LNP: Brisbane Metro Plan

[Stillwater]

Are we all part of a political scam?  The Brisbane Metro emerged during the local government election campaign -- one of those pipedream projects that emerge at election time and are designed to have no other purpose than to stir public sentiment (who doesn't like a good bit of infrastructure) and to create the ILLUSION that someone has a plan when really they don't.  The LNP has form here -- think the Cleveland Solution and the BAT, which the party later admitted it had no intention of proceeding with.

Is the Brisbane Metro in that same basket?  The reasoning?  Lord Mayor Quirk took 'something different' to the election.  Its strange how these transport projects seem to service those wards and electorates where the party suggesting the project is on shaky ground.  The intention was to gain votes, not to move people efficiently from A to B.

Moreover, Cr Quirk was able to create the ILLUSION that he had a plan and a firm concept.  Quirk is showing that he is doing something positive for Brisbane, forcing Labor to oppose it.  The result?  The LNP has a plan (however ill-conceived) and Labor doesn't.  Quirk has contrasted LNP with its metro plan and Labor with its do nothing approach or stalled CRR project.  Is it all just a political trick?

There are plenty of examples in Queensland where politics casts a perverse shadow across the landscape.  Both political parties will do ANYTHING to show up the other and destabilise, given the state of the majority in the state parliament.  Bugger the hapless commuter.   

[#Metro]

Anything is possible in Adobe Photoshop, Stillwater.

I have half a mind to cut and paste a train into an image of the sky and forward that off to media outlets as a new "flying train" proposal.

Trains could shoot out of the tunnel portal at Dutton Park, arching over the Brisbane river to land wheel side down on the roof of Roma Street station...

Would solve everyone's problems, and then we could all go live under the sea...

[#Metro]

EXCLUSIVE

Metro animation released! Includes trip over 'Victoria Bridge'. Even decked out in Blue Team colours!

[BrizCommuter]

http://brizcommuter.blogspot.com.au/2016/09/anna-nails-quirky-metro-coffin.html
Anna nails the Quirky Metro coffin.

[Stillwater]

Loved it, LD Transit.  At least people now know that a media kit and an animated video does not a good idea make.  Journalists in this town must be far more questioning about these things, even to the point of not reporting them, if they are stupid political stunts.  Or they should call them out for being dumb.

[ozbob]

Couriermail --> Lord Mayor Graham Quirk's 'rapid transit' rail plan hits now roadblock

BRISBANE Lord Mayor Graham Quirk has not been able to identify alternative sites for the city's proposed Metro subway system after the State Government derailed Brisbane City Council's original plan.

The council wanted to use Woolloongabba's former Go Print site as a stabling yard for the $1.5 billion "rapid transit" system's rolling stock. But that idea was scuttled at the weekend when Deputy Premier Jackie Trad announced council's use of the site had been rejected because it couldn't accommodate both the Metro and the Government's Cross River Rail. ...

[ozbob]

. @Team_Quirk ' metro ' doesn't stack up. Lot more wrong than just stabling issues.
> https://t.co/TJZEUO1XBZ#qldpol
>> @couriermail

— Robert Dow (@Robert_Dow) September 5, 2016

[ozbob]

http://brizcommuter.blogspot.com.au/2016/09/anna-nails-quirky-metro-coffin.html
Anna nails the Quirky Metro coffin.

BrizCommuter:
' Anna nails the Quirky Metro coffin '
> https://t.co/8TdxQdoKMM#qldpol@Team_Quirk @jackietrad pic.twitter.com/rPZJWSJEnm

— Robert Dow (@Robert_Dow) September 5, 2016

[#Metro]

BRISBANE Lord Mayor Graham Quirk has not been able to identify alternative sites for the city's proposed Metro subway system after the State Government derailed Brisbane City Council's original plan.

Probably have blocked RBOT media then? Clearly there is a site available at Herston on Gilchrist Ave. Only thing there atm is a car park and cricket wickets.

Save the cricket wickets!! 

[ozbob]

Brisbane Metro animation released! Includes trip over 'Victoria Bridge'
>> https://t.co/uGIu7eu35c#qldpol
O_o

— Robert Dow (@Robert_Dow) September 5, 2016

[ozbob]

Crazy stuff, they are going on about the ' metro ' stabling issue when in fact that is the least of the issues really ...

. @Team_Quirk @jackietrad @612brisbane main issues > https://t.co/TJZEUO1XBZ stabling one of many ..
Ditch it! #qldpol

— Robert Dow (@Robert_Dow) September 5, 2016

[#Metro]

Team Quirk still trying to peddle their rubbish wares. Just UNBELIEVABLE!
#Rubbish

[ozbob]

Brisbanetimes --> 'We want to work with council': Govt changes tune on Metro

[#Metro]

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/government-changes-tune-on-brisbane-metro-20160906-gr9s7v.html

Further support for the "metro as political wedge tool" in the article. Look at how No-Policy Tim Nicholls steps in to promote himself:

State opposition leader Tim Nicholls said it was symptomatic of a "deeply divided" government.

"Just yesterday, Annastacia Palaszczuk, who claims she isn't a dictator, told the Lord Mayor that he should ditch his Brisbane Metro project and get on board with Cross River Rail," he said.

"But just this morning on radio, we've heard the Deputy Premier say she wants to work cooperatively with the Lord Mayor and Brisbane City Council in order to try and get the project  going.

"The latest example (of division in the Labor Party) we're seeing today is the Premier saying Graham Quirk should ditch the Brisbane Metro project and we're seeing the Deputy Premier say she wants to work with him cooperatively on it.

"It is a mess and nothing is happening."

[Stillwater]

It remains a mess so long as politics is played.  There was no contradiction between Palaszczuk and Trad.  Watch.  One or the other will come out and say that Quirk was told to ditch his plan, as proposed, and that local and state government should work on a more effective metro proposal.  See!  Nothing here, move on.

Of course, Mr Nicholls makes a rod for the LNP's back.  Where is the LNP transport plan, Tim?  Where's yours Anna?

The case should be argued on the strategies, not on the day-to-day ramblings around political point-scoring.  Media engaged in the 24-hour news cycle have got to get their minds off 'Anna said this at 10am' and 'Tim said this in reply at 11am' and 'Jackie said Scott is a political pigmy'; we are seeking comment from Scott.  Most would want the media and political classes to elevate the debate above the thought retention cycle of a goldfish.

[ozbob]

Brisbanetimes --> Brisbane Metro: Premier and deputy's train of thought aligns against Quirk plan

The Premier and her deputy have presented a united front against Brisbane City Council's proposed Metro rapid transit system, insisting it could not go forward in its current form.

In a joint statement issued on Tuesday afternoon, Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk and Deputy Premier Jackie Trad sought to clarify the government's position in its ongoing dispute with Lord Mayor Graham Quirk over his proposed Brisbane Metro.

It came after divisions appeared to emerge on Tuesday morning when Ms Trad told 612 ABC Brisbane the government would assist the council in delivering the project.

Ms Trad's comments were less that 24 hours after Ms Palaszczuk said Cr Quirk should "ditch" the $1.5 billion project altogether, since the state government had ruled out providing the old Go Print site at Woolloongabba.

The site had been earmarked as a location for the Metro's southside rolling stock holding yard, but the state government said it required the land for its $5 billion Cross River Rail project.

Ms Palaszczuk and Ms Trad sought to sing from the same hymn sheet on Tuesday afternoon, when they issued a joint statement to Fairfax Media.

"The fact the Go Print site has been ruled out, which the government confirmed on Saturday, means Mr Quirk's Brisbane Metro plan cannot work in its current form," they said in the statement.

"Of course, if Mr Quirk chooses to develop a business case, the state will look at it, but the number one public transport priority for every level of government must be Cross River Rail.

"We urge him to put everything else aside and get onboard.

"We now know Scott Emerson and the LNP supported Cross River Rail in 2013, it's about time the project again received bipartisan support so it can proceed as soon as possible."

Federal opposition infrastructure spokesman Anthony Albanese revealed on Monday how close the Gillard and Newman governments had come to delivering Cross River Rail in 2013, prior to the election of the Abbott government.

Cr Quirk said the Go Print site could accommodate both infrastructure projects.

"We have said all the way along the business case would look at the coexistence of Cross River Rail and Metro and we are committed to that," he said.

"We're not about taking over the Go Print site. We never have been. We understand that the state have plans for that site in respect of Cross River Rail.

"We understand they have plans for that site in terms of a 40-storey tower and there's no reason why those plans cannot continue.

"They can coexist and the invitation to the state to be a part of the business case was about working in co-operation."

[ozbob]

. @brisbanetimes Many issues with the ' metro ' - stabling is but one ..
> https://t.co/TJZEUO1XBZ#qldpol pic.twitter.com/8qkrjU5mgo

— Robert Dow (@Robert_Dow) September 6, 2016

[SteelPan]

BCC's proposed Metro project is a Great Plus for the City!

Let's get behind it as fans of rail, it's not everyday we get to see this type of project trying to get up-n-running! I mean BCC doesn't run the same type of actual buses it did 30...40yrs ago...technology changes...things change!

If this works out well, unlike the Premier and Deputy Premier of Qld, we can get TWO major infrastructure projects underway to service inner Brisbane. Of course, CRR has wider ramifications for the SE Qld rail network AND Metro will no-doubt grow over time.

If the Premier and Deputy Premier of the State, clearly see "Brissy" as forever a Cinderella like, 2nd rate city.....we, as backers of rail can get behind this rare opportunity! Many cities around the world....WARNING: some "Brissy" folks might need to sit down as they read this [including clearly the Premier and Deputy Premier]......many cities around the world, already run BOTH heavy and light-rail based inner-metro systems.... shocking I know....so yeah, kind of makes you wonder why there's anything but support for BOTH projects!

One can certainly see the need, with BCC buses moving 24 MILLION More passengers, than the entire SE Qld rail network!

Let's help bring on Metro....and deliver for Brisbane a great piece of transit infrastructure!

[verbatim9]

I hope Brisbane Metro and CRR are passenger ready by 2022

[#Metro]

BCC's proposed Metro project is a Great Plus for the City!

Let's get behind it as fans of rail, it's not everyday we get to see this type of project trying to get up-n-running! I mean BCC doesn't run the same type of actual buses it did 30...40yrs ago...technology changes...things change!

It has been my consistent position that a metro within Brisbane is not justified, with the sole exception of the SE (and possibly Nth) busway corridor.

If the CRR and Metro projects were combined into a single project with common alignment, the Queensland Government would solve its funding problem (by getting BCC to contribute) and BCC would get its approvals problem solved (by getting the State Government tick) plus be able to use larger vehicles and have enhanced interchange capability within the CBD core.

[Gazza]

I dont see how it would solve any funding problem lapdog, because the additional costs of a double deck tunnel would be greater than any BCC contribution.

[Gazza]

Here are the facts:

-BCC say the metro will cost $1.6 bil.
-But the BCC want funding from other levels of government, so that means the BCC say have $1 bil to actually offer.
-the additional cost of double decking, stations With enough escalators for two lines worth of pax, metro rolling stock, the conversion of the INB etc will easily be more than $1 bil.

-So with all that money spent, how has CRR gotten ahead financially?

[#Metro]

I dont see how it would solve any funding problem lapdog, because the additional costs of a double deck tunnel would be greater than any BCC contribution.

But would be cheaper than doing two projects independently, and would also not have the time delay or funding competition at the federal level if combined.

A combined option proposal should go off to TMR or Building Queensland for assessment, and treated in the same way as any other proposal.
The current proposal does not have BCC support or funding, and I expect CRR#3 would be formally cancelled come the next election.

The groundwork for a combined project is already there from the investigation of BaT. It doesn't have to be a double deck tunnel, it could also be parallel tunnels. Whatever the case, it should be sent off for assessment.

[HappyTrainGuy]

FFS there's no need for a dual bat tunnel. There's no need for a fancy metro. The current bus system can more than handle it. The problem we currently have is that the system isn't properly designed. So instead of having a few frequent routes using it we have every bus route in Brisbane wanting to use it and all terminating/starting at the same city location. No mention of the 330,333,345 blocking the CC when they all arrive in the morning peak hour.

[Gazza]

I dont see how it would solve any funding problem lapdog, because the additional costs of a double deck tunnel would be greater than any BCC contribution.

But would be cheaper than doing two projects independently, and would also not have the time delay or funding competition at the federal level if combined.

A combined option proposal should go off to TMR or Building Queensland for assessment, and treated in the same way as any other proposal.
The current proposal does not have BCC support or funding, and I expect CRR#3 would be formally cancelled come the next election.

The groundwork for a combined project is already there from the investigation of BaT. It doesn't have to be a double deck tunnel, it could also be parallel tunnels. Whatever the case, it should be sent off for assessment.

Look I totally get that combining two projects into one results in an economy of scale, and lower final combined cost than if the two projects were separate.
We have seen this approach for example with Airport link an the northern busway, as well as combining the springfield line with the centenary upgrade.

But what you are suggesting is a crazy, unrealistic enconomy of scale... and some costs wont become lower because of this approach
(Eg the train manufactuer won't give you a discount because you're digging two tunnels at once)

CRR is costed at $5.4 billion.
BCC can potentially offer say $1 billion in funding from their kitty.

Therefore, for your funding mechanism to 'break even', the combined project would have to cost $6.4 billion or less.

And for BCC to actually be "solving Qlds funding problem" by "offset some of CRRs costs in some meaningful way, the combined project might have to come in at say $6 billion (In other words a $400 mill effective contribution to the original CRR funding pool)

(And you'd have to even get the council to agree!...they could well say f**** you, our sh%t is only resulting in $400 mil in additonal costs to your project, so we're only giving you $400 mil!)

But im digressing...
Now, I'm not sure what you have in your head, but there is no possible way you could deliver a combined project for $6.4 bil.

[#Metro]

Look I totally get that combining two projects into one results in an economy of scale, and lower final combined cost than if the two projects were separate. We have seen this approach for example with Airport link an the northern busway, as well as combining the springfield line with the centenary upgrade.

BCC needs to do a deal with the State Government. We put in cash for your CRR, you give us approval for metro along a combined alignment.

But what you are suggesting is a crazy, unrealistic enconomy of scale... and some costs wont become lower because of this approach
(Eg the train manufactuer won't give you a discount because you're digging two tunnels at once)

Pretty irrelevant what the train manufacturer does. Let's say the train manufacturer got the contract for trains and metro vehicles and gave a bulk discount, would your position change to support the combined project? Doubt it...

CRR is costed at $5.4 billion.
BCC can potentially offer say $1 billion in funding from their kitty.

Therefore, for your funding mechanism to 'break even', the combined project would have to cost $6.4 billion or less.

And yet BaT was cheaper than CRR1. However it is CRR1 that is the best project so far on efficiency (BCR) and total volume of benefits for society (NPV), by a large margin.

And have you seen what the costs are in Melbourne and Sydney?

http://metrotunnel.vic.gov.au/about-the-project/faq
The estimated construction cost of the Metro Tunnel in nominal terms is $10.9 billion.

SW Budget - $12 billion in Budget for metro rail revolution

"Tomorrow's NSW Budget will commit a massive $6.2 billion towards Sydney Metro City & Southwest and $5.8 billion for Sydney Metro Northwest over the next 4 years, with both stages now fully funded."
http://www.transport.nsw.gov.au/media-releases/nsw-budget-12-billion-budget-metro-rail

The cheapest CRR project is of course, is no project at all.

Large long term (i.e. 50-100 years) projects in central CBD areas are expensive. That's a given.

And for BCC to actually be "solving Qlds funding problem" by "offset some of CRRs costs in some meaningful way, the combined project might have to come in at say $6 billion (In other words a $400 mill effective contribution to the original CRR funding pool)

QLD doesn't have a funding problem. Plenty of funds locked up in assets for example - I have previously demonstrated this. Interest rates are at record lows. Central problem is the politics - gov't doesn't want to borrow, tax or spend which pretty much rules out doing anything.

But im digressing...
Now, I'm not sure what you have in your head, but there is no possible way you could deliver a combined project for $6.4 bil.

See comments above.

Staff at the Department of Transport and Main Roads should take the BaT plans out and see how it would work with the bus component replaced with a train. Proper cost benefit and other business case things should also be calculated from that.

TMR should do the study. Waste of time to pre-empt the outcome. I want to see BCRs and NPVs for all options.

[ozbob]

Funny that in some ways we are back to where we started with BaT.  We suggested that the BaT ( the B component ) would need ' rubber tyre metro ' to actually work.  As proposed for buses it was never going to get the required capacity.

" BCC's proposed Metro project is a Great Plus for the City! "

SteelPan.  We are not against a metro per se, we are against a mediocre ' metro ' that makes everything a lot worse. 

Our relentless pressure on the lack of capacity of the Quirk ' metro ' may well have a pay off in the end.

Brisbane will only get one crack at this. 

What ever eventuates has to be truly scalable, has to have the correct alignments  and has to have the capacity that is needed now and will deliver in the future.

I have been informed that there is data to suggest that the busways have peaked at around 18,000 pphpd on some days.  The Quirk ' metro ' only has a capacity of 9,000 pphpd.  This is the fundamental issue. There are many more of course, but unless there is the capacity (~30,000 pphpd ) it is simply not worth the cost or network disruption. BCC understand this now.

[#Metro]

I have informed that there is data to suggest that the busways have peaked at around 18,000 pphpd on some days.

As I keep pointing out, 12 000 pphd is pushing the lower bound of metro systems. If a metro existed today (not necessarily the Quirk one) it would be running a train:

12 000 divided by 1000 pax train = 12 trains per hour
60 minutes / 12 = a train every 5 minutes.

The SE Busway already has the patronage to support a metro as it is.

At 18 000 pphd, this works out to be a train every 3 minutes.

I look at that and think "METRO" is the right tool for that job. That's my case.

Bus reform is a versatile thing. It can be done with or without infrastructure spend. The original proposal did have a automatic metro a la Vancouver along the SEB, but I removed it as I thought that nobody would ever seriously think of doing that. How time has changed.

[aldonius]

Something to bear in mind when fantasy mapping: if we're going to dig a metro out the southeast, it might be better to deviate it a bit to the north of the freeway. Reason being, there's actual land use along Logan Rd.

Also makes it easier to justify heading SW down to Sunnybank outbound of Garden City.

[#Metro]

Quack, Quack!

LM Quirk still thinks he can get his hands on the W'Gabba site. 

He's STILL pushing.

Honestly, I think this is setting up a wedge Red Team thing. Nicholls will then swoop in and promise the site or the background will suddenly drop away to reveal the real proposal, completely different from this Quack Metro.

Another transport infrastructure figure in the private sector, who wished to remain anonymous, said Victoria Park in Spring Hill might be suitable but it was listed on the state heritage register, which would make it hard to use the area.

Lord Mayor Graham Quirk said he was still hopeful the State Government would allow access to the crucial Woolloongabba site.

"We understand that the State Government has plans for the Go Print site in respect of Cross River Rail and 40-storey towers and there's no reason why those plans cannot continue with the stabling of Metro rolling stock," he said.

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/brisbane-metro-significant-redesign-required-without-woolloongabba-site/news-story/48f6dfcc22da7a0f049aec2d90cce72b

[Gazza]

, the Queensland Government would solve its funding problem (by getting BCC to contribute)

QLD doesn't have a funding problem

LD, is this doublespeak?

[ozbob]

Couriermail --> Brisbane Metro: Significant redesign required without Woolloongabba site

THE $1.5 billion Brisbane Metro will probably require a "significant redesign" after the State Government ruled out providing access to a key site.

The former Go Print site at Woolloongabba was the preferred site for the project's stabling yard but Deputy Premier Jackie Trad has rejected the plan because the land is crucial for Cross River Rail.

Transport experts have claimed the decision would force Brisbane City Council back to the drawing board with the Metro.

SITE: Brisbane Metro project dead in current form

Griffith University transport ­researcher Matt Burke said there were limited sites for a suitable stabling yard.

"There's almost nothing in Woolloongabba or Buranda that would work so they might have to push (the line) out to Greenslopes (near Ekibin Park) to find an area that fits," Dr Burke said.

He said the project would be more expensive and harder without the Go Print site.

"It's definitely going to be a lot harder but there is the ­opportunity to go back and do a significant redesign of the whole project, which could get ­better outcomes," he said.

Another transport infrastructure figure in the private sector, who wished to remain anonymous, said Victoria Park in Spring Hill might be suitable but it was listed on the state heritage register, which would make it hard to use the area.

Lord Mayor Graham Quirk said he was still hopeful the State Government would allow access to the crucial Woolloongabba site.

"We understand that the State Government has plans for the Go Print site in respect of Cross River Rail and 40-storey towers and there's no reason why those plans cannot continue with the stabling of Metro rolling stock," he said.

" ... there is the ­opportunity to go back and do a significant redesign of the whole project, which could get ­better outcomes," he said. ... "

Indeed ... 

[ozbob]

.@Robert_Dow Build it along the TMR Connecting SEQ route! Add capacity to network not reduce it!! pic.twitter.com/iCR9dGTBc6

— Jon Bryant (@JonathanPBryant) September 7, 2016

[Stillwater]

Geez!  What's this about going back to the drawing board re the Quirk Metro plan?  It was only ever a thought bubble, an ink blot on a map and a few Photoshop images.  We have to get over this thinking that says a swift PR stunt during an election campaign (Cleveland Solution, BAT, Metro) are actually real.  They are the illusions and conjuring tricks of politicians.  Politicians are not traffic planners or civil engineers (with the exception of Campbell Newman, but that is a different story).  They must be informed by experts.  What has happening in Queensland is that various politicians spout a theory publicly, then call the experts into a room and tell them to make it happen.  The experts smirk among themselves, and try to make the best of it.  Meanwhile, a gormless media run with the idea because it creates click bait.   

[ozbob]

Slowly, folks in and out of the media are starting to grasp the fact that there are some very major and terminal issues  with the ' metro ' as proposed.

About time!

[#Metro]

LD, is this doublespeak?

The Queensland Government could fund the entire thing, including metro, if it sold off the assets, leased them off or

borrowed against them. Obviously, that is not going to happen with this lot in administration, so there is a "problem",

even though it is entirely artificial in its making. This is where BCC comes into play.


Obviously, like any charge, the Queensland Government will not contribute money that it doesn't have to and will try to

shift the cost onto other parties as much as possible.


I expect CRR3 to be cancelled at the next election, just as CRR1 and CRR2 were cancelled. New gov't will do something different again.

[Stillwater]

^^ I think this government has sought to break the cycle that's got all of us in cynical mode by establishing a 'delivery authority' for CRR III.  A 'betterment tax' remains on the agenda.  Wait for the bunfight over that!  BCC would be banking on the increases in rates brought about by newdevelopment and property value increases along the route.  Along comes Aunty Anna and grabs the piggy bank, directing that money to paying off the infrastructure that brought about the wealth creation that the mayor thinks is his.

[#Metro]

Along comes Aunty Anna and grabs the piggy bank, directing that money to paying off the infrastructure that brought about the wealth creation that the mayor thinks is his.

There is a non-artificial, genuine problem with the CRR funding. And it is this: any improvement that this project has on the city will lift land values - which will be captured by Brisbane City Council and the Lord Mayor as permanently increased rates revenue.

This is a good reason why BCC should be making a funding contribution to CRR.  Annastacia could come in and take it, but it would require extension of land tax to residential property. This is somewhat controversial as politicians are using this as a political tool - "you vote for my party, and I will make the rules such that your home increases in value, even to the point where it becomes unaffordable for anyone else to buy."

Residential property is exempt from land tax precisely because the political class want to curry favour with that voting bloc. We know this independently from all the rhetoric about interest rates come election time and how "party x will always have lower interest rates than under party y", even though interest rates are set by supply/demand of funds and the Reserve Bank (an independent organisation).

In recent years we have heard less of this rhetoric, as rates are at rock bottom, but the scheme is still in place.

[BrizCommuter]

A bit of satire for you:
http://brizcommuter.blogspot.com.au/2016/09/bcc-to-demolish-rbwh-for-brisbane-metro.html

[ozbob]

LOL!

BrizCommuter:
" BCC to demolish RBWH for Brisbane Metro depot "
> https://t.co/W7KXWI8YlS#qldpol
(T.I.C.) pic.twitter.com/iOqTuLigtH

— Robert Dow (@Robert_Dow) September 12, 2016