LNP: Brisbane Metro Plan

[Old Northern Road]

We are going to need something with this expected population boom of 10 million in 30years time. Los Angeles basin has 9.6million today and look at the grid lock there. Just a suggestion we should change this thread to A political and just call it "BNE Metro Plan"

LOL 10 million? Try 2 million and even that number seems really optimistic. And Los Angeles is over 18 million

[ozbob]

We are going to need something with this expected population boom of 10 million in 30years time. Los Angeles basin has 9.6million today and look at the grid lock there. Just a suggestion we should change this thread to A political and just call it "BNE Metro Plan"

No - this thread is about the Brisbane Metro plan as proposed by Team Quirk et al.

There is a separate thread for possible rational metro discussion > http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=12520.0

[verbatim9]

We are going to need something with this expected population boom of 10 million in 30years time. Los Angeles basin has 9.6million today and look at the grid lock there. Just a suggestion we should change this thread to A political and just call it "BNE Metro Plan"

LOL 10 million? Try 2 million and even that number seems really optimistic. And Los Angeles is over 18 million

They are expecting10Million people in total by 2050-2060. As per projected in the SEQ regional plan, unless it was a misprint ?

[Old Northern Road]

We are going to need something with this expected population boom of 10 million in 30years time. Los Angeles basin has 9.6million today and look at the grid lock there. Just a suggestion we should change this thread to A political and just call it "BNE Metro Plan"

LOL 10 million? Try 2 million and even that number seems really optimistic. And Los Angeles is over 18 million

They are expecting10Million people in total by 2050-2060. As per projected in the SEQ regional plan, unless it was a misprint ?

Nope. 5 million by 2041

[verbatim9]

Quoted on Abc online

http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2016-10-20/new-se-qld-plan-aims-to-predicts-regions-need-for-next-50-years/7949120

Ms Trad said an extra 2 million people were expected to live in south-east Queensland by 2041, swelling the population to 5.3 million.

By 2061, the population was expected to grow to 10 million.

[Old Northern Road]

Quoted on Abc online

http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2016-10-20/new-se-qld-plan-aims-to-predicts-regions-need-for-next-50-years/7949120

Ms Trad said an extra 2 million people were expected to live in south-east Queensland by 2041, swelling the population to 5.3 million.

By 2061, the population was expected to grow to 10 million.

Has to be a misprint. No way would the population double in 20 years

[verbatim9]

Contact the editor

[#Metro]

We are going to have a Canberra added to Brisbane, and a Sunshine Coast added to Logan. Building is already going gangbusters across the city too. Has anyone seen the former DTMR Spring Hill HQ? It's being turned into apartments!

If we assume that trip generation will double with double population, and we know that peak hour we do 15 000 pphd on the SE Busway, then it is not unreasonable to assume that we would require around 30 000 pphd on the SE Busway.

30 000 pphd / 150 pax superbuses = 200 buses per hour or a bus every 18 seconds.
More will come from Logan also, a good 20 km bus trip into the city.

SEB is capable of supporting a 5 minute metro service right now, already does 12 000 - 15 000 pphd in peaks, go for something that can be expanded further in the future. Fully automatic.

Transport infrastructure is built to accomodate peak demand, and automatic operation means that the cost of an additional service is extremely low, so large variations between peak and off peak load are not a concern.

[ozbob]

The ' Quacker ' doesn't cut it at all.  It's a dead duck!

Fantasy.

A proper metro needs to be able to move at least 30,000 pphpd, automated and scalable.

The Quacker is a nice toy ..

[Gazza]

Question, but many bus routes are approaching LRT levels, yet the suggestion of that gets shot down.

Im not sure if a doubled population equals double SEB trips....How much of the growth will occur in the SEB catchment.

[HappyTrainGuy]

Question, but many bus routes are approaching LRT levels, yet the suggestion of that gets shot down.

Im not sure if a doubled population equals double SEB trips....How much of the growth will occur in the SEB catchment.

Not to mention that doesn't help those that don't plan on using it ie connecting to heavy rail or local employment.

[#Metro]

I think an information request is in order. Some of the info in the SEQ plans don't have the finer grain that would be useful.
Even some of the info BCC has put out could have more than one interpretation, so that requires clarification.

Question, but many bus routes are approaching LRT levels, yet the suggestion of that gets shot down.

Which bus routes are those? Bus technology has changed quite a bit.

If you are talking about Newstead - CBD - West End, that has been studied over and over again.

The Lord Mayor's Mass Transit Report goes into that in great detail. https://www.brisbane.qld.gov.au/sites/default/files/sept07_final_report_brisbane_mass_transit_investigation_lmt.pdf

The report goes into detail about why. Bus BCR 2.4, LRT 2.0. Bus NPV 3.4 BN, LRT NPV 2.9 BN.

The bus option was more efficient in that corridor at converting taxpayer cash to benefits, and it delivers more benefit (more effective) in absolute terms also.

Another interesting piece of the report is that BCC and State Government talk at each other about partnership, but seem unable to form joint investigation taskforces. Hopeless!

It is not considered that the capacity provided by a Metro system would be needed prior to 2026, but the concept should be included in planning being undertaken for inner city rail and bus capacity by a joint Brisbane City Council and State work group.

(p8)

I have demonstrated that SEB supports a metro now. The report at the time said that we need one by 2026, so 10 years from now. It would take about 10 years to get through all the politics, planning and gov't intertia to get it built. So today is a good place to start the process.

From the report, any growth in Logan will spill over directly into trips generated towards the Brisbane CBD. This is significant as the entire Logan bus network would plug into an SEB Metro at Eight Mile Plains, and add Griffith Uni and Garden City as destinations.

Currently the City of Brisbane accounts for over 75% of the jobs within greater Brisbane.
More than 50% of employed residents in surrounding shires work in the Brisbane City area
(Pine Rivers 61%, Logan City 51%, Ipswich 54% and Redland Shire 50%).

In addition to raw population growth, there is also "induced demand" from when services are improved. The BUZ services are excellent examples of this in Brisbane, IIRC patronage roughly doubling with a doubling of service supply. If money spent driving buses all the way from Logan into the Brisbane CBD, or parts of Brisbane's southside to the CBD were instead used to boost frequency to feed a metro service on the SEB, we should also see patronage increase independant of population growth (Mohring effect).

The Mohring effect is the observation that, if the frequency of a transit service (e.g., buses per hour) increases with demand, then a rise in demand shortens the waiting times of passengers at stops and stations.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohring_effect

Interestingly, Table 9-2 page 48 rules out both bi-arctic bus (180 pax capacity) and Light Rail (250 pax capacity). Both modelled options fail to meet the projected demand, even after diverting some services to rail (150,130) and metro terminus at Woolloongabba.

As I wrote earlier, an information request in order IMHO.

[#Metro]

PS: I made a small observation of a detail in the BCC Mass Transit Report.

Look at what the Green metro line is doing:

Woolloongabba-QUT-CityHall(Adelaide St)-Roma St.

It's basically the current CRR alignment.

[Gazza]

Something similar to the Blue line is essentially what I was thinking would be better if BCC want to build their metro. except of course it would go to the Gabba rather than east Bris.

As youve said Green is already being sorted with CRR.

The red line is an unrelated project, but more or less follows a good route too for an initial stage, and would be a massive speed increase over the gilders and 199.

In the long term youd go from UQ to Indro, and also from Newstead to Bulimba, and then eventually to some point on the Cleveland line.

[#Metro]

Something similar to the Blue line is essentially what I was thinking would be better if BCC want to build their metro. except of course it would go to the Gabba rather than east Bris.

Already Clem 7 under Kangaroo Pt now.

As youve said Green is already being sorted with CRR.

It's the current alignment of CRR, but not "sorted" by it.

[Gazza]

Bear in mind that study was done in 2007, we didn't have a "city hall" station, but the busway connection project fixed that with KGS.

The Albert st station serves the needs of the QUT stop proposed.

Roma st....check

Suncorp doesn't need to be on CRR, or a metro for obvious reasons.

Normanby is a bit of an odd choice for a metro stop.....hemmed in by the ICB and sports Fields, it has no significant redevelopment potential.

The only stop not being served on that green is QUT KG.

So where's the problem.

Re KP already having clem 7, BCC would have access to clem 7 drawings, so could design around it.

Kangaroo point, at its narrowest part is 270m wide (where the marina cuts in immediatley north of Carins st)
Otherwise it averages 400m wide or more....It's crazy to say that a road tunnel and a metro tunnel both wont fit within a 400m wide strip of land, even taking into account the need to keep the structures separated to avoid subsidence.

There is precedent for this. The Eastern suburbs line and the Cross City tunnel in Sydney are in very close proximity in Wooloomooloo in Sydney, with the train line popping out between the two road tunnels.
https://www.google.com.au/maps/place/Woolloomooloo+NSW+2011/@-33.8765463,151.2265237,165m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x6b12ae12e4d30f67:0x5017d681632d0e0!8m2!3d-33.8704!4d151.2223

[SurfRail]

The Clem 7 is probably quite a bit deeper than the metro would need to be given the tunnel doesn't pop up until Bowen Hills - the gradient throughout reflects that.

[aldonius]

The issue is and always will be Woolloongabba. The tunnels go directly under the busway station, and considering they surface only about half a km further south, they can't be that deep down.

[ozbob]

Brisbanetimes --> Brisbane Metro: Council gives up on preferred Go Print site

Brisbane City Council has all but given up hope that it could use the state-owned Go Print site as part of its Brisbane Metro transport system.

But Lord Mayor Graham Quirk has told the council chamber at City Hall he was confident the project's business case, due to be delivered next May, would find an alternative site.

"We have set down where we believe the metro ought to be, but the reality is that when you are developing a business case, you have to look at different options," Cr Quirk said.

"We've done this with all of the projects that we have been undertaking; there's nothing new about this."

The Brisbane Metro project received a significant boost on Tuesday morning when Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull linked a $10 million funding commitment to the state government's proposed Cross River Rail planning process to ensure it linked with the council's metro project.

Central to Cr Quirk's original plan for the Brisbane Metro was a stabling yard for metro rolling stock, something the Lord Mayor conceded was now off the table.

"OK, so if we can't do that, of course we have to look at some other aspects to ensure this project works," Cr Quirk said.

"... We are required, in terms of the business case to be presented to Infrastructure Australia, for example, to be able to present options in relation to that.

"We have to, in the building of a business case, look at a range of options and this is not peculiar to this project; this relates to any project.

"So we have put forward what we believe is a start and a finish point, which are very, very important."

Earlier, Deputy Premier Jackie Trad said that despite the state government's earlier scepticism of the Brisbane Metro, she was keen to make the most of the project.

"We have always said that the council's metro transport project needs to be complementary to Cross River Rail," she said.

"It can't cannibalise it, it can't duplicate it. It would be silly to spend money on two public transport projects that effectively do the same thing."

Ms Trad said Cross River Rail was "ready to go" and the government had  "always said" they wanted it to work in conjunction with the Brisbane Metro.

But, just last month, Annastacia Palaszczuk said Cr Quirk should "ditch his metro-style plan" and "forget" going ahead with the project.

"I think it's very important to understand the genesis, the reason, why the Premier made those comments," Ms Trad said.

"Graham Quirk has said that he needs the Go Print site, located at Woolloongabba, in order to turn it into a depot for his metro buses.

"We have made it clear that the Go Print site, which is a state government site, which has a priority development area application over it, is a site for a Cross River Rail station.

"Look, ultimately this is a state government site that will be used for a Cross River Rail station and not as a depot for the metro."

The state government's Cross River Rail delivery authority will include representatives from all levels of government.

The state government has also provided its services to the council in its planning for the Brisbane Metro.

[ozbob]

One by one the absurdities are confronted and exposed ...

==================================================


Confronting the Quirk Metro con ...

Bus network reform does not cost billions of dollars and will dramatically improve public transport outcomes for Brisbane and with positive flow on effects for all of SEQ.

It is time the Brisbane media stopped swallowing the ' metro '  bull-dust and did some basic research.

Problems with the Quirk ' Metro ' as proposed:

1.  Delivers less capacity than the present busways - fatal flaw**.  Proposed metro is only a capacity of 9000 passengers/hour/direction.  Busways deliver 15,000 passengers/hour/direction.

2.  Is under-costed, grossly in our opinion. We challenge the Lord Mayor to sign a cost explosion indemnification agreement, guaranteeing that any cost overrun on the project ( over $1.5 BN) will be borne solely by BCC.

3.  Absolutely wrecks the inner-city busway network. Stops one station short of RBWH Hospital (to save costs?)

4.  Is very doubtful if Victoria Bridge can be used due to the significant weight of metro trains, track and electrical systems.  Use of Victoria Bridge precludes any further network improvements.

5.  Is not driverless as proposed. If changed to automatic then cost of stations etc. increases massively. Comparisons with Sydney Metro make this abundantly clear.

6.  State owns and controls the busway infrastructure.  It is unlikely that a State Government of any political persuasion would allow the busway system to be wrecked for a system that delivers less capacity than the current network!

7.  Proposed Quirk ' metro ' depot site is state owned and is actually earmarked for CRR.

The absolute minimum capacity for a train to reach the touted 30,000 passengers/hour quoted in the BCC election vote-bait material is 750 passengers per train. The Lord Mayor is suggesting trains with a capacity 2.5x lower, that is 300 passengers/train.


** Quirk ' Metro ' Capacity Calculation

1 hour = 60 minutes = 3600 seconds. World's best practise train throughput is a train every 90 seconds. 3600 seconds / 90 sec = 40 trains per hour.

Therefore 30,000 passengers/hour divided by 40 trains/hour = 750 passengers per train (absolute minimum).

Lord Mayor Graham Quirk's Metro is 300 pax/train as proposed.

Run every 2 minutes (as announced in election) 30 trains / hour x 300 pax/train = 9000 passengers/hour/direction - a backward step for the network.

Even under the most extreme assumptions, the metro would have less capacity than the busway and be at capacity on opening day.

[#Metro]

1000 pax x 85 kg each (have to give a bit of room as population is piling on the kilos) = 85 tonnes

Then we have to add in the train itself, which might be another 85 tonnes or so.

We are easily looking at something like 200 tonnes on the Victoria Bridge.

Really? 200 tonnes? 

That's the same as 45 elephants on the Victoria Bridge. Of course, trains will pass each other so at peak load, it will be more like 400 tonnes pressing down on it.

In fact, we know that Brisbane City Council has an idea of the limitations of the Victoria Bridge. If one looks at the Lord Mayor's mass transit report, the Light Rail option was given a completely new $50 million bridge as that was apparently unable to use the Victoria Bridge.

Why should it be any different for a metro then?

.... unless the Lord Mayor is going to use TransLohr or something like that, which is really a guided bus on a steel rail. But that won't have the capacity!

"It can't cannibalise it, it can't duplicate it. It would be silly to spend money on two public transport projects that effectively do the same thing."

A common corridor with shared CRR + Metro stations at Woolloongabba, CBD and Roma street is not duplication IMHO.

We can determine this in a thought experiment.

For example, say we are a public servant in the ' Tower of Power ' and we walk to a combined CRR + Metro Station in the CBD to go home.

We have a choice of catching a QR train or a BCC metro.

Or do we?

In reality, although the CBD stations are shared, people usually only have 1 house to go home to. And that is either going to be near a QR rail station or a metro station.

For example, if our public servant lived at Garden City or Eight Mile plains, the reality is that only the BCC metro would be the real option. Similarly, the same is true if our public servant lived out at Kuraby, Beenleigh or Gold Coast. Only the CRR component would be useful to them.

So it's not really a duplication. To think so is to confuse infrastructure with service. It is a co-location. The home destination stations are completely different.

[SurfRail]

Semantics.  It is duplicating the inner city distributory function CRR will have when it could be taking another route and serving new markets that aren't entirely oriented on CBD to suburbs commuting.

The aim should be to disaggregate the core of the system as much as possible to reduce strain on each station as patronage increases over time.  If you funnel everybody into the same spot, you end up with the same problem Central is in now even with 6 platforms and 2 track pairs.

[Gazza]

So it's not really a duplication. To think so is to confuse infrastructure with service. It is a co-location. The home destination stations are completely different.

Your thought experiment is incorrect.

The goal should be to have a good spread of stations on all parts of the line, (aside from interchange stations), not just the "home" destination because this increases the network effect.
http://www.spur.org/publications/urbanist-article/2014-07-16/network-effect

Basically, the theory goes the more destinations served, you have a multiplier effect because you get more and more possible start end points, so the system becomes more useful, and usage increases at a higher rate. Connective public transport systems with good interchange opportunites leverage of this.
http://humantransit.org/2009/04/why-transferring-is-good-for-you-and-good-for-your-city.html


By duplicating CBD stations, you reduce the effectiveness of the money spent because you only get one new station (Albert St)

If you pick a new alignment, you could get 3 or so new stations.

I literally do not understand why you would argue against a vision where Brisbane could easily have extra CBD stations beyond what CRR is offering.

[#Metro]

Your thought experiment is incorrect.

No it's not incorrect.  You are not denying that the home destination stations are completely different.

Brisbane's CBD is small and constrained. Roma Street also a major destination that connects to all parts of the QR rail network.

I actually have a proposal http://tiny.cc/CRRMETRO

Fully mapped out, fully connected to bus network, everything shown.

Your alternative proposal is ..??

It has been interesting to observe the shift of position from  ' we don't need a metro ' to ' we'll have a metro, just not on that alignment'.

Makes sense to have metro station at QUT/Queens wharf etc.

If people want to make their own proposal and promote that, please do. I welcome that. Let the best idea win.

[Gazza]

Your alternative proposal is ..??

LOL i already posted it 
Broadly similar to the blue route proposed in the 2007 mass transit study but the southern end goes to Gabba so it could eventually connect to the SEB. No need to draw a map because BCC have done that for me.

It is a logical fallacy to say that I need a full counter proposal anyway to pick holes in yours.

A simple thought experiment proves this.
Imagine someone buys a video game but does not enjoy it, and finds it buggy and unplayable.
The maker of the game tries to brush of this criticism by arguing that since the player has never programmed a video game of his own that the players criticisms are invalid and that there is actually no problem with the game at all.

It is safe to say that there are many locations in inner brisbane that do not have mass transit stations, so a simple thought experiment proves that are a large number of potential routes that could connect the northen and SE Busways with a metro.
It could be proven that the number of route options that do not involve shadowing CRR would outnumber it many to one.

Brisbane's CBD is small and constrained.

It is quite long though compared to other cities...Try walking from an office tower in Spring Hill to QUT gardens point.
and we don't really have high capacity for distributing people around the CBD like other cities in Aus have.
If this wasn't an issue, we wouldn't have rocket bus variants trying to go to different ends of the CBD to distribute people.

No it's not incorrect.  You are not denying that the home destination stations are completely different.

No, it defintley is incorrect, which is why nobody was convinced.

How does the fact the SEB goes to a different way to the Beenleigh/GC line help people get to different locations in the CBD.
In effect, you are trying to sell an unrelated benefit of suburban destinations to the debate at hand, which is having stacked stations versus having stations in unversed areas.

It has been interesting to observe the shift of position from  ' we don't need a metro ' to ' we'll have a metro, just not on that alignment'.

Of course, people dont really mind seeing a metro in Brisbane at some point in the future, but CRR is the most urgent priority, which would be the prevailing view.
If BCC were being sensible and spending the funds they had to accellerate CRR in partnership with the state, they would be reaping the benefit, and nobody would be talking about rubber tyre metros.

Makes sense to have metro station at QUT/Queens wharf etc.

Of course, but CRR is sorting that out, and will have massive hourly capacity at that stop, so having a 30,000 p/h metro going there too is not actually increasing the utility of that station

If people want to make their own proposal and promote that, please do. I welcome that. Let the best idea win.

My idea already has won though and I haven't even had to draw a map 
That's why members have made posts in this thread where they understand the benefits of building lines on new allingments, and there was a previous poll done on RBoT where the idea of a double deck metro/CRR was strongly not supported.

[#Metro]

This is my proposal, and its what I'm running with. http://tiny.cc/CRRMETRO

If you think you have 'won' that is great. I'm happy for you.

I've put it up because I think it will be a worthwhile thing to co-construct with CRR and I am not entirely convinced of your proposal due to the Clem 7 tunnel. We also don't know what the constraints under that section (i.e. S1 sewer, building basements etc) of the CBD are and how that will work.

[Gazza]

I've put it up because I think it will be a worthwhile thing to co-construct with CRR and I am not entirely convinced of your proposal due to the Clem 7 tunnel. We also don't know what the constraints under that section (i.e. S1 sewer, building basements etc) of the CBD are and how that will work.

But even if we do not run via Kangaroo point, there are an immensive number of ways to draw a North South line connecting Gabba with RBWH.
A simple thought experiment proves this.

This is my proposal, and its what I'm running with

Why are you unable to modify proposals based on feedback. Why post them in the first place?

[#Metro]

Why are you unable to modify proposals based on feedback. Why post them in the first place?

Instead of telling other people what to do, why don't you put the work in and actually go to Google Maps and do up a proper proposal with station locations, route alignment and bus network in place, just like I have.

Make your own!!

[Gazza]

Instead of telling other people what to do, why don't you put the work in and actually go to Google Maps and do up a proper proposal with station locations, route alignment and bus network in place, just like I have.

Make your own!!

So every member on here has to draw up a full proposal and can't comment (except positively) on yours?

What does the amount of work have to do with the quality of the product?

I don't really get how quickly tracing a line over the CRR allignment and the SEB, then changing some lines on the new bus network is some massive effort on your part?
I mean, that's pretty much what BCC did (except they traced over the busway through mater hill, then cut their bus routes back to Gabba)

Why is it OK to criticise the BCC proposal, but not yours, when they've had about an equal amount of effort put into them?

I bet someone spent a lot of work hours designing the Eagle Junction station upgrade, or designing BAT (  ) for example.

I didn't have to sit down and design a whole train station, or design and cost a rail/bus tunnel to pick holes in those things.

[STB]

Your thought experiment is incorrect.

If people want to make their own proposal and promote that, please do. I welcome that. Let the best idea win.

I haven't really been following this thread, but I saw this line and I instantly thought why are you treating this as some sort of competition?  Any idea or concept is generally a team effort in the real world and one should always be open to new ideas and listening to others to see if an idea or concept can be improved upon or changed.

[Marshal]

We have a choice of catching a QR train or a BCC metro.

Or do we?

In reality, although the CBD stations are shared, people usually only have 1 house to go home to. And that is either going to be near a QR rail station or a metro station.

For example, if our public servant lived at Garden City or Eight Mile plains, the reality is that only the BCC metro would be the real option. Similarly, the same is true if our public servant lived out at Kuraby, Beenleigh or Gold Coast. Only the CRR component would be useful to them.

I happen to live at Kuraby, and study in the city. Every time I travel into the city, i have a choice between catching the train, or catching a bus/driving to the park and ride at eight miles plains. both take about the same time. If I had a more reliable bus service between my home and eight mile plains, rather then the hourly service that ends at around 6pm, the two options would be essentially identical, which in turn would make your combined metro/crr corridor essentially identical.

Then we have to consider that in a world with crr but no metro on the same corridor our public servant need only make the easy walk across the nearby goodwill bridge to hop on the busway at Southbank, or just a short walk to QSBS, something that I know tonnes of people are doing every weekday at both uni and workplaces across the CBD.

I just don't see what a combined metro/CRR, with metro continuing along the northern and s/e busways, offers that wouldn't be achieved with CRR and proper trunk and feeder routes for our bus system, which saves money to be put towards a different metro corridor that doesn't duplicate and replace other high capacity transport infrastructure.

[#Metro]

So every member on here has to draw up a full proposal and can't comment (except positively) on yours?

Not at all Gazza, that's something you made up.

I haven't stopped, blocked or censored anyone putting their alternative proposal or criticisms. I get feedback and criticism all the time.

Proposal is public. Anyone is free to download and modify, comment and criticise. Even you.

In contrast, your map is ??

I don't really get how quickly tracing a line over the CRR allignment and the SEB, then changing some lines on the new bus network is some massive effort on your part?
I mean, that's pretty much what BCC did (except they traced over the busway through mater hill, then cut their bus routes back to Gabba)

If it is not such a massive effort, why are you so reluctant to actually draw up your alternative proposal in Google Maps etc which you keep talking about. I just don't understand that.

Let's see it done properly in Google Maps and then people can look at that and perhaps criticise it too. Maybe that has problems and drawbacks as well.

I put my proposal out there and expose it to the heat. Why not you??

Why is it OK to criticise the BCC proposal, but not yours, when they've had about an equal amount of effort put into them?

Disagree. I have a full published proposal that is public, it is all out there for anyone to download and modify. People can and have criticised it.

Huge difference between an unpaid volunteer on a forum and a paid professional in BCC using rates money. Completely different thing.

Any idea or concept is generally a team effort in the real world and one should always be open to new ideas and listening to others to see if an idea or concept can be improved upon or changed.

True.

At the moment there are four broad options
- no metro (at all)
- LM Quirk's conception
- Gazza's conception
- My conception (Not popular, but everything is on the table)
- there may be others

I happen to live at Kuraby, and study in the city. Every time I travel into the city, i have a choice between catching the train, or catching a bus/driving to the park and ride at eight miles plains. both take about the same time. If I had a more reliable bus service between my home and eight mile plains, rather then the hourly service that ends at around 6pm, the two options would be essentially identical, which in turn would make your combined metro/crr corridor essentially identical.

Then we have to consider that in a world with crr but no metro on the same corridor our public servant need only make the easy walk across the nearby goodwill bridge to hop on the busway at Southbank, or just a short walk to QSBS, something that I know tonnes of people are doing every weekday at both uni and workplaces across the CBD.

I just don't see what a combined metro/CRR, with metro continuing along the northern and s/e busways, offers that wouldn't be achieved with CRR and proper trunk and feeder routes for our bus system, which saves money to be put towards a different metro corridor that doesn't duplicate and replace other high capacity transport infrastructure.

Thanks Marshal, yes point taken. I only used Kuraby as that has a train station (no busway) and that first came to mind.

The thing is that the SEB is already capable of supporting 5 minute metro already, and to get 30 000 pphd down it that's a bus every 18 seconds. A similar scenario is looked at in the LM Mass Transit report where a metro exists at Woolloongabba. My interpretation of the info in that report is that even under that scenario the SEB demand was not met.

But certainly more info on future projections about the SEB demand is necessary, I agree.

In my proposal, you can see that a number of BUZ routes and almost all rockets are absorbed into the new metro. High load ones like 222, 174/175, almost all rockets, 555, the entire Logan network etc.

[Gazza]

I put my proposal out there and expose it to the heat. Why not you??

It is out there.
Because the BCC map, and the fact that members have a brain and know where I am talking about makes a map redundant.
Obviously an eastern CBD allignment is only one option, but have you noticed that I'm not the only one onboard with an alternative option as a general principle.

Are you seriously suggesting that people reading this thread don't get the gist of what I'm proposing 

Or is presenting the idea in the format you choose to present ideas the only valid way of doing it? Seems to me this is more about your google map skills rather than actual content or the nexus of the idea.

The reason I haven't gotten any heat is because people are generally onboard with that for the idea as how you'd do a future metro.

We don't want the quirk design, but we don't want a double deck CRR either, because they both have the exact same flaw of putting all your eggs in one basket instead of spreading infrastructure $$$ out to get the best possible coverage.


I'm currently too busy to do a google map, but obviously pretty much everyone can imagine in their mind where it would go, because we are mostly all SEQ residents.
Contrary to what you might believe, making an argument or describing an idea doesn't always require a page long post with 10 article links and diagrams for the majority to understand it.

[Marshal]

Thanks Marshal, yes point taken. I only used Kuraby as that has a train station (no busway) and that first came to mind.

The thing is that the SEB is already capable of supporting 5 minute metro already, and to get 30 000 pphd down it that's a bus every 18 seconds. A similar scenario is looked at in the LM Mass Transit report where a metro exists at Woolloongabba. My interpretation of the info in that report is that even under that scenario the SEB demand was not met.

But certainly more info on future projections about the SEB demand is necessary, I agree.

In my proposal, you can see that a number of BUZ routes and almost all rockets are absorbed into the new metro. High load ones like 222, 174/175, almost all rockets, 555, the entire Logan network etc.

Because the busway can support it does not necessarily mean it should be done. I highly doubt the SE busway beyond the inner city section is that close to capacity, let alone in need of the capacity to move 30 000 ppd/h. You are hinging a huge part of your argument for a combined metro/CRR on the need to upgrade the entire busway network to metro, and provided the inner city capacity issue is resolved, I see no real evidence that that is remotely necessary. And sure, you could argue future proofing, but tbh I really don't see the need for that kind of capacity beyond Woolloongabba in the foreseeable future.

Even if a full metro all the way down the busway were necessary, you still achieve very little by duplicating the inner city corridor that isn't also achieved with a different inner city corridor. As I pointed out above, walking across the goodwill bridge to a bus station is a pretty small ask. Bus stations/train stations have a walk-able access of roughly 800m, that's about the distance most people are prepared to walk to reach one. There is far more benefit in having a CRR in one part of the city, and a metro stop in another, either within 800m of the CRR station or just a little beyond it, with overlapping walk-able buffers. That way more people have more access to high frequency and capacity systems.

[ozbob]

I am increasingly getting the feeling that Lord Mayor Quirk et al. are realising that the ' metro ' as proposed is non-deliverable and simply does not stack up.

Even Brisbane Transport planning staff have grave reservations.  I guess the public feedback has been rather pointed as well during the consultation sessions. 

Yesterday's political stunts don't change the fact that the metro as proposed is nonsense.

But what else do we really expect in banana-land hey, other than stunts and stupid politicised policy?

QUEENSLANDER !!

[ozbob]

Well well ...

Brisbanetimes --> Cross River Rail: Single intersection key to immediate congestion relief

There is no doubt that the State Government's plans to build Cross River Rail must be the number one public transport infrastructure priority in south-east Queensland. But it's not about the potential of servicing a whole new area of the CBD with a high capacity rail service – places like Albert Street and Eagle Street become an easy walk from a train.

In recent years we've seen whole new growth areas such as Springfield and Redcliffe able to take advantage of rail with connecting buses under an integrated ticketing framework.

But others benefit from these lines too. The Moreton Bay Rail line, for example, means more services for anyone on the northern line from Petrie all the way to the City. Likewise, the Springfield Line for people using stations from Darra inwards.

Yet there are two critical choke points that mean there is very little room for further future service expansion. There are only two tracks across the Brisbane River in the inner city. Trains coming from the south then have to cut across the western line to Ipswich and Springfield, further limiting capacity.

We need to further extend the Gold Coast line ultimately to the Coolangatta Airport and build a line to Beaudesert to serve growth areas such as Flagstone and Yarabilba. This can't be done without Cross River Rail giving increased capacity into the city centre.

This project was listed "ready to proceed" by Infrastructure Australia in 2012. Lack of agreement between parties at a State level and with Federal Governments has delayed progress. There is every reason, post Tony Abbott, that both sides of Federal politics will ultimately support the project, yet on current time frames it won't open until 2023.

In the meantime, the Brisbane City Council has commenced investigations into a Brisbane Metro to increase bus capacity into the city. Our busway network is arguably one of the best in the world. But at 16,000 passengers an hour it's also a victim of its success. About half of the peak hour South East Busway traffic has to get off at Woolloongabba to come in on the South East Freeway.

Why? The Busway also has a capacity issue. The greatest problem is the dysfunctional intersection between the Victoria Bridge and Grey Street. The intersection causes bus and traffic congestion, is dangerous to pedestrians, and has almost zero interface with the South Brisbane Railway Station. In our cultural heartland we have a traffic wasteland.

Fixing this intersection is the key to getting immediate relief. The State owns three corners of this intersection and has ultimate control of the intersection itself.

The solution is to underground the intersection and move the cultural centre bus stop closer to the rail station so they are truly integrated. The result? An immediate increase in capacity of the busway and, prior to Cross River Rail opening, an ability for Qld Rail to put on new services terminating at South Brisbane but linked to a busway to get commuters quickly into the CBD.

Is this justified? It gets immediate capacity benefits. It has permanent benefits even after Cross River Rail and will create a fantastic podium level public space that integrates all four corners of a blighted intersection and can be partially paid for by a job-creating high-rise above it.

And the Bus metro? Why spend the money converting a state busway that can take any bus – not just special wheeled ones) into a metro that can only take specialised buses? What happens to the buses on the UQ, South-Eastern and Eastern Busways? They will need interchanges onto the metro bus. Why do that at a multibillion-dollar cost when you can increase capacity in the existing busway network and interchange with rail with a far greater capacity and SEQ-wide reach?

The solution is to spend far less money to get increased capacity out of the existing world-class busway and then to have those buses that don't use the busway interconnecting with a greatly increased rail system that brings them into the city.

If the money from the Federal Government does anything, it should quickly sort out these issues, give the green light for cross river rail and let the City Council off the Metro hook by fixing capacity issues in the existing busway network.

Paul Lucas is a former Transport, Planning and Infrastructure Minister and Deputy Premier of Queensland.

[ozbob]

Sent to all outlets:

26th October 2016

The Quirk Metro as proposed is nonsense, confirmed again ...

Greetings,

The Quirk Metro as proposed is nonsense.  There are commonsense low cost solutions to the bus problems.  Having the courage to undertake bus network  reform would deliver huge benefits for little cost.

Interesting opinion piece by former Deputy Premier Lucas at Brisbanetimes: Cross River Rail: Single intersection key to immediate congestion relief
> http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/comment/cross-river-rail-single-intersection-key-to-immediate-congestion-relief-20161025-gsakvq.html

Quote:

In the meantime, the Brisbane City Council has commenced investigations into a Brisbane Metro to increase bus capacity into the city. Our busway network is arguably one of the best in the world. But at 16,000 passengers an hour it's also a victim of its success. About half of the peak hour South East Busway traffic has to get off at Woolloongabba to come in on the South East Freeway.

Why? The Busway also has a capacity issue. The greatest problem is the dysfunctional intersection between the Victoria Bridge and Grey Street. The intersection causes bus and traffic congestion, is dangerous to pedestrians, and has almost zero interface with the South Brisbane Railway Station. In our cultural heartland we have a traffic wasteland.

Fixing this intersection is the key to getting immediate relief. The State owns three corners of this intersection and has ultimate control of the intersection itself.

The solution is to underground the intersection and move the cultural centre bus stop closer to the rail station so they are truly integrated. The result? An immediate increase in capacity of the busway and, prior to Cross River Rail opening, an ability for Qld Rail to put on new services terminating at South Brisbane but linked to a busway to get commuters quickly into the CBD.

Is this justified? It gets immediate capacity benefits. It has permanent benefits even after Cross River Rail and will create a fantastic podium level public space that integrates all four corners of a blighted intersection and can be partially paid for by a job-creating high-rise above it.

And the Bus metro? Why spend the money converting a state busway that can take any bus – not just special wheeled ones) into a metro that can only take specialised buses? What happens to the buses on the UQ, South-Eastern and Eastern Busways? They will need interchanges onto the metro bus. Why do that at a multibillion-dollar cost when you can increase capacity in the existing busway network and interchange with rail with a far greater capacity and SEQ-wide reach?

The solution is to spend far less money to get increased capacity out of the existing world-class busway and then to have those buses that don't use the busway interconnecting with a greatly increased rail system that brings them into the city.

If the money from the Federal Government does anything, it should quickly sort out these issues, give the green light for cross river rail and let the City Council off the Metro hook by fixing capacity issues in the existing busway network.

Very sad to note yesterday that the Prime Minister, of all people, has swallowed hook line and sinker the nonsense that is the Quirk Metro proposal.

There is no way that billions of dollars would be expended to deliver a ' metro ' solution that only gives half the present busway capacity.

Not only is it dumb, it is morally and fiscally irresponsible.

Best wishes
Robert

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

[ Attached: http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=11952.msg179169#msg179169 ]

[ozbob]

The Quirk Metro as proposed is nonsense, confirmed again ..
> https://t.co/3rXLCRvsqg#qldpol@TurnbullMalcolm @Team_Quirk @StirlHinchliffe pic.twitter.com/VkXiJXrTMd

— Robert Dow (@Robert_Dow) October 26, 2016

[ozbob]

Malcolm ...   

[ozbob]

Couriermail Quest --> Lord Mayor Graham Quirk defends Brisbane Metro plan

HE proposed Brisbane Metro has been scrutinised by Brisbane City councillors with claims of secrecy and lack of consideration in the planning.

At yesterday's Brisbane City Council meeting Opposition Leader Peter Cumming questioned Lord Mayor Graham Quirk about the lack of alternative routes being explored for the $1.5 billion project.

"Why won't you swallow your pride and allow the project team to investigate alternative routes that will service more commuters such as connecting Newstead, CBD, West End and out to the University of Queensland?" Cr Cumming asked Cr Quirk.

Cr Quirk said he was stunned by part of the question and said it relayed something that the people of Brisbane had already voted on.

Labor's Brisbane Lord Mayoral candidate Rod Harding proposed a $1.2 billion light rail connecting Newstead and The University of Queensland at this year's election.

"In the building of a business case we need to look at a range of options ... we have put forward what we believe are a start and finish point that we believe are very important," Cr Quirk said.

"It connects with hospitals, it connects with two sports stadiums, it connects with a whole lot of education facilities and education accommodation that's being constructed along that corridor."

The seven kilometre Brisbane Metro route is proposed to run from Woolloongabba to Herston.

Documents tabled as part of the Establishment and Coordination Committee Report revealed engineering firms had placed bids to assist with the planning of the metro and contracts had been awarded.


In August more than $4.5 million was awarded to Jacobs Group (Australia) for design and engineering services and Phillip Boyle & Associates won the tender for bus network and services planning at $353,000

Councillor Jared Cassidy (Deagon) said the ALP had serious concerns about the money being spent on a business case.

"It is shrouded in secrecy and has a whole heap of flaws," he said.

Cr Cassidy said he had attended council run information sessions about the project and asked engineers if the route could be changed.

"They said, we wish we could look at alternative routes but unfortunately we were directed to only look at this one particular route because the Lord Mayor said this is what it's going to be and we were told when we started this business case this was the only route," Cr Cassidy said.

The $16 million business case will be finished by May next year.

Community information sessions will be held at:

King George Square, Tuesday October 27, 11am-2pm

Victoria Park Golf Course, Saturday October 29, 10am-1pm

Pop up venue information opportunities will be held at:

Chermside Library, Tuesday October 12, 10am-12pm

Carindale Library, Wednesday October 13, 1-3pm

Garden City Library, Wednesday October 19, 11.30am-1.30pm