18m elevation).
(And there is a power substation up there too.)

The train climbs 9 m to do this.

Gloucester Street, Highgate Hill
Beenleigh/Gold Coast Line

South Brisbane Station is 9 m elevation, the train heading south needs to climb to 14 m elevation (+5m)
to reach South Bank and climb to 23m elevation (+9m) to reach Park Road. That's about a 14 m climb using
South Brisbane as the reference point. The line is placed into a cutting into the side of Highgate Hill.

Roma Street and Central Station
All Lines

Spring Hill sits between Roma Street and Central Station. To get trains from Roma Street
to Central the Engineers built a portal into the side of Spring Hill. Works well.

And if we look at where the extension from Springfield (elevated station) to Ripley and beyond is going to be, that
isn't going to be flat ground either.

And it's not like RBOT members have held back proposing very expensive 5 km underground tunnels under Woodridge
or viaducts over Bethania. These areas already enjoy the benefit of rail lines and rail service, which the Centenary Suburbs do not.

The second big idea is to build an express tunnel for 5km, from Kingston to Trinder Park, passing under Woodridge
While tunnelling with multiple underground stations can be expensive in the middle of a busy city, it can be much cheaper in the suburbs. Not only will a tunnel disrupt residents less, it will allow trains to hit full throttle as they rocket under the suburb.

Images

South Brisbane to Roma Street


Roma Street trains travelling through the side of Spring Hill to Central Station


Gloucester Street approach, built into the side of Highgate Hill


Contour Elevation Map (Google) of Ripley line extension area

[HappyTrainGuy]

Sorry but your last post just reinforces yet more proof you do not know the topography and limitations of the area you are referring too.

[#Metro]

Sorry but your last post just reinforces yet more proof you do not know the topography and limitations of the area you are referring too.

HTG, what precisely is preventing some of the mitigation engineering strategies (e.g. tunnel, cuttings, viaducts etc) that have been used elsewhere on the QR network from being deployed in the Centenary M5 Corridor area? Isn't the M5 sitting in a cutting? Would the grades exceed 3.5% with these mitigation strategies in place?

[HappyTrainGuy]

The M5 cutting is about 35-40m with Kenmore road being around 50m. A lot more than 9m of climbing over a long distance. If you then want to run on the M5 you need to build even more elevation into that. It does drop a bit on the other side but as I said trains do not like climbs nor do they like twisty track. You then have to maintain the elevation to clear Fig Tree Pocket Road and Cubberla Creek and that's before you then make a dive to tunnel under to get to indooroopilly. I understand your intentions but it's really just a whole lot of foam given what the cost would be vs a review of the bus network.

[#Metro]

The M5 cutting is about 35-40m with Kenmore road being around 50m. A lot more than 9m of climbing over a long distance. If you then want to run on the M5 you need to build even more elevation into that. It does drop a bit on the other side but as I said trains do not like climbs nor do they like twisty track. You then have to maintain the elevation to clear Fig Tree Pocket Road and Cubberla Creek and that's before you then make a dive to tunnel under to get to indooroopilly. I understand your intentions but it's really just a whole lot of foam given what the cost would be vs a review of the bus network.

Thanks, HTG, I appreciate the detailed feedback and agree that ideally, things would be flat as possible. The bus issues were explored in a separate CentenaryGlider thread. This thread is really about exploring the rail option. I was curious to see what elevation or grade the M5 motorway uses. And there are cuttings and the like in this corridor for the road.

Motorways cannot be too steep either.

Heavy vehicles and freight are moved on motorways such as this so the road engineers would have thought about this when selecting the corridor for the M5 motorway. I had a look at the QLD Department of Transport and Main Road road engineering manual to see what the grades for contemporary motorways are. Here is an extract:



The grades for a contemporary motorway corridor in general (M5 corridor obviously has to be widened a bit to fit rail, but there appears to be some land reserved for motorway expansion) are preferably 3% which is not too far off that for commuter rail. Perhaps this suggests that a rail corridor would not be too different from the engineering mitigations already in place for the motorway.

Source: https://www.tmr.qld.gov.au/-/media/busind/techstdpubs/Road-planning-and-design/Road-planning-and-design-manual/Current-document/RPDM_Chapter4.pdf?la=en

[Gazza]

Sorry but your last post just reinforces yet more proof you do not know the topography and limitations of the area you are referring too.

HTG, what precisely is preventing some of the mitigation engineering strategies (e.g. tunnel, cuttings, viaducts etc) that have been used elsewhere on the QR network from being deployed in the Centenary M5 Corridor area? Isn't the M5 sitting in a cutting? Would the grades exceed 3.5% with these mitigation strategies in place?

Again.

There's nothing stopping rail in challenging areas, you can always build tunnels and cuttings as you said.

But all these features cost extra money, which can make the line too expensive to build relative to the number of passengers it will add into the system.


Quite often they'll make the effort in the inner city, when large numbers of trains and passengers will use the infrastructure, but are less likely elsewhere.
Or they might do it on crucial intercity links where they have no choice.

We know that pre covid, both Toowoong and Indro get 5000 passengers per day each.
More average suburban stations like Darra and Oxley get 2000-3000 passengers per day.
Some like Sherwood and Graceville get around 1200 per day.
Being optimistic I would expect something like 5000 per day at Mt Ommaney, then 2500 per day at Jindalee and 1200 at Kenmore south.

And under 9000 pax a day is quite dissapointing for a $3b project, im sorry to say.

The grades for a contemporary motorway corridor in general (M5 corridor obviously has to be widened a bit to fit rail, but there appears to be some land reserved for motorway expansion) are preferably 3% which is not too far off that for commuter rail. Perhaps this suggests that a rail corridor would not be too different from the engineering mitigations already in place for the motorway.

Ya but the centenary is not a contemporary motorway it was built to older standards (its so steep and twisty it has an 80km/h limit)
Does anyone else remember when it had a roundabout on it lol.

I get around 7% grade based on google earth.

[HappyTrainGuy]

Metro, Note the speed limit and for new infrastructure. This section of the M5 is 80kph with now functioning variable speed limit signs. During congestion you can see 60kph appear on the signs along with 70kph advisory speed signs. The hill is 8% from memory. And that route was chosen as it was the lowest elevation in the area. To the east and west are 60m peaks.

Realistically it's not going to get traction. If you want a corridor with traction you'd resume the golf course, bridge over the river, tunnel to the northwest to Kenmore and loop back to indooroopilly popping out near Taringa with some more property resumptions. It would cost shed loads but it's really the only way you could get foamy traction. As I said earlier there are more pressing problems with the network at the moment. Christ spending that much cash could enable some 140kph running to Oakley with change left over just by replacing the timber sleepers and upgrading the rail.

[Cazza]

I'd hedge my bets in saying that said road manual probably wasn't around then the road was first constructed on this alignment back in the early 1960s. Let's also go through the table you are using: Desirable design criteria for new rural motorways for a speed limit of 110km/h.
1- This is an existing piece of infrastructure (i.e. not a new build)
2- This is an urban motorway (unlike motorways like the Warrego Hwy)
3- The main pinch point in question between the Centenary Bridge and just north of Fig Tree Pocket has a posted speed of 80km/h (not a speed limit of 110km/h)
[As HTG and Gazza have just said]

Even if this applied, there is no way this is a 3% grade: https://www.google.com/maps/@-27.5270141,152.9470908,3a,15y,11.32h,90.51t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1st-VrygSb6y2JUWyW_XvgdQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

The simple fact of the matter is a large number of our issues put forward with this idea simply haven't been mentioned, raised or provided evidence in the contrary. It's all well and good to point out potential positives of something but if there are an overwhelming number of issues or much cheaper and effective solutions, then there's no point beating a dead horse.

Sure it would be nice to have rail to every corner of the City, but back in the real world (especially coming out of the COVID recession), money is not something that can just be thrown around. A simple bus network revamp feeding into an already existing heavy rail line (which actually needs funding put towards it to have fast and frequent services run all day on it...) is more than adequate for what is needed. If in the longer term there is enough of a justification for a rail service, the Indro-Skygate Metro (which would be something worth putting a media release out about) could be extended down into the Centenary suburbs if required. We are talking a good couple of decades for that.

You go talk about the importance of positive BCR's in the CRR thread, yet this would surely have a BCR of 0.5 at most. Economics-wise (something you seem to be fairly switched on about), the opportunity cost of this project would be extremely high and truly not worth it. Fixing the bus network and spend any sort of money on useful rail infrastructure upgrades or projects would be a much better use of time and money (both of ours and the Governments). This is the last I have to say on that.

(I should note that in your bus comparison, you still talk about peak hour Routes P457, P458 and P459- these routes have not run in years and P455 and P456 are the only remaining peak hour rockets. Also on that, the majority of the points you listed with the bus network could be done with or without this rail line, without the $4b+ price tag!!).

[Gazza]

As I said earlier there are more pressing problems with the network at the moment. Christ spending that much cash could enable some 140kph running to Oakley with change left over just by replacing the timber sleepers and upgrading the rail.

$2b would easily construct rail as far as Browns Plains, no tunnels needed and a good alignment, and would free up more bus KM from the CBD since you've got the 130/140/150 and a huge number of rockets, plus also routes like the 110.
It would generate larger time savings since in that area people are further from a station in general (8km Browns Plains to Runcorn versus 2km Mt Ommaney  to Darra)

[#Metro]

Cazza, just a general response to your last post.

Most of the commentary has so far focused on speeding up buses with priority lanes. This focus overlooks the benefits that rail has in re-organising the bus network by combining passengers with different destinations on the same local bus services. The spreading of passengers across an array of competing bus services is a key reason why none of the individual bus services in the Centenary area has the patronage to support all-day frequent services.

Setting aside the mode for a moment -

As I quoted above, the city-direct services are competing with rail feeder services because essentially they are at right angles to each other in this geography. It is not simply a case of just making buses faster or giving them priority. That is only one aspect of the issue. The passengers who are going to the city are on different buses to those making the trip to rail stations.

By spreading passengers across competing services like this, none of the services has the patronage to be frequent. Especially the rail feeder services.


Image 1 (Direct Service Model): Passengers accessing Darra Rail have to travel in the opposite direction across the suburbs to get to the station. It is not reasonable or convenient for residents living West of the M5 to access Ipswich line stations.



Image 2 (Connected Network): With line-haul PT in the M5 Corridor, buses flow East-West across the M5 Corridor (but not in it) collecting patronage
from both Brisbane CBD-Bound and Ipswich line station bound services on the same buses, which gives the patronage to support all-day frequency on these feeders. With a more frequent single-seat trip to Darra (also combining to be every 10 min from suburbs west of the M5) it is much easier to access Ipswich line stations.



I think a challenge for yourself and others here is to design a bus network for this area that can do both the rail feeder role and the line haul well and attract the pax to support both. There is a clear need for some sort of major station (not just bus lanes) at Jindalee and Mt Ommaney actually set in the M5 corridor.

[Gazza]

I think a challenge for yourself and others here is to design a bus network for this area that can do both the rail feeder role and the line haul well and attract the pax to support both. There is a clear need for some sort of major station (not just bus lanes) at Jindalee and Mt Ommaney actually set in the M5 corridor.

I thought we had?
Here's something by submission back during the 'centenary bus research' thing the BCC did.

Obviously what routes do at Indooroopilly is up for debate (Terminate, go to UQ or got to the CBD) but if it was the former its a very simple network proposition...If you live in the southern centenary, ride a bus to Darra, if you are in the north, go to indro.