LNP: Brisbane Metro Plan

[Gazza]

Actually its not quirky paying for that stuff, it's Brisbane ratepayers.

Minor detail.

[HappyTrainGuy]

Time to take the blinders off mate.

[#Metro]

In Melbourne, the early stages of the project looked at adding a 3rd level of tunnels in the City Loop. It was found instead that the new alignment via Domain, Swanston St and Parkville was more advantageous.

Just in

New City Loop Tunnels 
Melbourne

"Tunnels would be built between Flagstaff and North Melbourne, and Parliament and Richmond, while a flyover would be built from North Melbourne to link to the proposed electrification of the Wallan line."

"Infrastructure Victoria's draft 30-year plan says construction of the new City Loop tunnels should begin "shortly after completion" of the Metro project, which could also help alleviate disruption associated with the major works."

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victoria/new-rail-tunnels-proposed-for-3-billion-city-loop-upgrade/news-story/e53b4a18dafe60e8d0d4fb985a65180f

[Gazza]

Yes, those changes were flagged in the PTV network development plan.
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8366/8593957165_86071ee487_z.jpg
Basically the Frankston line would be connected to to Cragieburn line, by breaking into two of the existing city loop tubes and running them as throughrouted lines around the North Eastern edge of the CBD rather than as balloon loops.

The South Morang (Mernda) line would be disconnected from the loop and get its own brand new CBD tunnel through to Fishermans bend.

[petey3801]

Can I not say this any clearer?
Business. Case. Is. NOT. Required. To. Rule. Out. An. Option.
Clear enough now?
If a business case was developed for every single option of every single piece of infrastructure that was built, NOTHING WOULD BE BUILT because it takes TIME and MONEY to develop a business case! An evaluation of options is what occurs when an investigation takes place, like, oh, I don't know, the original CRR development team evaluation!

BaT was a silly, very expensive (time and money wise) thought bubble that was NEVER GOING TO BE BUILT! The business case was basically a flop, especially when pit against the original CRR business case.
You want a metro/CRR combined business case? How about you put up the money yourself, so the state can (hopefully) get on with the real job of building CRR without wasting yet more time and money on a pointless and unrequired business case for a thought bubble.
Move on.

[verbatim9]

^^Isn't this the what the community forum is all about; To ensure to proceed with a business case or not?

[Marshal]

Can I not say this any clearer?
Business. Case. Is. NOT. Required. To. Rule. Out. An. Option.

It's not that I disagree with you, but check out the business case for the Melbourne Metro project. They devote a chapter to a succinct analysis of other options for alleviating inner city rail congestion. They assess these analysis on an established criteria to demonstrate why they believe the project they are proposing is the best option to proceed with.

So yeah, I don't think there should be a full blown business case for every possible option, but I would like to see some actual evidence that some range of options was at least considered before we arbitrarily decide the current option is "da best". I mean how many people here have said that they support metro for Brisbane but dislike the alignment presented? A key part of the business case has to be justifying the project against the alternatives.

Edit: I should add to clarify, I don't see any reason to produce a business case specifically for a joint metro-crr project at this point in time, just that I would like the business cases for these two projects to actually outline alternatives and why they are better then the alternatives

[petey3801]

Does anyone have a copy of the original CRR business case? I do remember at the time them saying that every option was explored and this one came out trumps. Hell, even Newman's review board came up with the same conclusion before he completely ignored them and went with BaT!
I'm not against a metro per se, but IMO it is a looooooooooooooooooooooooooong way down the priority list for Brisbane at the moment. Mamy, many other more important projects to spend money on before we even approach the need for a metro (once the bus network has been properly sorted out!).

[#Metro]

Does anyone have a copy of the original CRR business case? I do remember at the time them saying that every option was explored and this one came out trumps.

I believe that you are referring to the ICRCS study, conducted in 2008. Approaching 9 years ago.

The option that came out on top IIRC was the duplication of the rail corridor via the Merivale Bridge into Roma Street.

That option did the job and was the cheapest.

However, the more expensive alignment was chosen via Woolloongabba as the State Government wanted to develop the land parcel there (and there was the North Bank idea as well). Now, it doesn't really open up "new" area for PT as there is already a busway station at Woolloongabba and it has not been a difficult area to access since the busway opened around 2000.

A mark against the Merivale Bridge option was the corridor was a little narrow/constrained. This is because the busway and the railway run in a combined corridor with co-located busway and railway stations at South Bank (Busway+Railway) and South Brisbane/Cultural Centre.

Come to think of it Roma Street station is also a combined corridor with a railway track being removed to make way for the busway to go in.

A common corridor isn't something new - in a sense, we already have it.

[Derwan]

It's not that I disagree with you, but check out the business case for the Melbourne Metro project. They devote a chapter to a succinct analysis of other options for alleviating inner city rail congestion. They assess these analysis on an established criteria to demonstrate why they believe the project they are proposing is the best option to proceed with.

As we haven't seen the full business case for CRR, it's quite possible that they've already assessed the option of a combined tunnel (with bus or metro) and have already included it in the business case.

Of course it'd be nice if they released this information so that we would know whether it's something they have definitely investigated.

[Derwan]

Come to think of it Roma Street station is also a combined corridor with a railway track being removed to make way for the busway to go in.

A common corridor isn't something new - in a sense, we already have it.

It's not a common corridor.  It's an interchange - one that is planned to be included in CRR as well.  It's a logical interchange - with long-distance bus and rail also located there.

[petey3801]

I believe that you are referring to the ICRCS study, conducted in 2008. Approaching 9 years ago.

No, I am referring to the original business case of the original CRR, as I said.

[Gazza]

Come to think of it Roma Street station is also a combined corridor with a railway track being removed to make way for the busway to go in.

A common corridor isn't something new - in a sense, we already have it.

It's not a common corridor.  It's an interchange - one that is planned to be included in CRR as well.  It's a logical interchange - with long-distance bus and rail also located there.

This.

Its a short stretch in parallel to allow an interchange and you would know well that isnt what we are arguing against.

But what you want with your combined tunnel is to have a bucketload of capacity and infrastructure on top of each other serving the one  pedestrian catchment area over a distance of kilomerts, which ignores other parts of the inner city such as eagle street, spring hill, Newstead etc which could be served by a future line if designed well.

They would be left out in the cold.

Previous transport studies, including the ICRCS have identified serving these areas as future/alternative options.

This is why nobody supports a combined corridor.

[SurfRail]

The option that came out on top IIRC was the duplication of the rail corridor via the Merivale Bridge into Roma Street.

Nope.  The preferred option was a tunnel from somewhere south of Dutton Park to the Ekka Loop via Central.  That was later refined into CRR Mark 1.

[#Metro]

Nope.  The preferred option was a tunnel from somewhere south of Dutton Park to the Ekka Loop via Central.  That was later refined into CRR Mark 1.

But the corridor via Merivale did the job and was cheapest. Minimum necessary solution.

IIRC they chose the Woolloongabba alignment because they wanted extras.

It's not a common corridor.  It's an interchange - one that is planned to be included in CRR as well.  It's a logical interchange - with long-distance bus and rail also located there.

And the section between South Bank/South Brisbane where the busway runs parallell to the railway line?

But what you want with your combined tunnel is to have a bucketload of capacity and infrastructure on top of each other serving the one  pedestrian catchment area over a distance of kilomerts, which ignores other parts of the inner city such as eagle street, spring hill, Newstead etc which could be served by a future line if designed well.

They would be left out in the cold.

Nobody is being "left out in the cold" transport infrastructure isn't a person, and it is not unprecedented to have many lines converge, especially in a radial/circuar type city. Melbourne has many trains from the suburbs where multiple lines all converge into a city loop, as does sydney.

Your solution ignores the fact that the busway is already capable of supporting 5 minute train frequency in peak with the 12 000 pphd it already carries and that metro is a suitable mode choice for that kind of passenger volume.

Never mind. I throw the idea into the ring regardless. So much opposition to what - an idea? Let them assess the thing, along with every other option. Whole essence of public consultation. 

I don't mind if it is ultimately shown to not be the best option. You might think that, we don't know that.

Comes down to due process really.

Proposal is now submitted in my private capacity, independent of RBOT.

Thank you for your email. It has been forwarded to the project team.

Kind regards,
Brisbane Metro Subway System project team | BRISBANE CITY COUNCIL
..................................................................
Email: ****@brisbane.qld.gov.au
Phone: 1800 692 333

If anyone has an objection, you are free to write or contact the BCC project team and send it there.

[petey3801]

Just because it is the cheapest solution, does NOT mean it is the best solution. The Maryvale 'duplication' solution was actually a very poor solution in the grand scheme of things. Yes, it 'got the job done' and it was cheaper, but with multiple comprimises (such as, but not limited to: No extra capacity through the City, exaserbated junction conflicts at Roma Street west if using a bridge option, no new rail served destinations, inferior and slow alignment etc).
Re: common corridors: Roma St is an interchange point. South bank is also an interchange point with a short (1km or so) common corridor. Sydney and Melbourne City loops are quite old (especially Sydney), as is the Brisbane city route. New build infrastructure is (for the most part) using new alignments, opening up new rail served destinations (Melbourne Metro Rail, Sydney Metro etc) instead of following the existing corridors (Melbourne future plans regarding City loop is to increase corridor capacity I believe).
What you are suggesting is a common corridor for two modes several kilometers long, stopping at the same stations. For someone who is so against bus route duplicating railway lines, I really do struggle to believe why you are suggesting a Metro should follow the exact same route as the heavy rail CRR for several kilometers including the exact same stations!

[SurfRail]

But the corridor via Merivale did the job and was cheapest. Minimum necessary solution.

IIRC they chose the Woolloongabba alignment because they wanted extras.

They chose the Gabba alignment because the BCR was the highest of the many options they assessed for getting a second track pair through the city and out the other side.

[#Metro]

They chose the Gabba alignment because the BCR was the highest of the many options they assessed for getting a second track pair through the city and out the other side.

Fair point, but what were the NPVs for the two options. BCR is dimensionless as it is a ratio and it only tells you how efficient a project is at converting taxpayer cash to benefits, not at how effective it is.

[Gazza]

They chose the Gabba alignment because the BCR was the highest of the many options they assessed for getting a second track pair through the city and out the other side.

Fair point, but what were the NPVs for the two options. BCR is dimensionless as it is a ratio and it only tells you how efficient a project is at converting taxpayer cash to benefits, not at how effective it is.

You forgot to write the bit about gold plated rails mate.

[Gazza]

Everyone knows that the CRR option they chose cost more than cheaper options like duplicating the merivale bridge, but it came with higher benefits so that's why it became government policy.

I think petey has summed it up well. We dislike duplicating bus routes, but want a metro to do that?

We rightfully dislike the BCCs metro proposal because it has numerous flaws and is a waste of money. Lets not substitute that with another proposal that has its own drawbacks and is equally a waste of money.

Major CBD tunnel projects are a once in a 20 year thing, and can't be changed once built, so thats why basically everyone would rather see a future metro go somewhere new....if we got a double deck design that basically means nowhere else gets served for decades to come.

(I bet because I've said this I'll get the whole "perfect is the enemy of good" lecture.  :bi )

Nobody is being "left out in the cold" transport infrastructure isn't a person

Yes people do get left out in the cold. Remember the BUZ black holes like yeronga and Albany Creek. Remember that map you did showing the red zones not served by mass transit lines in Brisbane. Holes in the coverage of rail in the inner city are real.

[#Metro]

What you are suggesting is a common corridor for two modes several kilometers long, stopping at the same stations. For someone who is so against bus route duplicating railway lines, I really do struggle to believe why you are suggesting a Metro should follow the exact same route as the heavy rail CRR for several kilometers including the exact same stations!

Disagree, it is not that much longer than the common corridor between say Mater Hill and Cultural Centre. It is within the CBD as well, and the Brisbane CBD is quite small compared with other cities. I think it is an elegant solution that solves multiple problems simultaneously and allows seamless interchange between metro trains and Queensland Rail services.

The designers of Melbourne and Sydney's CBD rail loops seemed to think it was a decent idea.
Because its the CBD. You wouldn't use that strategy further out in the suburbs, but this is not that case.

The walk up zones are the same around Roma Street, CBD and Woolloongabba, but that misses the point - obviously the home destination stations are completely different!

See here:



I understand that some think a metro through Eagle street etc, but IMHO that is just a distraction as that issue is nowhere near the problem magnitude the SE busway capacity issues are.

[Gazza]

I understand that some think a metro through Eagle street etc, but IMHO that is just a distraction as that issue is nowhere near the problem magnitude the SE busway capacity issues are.

Bus reform and high capacity buses will fix the SE busway capacity issues.

Anyway, if a piece of infrastructure can solve a few issues at once then it should (This is why we love CRR)

[#Metro]

Bus reform and high capacity buses will fix the SE busway capacity issues.

The SE Busway can support a metro now with its current patronage. That is fact. 12 000 pphd / 1000 = trains every 5 min.

Metro is a suitable mode for carrying passengers along a corridor with 12 000 pphd or higher.

To carry 30 000 pphd (final end capacity) on the busway using 150 pax superbuses requires 200 buses per hour, or one superbus every 18 seconds.

[Gazza]

The SE Busway can support a metro now with its current patronage. That is fact. 12 000 pphd / 1000 = trains every 5 min.

Cool, so then why can't we have a SE metro that then forges a new path through the CBD?

[#Metro]

Cool, so then why can't we have a SE metro that then forges a new path through the CBD?

In a sense it is a new path - the current busway goes via South Bank. This combined CRR+Metro proposal does not use the current busway stations at Mater Hill, South Bank, South Brisbane, Cultural Centre, Queen Street Bus Station or King George Square.

So it does put the busway in a new alignment - along with the new alignment with CRR. It also gives a new station in the CBD, where one could perhaps walk to QUT, the new casino or Eagle Street (bit of a walk, but doable).

Your proposition does not provide long term solution for SE Busway capacity issues IMHO. Indeed I am not sure if you do have an alternative competing proposal, as I haven't seen an actual alternative alignment for a metro proposal from your side that solves the SE busway issues etc.

[verbatim9]

Went to the Info session @ The German Club, very informative. Most likely 6 Car sets May also allow bikes on out of peak. I asked about the second and 3rd stages for an overall picture. Currently work in progress for later stages might be released with final draft of stage 1 March April next year, which then goes to community consultation once again.

[Gazza]

In a sense it is a new path - the current busway goes via South Bank.

Ok ill rephrase, a path that isnt CRR or the current busway.

Basically, it'd follow the SEB from 8mp to Buranda or so, then run along the eastern side of the CBD and onwards to Spring hill, and then join onto the northen busway metro there.

[#Metro]

Ok ill rephrase, a path that isnt CRR or the current busway.

Basically, it'd follow the SEB to Buranda or so, then run along the eastern side of the CBD and onwards to Spring hill, and then join onto the northen busway metro there.

It is not up to me to decide if there can or can't be other proposals. Of course others can come up with their own proposals that may be on whatever alignment they want. If they have such a proposal, they can post it with details and elaborate on that and make their own case.

I am not going to stop anyone promoting or coming up with their own ideas and promoting that.

Even partial combination is possible, with the metro component branching out part way.

Up to you really to make the case for your own proposal, and then perhaps send that off to Brisbane City Council.

[HappyTrainGuy]

[verbatim9]

I did ask about CRR competing and duplicating with Metro. They replied that both alignments compliment each other + having a Bus, CRR, Metro interchange at Woolloongabba and council has identified commerical opportunities along the Metro route for value capture.
They also mentioned they received a lot of feed back to have a direct tunnel from KGS to Cultural Centre all underground.

[Derwan]

I also went to the session at the German Club yesterday.  Spoke to one of the project people.  Raised the obvious ones like ripping up existing infrastructure to replace it with something that will reduce capacity, etc.  I asked a few other questions:

What will happen with existing buses using the busway from the south? Will everyone will be forced to change?
Some buses will terminate at Woolloongabba.  Some buses will continue on to the city via other routes such as the SE Freeway (adding to the already-congested roads).

What will happen to all of the buses while the busway is being converted?
That hasn't been worked out yet.

At the end of the discussion, he asked, "Would you like me to write anything down?"  Here was me thinking they were going to record all feedback.  I'd observed another member of the public talking to a couple of project people, with one of the feverishly taking notes.  I answered his question with, "It'd be great if you could include my feedback."  I don't know if he eventually wrote anything down.  Perhaps they're sick of hearing the same thing and couldn't be bothered.

[#Metro]

Some buses will continue on to the city via other routes such as the SE Freeway (adding to the already-congested roads).

Really? That's a shocker!

What will happen to all of the buses while the busway is being converted?
That hasn't been worked out yet.

Wow, sounds like fun already. Can't wait!

[ozbob]

The ' Quacker ' saga is truly bizarre ... bizarre  ... bizarre ...

[Gazza]

Saying they "complement" each other just sounds like sugar coating.

To me that makes it sound like the two projects need each other to make a whole.... Righto.

[Marshal]

Saying they "complement" each other just sounds like sugar coating.

To me that makes it sound like the two projects need each other to make a whole.... Righto.

From my perspective cross river rail is just a better metro. It won't be as frequent of course, but the station spacing is reasonably similar, it brings heavy rail to a section of the city that doesn't presently have it, and it opens up capacity on existing infrastructure instead of replacing capacity on existing infrastructure.

I really would like to see alternative route options for the metro. Maybe something like an indooroopilly/UQ, West End, South Bank, Charlotte/George st intersection, Eagle Street esq route. something that takes away demand for some bus services on the Victoria bridge without replacing it.

Another option I think might have merit would be a Morningside, New Farm , Valley, City via Eagle Street route, but I find it hard to see that beating out other options at this state. The main merit would be reducing demand for rail and bus services from the eastern regions and reducing the load on the merivale/Victoria bridge, bringing heavy PT service to Newfarm and what might be a more direct route into the city for eastern commuters (I assume it's shorter and faster but haven't actually checked)

Point is, its not hard to come up with a handful of options that can ease congestion on the Victoria Bridge and then some, so I'd like to see that other options have actually been explored

[verbatim9]

^^I was told that there is a work in progress to release Stage 2 and 3 draft designs along with the final alignment next March April.

[BrizCommuter]

I also went to the session at the German Club yesterday.  Spoke to one of the project people.  Raised the obvious ones like ripping up existing infrastructure to replace it with something that will reduce capacity, etc.  I asked a few other questions:

What will happen with existing buses using the busway from the south? Will everyone will be forced to change?
Some buses will terminate at Woolloongabba.  Some buses will continue on to the city via other routes such as the SE Freeway (adding to the already-congested roads).

What will happen to all of the buses while the busway is being converted?
That hasn't been worked out yet.

At the end of the discussion, he asked, "Would you like me to write anything down?"  Here was me thinking they were going to record all feedback.  I'd observed another member of the public talking to a couple of project people, with one of the feverishly taking notes.  I answered his question with, "It'd be great if you could include my feedback."  I don't know if he eventually wrote anything down.  Perhaps they're sick of hearing the same thing and couldn't be bothered.

They only appear to write down positive feedback from the uninformed. Make sure you email them your views.

[#Metro]

===============================
Cross River Rail + Metro
http://tiny.cc/CRRMETRO
===============================

I publish modeling of a transport network scenario for Brisbane where the following
measures are taken: http://tiny.cc/CRRMETRO

- Cross River Rail is built along a new alignment into the CBD
- Brisbane Metro is built along a new alignment into the CBD, combined with CRR
- Bus Reform is applied

Take a look by clicking on the link. It is publicly available to download and modify as you like.

New Bus Network Review originally intended to have a metro, as it was directly based on
modifying the Toronto Transit Commission model expounded by the late academic Paul Mees.

The metro component was dropped as what was needed at the time was a bare-minimum bus proposal
and I didn't think anybody would support a metro then.

Times have changed! Lord Mayor won an election on it and is willing to put up funds. Very well...

You can see that the network, particularly in the South East Brisbane areas is greatly simplified.

Bus Routes

The metro would when fully built out, absorb some of Brisbane's busiest routes and BUZ routes
guaranteeing decent patronage from day one.

- Route 66 (highest patronised bus route)
- 160 Garden City
- 174/175
- BUZ 120
- BUZ 185
- BUZ 200
- BUZ 222
- whole heap of UQ bound services 139, 209
- BUZ 130, 140, 150
- almost every single rocket from the South and East parts of Brisbane
- 555 Logan Hyperdome buses

BCC Metro benefits spill over into Logan LGA

A surprise is this: the largest benefits of the metro aren't BCC residents, but Logan residents.
This is because the ENTIRE Logan bus network would be plugged into the metro at Eight Mile Plains.

The fact that benefits 'spill over' into a neighbouring local government area is a strong prima facie
case for State Government funding. BCC cannot capture the land value rises through rates in a neighbouring LGA,
but the State Government can.

There is future scope for extending the metro directly through Sunnybank in a direct line,
hitting all major shopping Centres along Mains Rd to Browns Plains.

There is also scope for an East-West rapid transit service linking Indooroopilly-UQ-PA Hospital
and Carindale together, however, the mode could be buses in a busway, metro or light rail.

Northside would also be simplified, for example, the Chermside BUZ 333, BUZ 340 and 375 (almost a BUZ)
would all be abolished under a metro scenario.

There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that an absolutely enormous amount of labour costs
would be saved with a metro proposal, particularly if automatic. That money could be reinvested
in more frequent buses in the suburbs.

Due to the inner northern busway being converted to metro, the model indicates that a handful
of Legacy Way rocket services would be unable to run under this scenario.

NOTE: This is a model for discussion purposes only and cannot be guaranteed to be fit for any purpose.
LD Transit.

[SteelPan]

Great to see the Metro plan moving forward.....   

What an odd comment, benefits to mostly favour Logan residents....... they'll favour the people, who everyday use the Brisbane transit infrastructure involved!

It's no-longer 1969.....bring on Metro, we can do it and we'll grow it in the years ahead..........while the State Govt issues reports......with sexy covers on them!

[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"