Station Upgrades

[kram0]

I spoke to Mark Bailey today on a matter in our local area, and during the phone call asked him about the Central station upgrade. I got a typical politician answer but he seemed to indicate there are some major changes that are being considered before they proceed. These however are not guaranteed to happen. I then asked are we talking a complete rebuild or TOD, to which he said he could not rule anything in or out.

I smell bullsh%t and don't trust the guy. Maybe the CM need to push the issue as we are getting nothing from the so called leaders.

[ozbob]

I spoke to Mark Bailey today on a matter in our local area, and during the phone call asked him about the Central station upgrade. I got a typical politician answer but he seemed to indicate there are some major changes that are being considered before they proceed. These however are not guaranteed to happen. I then asked are we talking a complete rebuild or TOD, to which he said he could not rule anything in or out.

I smell bullsh%t and don't trust the guy. Maybe the CM need to push the issue as we are getting nothing from the so called leaders.

It is hard to have confidence in anything much anymore ... 

Central keeps getting pushed back.  I suspect that lack of moolah is the fundamental  issue ...

It is a very sad reflection that the key station in the Citytrain network still has 4 of its 6 platforms as low level ...  says it all really.

[JustSomeTrainGuy]

And even then, the Roma St end of platform 5/6 isn't the same height as the NGR doors as I just found out the hard way. The step is a good 5 - 10 cm higher than the platform

[verbatim9]

Better accessible Northern entrance to the station @ Fortitude Valley

Valley Metro/Transport House Laselle redevelopment moving along. New northern entrance and walkway to the station.

[techblitz]

https://www.facebook.com/QueenslandRail/posts/2440248472660165

Has the issue of no disable access at Mooroka Station been raised? If so how is it being addressed

so far standing out as the only unanswered in a sea of answered posts.

[ozbob]

https://twitter.com/MarkBaileyMP/status/1107773889533243392

[not_available]

https://twitter.com/MarkBaileyMP/status/1107773889533243392

Nice to see it get some attention, even if it is just a fancy drawing. Always wondered how a station next to a hospital doesn't have lifts

[ozbob]

Yes, good news. Taken a while. Only partial platform raising though.

🤓

[mufreight]

Moving the station entrance to the western end of the platforms further away from the hospital entrance is typical of another TMR design failure, another of their gold plated half axed designs.  The lifts could have been put at the Brisbane end of the platforms using the existing station overbridge which could be rebuilt probably at  but then half the cost someone would not have got a good contract.

[Old Northern Road]

What part of the platform are they raising though?

[ozbob]

What part of the platform are they raising though?

Same as the other recent ' upgrades '.  Centre, where the assisted boarding points presently are ... 
it says so in the flyer above ...

[Stillwater]

It is a station next to a hospital.  Full height platform raising justified.  Family member, 90-y-o, travels by train for regular treatment at the Wesley and would appreciate being able to step onto platform without much of a step up/down.  Lots more like her.

[brissypete]

Moving the station entrance to the western end of the platforms further away from the hospital entrance is typical of another TMR design failure, another of their gold plated half axed designs.  The lifts could have been put at the Brisbane end of the platforms using the existing station overbridge which could be rebuilt probably at  but then half the cost someone would not have got a good contract.

Actually the Western end of platform should be no more difficult and even easier. Just enter Medical Centre building take lift to Level 3 and follow walkway to Level 2 of next building which connects to hospital entrance.

IF coordinated with hospital it could be a massive improvement on the current situation.

Sent from my G8141 using Tapatalk

[achiruel]

Is anyone or RBoT officially giving feedback on the situation at Auchenflower.

I don't think I've ever been there (only through) but from satellite the platforms do appear to be on a slight curve. Is this the reason behind partial raising?

Although only partial raising at Loganlea as well (which is also near a hospital) and is absolutely dead straight so 

[ozbob]

The partial platform raising is purely driven by false economic considerations.

Yes, it has been raised a number of times directly with the authorities.

At least we do have commitment for full length platform raising for Central platforms 1 & 2, 3 & 4   

[SABB]

For those who think that raising platforms is easy.
First, some history.
Most of the QR suburban stations were built before the early 1900s.
Typically, the platform is earth-filled with a concrete platform face and a platform coping stone on top.
The platform facing is not like a retaining wall that has a footing extending out or back into the platform. It is only stable because of the weight of the coping stone.
Track standards at that time were probably 60 pound rail with timber sleepers and 4 inches of ballast. Total depth from rail to formation was something like 15 inches (380mm).
Since that time, we now use heavier rails, sleeper plates, deeper sleepers and more ballast - rail to formation is now in excess of 660mm.
If you change over to a more modern track structure, you still need to keep top of rail at the same level, so you need to cut the formation down by about 300mm which, if you are not careful, will cause the platform facing to fall over as you are undercutting the ground support for the facing.
The undercutting operation is done in short sections to prevent this.
To raise a platform, the very first action is to remove the coping stone. Remember this is providing the weight to stabilise the platform face.
You then add more fill which increases the horizontal earth pressure on the platform facing which has also been undercut sometime in the past for the new track structure.
There is a real risk that the platform face will fall over while you are doing this.
If you want to do a short high level section, you can do things like using special backfill/ties to stabilise that short section.
Another issue is that platforms are graded so that water runs towards the platform edge, away from the station building.  If you lift the whole platform, you will be making the building the low point.

[ozbob]

^  thanks SABB.

South Brisbane was completely raised a few years ago.  It is really just a matter of wanting to to do it in the end.

South Brisbane was closed for a few weeks and done.

There is a culture at present that is afraid of closing the stations for a few weeks and doing them quickly,  and properly in a few weeks.  They prefer to do a  half-baked upgrade over 18 months or longer.  By closing the stations (bus pax UP and Down to next stations) they would actually save a lot in labor costs (security 24/7 etc.). Also a lot safer as pesky pax are not in the way. Melbourne is a good example of doing it right.  They bite the bullet, close the stations and just do it.  Much better outcomes in the end.

[mufreight]

For those who think that raising platforms is easy.
First, some history.
Most of the QR suburban stations were built before the early 1900s.
Typically, the platform is earth-filled with a concrete platform face and a platform coping stone on top.
The platform facing is not like a retaining wall that has a footing extending out or back into the platform. It is only stable because of the weight of the coping stone.
Track standards at that time were probably 60 pound rail with timber sleepers and 4 inches of ballast. Total depth from rail to formation was something like 15 inches (380mm).
Since that time, we now use heavier rails, sleeper plates, deeper sleepers and more ballast - rail to formation is now in excess of 660mm.
If you change over to a more modern track structure, you still need to keep top of rail at the same level, so you need to cut the formation down by about 300mm which, if you are not careful, will cause the platform facing to fall over as you are undercutting the ground support for the facing.
The undercutting operation is done in short sections to prevent this.
To raise a platform, the very first action is to remove the coping stone. Remember this is providing the weight to stabilise the platform face.
You then add more fill which increases the horizontal earth pressure on the platform facing which has also been undercut sometime in the past for the new track structure.
There is a real risk that the platform face will fall over while you are doing this.
If you want to do a short high level section, you can do things like using special backfill/ties to stabilise that short section.
Another issue is that platforms are graded so that water runs towards the platform edge, away from the station building.  If you lift the whole platform, you will be making the building the low point.

Just for the record a few facts.
(1) South Brisbane had all three platforms raised full length over three weeks.
(2) The platforms at South Brisbane were a concrete face with an earth fill.
(3) The modern approach to platforms is that they slope away from the running lines as a safety measure to     help prevent unattended strollers from rolling on to the running lines
(4) Platforms can be constructed on a curve, platforms 5 & 6 at Central are full height and on a curve, the argument that they can not build platforms on a curve because of clearances for freight trains is again nothing more than an excuse to do nothing.  Freight trains both intermodial and coal have on occasion been operated through both platforms 5 & 6 at Central hauled by both 2800 class locos and PN's PN class both of which are restricted in which lines they can operate on because of clearance issues.
(5) The electric trains operating on the electrified lines are the longest and widest rolling stock operating on QR yet this rollingstock and freight rollingstock including 2800 class and PN class locos can pass down platform 4 at Bowen Hills which is full height and negotiate the turn to and from the hole in the wall into Mayne without striking the platform face and there is no indent into the platform face which would be the case if one was needed.

Perhaps there needs to be less effort put into espousing misinformation and justification not to do things and more effort into supporting efforts to improve rail and support the staff trying to do a difficult job.
The sooner there is a Minister for Transport who has the spine to buck the unions and separate Queensland Rail from the road centric Transport and Main Roads and allow the railways to be run by railway men with the railways own infrastructure and procurement branches the better for the Queensland taxpayer

[mufreight]

An engineer friend had a look at the proposed upgrade for Auchenflower station and made the comment that there is no justification for moving the station entrance to the western end of the platforms.  The station could be made compliant with the lifts installed on the Brisbane end of the platforms and the station office could be rebuilt on the existing overbridge with the entire upgrade costing only half to two thirds of the proposed upgrade.

[verbatim9]

The outcome has been derived from extensive community consultation. So there must be a reason for altering the main entry point? It doesn't look too inconvenient for hospital workers and patrons?  Maybe it's to allow further expansion for the hospital in the future?

[ozbob]

https://twitter.com/MarkBaileyMP/status/1108259930014801920

[SABB]

Hi Ozbob
You might be getting your wish about platform raising. Rumour has it that QR is thinking about setting up a program to lift platforms.
No details issued yet.

[ozbob]

Hi Ozbob
You might be getting your wish about platform raising. Rumour has it that QR is thinking about setting up a program to lift platforms.
No details issued yet.

Thanks! 😎

[SurfRail]

Hi Ozbob
You might be getting your wish about platform raising. Rumour has it that QR is thinking about setting up a program to lift platforms.
No details issued yet.

I wonder if they will "think" about complying with all of their other statutory obligations under the DDA.  That would be nice.

[James]

The outcome has been derived from extensive community consultation. So there must be a reason for altering the main entry point? It doesn't look too inconvenient for hospital workers and patrons?  Maybe it's to allow further expansion for the hospital in the future?

I imagine it's just for ease of construction.

If you construct on the northern end, you have issues with building on a working concourse, which for local access reasons I imagine would have to be kept open during the entire project. By comparison, building on the western end allows for a lot more freedom as it is a "greenfield" site (insofar as the only things there are a few stairs, which can be closed). Disabled pax are also more likely to need to Wesley, and that end ties in with the complex just as well.

I personally think it is lazy doing it this way, but I can understand the rationale.

[red dragin]

Hi Ozbob
You might be getting your wish about platform raising. Rumour has it that QR is thinking about setting up a program to lift platforms.
No details issued yet.

https://www.hpw.qld.gov.au/qtenders/tender/display/tender-details.do?CSRFNONCE=883ACC72BE672A9DBD0D4315C3C2886D&id=27109&action=display-tender-details&returnUrl=%2Ftender%2Fsearch%2Ftender-search.do%3FCSRFNONCE%3D4D4EC93042B69EE9FD3E39B3486EE97F%26amp%3Baction%3Dsearch-from-main-page%26amp%3Bkeywords%3Drail

Queensland Rail is undertaking a Station Accessibility Upgrade Program, which provides accessibility upgrades to stations across the South East Queensland network. The program has been expedited however, many Citytrain station platforms will remain at low level for many years to come, resulting in continued issues with boarding and alighting customers with a disability. This project is intended to provide an interim platform solution capable of quickly raising the height of existing platforms from low to high level to improve their accessibility.

Queensland Rail is seeking an Expressions of Interest (EOI) from suitably qualified and experienced suppliers to offer their innovative proposal in accordance with the Specification (to be used as a guide only).

[SurfRail]

^ It appears to be nothing more than implementing a more permanent version of the temporary upgrades done for the Commonwealth Games - core boarding area only, at about 200 platforms.

No commitment to fixing the problem permanently and properly, but at least to ensuring there is some level boarding.  Scope is indicated as being over 200 individual platform faces, so it would be a decent chunk of all remaining low level platforms (if not all).

[not_available]

P1 Strathpine appears to have recieved it's partial platform raising (unsure if permanent). If you want an idea what it's like without seeing it think Fortitude Valley p3/4.

[ozbob]

It will be interesting to see whether the rebuilt Eumundi platform (from temporary to permanent) will be built to the same height as the platforms at Cooran and Pomona.  The platform at those stations aligns very nicely with the floor of the train - and for their entire length.  Camel humps at Nambour. Step-up at Yandina and Cooroy, also Traveston.

^ full height full length.  This should be the standard for all station upgrades.  It  isn't unfortunately as they do it on the cheap and it is just going to perpetuate boarding issues and prolonged dwells particularly at the suburban stations.

[Cazza]

^ full height full length.  This should be the standard for all station upgrades.  It is isn't unfortunately as they do it on the cheap and it is just going to perpetuate boarding issues and prolonged dwells particularly at the suburban stations.

So, let me get this straight. They choose to upgrade stations to full height, full length that struggle to generate above 3,500 people/year, yet stations like Alderley, Graceville (both approx. 350,000/year) or even Loganlea (approx. 720,000/year) only get the half-arsed treatment? Am I missing something that's limited the ability to do this at these stations (apart from the cost)? Or is this sheer laziness and government incompetence? It's gotta be done so just bite the bullet F.F.S!

[ozbob]

Incompetence, neglect, lack of vision and a false methodology of doing the station upgrades. 

I have explained to bureaucrats a number of times that if you close the stations (bus pax up and down) you can complete the upgrades in around 6 weeks.  No pesky pax in the way, safety issues minimised.  The savings by not doing the project over 18 months or so (as they do at present) will cover the cost of proper platform treatments (full length, full height).  No 24/7 security etc. for 18 months.

Queensland Rail actually did this when South Brisbane station was upgraded.  It was closed and they did the job in around 6 weeks.

[ >> Busy Brisbane train station closes for major upgrade  ]

We are being led by morons sadly ...

[kram0]

That would take common sense and a leader with vision, something we are lacking in this state.

As as per your comments re South Brisbane, I believe this was finished on-time and on budget with a very good end product.

[ozbob]

^ yes.  The clumsy way they are doing the recent upgrades is a further demonstration of how feeble and mediocre transport policy really is.

Queensland should change its logo to a ' half baked potato '

[HappyTrainGuy]

Incompetence, neglect, lack of vision and a false methodology of doing the station upgrades. 

I have explained to bureaucrats a number of times that if you close the stations (bus pax up and down) you can complete the upgrades in around 6 weeks.  No pesky pax in the way, safety issues minimised.  The savings by not doing the project over 18 months or so (as they do at present) will cover the cost of proper platform treatments (full length, full height).  No 24/7 security etc. for 18 months.

Queensland Rail actually did this when South Brisbane station was upgraded.  It was closed and they did the job in around 6 weeks.

[ >> Busy Brisbane train station closes for major upgrade  ]

We are being led by morons sadly ...

In the past (around the time Roma Street was modified) QR wanted full height platforms similar to what was being undertaken at Central P5/6 but treasury found some savings by minimising the amount of material required for platforms, elevators etc etc. Sadly we also had similar savings at Petrie for the L2P/MBRL projects for gold plating removal at the expense of future NWTC routing. Either you do, you're damned or someone else entirely has some say unfortunately.

[ozbob]

Yo.  It is a false economy that will prove very costly down the track. 

Our bureaucracies have failed, and are failing our communities constantly sadly. 

[kram0]

But having platforms at full height should not be deemed as the gold plated version, just the common sense version for future proofing and efficiency.

Some of our platforms (Southbank 2 & 3 as an example) have a ridiculous step up or down. This is just dumb and dangerous. 

[ozbob]

Done enough analysis of the peak on-time running data now and it shows clearly the overall impact of the low level platforms on dwell times. For example January this year ALL lines better than 95%. March only 4 lines better than 95%. Same timetables, it is reflecting the greater numbers of passengers in March. Other factors impact as well but this is a major thorn in the ' on-time ' side. Will only get worse as loads increase and population ages.

There are also the safety benefits of full height platforms too of course.

The authorities need to rethink the present half baked approach.

[HappyTrainGuy]

But having platforms at full height should not be deemed as the gold plated version, just the common sense version for future proofing and efficiency.

Some of our platforms (Southbank 2 & 3 as an example) have a ridiculous step up or down. This is just dumb and dangerous.

The gold plating at Petrie was the removal of additional infrastructure that would help facilitate other key state infrastructure projects, remove future infrastructure projects (such as the full strathpine interchange upgrade), keep costs down in the long run and prevent problems that we see elsewhere on the network such as Park Road congestion. If there's ever a NWTC or 9 car sets expect to see more pricey upgrades undertaken at Petrie.

[timh]

But having platforms at full height should not be deemed as the gold plated version, just the common sense version for future proofing and efficiency.

Some of our platforms (Southbank 2 & 3 as an example) have a ridiculous step up or down. This is just dumb and dangerous.

The gold plating at Petrie was the removal of additional infrastructure that would help facilitate other key state infrastructure projects, remove future infrastructure projects (such as the full strathpine interchange upgrade), keep costs down in the long run and prevent problems that we see elsewhere on the network such as Park Road congestion. If there's ever a NWTC or 9 car sets expect to see more pricey upgrades undertaken at Petrie.

Just out of curiosity, what sorta works would have been done at Petrie to facilitate NWTC?

[HappyTrainGuy]

Mostly P1-3 and sectorisation works. From what I remember it incorporated the removal of the planned infrastructure needed at Strathpine interchange (ie additional platforms for turnbacks of Strathpine to city via Northgate services). P2/3 extended to 9 car length and set up for future sectorisation ie NCL/NWTC express services. P2/3 was to be a platform for terminators/starters. P4 was down MBRL. P5/6 for up mbrl and NCL Starters/terminators in peak hour. In the future south of Lawnton is to be a quad. With sectorisation P5/P6 enabled dedicated platforms for starters/terminators without conflicting moves such as at Park Road. It's been known for ages that land to the north west has been reserved for a stabling yard so dead running would have been minimised quite a lot. Might have been overkill in the short term but long term it was ideally set up as a proper network with CRR/NWTC/CAMCOS in mind. I'm sure i've left a few things out like a triple to caboolture but its mostly sectorisation/future works that were removed.