Brisbane: Bus Electric Rapid Transit (' Brisbane Metro ')

[ozbob]

https://twitter.com/railjournal/status/1610669930533224455

https://twitter.com/ozbob13/status/1610682990929272833

[ozbob]

[ozbob]

Letter to the Lord Mayor of Brisbane Requesting Name Change of the Brisbane Metro

LM23Dec2022RBoTn.pdf

 

[ozbob]

https://twitter.com/ozbob13/status/1617906839735402496

[ozbob]

https://twitter.com/ozbob13/status/1623013343970865152

[ozbob]

Apparently they are unable to reply to correspondence.

 

Letter to the Lord Mayor of Brisbane Requesting Name Change of the Brisbane Metro


LM23Dec2022RBoTn.pdf

[ozbob]

^ Appears BCC et al are unable to defend their misnomer. A lack of a reply to my correspondence confirms.
The letter was sent by snail mail and electronic.  An acknowledgment of receipt was received for the e-correspondence. 

You have until 24th February 2023 for a response. Expect more.

Song for y'all lurkers       

[ozbob]

https://twitter.com/ozbob13/status/1625149526079340544

https://twitter.com/ozbob13/status/1625160266605543425

[Jonno]

BERT is only good where Brisbane doesn't have BRT today. 

Where we already do needs to be converted/extended as a true Metro. BERT adds no capacity and cant scale on the busway. It locks us into a low capacity future on high capacity infrastructure.

Plenty of research on how to manage conversion using counter-peak routes off busway.

I know lots don't agree that BERT is the wrong thing on buswsy or it too late to change but the research below is a great and really interesting read anyway https://prism.ucalgary.ca/bitstream/handle/1880/103853/ucalgary_2008_james_david_544546.pdf?sequence=1

[#Metro]

Agree with Jonno.

Busway would already support a metro on current patronage.

Main issue is the economy of a tunnel to carry rail into the CBD. That will be expensive. This is why planning authorities have it as a last resort solution.

My current thinking is that there is no need to convert the busway between Mater Hill and the CBD to rail.

Rather, SE Busway rail services would dive under the Brisbane river largely parallel to CRR to enter the Brisbane CBD.

[Gazza]

Build rail to Flagstone (Or at least Browns Plains) and that takes pressure off the 110, 130, 135, 140 and 150 and the busway is no longer forced to deal with metro levels of patronage.

You all know how the Merivale bridge has to carry ALL rail traffic from the southside.
Nice bit of infrastructure at the time, but ultimately putting all your eggs in one basket is not a permanent solution.
Building CRR means that many trains will now run through the tunnel, and the number of passengers and trains at South Brisbane will reduce.

In a similar sense, the Busway carries almost all major routes from the southside. All our eggs are in one basket.
But if some of those passengers are diverted to rail, the number of bus movements through Mater hill would reduce.

This is my thought process:

1-If the SEB is a rail based metro, ALL passengers will be transferring.

2-This will mean an unavoidable truncation of the 130, 140, 150 at Griffith or Garden City.

3-If those routes are being truncated, why force passengers to go all the way to Griffith to get on rail?

4-You could get on rail sooner with stations at Hillcrest, Algester or Acacia Ridge

5-The Flagstone corridor is straighter and will have less stations, so is more beneficial to transferring passengers compared to the slow Beenleigh line.

[aldonius]

Keep in mind that over 40% of the busway patronage from the 1xx and 2xx routes has Mater Hill, South Bank or Cultural Centre as their destination.

edit: I realised I forgot to exclude the West End routes from that figure above, but the core point stands: there's a LOT of people who get off at Mater Hill, South Bank or Cultural Centre and any busway conversion proposal has to keep them in mind.

[Gazza]

To be clear I did say "Take pressure off" those routes.

If 40% are headed to those stations, the remaining 60% are headed to the CBD, or to other destinations on the SEB.

I'm unsure of what the exact route structure would be down there if a Flagstone line existed, but you can imagine a few changes:

-Via Capt Cook bridge rockets like the 141 would probably be a thing of the past
-Peak hour capacity on existing routes could be reduced, eg don't have to run at 5 min frequency
-Strengthening of crosstown routes changing passenger behavior.

[#Metro]

Keep in mind that over 40% of the busway patronage from the 1xx and 2xx routes has Mater Hill, South Bank or Cultural Centre as their destination.

edit: I realised I forgot to exclude the West End routes from that figure above, but the core point stands: there's a LOT of people who get off at Mater Hill, South Bank or Cultural Centre and any busway conversion proposal has to keep them in mind.

I would suggest the Sydney/Vancouver Canada approach.

- Build metro from the CBD along the SEB alignment, split into two branches - one going in the alignment of Mains Road which will join up all the shopping centres, Beenleigh line etc.

- Building metro and not QR commuter rail will mean the frequency can be as low as 90s between services and fully automatic. No guards, no drivers.

- New alignment means it can be built to the highest speed and acceleration allowable rather than run on or depend on legacy alignments (I think rail is something like 35-40 km/hr average speed, this will not do)

^ All of the above will maximise the pull of the service by providing uncompromising quality in terms of speed, frequency and span. This will get people out of cars and meet the objectives that Jonno and myself aim for.

- Anyone bound for South bank etc, change at Wooloongabba for a bus, which will be coming every few minutes anyway.

[verbatim9]

I can't see them converting the busway to rail/metro anytime soon. That's why we have the current proposal going ahead.

We need the busway extended from UQ to Indooroopilly. This will speed up east west trips tremendously as well as provide an alternative route to the city. It will also speed up trips for people travelling on the Southern lines, due a transfer point at Boggo Road, thus avoiding the city.

[Gazza]

(I think rail is something like 35-40 km/hr average speed, this will not do)

It depends on the location, for example the GC line south of Beenleigh is around 90kmh/h average speed.

The Flagstone alignment is pretty decent, by rail it's 23km from Albert St to Browns Plains, you could be out there in under 30 mins, compared to 50 mins on the 140.

Similarly. 17km from Algester to Albert St, so probably 20 mins, versus 40 mins on the 130.

I can't see them converting the busway to rail/metro anytime soon. That's why we have the current proposal going ahead.

That the way I see it. Like it or not, its going to be a messy job to do the conversion.

- Anyone bound for South bank etc, change at Wooloongabba for a bus, which will be coming every few minutes anyway.

I think what aldonius is perhaps getting at this that if the goal a metro on the SEB is to increase patronage, then clearly it would cause a long term mismatch if you have passengers pouring off a high capacity rail line onto the low capacity legacy busway.

Calculation:

40% of passengers bound for those stations.
The Metro train holds 1000 people every 90 seconds.
Thus you expect 400 people transferring every 90 seconds.
Can the buses through Mater Hill cope with 400 people every 90 seconds?

[#Metro]

Keep in mind that over 40% of the busway patronage from the 1xx and 2xx routes has Mater Hill, South Bank or Cultural Centre as their destination.

SE Busway does 12,000 - 18,000 pphd (the higher end assumes the buses are full but BCC carries a lot of air).

40% of that is 4800-7200 pphd.
Doable IMHO.

For comparison, Brisbane 'metro' buses are capable of carrying 4500 pphd if run at 2 minute frequency.

[verbatim9]

We need to automate both QR services as well as build new automated subways.

Automation is achievable in the short term.

They can automate the Springfield line easy enough.  All needs to be done is remove the level crossing at Sherwood, as well as platform screens at the stations.

**A new station at Taringa as well as Indooroopilly with Indooroopilly being a fully enclosed station with a TOD.

[aldonius]

If you converted the Greenslopes section of the busway, the tunnel portal would have to be more-or-less between the Eastern Busway junction and Cornwall St, surely? I don't know how feasible that is but I also don't see any other options without dragging in a full Eastern Busway conversion too (both to UQ and to Carindale).

I'm not super hung up on extension to Indro. Would it be a nice feature? Sure. Do we have higher priorities for the money? Also yes.

[#Metro]

If you converted the Greenslopes section of the busway, the tunnel portal would have to be more-or-less between the Eastern Busway junction and Cornwall St, surely? I don't know how feasible that is but I also don't see any other options without dragging in a full Eastern Busway conversion too (both to UQ and to Carindale).

You could deviate the alignment slightly so that it tunnelled under the SEB both before and after Buranda Busway Station. Buranda Station would be retained, and new entraces built to link the busway with the new metro rail portal. That way you could keep the Boggo Road and Eastern busways as busway.

You can also imagine a scenario where it tunnels from just before Harrogate St to just after Buranda station heading south bound.



Edit: Added schematic image. Any thoughts Jonno?? 

[Gazza]

SE Busway does 12,000 - 18,000 pphd (the higher end assumes the buses are full but BCC carries a lot of air).

40% of that is 4800-7200 pphd.
Doable IMHO.

For comparison, Brisbane 'metro' buses are capable of carrying 4500 pphd if run at 2 minute frequency.

But we are doing the Metro to go above and beyond 18,000? Or else why do the project to just match the Busway or the BERT?

So say 1000 per train, every 90 seconds, 40,000 per hr.
40% of that is 16,000 per hr.

I'm struggling with the benefit of increasing capacity of the busway, except at the most popular stations along it.

[Jonno]

SE Busway does 12,000 - 18,000 pphd (the higher end assumes the buses are full but BCC carries a lot of air).

40% of that is 4800-7200 pphd.
Doable IMHO.

For comparison, Brisbane 'metro' buses are capable of carrying 4500 pphd if run at 2 minute frequency.

But we are doing the Metro to go above and beyond 18,000? Or else why do the project to just match the Busway or the BERT?

So say 1000 per train, every 90 seconds, 40,000 per hr.
40% of that is 16,000 per hr.

I'm struggling with the benefit of increasing capacity of the busway, except at the most popular stations along it.

SE Busway does 12,000 - 18,000 pphd (the higher end assumes the buses are full but BCC carries a lot of air).

40% of that is 4800-7200 pphd.
Doable IMHO.

For comparison, Brisbane 'metro' buses are capable of carrying 4500 pphd if run at 2 minute frequency.

But we are doing the Metro to go above and beyond 18,000? Or else why do the project to just match the Busway or the BERT?

So say 1000 per train, every 90 seconds, 40,000 per hr.
40% of that is 16,000 per hr.

I'm struggling with the benefit of increasing capacity of the busway, except at the most popular stations along it.

With active and public transport well and truly below leading practice and needing to triple if not quadruple to be leading practice then capacity, frequency, integration between modes including bike/escooters and legibility (particularly to non-frequent users) is critical. Busway in its current form fails on capacity and legibility.  I am not saying the busway was a poor investment or that it has not done a great job to date. It is more that it needs to do a even greater role in the future. BERT improves legibility slightly but not capacity and, in my honest opinion, limits it into the future. It can only move low numbers at 2min head way.  There is no room to expand...or even fit the existing buses that share the route.

The point on the 130, 140 and 150 is super valid.  The Beaudesert line is a must. This leaves the question of is the service along Mains Rd either a future extension to the Metro or a BRT that continues north/east of the Metro.  Either works depending on what the proper network planning says. Again the Vision is leading practice public transport levels.

We can argue that there is better places to invest the money but as I see it there lot of money ($1 Billion)  being invested for very questionable/low benefit which is a net loss to public transport. Value for money BERT is a massive fail. It is a lot of money to potentially limit future growth.

[aldonius]

Proposition: most CBD and CBD-adjacent peak hour commute trips are already catered to by public (and active!) transport. At least, the PT+AT mode-share for these commutes is much higher than for other journey types.

Implication: tripling to quadrupling mode-share will come from off-peak and non-CBD-adjacent trips.

Further implication: further investment in busway capacity is fine to lag demand rather than lead it.

[Jonno]

Proposition: most CBD and CBD-adjacent peak hour commute trips are already catered to by public (and active!) transport. At least, the PT+AT mode-share for these commutes is much higher than for other journey types.

Implication: tripling to quadrupling mode-share will come from off-peak and non-CBD-adjacent trips.

Further implication: further investment in busway capacity is fine to lag demand rather than lead it.

Still leaves the question of 1 billion dollars to not really increase capacity and make sure it is hamstrung into the future?

Also a true Metro would see many trips through the CBD that are made by car now as transferring in the CBD is not easy!! I think BERT will assign #Bne to the laughing stock of public transport systems and a great show case on how to not build public transport for Uni student's for years to come.

[#Metro]

I support Brisbane metro buses but I agree along with others that it's a short to medium term bridging solution.

[HappyTrainGuy]

We need to automate both QR services as well as build new automated subways.

Automation is achievable in the short term.

They can automate the Springfield line easy enough.  All needs to be done is remove the level crossing at Sherwood, as well as platform screens at the stations.

**A new station at Taringa as well as Indooroopilly with Indooroopilly being a fully enclosed station with a TOD.

Automation is not going to happen so it's pointless even considering it. Rollingstock not compatible. Signalling is still AWS so that's not going to happen without a major upgrade. Springfield - cool but what about the other end. What about rollingstock utilisation? Eg at the moment the Northgate terminators dead run via the mains back to Bowen Hills for Springfield services (yes the network is supposed to be sectorised but in reality it's simply not). Then you have the stations themselves which further increases rollingstock costs to retrofit trains to use screens. Just like busway metro conversion.

Metro and others stop using guards as an excuse. In the grand scheme of things drivers and guards are a moot point when you can't even get decent coverage, span of hours and infrastructure upgrades. This applies to both rail and the bus network. Focus on driving and sustaining all day network patronage first then you can start looking at other projects to cut operational costs. Christ rollingstock costs sh%t all over what a few guards cost. By that I mean the different brake pads, fluro lights, seats - padding/mounts/styles (you might have noticed IMU120 seats are now modified 200 seats), window panels, door components, bolt lengths and styles, air conditioning parts, filters and systems (EMU, SMU200, SMU220, IMU100, IMU120, IMU160/SMU260, NGR), safety handles/ceiling handles and mounts, toilet parts, cab mounts, driver seats, radios, display signage, door buttons, advertisement signage etc etc etc. That's your operating cost. If you want to deep dive even further ask yourself why did they spend extra money on plastic coating fencing for the north yard knowing that they will and we're cut up by contractors for CRR works. Then you have station staff for NGR which has forced a recruitment drive to have more staff than before the staff cuts under Newman (under Newman much of the business was outsourced in favour of staff cuts. Considering that's still outsourced and now there's more staff prior goes to show how much staff is required just to have the NGR's operational but hey a few less guards is going to fix the problem - get real. There's a reason why Beenleigh-Ferny Grove don't run NGR's).

[Jonno]

I support Brisbane metro buses but I agree along with others that it's a short to medium term bridging solution.

A bloody expensive one if it can bridge anything at all!!

[ozbob]

Got a bite! 



https://twitter.com/ryansrumblings/status/1625388642033344513

[Jonno]

Time to expose this shame and waste of money for what it is!!

[aldonius]

So let's recap:

* the North American experience shows we can't run mixed-mode trams and buses at the demand levels the SE Busway sees
* even if you can get away with it to an extent with trams, you can't run mixed-mode light metro and buses
* no way can we get away without doing an equivalent or more-expensive CBD tunnelling for rail either, even normal buses barely make it from QSBS to KGS
* If you do a busway conversion through KGS, where do all the northside buses go? Heck, where do all the Eastern Busway buses go? Good luck converting the entire busway network in one hit.

[verbatim9]

7 News--->https://twitter.com/7NewsBrisbane/status/1625425852702814208

[#Metro]

The Brisbane busway was based on the Ottawa Transitway in Canada. Which has now been converted to light rail.

In Brisbane you would also have the benefit of potentially diverting some buses to rail (e.g. Altandi, Gabba CRR, Boggo Road) or down the SE freeway in bus lanes during conversion works.

Similarly, Eastern busway buses would be simplified, operated by Brisbane metro buses and terminate at UQ Lakes.

City-bound pax transfer at buranda for rail metro to CBD or at Park Road.

The only real point of difference I see between Jonno and myself on this one is future timing.

[ozbob]

Brisbanetimes --> 'Extremely delicate' Brisbane tunnel project promises to free up the CBD

Brisbane's newest tunnel will finally link the Inner Northern Busway, which runs past the Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, with the South East Busway that extends to Eight Mile Plains.

Underneath the CBD, workers are forging ahead with the first tunnel to be dug in "soft rock" in Australia, using engineering techniques fine-tuned beneath the waterfront Sydney Opera House. ...

Possibly the best thing about this project is this tunnel.

[verbatim9]

In Qld---> Adelaide Street's hodge-podge of bus stops and congestion to be transformed

Adelaide St bus stop changes and retransformation  begins February 16 and will be completed by the end of 2024.

[verbatim9]

Meanwhile in Sydney the Government is developing business cases for four new true metro lines--->https://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=6058.msg267618#msg267618

[ozbob]

ABC News --> Brisbane Metro project commences tunnel under Adelaide Street, linking busways

Key points:

Works on boring a tunnel underneath Adelaide Street has started in Brisbane CBD

The tunnel is part of the Brisbane Metro project

The 213 metre-tunnel will connect North Quay with the King George Square Bus Station

...

[ozbob]

https://twitter.com/ozbob13/status/1625921749903880192

[verbatim9]

In Qld---> Adelaide Street's hodge-podge of bus stops and congestion to be transformed

Adelaide St bus stop changes and retransformation  begins February 16 and will be completed by the end of 2024.

Hopefully, they can reduce the number of stops to one or two in either direction between Albert and Edward streets. I also hope that the stops get ePaper or dynamic signage for real time arrivals as well.

Some misting fountains wouldn't go astray either. Maybe they can have these amongst the new plants or something?

[SurfRail]

What would be ideal for Adelaide Street is something not unlike the way the Belconnen Community bus station works down in Canberra - an inbound and outbound platform with multiple designated stands to separate the traffic out.

Instead of having to remember individual stop numbers, you would have all Adelaide Street buses stopping at say 3 "stations" - something like "King George Square", "Central Station" and "Uptown" - and every bus stops at the same stop at each of those stations (eg all Route 60 trips stop at "Stop A", all 411s stop at "Stop B"), in both directions.

Eventually a number of the current Adelaide Street services will be going elsewhere (ie Eagle Street, southern CBD and Captain Cook Bridge), which should make that easier.

I think the opportunity is lost to get bi-directional bus traffic along Elizabeth Street now the bikeway is there, and Ann Street probably has its own challenges, but it would be good if there could be work on getting more bi-directional streets. 

The only other option I can think of would be fairly expensive and may not be technically possible - that would be building new QSBS platforms under the stretch from Albert Street to Edward Street, extending the mall to the GPO and building a portal to connect to the Creek Street intersection, which would allow buses to run from the Cultural Centre to the upper part of Queen Street in more or less a straight line.

[#Metro]

What would be ideal for Adelaide Street is something not unlike the way the Belconnen Community bus station works down in Canberra - an inbound and outbound platform with multiple designated stands to separate the traffic out.

Instead of having to remember individual stop numbers, you would have all Adelaide Street buses stopping at say 3 "stations" - something like "King George Square", "Central Station" and "Uptown" - and every bus stops at the same stop at each of those stations (eg all Route 60 trips stop at "Stop A", all 411s stop at "Stop B"), in both directions.

I think this was similar to the bus superstops idea floated in the TransLink 2013 bus review.

The only other option I can think of would be fairly expensive and may not be technically possible - that would be building new QSBS platforms under the stretch from Albert Street to Edward Street, extending the mall to the GPO and building a portal to connect to the Creek Street intersection, which would allow buses to run from the Cultural Centre to the upper part of Queen Street in more or less a straight line.

This is a great idea, you could essentially begin making a busway connection through the CBD towards Fortitude Valley. The Car park at Post Office Square could be converted to a busway stop similar to KGS.