ALP - Brisbane trams: Labor’s light rail plan for city

[verbatim9]

In regards to announcements over the coming weeks. I bet its a tunnel underneath Adelaide Street and some bus network improvements around the place.

[ozbob]

Could be some new Glider routes ...

Bus tunnel is just going back to the past.  Network reform is needed, together with Cross River Rail.

Brisbane will end up a festering failed mess of congestion and transport failure unless some real moves are made to reform the network.

Transfering a conga line of bus jam underground is still bus jam ... lol

Just makes the taking of happy bus jam snaps a little more tricky ...

Victoria bridge should be made bus/active only.  Saves billions ...  but when these clowns are spending others moula, they don't really care too much, to wit KSD ...

From the dim past ..

Brisbanetimes --> Victoria Bridge our 'weakest link', say transport experts

[verbatim9]

Yes! Vic Bridge should be Transit way only and two extra platforms at Cultural centre I guess?

[ozbob]

Yes! Vic Bridge should be Transit way only and two extra platforms at Cultural centre I guess?

It is an obvious thing to do hey?  However it will take more than a modicum of political courage, something that is very scarce it appears in Queensland.  Other jurisdictions would act to fix it, but hey ... Queensland! 

[#Metro]

^^ I have a problem with the Audio. It seems to be on a loop - can hear Harding but then stops and goes back to the start. Seems to be cut short.

Edit: Downloaded the mp3, works ok.

[QLDBUS]

Proposal solution for victoria bridge Congestion

https://www.google.com/maps/d/edit?mid=zyOQoSHIbm5k.ko-B2SzS79Qc&usp=sharing

[ozbob]

Proposal solution for victoria bridge Congestion

https://www.google.com/maps/d/edit?mid=zyOQoSHIbm5k.ko-B2SzS79Qc&usp=sharing

Thanks, but not public.  You will need to make it public I think.

[QLDBUS]

Proposal solution for victoria bridge Congestion

https://www.google.com/maps/d/edit?mid=zyOQoSHIbm5k.ko-B2SzS79Qc&usp=sharing

Thanks, but not public.  You will need to make it public I think.

Whoops https://www.google.com/maps/d/edit?mid=zyOQoSHIbm5k.ko-B2SzS79Qc&usp=sharing

[ozbob]

Thanks.

[verbatim9]

Proposal solution for victoria bridge Congestion

https://www.google.com/maps/d/edit?mid=zyOQoSHIbm5k.ko-B2SzS79Qc&usp=sharing

Thanks, but not public.  You will need to make it public I think.

Whoops https://www.google.com/maps/d/edit?mid=zyOQoSHIbm5k.ko-B2SzS79Qc&usp=sharing

You've nailed it! All completed by 2021?

[#Metro]

I was looking again at the New Bus Network Proposal:
http://tiny.cc/newnetwork

Problem with Red Team's proposal is that after decades and decades and billions of dollars, we are going to only have a skeleton LRT network. Crucially, nobody would be able to get anywhere any faster or more frequently than they could do now on buses. In addition, nobody would be able to get anywhere where they couldn't already go on the existing bus network.

In contrast, bus reform would cover the entire city, massively increase the number of BUZ routes at neutral cost. Many new places opened up across the whole city, and it is doable in 2 years.

I wish I had a side-by-side comparison map of the main High Frequency bits of the New Bus Network vs whatever red team is proposing at the moment. It would make the difference quite stark!!

[#Metro]

Hmm, maybe this can actually be drawn in Google... 

[SurfRail]

For this to make any kind of sense to me, you would need to probably run it along Montpelier Rd.  You could potentially run trams in a loop from McWhirters, via Wickham St to Montpelier/Skyring, then to Bowen Hills station and O'Connell St, RBWH station and back down Bowen Bridge Rd to Brunswick St.  That give you 2 potential interchange and launching points for extensions further north at Skyring Tce and RBWH, and access to a potential depot site between the 2 in the commercial part of Bowen Hills. 

Without a lot of bus interchange, I don't think this is going to achieve much.  You would need to terminate buses from the Kingsford Smith Dr corridor at an interim interchange near Skyring Tce until the line can be extended further towards Hamilton, and likewise you would terminate buses coming into RBWH from the north except for those heading down the INB to Kelvin Grove. 

Doing this you might be able to leverage some extra bus resources out of the scheme to pump into other parts of the network, but you hardly need this project to do that - just some gumption to get on with network reform.

I don't think it will accrue the same kind of benefits to the south, since you are really only going to be replacing one of the 199 or the Cityglider.  You can hardly force terminations at the Cultural Centre.  You could sell it as a major upgrade to capacity maybe.

Certainly bridging the river to either UQ or Toowong would make it a much more attractive proposition, but again you don't need light rail to do that, as UQ Lakes has proved so spectacularly.

[#Metro]

or this to make any kind of sense to me, you would need to probably run it along Montpelier Rd.  You could potentially run trams in a loop from McWhirters, via Wickham St to Montpelier/Skyring, then to Bowen Hills station and O'Connell St, RBWH station and back down Bowen Bridge Rd to Brunswick St.  That give you 2 potential interchange and launching points for extensions further north at Skyring Tce and RBWH, and access to a potential depot site between the 2 in the commercial part of Bowen Hills

This sounds a lot like the 393, which was beautiful on paper but was a disaster in practice. I think it used to be every 15 minutes, and that was progressively downgraded due to low patronage to a bus every hour or so?

[HappyTrainGuy]

Gympie road should be easy to do considering they just poured bitumen on top. During the mods on Lutyche Road the tracks were visible.

[SurfRail]

or this to make any kind of sense to me, you would need to probably run it along Montpelier Rd.  You could potentially run trams in a loop from McWhirters, via Wickham St to Montpelier/Skyring, then to Bowen Hills station and O'Connell St, RBWH station and back down Bowen Bridge Rd to Brunswick St.  That give you 2 potential interchange and launching points for extensions further north at Skyring Tce and RBWH, and access to a potential depot site between the 2 in the commercial part of Bowen Hills

This sounds a lot like the 393, which was beautiful on paper but was a disaster in practice. I think it used to be every 15 minutes, and that was progressively downgraded due to low patronage to a bus every hour or so?

The reality is there just isn't that much demand for that particular route.

There is only very limited room for a depot - you are basically stuck with whatever room you can find at either end.  On the southern leg, the only room would probably be somewhere around the bottom of Montague Road - in the north you at least have a range of sites in semi-industrial areas.

You could completely eliminate bus services between the RBWH and the Valley with this move, which would mean a stack of bus resources to throw at the northside and relatively congestion free travel through the Valley.

[Old Northern Road]

I think the only places where light rail could work in Brisbane is along Gympie Rd and Old Cleveland Rd.

If Labor want to talk about light rail all they need to do is mention that the Transitways are designed to be converted to light rail at a later date

[Old Northern Road]

I think you could fit a tram in but it would require either class C, or some demolitions. Demolitions are disruptive, but on the other hand that could be funded by development of West End around the main street - apartments, mixed use etc. The thing is, West End is a known protest suburb, and any kind of change it likely to trigger a strong response.

In class C, any tram would get caught up in congestion. It is not enough to point to the Gold Coast and say 'see, it works'. The Gold Coast has massive apartment towers immediately next to the alignment and people in West End are against that. If you compare the GC tram patronage to LRT in Sydney, Melbourne and Adelaide, they are all significantly lower and comparable to a bus or the CityCat. The absence of feeder bus networks is the reason behind that.

When was the last time you've visited the West End? It's one of the densest suburbs in Brisbane
And Melbourne's tram patronage is lower than the Gold Coast's? There are several tram routes in Melbourne which get over twice the daily patronage as the G:

[SurfRail]

^ There's a good chance it will pick up to the point where it is giving the Big 3 (86/96/109) a run for their money.  Only has to roughly double its current patronage level to be in the same ballpark, and the growth (current organic growth and fed by the increase in development) is looking very healthy.

Give it a few years...

[hU0N]

Melbourne is instructive. About 80% of the network runs in Class C ROW. And the all day, all route average tram speed is just around 15km/h. Take away the sections that do run in Class B (which likely run much quicker) and you can see just how bad Class C ROW can be.

By comparison the all day all route average speed for buses in Brisbane is in the mid twenties, which might be as much as twice as fast as Melbourne trams.

If you need an example of why Class C isn't an option even if it's the only thing you can afford, Melbourne is it. And it's no surprise that Melbourne have been getting rid of Class C ROW bit by bit since at least the eighties.

[ozbob]

Couriermail --> Opinion: Lord Mayor candidate Rod Harding should concentrate on making existing public transport better

....
So I'm not very excited about Rod's light rail thought bubble. How many more millions of taxpayer's dollars are to be wasted regurgitating previous plans and studies? Maybe he should concentrate on suggesting ways to improve the efficiency of our existing public transport assets.

Perhaps better high-capacity park and ride facilities on express bus/rail corridors and smaller, more frequent buses for low-volume suburban routes. And how about really efficient bus/rail interchanges with co-ordinated feeder bus services? Keep thinking Rod.

Peter Quick is a Sunshine Coast-based transport professional.

Emphasis mine .... on the right track Peter.  Bus network reform is the key issue in our opinion for this election.  Who will deliver the necessary reform?  Team Quirk?  Team ALP?  Team Greens?  Or will we just limp along with our underperforming high cost essentially direct service model that is causing many issues for our community?

[ozbob]

Sent to all outlets:

19th January 2015

Re: Kites and buses ... bus reform the priority

Good Morning,

Interesting opinion piece in today's Couriermail.

Couriermail --> Opinion: Lord Mayor candidate Rod Harding should concentrate on making existing public transport better

We all love to reminisce about Brisbane trams, but sadly they are gone.  We accept that at RAIL Back On Track.

Brisbane has evolved with bus a key component of the public transport mix.  It is bus that really is very much the weak link at present, network reform is needed.

Peter Quick, who is a Sunshine Coast based transport professional, has highlighted the real issues, as we have constantly pointed out as well.

....

So I'm not very excited about Rod's light rail thought bubble. How many more millions of taxpayer's dollars are to be wasted regurgitating previous plans and studies? Maybe he should concentrate on suggesting ways to improve the efficiency of our existing public transport assets.

Perhaps better high-capacity park and ride facilities on express bus/rail corridors and smaller, more frequent buses for low-volume suburban routes. And how about really efficient bus/rail interchanges with co-ordinated feeder bus services? Keep thinking Rod.

It really is not rocket science.

Who will deliver the necessary reform?  Team Quirk?  Team ALP?  Team Greens?  Or will we just limp along with our under-performing high cost essentially direct service model that is causing many issues for our community?

How many times does it have to be pointed out what is needed for Brisbane?

We will not stop pointing it out until bus network reform is delivered.

Best wishes
Robert

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

Sent to all outlets:

18th January 2016

Kites and buses ... bus reform the priority

Greetings,

RAIL Back On Track welcomes contributions to the policy debate for transport options for Brisbane.  The suggestion of Light Rail for Brisbane by the ALP Candidate needs a lot more detail and research.

Previous studies have shown considerable initial capital cost and some difficulty in retro-fitting light rail in the Brisbane environment.

The most important issue for Brisbane is sorting out the bus network.  We have shown how this can be achieved.

Our new Bus Network would create Australia's best bus network in Brisbane, at virtually neutral cost, within 2 years.   Expensive infrastructure and concrete is not the only approach.

High-frequency CityGliders to Bulimba (230 BulimbaGlider) and The Centenary Suburbs (400 CentenaryGlider), along with upgraded BUZ service to other parts of the city form the central part of our proposal.

Virtually all Brisbane City Council wards stand to benefit from our new Brisbane Bus Network proposal, which can be found here http://tiny.cc/newnetwork

Lets get back on track and sort out what is really achievable - fixing the Brisbane bus network.

Best wishes

Robert

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

[ozbob]

Twitter

Robert Dow ‏@Robert_Dow now

... bus reform the priority

> http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=11894.msg166922#msg166922 ...

#qldpol #bccvotes

@Team_Quirk @Rod4Bris @BenPennings

[#Metro]

When was the last time you've visited the West End? It's one of the densest suburbs in Brisbane
And Melbourne's tram patronage is lower than the Gold Coast's? There are several tram routes in Melbourne which get over twice the daily patronage as the G:

When the last time I visited West End is irrelevant, but it you really want to know - yesterday!

There are two West Ends. One North of Montague Rd, and One South of Montague Rd. The density is not uniform, much of the new apartments etc has deliberately been restricted to the former industrial area due to community push-back. The community there does not want high density in the established 'tin and timber' areas of the suburb. This is relevant because one funding method of funding LRT is a developer fee or tax-increment financing mechanism.

Previous attempts at LRT in West End led to protests, and a later LRT attempt stopped short of going all the way to the ferry. On the other hand, the reception may be different and sensitive to the routing in the future (199 as LRT might be problematic, having the Blue CityGlider might not).

There is also the issue of CRR2 - a tunnel that would go underneath West End to the CBD. Underground Rail stations could be added to this area, removing the need for surface LRT.

[QLDBUS]

what would be the better option for the light rail line to UQ

https://www.google.com/maps/d/edit?mid=zyOQoSHIbm5k.kwME9Lgc9NDQ&usp=sharing

[hU0N]

I think the consensus is that any future rapid transit to UQ should run via West End rather than via Toowong.

Both your options have significant challenges. Coro Drive route lacks a way to bypass heavy congestion on Benson Street north of High Street. Currently the five lanes are configured as the general traffic, two right turn storage lanes. LRT takes out two lanes for its ROW leaving one lane per direction and one right turn lane. This will increase congestion significantly particularly on the right turn movement, which is the majority of buses passing through this intersection (since the majority don't go to UQ). You might be able to tunnel LRT under this area, but cost.

The Ipswich line option is better in terms of ROW, but it would require rebuilding the line from Roma St to Toowong (or the invention of narrow gauge LRT), plus this line is shared with SMU/EMU, the odd long distance passenger train and a fair bit of freight. All of this would rule out most off the shelf LRV systems as they simply aren't safe enough to operate in a heavy rail environment.

The real problem is that most of the benefits of the Coro Drive route are because of the segregated right of way. So why not simply do on road fully segregated BRT. It's virtually as good and rather a bit cheaper?

Or if you are fixed on a rail solution, why not spend the comparatively small amount extra and do it with heavy rail a la CRR2?

[SurfRail]

I would say the feasible options are Montague Road, Boundary St or both, preferably involving river crossings of some description.  No point in just duplicating the railway.

[verbatim9]

I think the consensus is that any future rapid transit to UQ should run via West End rather than via Toowong.

Both your options have significant challenges. Coro Drive route lacks a way to bypass heavy congestion on Benson Street north of High Street. Currently the five lanes are configured as the general traffic, two right turn storage lanes. LRT takes out two lanes for its ROW leaving one lane per direction and one right turn lane. This will increase congestion significantly particularly on the right turn movement, which is the majority of buses passing through this intersection (since the majority don't go to UQ). You might be able to tunnel LRT under this area, but cost.

The Ipswich line option is better in terms of ROW, but it would require rebuilding the line from Roma St to Toowong (or the invention of narrow gauge LRT), plus this line is shared with SMU/EMU, the odd long distance passenger train and a fair bit of freight. All of this would rule out most off the shelf LRV systems as they simply aren't safe enough to operate in a heavy rail environment.

The real problem is that most of the benefits of the Coro Drive route are because of the segregated right of way. So why not simply do on road fully segregated BRT. It's virtually as good and rather a bit cheaper?

Or if you are fixed on a rail solution, why not spend the comparatively small amount extra and do it with heavy rail a la CRR2?

Yes definitely! The previous plan by the Bligh Government with a metro from Toowong was far too much duplication. Indooroopilly-UQ-West End-City a far better route. You could eventually build a second stage out to Kenmore via Chapel Hill. It can be a fast weather proof efficient mostly underground system.

[red dragin]

Isn't an LRT from the burbs to the CBD replicating anyway? I thought transferring services was the aim for an efficient network.

[SurfRail]

There needs to be recognition that this has to REPLACE bus services to work, and that means CUTS.  I can't see that playing well in Brisbane of all places.

[#Metro]

Ben Davis 4BC on Red Team's LRT proposal 'investigation'

Rod Harding, Labor candidate for Lord Mayor wants to deliver a light rail system for Brisbane if he becomes Lord Mayor.

Lord Mayor Graham Quirk responds to light rail comments made by Rod Harding earlier in the program.

The current Brisbane City Council administration have undergone numerous investigations into light rail and it was determined light rail wasn't the best public transport options for the city.

http://www.4bc.com.au/radio/labors-plan-for-brisbane-light-rail-20160119-gm8ux1

It is not correct to state that Light Rail is better/more reliable/faster because the trams have priority and their own lane. There is no reason why buses cannot be given the same road treatments, and indeed Mr Harding himself proposes similar treatments in his Transitways proposal.

[#Metro]

Another Bridge and a tram to UQ via West End?   

This is the proposal that had West End up in arms in the 1990s. If parking is removed on both sides of the road, I think you could just fit LRT through Montague Road and have LRT island platforms, however, the big alarm bells will sound when significant fig trees in Orleigh Park will have to be cut down and a Bridge constructed through Orleigh park OR housing resumptions.

I think that having the LRT terminate at the current Blue CityGlider would be acceptable to West End, but a bridge cutting into Orleigh Park would be totally unacceptable. The alternative is to have a bridge between the West End Ferry and Guyatt Park, however that also requires housing resumptions.

Harding is correct that a lot has changed in 10 years or so. We have busways now, and these have been extended and extended. It was red team that rejected Light Rail for the SE Busway, and go with BRT.

[hU0N]

Ben Davis 4BC on Red Team's LRT proposal 'investigation'

Rod Harding, Labor candidate for Lord Mayor wants to deliver a light rail system for Brisbane if he becomes Lord Mayor.

Lord Mayor Graham Quirk responds to light rail comments made by Rod Harding earlier in the program.

The current Brisbane City Council administration have undergone numerous investigations into light rail and it was determined light rail wasn't the best public transport options for the city.

http://www.4bc.com.au/radio/labors-plan-for-brisbane-light-rail-20160119-gm8ux1

It is not correct to state that Light Rail is better/more reliable/faster because the trams have priority and their own lane. There is no reason why buses cannot be given the same road treatments, and indeed Mr Harding himself proposes similar treatments in his Transitways proposal.

Absolutely. And for less money probably.

The only caveat is that LRT can operate in ever so slightly narrower ROW than a bus. So if physically segregating bus lanes is impossible for space reasons, there is still a chance that LRT could fit.

[hU0N]

Another Bridge and a tram to UQ via West End?   

This is the proposal that had West End up in arms in the 1990s. If parking is removed on both sides of the road, I think you could just fit LRT through Montague Road and have LRT island platforms, however, the big alarm bells will sound when significant fig trees in Orleigh Park will have to be cut down and a Bridge constructed through Orleigh park OR housing resumptions.

I think that having the LRT terminate at the current Blue CityGlider would be acceptable to West End, but a bridge cutting into Orleigh Park would be totally unacceptable. The alternative is to have a bridge between the West End Ferry and Guyatt Park, however that also requires housing resumptions.

Harding is correct that a lot has changed in 10 years or so. We have busways now, and these have been extended and extended. It was red team that rejected Light Rail for the SE Busway, and go with BRT.

Another thing that has changed is UQ lakes. I mean, forget all the LRT foaminess and ask yourself, if Mr Harding was proposing a new busway via Montague Rd and over the river to UQ, what would you think of it?

I know, I know bus reform and all that. But if Brisbane actually needs an extra 15,000 pphd to the St Lucia peninsula, then it shouldn't matter whether it's by bus or by tram.

[HappyTrainGuy]

You could completely eliminate bus services between the RBWH and the Valley with this move, which would mean a stack of bus resources to throw at the northside and relatively congestion free travel through the Valley.

Many of the buses RBWH-Valley are there because of an inefficiently designed and run public transportation network 

[#Metro]

There is another MAJOR problem with the Light Rail concept.

Trams stop all stops (unless they are super infrequent), buses can run express/rocket. (Think BUZ 150, BUZ 130 etc).

There is a reason why trams are limited to the inner city areas, even in Melbourne, which has had them for many many years. Trams cannot overtake at stations unless a larger ROW is provided for them. Buses can. When you have a city that is as spread out as Brisbane, you are going to have to run all stopper services, and that will limit how far out of the city you can get with that.

Brisbane is a spread out city. The places where people need PT are in Albany Creek, Bulimba, Yeronga, Centenary Suburbs etc. To reach those suburbs you really need express/rocket running. A tram, unless it is built on the SE Busway, or with stops 1km apart, is going to have a really hard time reaching those outer areas because trams need to stop all stations unless they are (a) really infrequent or (b) there are extra sets of "express" tracks. The infrastructure has to be continuous. With buses on busways or lanes, it does not have to be continuous.

A superbus is more than capable of reaching Mt Ommaney, for example, with or without dedicated infrastructure. A tram would require a continuous line, entirely new, stopping all stations, all the way out to Mt Ommaney to be in operation.

[#Metro]

Bus Reform vs Light Rail

Let's hope nobody compares the two proposals side by side. It's a BBQ stopper!

Light Rail - $1-2 BILLION

Bus Reform - Cost Neutral

*High Frequency routes (15 minutes or better) shown only. Vehicle purchase costs not included in LRT or bus reform comparison.
Purple lines - Superbus services (150 pax or better)
http://tiny.cc/newnetwork

[HappyTrainGuy]

There's no buz service between Aspley and Chermside via Gympie Road.

[#Metro]

There's no buz service between Aspley and Chermside via Gympie Road.

There is under bus reform! 

[verbatim9]

There is the 340.