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

[ozbob]

Couriermail --> Rod Harding proposes light rail system linking Brisbane CBD, Newstead, Fortitude Valley, West End and the University of Queensland

[newbris]

It wrong its not underground in the Valley and CBD precincts. Plus they want to rip up the Kingsford Smith Drive contract wasting more money. Look what happened in Melbourne.  Cyclist lobby is happy with the Kingsford Smith upgrade. The extra traffic lane that it creates can always be converted to lightrail or bus lane later if need be. All good!

Without commenting on the KSD contract I thought what happened in Melbourne was a good thing no ? A road that had a poor return was stopped...surely signing for that road was the greater fault ?

Cyclist lobby people I have noticed would obviously like the outcome of a great cycle lane but some wonder what $600 million could buy in separated infrastructure across the city.

[#Metro]

I'm not keen on Rod's proposal.

Brisbane is a spread out and sprawling city. Rod Harding is correct that there is projected to be large jobs growth within the CBD core, however most of those people will not be living in Newstead or West End. They will be out in the middle and outer suburbs, and using the Northern and South East busways to get into the Brisbane CBD.

The number of buses likely to be diverted by this proposal is low. The City-Valley buses could be replaced, but these would have to be terminated in the CBD or at Cultural Centre where there is no space to terminate them. Via Story Bridge buses would have to be terminated at Wooloongabba and then taken away from the CBD, up through Kangaroo Pt and the Valley into the CBD. This is quite a congested area, and even if the tram is given its own lane, would be held up at lights. It is also indirect, and I expect passengers will just wait at the busway station at Woolloongabba and catch the next bus going to the CBD from there.

Bus reform is the most viable thing to do. I am all for a metro via the SE busway, as that is what Toronto, Vancouver and Copenhagen do - bus feeding rail, but I too realise that will be quite a bit away, and the Quirk alignment is not quite good - it needs to be combined with the CRR tunnel.

[Gazza]

This is quite a congested area, and even if the tram is given its own lane, would be held up at lights.

Wouldn't you just do signal priority as seen on G:Link?

[HappyTrainGuy]

[rant]Good god Labor has some shocking plans and out right bs. That Gympie Road transit way. What a crock of sh%t. Sorry but it is. Save even more and convert the bloody existing lanes. Fix the shitty bt network and get more buses going to interchange. If there is a proper PT network you don't have to go spending 66 million just to apply a bandaid solution to your network. Best of luck to them this election because they won't be winning.

The biggest BS is on the front page. "Our Integrated  Transport Plan". 750 per 6 car train??? about 200 off the mark. "However, Brisbane needs more services in
the suburbs now" - yes, because Chermside needs 12 buses going in each direction at 10pm on a Monday night and that's not factoring in the mess of total duplication Chermside-RBWH during the day. "Our buses lack the frequency needed to instil confidence in our
bus network" - No, your scenic tour via everyones door to the CBD is why no one likes to use Brisbane Buses. No one wants to use them so the frequency gets cut. Fix the fundamental problem with Brisbanes public transport network you bunch of useless tools. Its not that difficult!!!![/rant]

[#Metro]

Wouldn't you just do signal priority as seen on G:Link?

You could do that for LRT or buses. It isn't mode specific. However, I am thinking more of congestion from accidents that often flow on to block the Story Bridge. Remember, it is Priority B ROW.

Story Bridge has a long history of becoming congested, even if the accident is not on the bridge.

This year:

A three-car nose-to-tail crash in centre lane of the north side of the Story Bridge about 8.15am caused already heavily congested traffic further delays.

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/brisbane-traffic-story-bridge-crash-causes-hourlong-commutes-20160208-gmp3aw.html

2015:

Roadworks on the bridge were already causing slow moving traffic, however a nose-to-tail crash has closed the two outbound lanes, forcing traffic to a standstill all through the Fortitude Valley.

I don't think that area needs LRT, it just need bus upgrades.

[Gazza]

There's a strong case to take lanes from the bridge, since Clem7 has plenty of capacity to pick up the slack.

Of course, why does Main Ave have such shocking frequency for an inner city area? There is no easy way to get from KP to the Valley via PT, due to the structure of the network, and getting to the CBD via the ferries involves perhaps the most expensive 'normal' journey in per/km terms in the whole TL network.

[ozbob]

Sent to all outlets:

22nd February 2016

Rod Harding's Light Rail Proposal - Election Votebait?


Image: Bus Reform will connect more people in more parts of Brisbane than Light Rail in the inner city.

RAIL Back on Track welcomes the release of Rod Harding's Light Rail proposal. All Rod Harding's plan will do though is put the existing CityGlider bus on steel wheels at a cost of $1.2 billion. It is a diamond-encrusted fancy bus proposal on tram tracks. What Brisbane actually needs is comprehensive bus reform as outlined in our New Bus Network Proposal > http://tiny.cc/newnetwork

Wrong Alignment, No New Destinations

Rod Harding's Light Rail does not bring any new mobility to the table. All locations specified can be readily accessed using existing frequent transport options. UQ, PA Hospital and RBWH are already serviced every 5 minutes by route 66 on the busway. Suncorp Stadium already has a Maroon CityGlider bus and Milton train station next to it. Wooloongabba has a busway station, and will be served by Cross River Rail.

Why reinvent the wheel?

Light Rail on the West End - Newstead alignment was already investigated multiple times and rejected multiple times. Brisbane City Council's 2007 Mass Transit Investigation (see below) showed conclusively that introducing superbuses would be sufficient for growth on this corridor and cost less. Rod Harding needs to clarify if a bridge to St Lucia will or will not be located in Orleigh or Guyatt Parks.

BCC's report clearly shows the superbus option generating larger benefits to society - lower operational costs, superior benefit-cost ratio and net present value. All of the economic and social benefits listed on page 11 of his election material are deliverable with bus reform or other policy tools. If there is a case for Light Rail in Brisbane, it is from the Centenary Suburbs to the CBD via Coronation Drive in our opinion.

Funding and Privatisation of Public Transport

Rod Harding's election material claims that without public funding, Light Rail could " be delivered at no or minimal cost to government ". We don't believe it, show us the names of these companies willing to spend at least $1 billion without some kind of ongoing government availability payment or subsidy?

RAIL Back on Track has no preference regarding private or public operations. However, the State Government has absolutely committed to not privatising the public transport system in any shape or form. Has the State Government changed its position on not privatising public transport in Brisbane?

Infrastructure Australia already has a long backlog of projects. For example, the Sunshine Coast Rail line and Cross River Rail. After queuing for many years, these projects have not received federal funding. Why would Rod Harding's Light Rail be any different?

Greenhouse Gas Emissions

Brisbane City Council's bus fleet is already carbon neutral through the use of carbon offsets. In addition, BCC's mass transit report shows that the emissions profile for superbuses is similar to Light Rail. Recent significant advances in rapid charging electric buses also provide an opportunity to go even greener with the bus fleet.

Conclusion

Restricted to the inner city, Light Rail will not have an impact on 'black hole' areas such as the Centenary Suburbs, Yeronga, Bulimba or the Northwest suburbs. It would take 10-12 years to deliver and has a high risk of project failure attached to it, as demonstrated by the failure of four previous Light Rail proposals for Brisbane. For something that adds no new destinations to the network, it is incredibly costly.

We think this Light Rail proposal will run into major problems and be cancelled soon after the election. This is also our opinion of Graham Quirk's ' pie in the sky' Metro  proposal. Victoria's experience with promises of rail to Melbourne Airport, Doncaster and Rowville back up our skeptical view. Lord Mayor Quirk was a supporter of the ' Cleveland Solution ' - light rail from Cleveland to Ferny Grove with an elevated section down the Brisbane River as well*. What happened to that nonsensical proposal? We don't mind visions, but we are wary of mirages.

Brisbane's broken bus network can be fixed up now at virtually neutral cost by implementing our New Bus Network Proposal. Twelve new hi-frequency bus routes would be added or improved, giving Brisbane Australia's best bus network within two years, and eliminating 'black holes' in BCC's bus network.

Contact:

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

References:

Rod Harding - Connecting Brisbane
http://backontrack.org/docs/bccvotes15/Connecting_Brisbane.pdf

Lord Mayor's Taskforce Brisbane - Mass Transit Investigation
http://www.brisbane.qld.gov.au/sites/default/files/sept07_final_report_brisbane_mass_transit_investigation_lmt.pdf

Page 62 shows that Superbuses have a better financial case than Light Rail along this corridor.
Page 58 shows that Superbuses have a similar emissions profile to Light Rail.

The Case For Brisbane Bus Reform (contains list of frequent bus lines)
http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=11894.msg167019#msg167019


*Scott Emerson Reveals New Light Rail Plans For Brisbane Over Labor's Cross River Project


Light Rail - Guide For Media Outlets
http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=11894.msg167061#msg167061

[James]

There's a strong case to take lanes from the bridge, since Clem7 has plenty of capacity to pick up the slack.

Of course, why does Main Ave have such shocking frequency for an inner city area? There is no easy way to get from KP to the Valley via PT, due to the structure of the network, and getting to the CBD via the ferries involves perhaps the most expensive 'normal' journey in per/km terms in the whole TL network.

They had the half-hourly 475 until that was cut back with the 234 being hourly.

This idea of LRT on the Story Bridge is absolutely bizarre though. That area has to be one of the most PT unfriendly environments in all of Brisbane, yet somehow we're going to put LRT down it? Even worse is the LRT going from the CBD to RBWH - we already have transit serving that route, it is called the Inner Northern Busway. Use it.
RBWH - PAH may have some benefit, but given this destination pair is not serviced at all via the Story Bridge (only via the 66), I question whether it is necessary. AFAIK, Qld Health is heavily divided into 'North Brisbane' and 'South Brisbane'.

[SurfRail]

I think there is merit in running a service from RBWH to UQ via KP - more for the fact it would form an inner orbital route than a bypass of the CBD.  The 2013 review picked up on this (kind of) with the inner circular route.

I'd probably run it all the way down Ipswich Rd to PAH then turn onto the busway there.

[#Metro]

You could have a bus do this by extending the 234 service through to UQ Lakes. I think there would be some demand from Valley- KP - UQ actually.

Try it and see if demand is there. I know the 234 is well used!

[HappyTrainGuy]

In the past I've suggested the 66 doing it as a loop route.... but that was more so as a means to remove the plethora of northside-valley routes

[aldonius]

234 extending to UQ via the Gabba busway is pointless duplication of the 29.
Via Ipswich Rd has interesting potential.
Bear in mind there's no right turn from Ipswich Rd into the under-PAH road (at least to my knowledge). Similarly, turning right from the busway ex-PAH onto OKeefe isn't very good either.

So the PAH stop would be different levels for each direction.

[SurfRail]

^ That shouldn't be much of a problem.  You can change at Boggo Rd if you want Buranda or the PAH upper level.  Common platform headed to UQ is more important to concentrate the headway, heading away less relevant because the routes diverge.

[#Metro]

234 extending to UQ via the Gabba busway is pointless duplication of the 29.

Not really. It's not duplication if selected 29 buses continue as 234s. My understanding is that some 234 services already do this. Would just be a matter of making it one route number.

[#Metro]

We need to ask more questions about this tram. Is it going to be Priority A (tunnelled), Priority B, or Priority C.

It is difficult to see how Priority B LRT will be deployed on the street. The old tram system was Priority C, and ran along behind cars. Pax had to jump off in the street. We cannot do that now because of DDA requirements (Melbourne has exemption to convert their system over time).

The Gold Coast has highway medians and took out Surfers Paradise Boulevarde, reducing it to one lane. How is this going to work in Adelaide Street etc?

My suspicion is that it is Priority C...

[OzGamer]

The Gold Coast has highway medians and took out Surfers Paradise Boulevarde, reducing it to one lane. How is this going to work in Adelaide Street etc?

I'm equally skeptical overall, but I think you could easily take cars off Adelaide St and have it for trams and buses with the buses running in the left lane and the tram in the middle. You could carefully arrange the centre tram platforms and the kerbside bus stops such that they would not interfere too much with each other. Essentially I think you could get Priority B level of service along there.

West End and the Valley are completely different stories however...

[nathandavid88]

I imagine the core idea with the light rail would be to remove buses from Adelaide Street altogether.

That aside, I disagree – the road wouldn't be wide enough to run both buses (with bus stops) and light rail really. The light rail alignment would take out the lane the buses use, so every time a bus stops, you would have a stopped conga line of buses stuck behind them. It would be unworkable. 

[#Metro]

Rod Harding for Lord Mayor
4 hrs ·
The University of Queensland is the busiest destination in Brisbane other than the CBD.
Today I spoke to students at UQ O-Week about how Labor's plan for modern light rail will make it easier to get to class.
A new bridge from West End to St Lucia will also mean students can walk or ride to uni instead of adding to Brisbane's traffic.

- The University of QLD already has a busway station, and it was upgraded again.
- Route 66 runs every 5 minutes to UQ lakes in the Busway (Priority A). A tram would run in Priority B.
- Takes just 17 minutes from KGS to UQ Lakes.
- CityCat already takes passengers to UQ Lakes from West End. Also accepts bicycles.
- CityGlider patronage would have to increase 5x before LRT capacity was required (compared to superbus)

A LRT would not be faster or more frequent. Rod Harding is effectively putting steel wheels on the CityGlider for $1.2 Billion

[#Metro]

I have done comparisons on TransLink journey planner.

The CityGlider takes 19 minutes to go from City Hall to West End Ferry terminal (leave after 8 am)

The UQ Route 66 takes 17 minutes to go from KGS at City Hall to UQ Lakes.

Remember the CityGlider already has stops about 800 m apart.

We can get an estimate of  how much Class B ROW would speed up the CityGlider/LRT by comparing it to how fast a

CityGlider runs at 10pm on Sunday night, when there is no traffic. The CityGlider takes 13 minutes. A saving of 6 mins.

It is highly likely that the LRT (in Priority B) will be no faster than the current 66 bus to UQ Lakes (Priority A). (And in any

case, applying the same priority measures to the CityGlider bus as to LRT would result in the same speed gains.)

[ozbob]

Couriermail Quest --> Rod Harding: Tram bridge would be open to bikes and pedestrians

[ozbob]

Sent to all outlets:

29th February 2016

Rod Harding's Light Rail Fail: Trams Not The Answer To UQ

Rod Harding's Light Rail proposal will simply take the existing CityGlider and put it on steel wheels
for $1.2 Billion. Harding's plan is remarkably similar to the 1997 Briztram proposal. Sensible in
1997, the South East Busway and Eleanor Schonell bridge to UQ Lakes now mean it is not.

Rod Harding's Tram Plan has the following flaws:

1. Light Rail to UQ will not be faster or more frequent than the Route 66 bus.
The 66 UQ Lakes bus takes just 17 minutes from King George Square to UQ, via the busway.
It runs every 5-10 minutes. How many minutes faster will Harding's tram to UQ be?
If more frequency is required, why not just add more bus services?
If speed is the issue, why not bring back rocket buses to UQ?

2. Light Rail to UQ will not be more reliable than the Route 66 bus.
Rod Harding's tram will run on roads, sharing intersections with car traffic (Traffic Priority B).
In contrast, the 66 UQ Lakes bus runs on dedicated busways, not general traffic roads (Traffic Priority A)
and does not share intersections with car traffic.

3. Light Rail adds no new destinations to the network.
UQ Lakes and RBWH already have busway stations. PA hospital has both a busway and a train station (Dutton Park).
Suncorp stadium already has a train station (Milton) and Maroon CityGlider. A $55 million green bridge already exists to UQ
Lakes.

West End passengers can already get the CityGlider to West End Ferry and take a CityCat to UQ,
including pedestrians and cyclists. The Newstead - West End corridor is already served by the Blue
CityGlider coming every 5-10 minutes. Rod Harding needs to explain the logic of why it is a good idea
to duplicate this infrastructure and services at incredible $1.2 billion cost with his tram.

4. Light Rail capacity is not yet required on this corridor.
With larger buses, capacity could be increased five times before Light Rail were required.*
Other corridors may be more suited to Light Rail.

5. Light Rail lacks the extensive coverage to solve Brisbane's transport problems.
This single line, inner city tram will not fix the real problem - 'black hole' bus service within Brisbane's
suburbs. Bus reform will.

Bus Reform - Saving $1.2 Billion

Rod Harding should solve the real problem at UQ St Lucia - The Gap, Mitchelton, Enoggera,
Ashgrove, Bardon and West Toowong all have poor access to UQ. The route 411 bus along Hawken Drive is
also poor service, coming half hourly on weekdays, and hourly on weekends. Under bus reform, services
would be recast, creating a 911 CityConnector bus from Brookside Shopping Centre, through Ashgrove
and Bardon to UQ St Lucia every 15 minutes all day and weekend. See our New Bus Network Proposal at
http://tiny.cc/newnetwork

Rational transport planning must be conducted on cold merit. Sexiness, excitement, nostalgia, the
proponent's feelings of confidence, or simply 'some other city has got it' are not a sound basis for
transit planning.

Will Rod Harding's Light Rail benefit students at UQ or Brisbane generally? Our assessment says NO.

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

Image - Proposed 911 UQ CityConnector


http://backontrack.org/images/bus/reform/route911.png

References:

New Bus Network Proposal http://tiny.cc/newnetwork
BCC Bus Network Service Quality Map http://tiny.cc/checkyourbus

Light Rail Down Under - Three Strikes and You're Not Out ! Peter Turner Parsons Brinckerhoff
http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/circulars/ec058/15_03_Turner.pdf

Route 66 Bus Timetable http://translink.com.au/sites/default/files/assets/timetables/131014-66.pdf

Call for CityGlider in the Centenary Suburbs
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/brisbane-buses-call-for-cityglider-in-centenary-suburbs-20141105-11gxl3.html

*Calculation Existing CityGlider 13 buses in peak hour x 65 passengers/bus = 845 passengers / hour
(A) Upgraded CityGlider 150-pax superbus, running every 2 minutes. 30 buses x 150 passengers/bus =
4500 passengers / hour (B)

Factor: Divide B into A: 5.3x

Neither Rod Harding or Graham Quirk appears to have performed a basic mode choice options analysis or
route choice options analysis.

[ozbob]

^

Sent to all outlets:

29th February 2016

Followup: Rod Harding's Light Rail Fail: Trams Not The Answer To UQ

Greetings.

This is the real problem at UQ - poor access to UQ from places like Ashgrove, Bardon, The Gap, Mitchelton and Enoggera. Half-hourly or hourly 411 UQ via Hawken Drive buses. Light Rail will not solve that, but Bus Reform will.

It could be solved at a fraction of the cost of Rod Harding's unnecessary Light Rail, which is essentially putting steel wheels on the existing Blue CityGlider for $1.2 Billion. We offer the following extract from a parliamentary debate in Canberra:

"Following the review being handed down I received a representation from a young constituent regarding bus services from the inner west suburbs. She raised the issue of bus routes from Ashgrove, Paddington and Bardon and the fact that there is no direct link between these suburbs and the University of Queensland. How crazy is that? All of these people living in the western suburbs cannot go directly to the University of Queensland. They have to travel into the city and then they have to travel out to UQ. I bet there are a lot of UQ students who would welcome that.

A huge number of students reside in these areas and attend UQ at St Lucia. Currently there are students living in these suburbs who are required to catch a bus to the CBD and transfer to a bus that goes back to the University of Queensland."

Best wishes
Robert

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

References:

Parliament House debates (Canberra) Monday, 27 May 2013

Private Members' Business - South-East Queensland: Public Transport
http://www.openaustralia.org.au/debate/?id=2013-05-27.166.9

New Bus Network Proposal http://tiny.cc/newnetwork

Image - 911 UQ CityConnector Cross-Town Bus

[ozbob]

Sent to all outlets:

3rd March 2016

No Benefit to UQ from Light Rail

Greetings,

We are pleased to note that UQ Vice-Chancellor Peter Høj would consider financial contributions to improve public transport to UQ St Lucia Campus. However, we draw his attention our assessment of the Light Rail proposal. In our opinion, Light Rail to UQ does not represent an improvement over current services and thus is unlikely to provide value for UQ's money.

1. Light Rail to UQ will not be faster or more frequent than the Route 66 bus.
2. Light Rail to UQ will not be more reliable than the Route 66 bus.
3. Light Rail adds no new destinations to the network.

The UQ Lakes 66 bus takes just 17 minutes from King George Square (CBD) to reach UQ Lakes. It runs on dedicated busways every 5 minutes during the morning. Capacity could be increased by almost six times if larger super buses were introduced.

In contrast, the proposed Light Rail would not be faster than the route 66 bus. It would have to travel through West End on surface roads at limited speeds rather than on dedicated high-speed busways. For comparison, the Blue CityGlider takes 19 minutes to reach West End Ferry Terminal from King George Square. Given the 66 UQ Lakes bus takes 17 minutes to reach UQ, it is difficult to see how a tram via West End could be faster. A tram would require additional time to make a river crossing and drive along Sir Fred Schonell Drive.

Light Rail will not increase mobility. Access from West End is already possible through a CityGlider connection with the CityCat, and the CityCat does not interact with road traffic in any way. Light Rail will only offer more capacity than an upgraded bus service if it is run more frequently than a service every four minutes. This is unlikely, for example, the Gold Coast Light Rail runs once every 7.5 minutes.

We agree that transport to UQ should be improved. Super buses should be introduced to the route 66 UQ Lakes capable of carrying 150 passengers per vehicle. An opportunity exists to strike a deal with Brisbane City Council and TransLink to brand this service the 'UQ Glider'.

There is also a serious access issue for UQ Staff and Students in Mitchelton, Enoggera, Ashgrove, Bardon, The Gap and West Toowong who must travel to the CBD and then backtrack to UQ. Under our New Bus Network Proposal, we suggest the creation of a UQ dedicated 911 CityConnector bus running every 15 minutes all day, 7 days a week to solve this problem. It will open up new access to inner north west suburbs and better service than the current 411 UQ via Hawken Drive bus, which only has services once every half hour during weekdays, and once an hour on weekends.

We provide references and calculations below for interested members of the UQ Senate or Urban and Regional Planning faculty to support our assessment. Our conclusion is that Light Rail does not represent an improvement on the status quo, and is thus not value for money.

Best wishes,
Robert

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


References:

UQ Vice Chancellor welcomes plan to build light rail service to UQ
http://www.couriermail.com.au/questnews/southwest/uq-vicechancellor-welcomes-plan-to-build-a-light-rail-service-which-would-connect-west-end-and-st-lucia/news-story/4cfc400cfaf1da4d7baeb7081f1ff581

Capacity Calculation:
Current situation: 60 mins / 5 min frequency = 12 buses/hour x 65 passengers/bus = 780 passengers / hour
Superbus Upgrade: 60 / 2 min frequency = 30 buses/hour x 150 passengers/bus = 4500 passengers / hour

Factor: Divide B into A = 5.7

Frequency Calculation
4500 passengers / hour (improved bus scenario) divided by a 300 person capacity tram = 15 trams per hour
60 minutes / 15 trams/hour = 4 minute frequency.

New Bus Network Proposal http://tiny.cc/newnetwork
BCC Bus Network Service Quality Map http://tiny.cc/checkyourbus

Route 66 Bus Timetable http://translink.com.au/sites/default/files/assets/timetables/131014-66.pdf

Call for CityGlider in the Centenary Suburbs
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/brisbane-buses-call-for-cityglider-in-centenary-suburbs-
20141105- 11gxl3.html

Parliament House debates (Canberra) Monday, 27 May 2013

Private Members' Business - South-East Queensland: Public Transport
http://www.openaustralia.org.au/debate/?id=2013-05-27.166.9

Image - 911 UQ CityConnector Cross-Town Bus

[ozbob]

Couriermail --> Brisbane Lord mayor could end up at odds with council

... Harding's 'on wrong track' with light rail

LORD mayor hopeful Rod Harding's plan to bring trams back to Brisbane would cause widespread traffic chaos and a number of heritage-listed homes to be resumed, a review commissioned by his ­political opponent Graham Quirk has found.

The report released yesterday by Brisbane-based TTM Consulting traffic analysts concluded the Labor candidate's light rail plan could increase traffic delays by up to 1000 per cent in Fortitude Valley and as much as 400 per cent in other popular areas such as West End due to increased wait times at intersections.

The report was commissioned by Cr Quirk, but his office said it was not funded by ratepayer money.

The in-depth report predicts the 7km to 8km route proposed will require about 11 stops to properly service commuters.

It says the predicted route of the light rail will force the heavily used Montague Rd in West End to be closed because it is not wide enough for two-way traffic and light rail.

Doubts are also raised over Victoria Bridge's ability to handle the 60-tonne loads the light rail would put on it. The report warns that property acquisition at "significant cost" will be required in the CBD to avoid street closures.

Mr Harding last night described commissioning the report as "desperate politics by Graham Quirk".

"I'm not surprised that in the dying days of an election campaign Graham Quirk has now resorted to paying for a politically driven attack on a positive plan to deal with Brisbane's future growth," Mr Harding, the Labor challenger, said.

"I'm confident that, just like countless cities across the world, light rail will be built in Brisbane." ...

[#Metro]

Harding isn't answering the question about how he will fit LRT into the road. This strongly raises the possibility that it is indeed Priority C ROW.

That is extremely concerning!! I don't think it is even allowed anymore due to DDA requirements.

[SurfRail]

Light rail will fit quite easily on Adelaide St and most anywhere else you want to put it.  What won't fit is light rail and much (if any) other stuff.

Unfortunately, Adelaide Street suffers from various problems somewhere like Swanston St does not - the KGS and Anzac Square car parks for one.

Collins St in Melbourne really isn't that wide in places.  However, you can see the effect of that is you have to cut general traffic space down in those places to a single trafficable lane right against the kerb so you have room for platform stops.

Staggered stops could be one way of making it work, so the roadway doesn't need to accommodate 2 platforms and 2 tracks at any one point in the CBD.  Kerbside running would be another and would take up even less space.

[ozbob]

Sent to all outlets:

16th March 2016

#BNEVOTES: Votebait Detect: NO BENEFIT From LNP Metro, ALP Light Rail!

Greetings,

RAIL Back on Track does not support the Lord Mayor Graham Quirk's Metro or Rod Harding's Light Rail. We base our assessment on 'cold merit' and this process has turned up critical flaws in both policies to the extent we could not support them. The media could be far more critical of these projects than simply reporting emotional and aesthetic aspects of what the vehicle looks like. These proposals are completely lacking in substance!

Light Rail - Rod Harding (ALP)

* No benefit to The University of Queensland
* Slower than existing route 66 bus (bus takes 17 mins to reach UQ from KGS)
* Less reliable than route 66 bus (bus runs on exclusive busway, tram does not)
* No new destinations added to network (areas already well served)
* West End residents can catch CityCat for 5 min trip to UQ already, no need for tram
* Duplicates existing busway, citycat, and railway infrastructure and services (i.e. Blue CityGlider, UQ already has a green bridge, busway and ferry terminal)
* Light Rail capacity not required on corridor (CityGlider peak hour patronage would have to increase about 5x to require trams)
* Unclear as to how it will fit into Montague Road - no images showing widths
* Unclear as to whether it will run on the street or in its own exclusive lane
* Effectively, places steel wheels on the existing CityGlider for $1.2 Billion. Crazy!

Metro - Lord Mayor Graham Quirk (LNP)

* No increase in busway capacity after construction. Even with the best signalling possible (40 trains/hour) a 300-person metro train would carry 300 people x 40 trains/hour = 12 000 passengers/hour at best, which is what the busway carries already.
* Not automatic
* Route is set, not indicative. Basically we don't know if the route is optimal. Potential construction efficiencies if co-located and built with Cross River Rail tunnel precluded.
* Not clear how the metro will fit at Mater Hill between a steep, curving busway ramp and a tunnel entrance.
* Effectively paying $1.5 Billion plus for NO increase in capacity. Crazy!

Both major parties are guilty of avoiding or stalling the 2013 bus reform. This helped escalate fare increases and is a reason why Brisbane City Council's bus network does not meet State Government mandated 'bus on time' standards. Bus reform along the lines of our New Bus Network Proposal http://tiny.cc/newnetwork is the way forward.

We call on Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk to terminate this circus immediately and introduce amendments to The City of Brisbane Act (2010). All general public transport operations should be stripped from Brisbane City Council, and the bus network uploaded to the State Government. The games have gone on for far too long.

Best wishes
Robert

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

References:

No Benefit to UQ from Light Rail (two posts)
http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=11894.msg170201#msg170201
http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=11894.msg169967#msg169967

*Calculation Existing CityGlider 13 buses in peak hour x 65 passengers/bus = 845 passengers / hour
(A) Upgraded CityGlider 150-pax superbus, running every 2 minutes. 30 buses x 150 passengers/bus =
4500 passengers / hour (B)

Factor: Divide B into A: 5.3x

Team Quirk Metro Information Request
http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=11952.msg170890#msg170890

"It is expected that a nominal load for a metro train with three carriages would be approximately 220
passengers. During peak periods, it would be expected that a full load could expand to
approximately 300 passengers."

KGS = King George Square

[ozbob]

Twitter

Pete ‏@PeteFTD 1h1 hour ago

@JonathanPBryant @Robert_Dow @Rod4Bris infrastructure investment like light rail must come after network reform, not before. #bnevotes