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

[ozbob]

The "existing rail" alignment shown in the map is a bit funny, especially at the southern end... When did they extend the rail line along the Ipswich Mwy west of Archerfield airport?

^ bus folk ... 

[ozbob]

Hey Tim @TimNichollsMP @LNPQLD
Cr @Schrinner is on board the bi-artics + CRR.
Are you?#qldpol
Quote from https://t.co/UARFbvlJCP pic.twitter.com/q85FfriVZv

— Robert Dow (@Robert_Dow) March 5, 2017

[verbatim9]

Would like to see the scheme use electric technology. A combination of overhead wiring (Catenary) and rapid recharge points at Terminuses and turnaround points. Less vehicle maintenance, less local air pollution (especially diesel fumes while waiting at stations) and a quieter ride. It needs to be enticing for the commuter to use this mode. Something better than a Deisel hybrid bus. Not saying I am against Deisel hybrid buses but these can be used along normal suburban routes to minimise pollution. The current bus way has already provisions in place to convert it to run electrified busses quite easily.

[verbatim9]

Another Electrified TRI Articulated concept design which would be appropriate in this instance


http://www.toplutasimhaber.com/iettden-elektrikli-otobus-yeniligi.html

Istanbul Electric Tram and Tunnel Operations decided to innovate in the vehicle fleet of IETT. In 2019, 25 percent of the fleet will be electric.

Mümin Kahveci, General Manager of Istanbul Electricity Tramway and Tunnel Businesses ( İETT), stated that IETT is one of the oldest institutions in Turkey and that they have entered into a big attack in public transportation in recent years. 
 Last 2 years thousand 850 that adds the new vehicle fleet, public buses and other public transport around the 3 bin noted that renewed Kahveci fleet of 360 CNG vehicle is located, consume environment less fuel these vehicles is less polluting and that less noise out, for it the fleet also CNG said it will increase the number of vehicles.  Mümin Kahvec , 
  who will be electrified by 25 percent of the fleet, stated that they plan to 
turn 25 percent of the fleet to electric and 30 percent of the CNG in 2019, especially working on the metrobus lines. "We are working on a vehicle that is both longer and easier to manage than the driver can handle, but it's not easy, it's a tough thing, there's a bridge problem, we can build a car system driven by catenary electricity on the Bosphorus Bridge. When we reach a reliable technological level, we will hear it in public and we will start to work, "he said. And that they are working especially on the lines of Metrobus. "We are working on a vehicle that is both longer and easier to manage than the driver can handle, but it's not easy, it's a tough thing, there's a bridge problem, we can build a car system driven by catenary electricity on the Bosphorus Bridge. When we reach a reliable technological level, we will hear it in public and we will start to work, "he said. And that they are working especially on the lines of Metrobus. "We are working on a vehicle that is both longer and easier to manage than the driver can handle, but it's not easy, it's a tough thing, there's a bridge problem, we can build a car system driven by catenary electricity on the Bosphorus Bridge. When we reach a reliable technological level, we will hear it in public and we will start to work, "he said. We can not build a car system driven by taking electricity from the catheter. We are working on a system that can be passed by battery in that area. When we reach a reliable technological level, we will hear it in public and we will start to work. " We can not build a car system driven by taking electricity from the catheter. We are working on a system that can be passed by battery in that area. When we reach a reliable technological level, we will hear it in public and we will start to work.

[ozbob]

Electric technology is such that with battery and rapid charging overhead not needed.

There is no intention at this stage of using trolley buses AFAIA - they will either be conventional, electric, or electric-hybrid bi-artics.

Either off the shelf or purpose designed for Brisbane.

The final choice is yet to be made.

[ozbob]

Letter to the Editor Queensland Times 6th March 2017 page 15

An integrated transport solution

[#Metro]

[tazzer9]

The plan is good in theory, but alot of changes are needed first.  the turnarounds at UQ lakes and RBWH I don't think are large enough to turn a conventional bi-artic bus.   Then there is the whole bus stops themselves.  Especially at KGSBS with the door positions and the UQ lakes indents.

This is more media fluff than substance though.   Brisbane doesn't even have that many artic buses now.   

IMHO, the whole idea of Bi-artic buses is just foaming.   The brisbane bus network would perform perfectly well with single artic buses.   

[OzGamer]

You're right that the existing bus network does not really need super high capacity buses, but my understanding is that this concept still being called "metro" is more than just large buses. The idea is that these would be a trunk routes that regular bus routes would feed, so passengers from a number of services would get off the bus at, for example, Garden City or RBWH, and board one of these very high capacity buses.

I think this could be a very good solution if they use it right.

[#Metro]

The plan is good in theory, but alot of changes are needed first.  the turnarounds at UQ lakes and RBWH I don't think are large enough to turn a conventional bi-artic bus.   Then there is the whole bus stops themselves.  Especially at KGSBS with the door positions and the UQ lakes indents.

This is more media fluff than substance though.   Brisbane doesn't even have that many artic buses now.   

IMHO, the whole idea of Bi-artic buses is just foaming.   The brisbane bus network would perform perfectly well with single artic buses.

I like the 256 pax buses. That has the most labour productivity and also means that the busways can actually hit the 30 000 pphd if more vehicles are put on in the future.

The trains carry 1000 pax during peak hours, they have no issue filling up with passengers so I can't see why the buses won't either. Particularly on routes like 66 where pax are often left behind.

BCC needs to bring over one test bus for running on roads and turning around. Autotram extra grand manufacturer is claiming small turn radii, but one has to see how it performs in real life in the conditions we have here.

[verbatim9]

^^People will need to go to the community feedback days or express their concerns via email submission I guess?

[ozbob]

Bi-artics do street running in many places!

Minor mods to the busways might be needed but this is the direction now. Damn good move IMHO.

Someone reminded me of this tweet from 2015.  It is a natural maturation for Brisbane ..

@Trainexpert @ptua Bi-artics are best on busways. Bris will end up with these - electric I reckon. If not enough $$$ consider in lieu of AR

— Robert Dow (@Robert_Dow) October 31, 2015

[ozbob]

You're right that the existing bus network does not really need super high capacity buses, but my understanding is that this concept still being called "metro" is more than just large buses. The idea is that these would be a trunk routes that regular bus routes would feed, so passengers from a number of services would get off the bus at, for example, Garden City or RBWH, and board one of these very high capacity buses.

I think this could be a very good solution if they use it right.

Spot on!   

[SurfRail]

the turnarounds at UQ lakes and RBWH I don't think are large enough to turn a conventional bi-artic bus.

Why?  It should fit more or less anywhere a standard articulated bus would, the same way a 1900-class and a 12-car EMU can use the same loop. 

If anything, a 12.5m rigid bus is probably the hardest vehicle in the current fleet to navigate anywhere as it has the longest wheelbase and doesn't have a steerable tag axle.

[verbatim9]

In other parts of the world they call them "Metro Bus"

[Gazza]

That's because the public transport system in LA is called Metro.

Just like Metro Tasmania and the Adelaide Metro.

Try not to confuse this with Metro as a noun in terms of a type of rail system, which is the issue at hand.

[verbatim9]

In Turkey they call it Metrobus as well. It's a good marketing name. In the end don't care what the state and council call it. Was just giving examples of latest Electric technology. Plus you need to be careful in Brisbane to get new commuters onboard. Mention "bus" People then drive to the nearest rail or light rail station.

[ozbob]

Brisbanetimes --> Brisbane Metro: 'If it walks like a bus and moves like a bus, it is a bus'

The proposed Brisbane Metro may run on existing busways, carrying commuters in large vehicles with tyres, but don't expect the Deputy Mayor to call them buses.

Cr Adrian Schrinner, fresh from being publicly called out for "moaning" by British superstar Adele, repeatedly refused to use the b-word to describe the vehicles on Monday morning.

"Like I said, it's a hybrid vehicle that doesn't exist in Brisbane," he told ABC Radio Brisbane listeners, saying the vehicles would carry about 150 passengers each.

"Some people call it a bus but, ultimately, it's about moving large numbers of people, as I said."

The Brisbane City Council announced at the weekend a significant redesign of the proposed network, which would be cheaper and carry more commuters.

On Saturday, Lord Mayor Graham Quirk, while describing the fleet vehicles as flexible in terms of their movement and not limited to set tracks, let slip that they were buses. But he wouldn't repeat the description at the announcement.

By Monday morning, Cr Schrinner was making no such concessions, prompting this exchange with Mornings host Craig Zonca.

Cr Schrinner: "I think there's often discussion of what type of vehicle is it. Is it a bus? Is it a tram? Is it a train? I don't think that's important. I think moving people effectively is important."

Zonca: "Well, effectively, it's going to be a bus. We're talking about tyred wheels on bitumen. It's going to be a bus."

Cr Schrinner: "Well, like I said, it's a hybrid vehicle that doesn't exist in Brisbane. Some people call it a bus but ultimately it's about moving large numbers of people, as I said."

Zonca: "So if it walks like a bus and moves like a bus, it is a bus?"

Cr Schrinner: "Well, you can say that. It's part of the Brisbane Metro. These will be purpose-designed Metro vehicles. As I said, there's nothing like it in Australia."

The original transport proposal came during the 2016 council election and drew criticism from the Labor state government for competing with Cross River Rail.

The $1 billion redesign would cost $540,000 less, include a second route, and service a much larger area than the original Herston-to-Woolloongabba network.

One route would run from Eight Mile Plains to Roma Street, with the other from the Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital to the University of Queensland.

The whole network would traverse 21 kilometres of busways, including 18 stations and 11 interchanges.

Cr Schrinner said the plan would address congestion through the cultural precinct at South Bank and Victoria Bridge, thanks to an underground bus station and the removal of cars from the bridge.

Speaking to the ABC after Cr Schrinner, Labor councillor Jared Cassidy was cautiously supportive of the redesign but added he would need to see more detail.

He described the proposed Brisbane Metro vehicle as a "bendy bus, if you will, with an extra bit on the back".

Cr Quirk said the changes came as a result of extensive consultation and a focus on connecting with Cross River Rail.

Deputy Premier Jackie Trad welcomed the integration on Saturday, also saying she wanted to see more detail.

[ozbob]

^

Bi-articulated bus ! - neat !
Excellent this.#qldpol https://t.co/Y19TLgr1Dy

— Robert Dow (@Robert_Dow) March 6, 2017

[ozbob]

[ozbob]

In other parts of the world they call them "Metro Bus"

^ rapid charging ..

[ozbob]

OK anyone still not sure what a bi-articulated bus is?#qldpol #bnepol
You will riding on them in a few years ... grouse!! pic.twitter.com/zMk1l8zIlA

— Robert Dow (@Robert_Dow) March 6, 2017

[Gazza]

Could they do some sort of optical guidance system to improve smoothness a bit?

[verbatim9]

Doesn't catenary aid in guidance and stability of Trains LRT and Electric buses!? On the inner northern busways modification would needed to be made coming up then ramp and corner after Normandy station before entering the tunnel down towards Kelvin Grove. The surface is rough, the corner tight and slips when wet. Maybe a new ramp so the corner is not as tight?

[Gazza]

No, a catenary plays no part in stability, its just a couple of spring loaded pole that rub on the wire to collect current.

How exactly does that guide the steering of the vehicle 

[verbatim9]

Vehicles with Catenary are less prone to veer off course at higher speed due to connection with the Catenary stablizing the vehicle. Electrification via Catenary is far more efficient and can operate in most weather conditions. A trolley Articulated bus would only be going max 90km along that Busway. Faster than the GC tram though. The vehicle be built with stablizing software to keep it on the right path in the same way as new cars with stablizing technology.

[Gazza]

Catenary does not stabilise a vehicle. It physically can't.

That's why trolleybuses have the occasional dewirement.

[verbatim9]

The pros of Electric buses via Catenary

Cheaper infrastructure - The initial start up cost of trams is much higher, due to rail, signals, and other infrastructure. Trolleybuses can pull over to the curb like other buses, eliminating the need of special boarding stations or boarding islands in the middle of the street, thus stations can be moved as needed.Better hill climbing - Trolleybuses' rubbertires have better adhesion than trams' steel wheels on steel rails, giving them better hill-climbing capability and braking.Easier traffic avoidance - Unlike trams (where side tracks are often unavailable), an out-of-service vehicle can be moved to the side of the road and its trolley poles lowered. The ability to drive a substantial distance from the power wires allows trackless vehicles to avoid obstacles, although it also means a possibility that the vehicle may steer or skid far enough that the trolley pole can no longer reach the wire, stranding the vehicle. Trackless trolleys also are able to avoid collisions by maneuver, while trams can only change speed.Quietness - Trolleybuses are generally quieter than trams.Easier training - The control of trolleybuses is relatively similar to motorbuses; the potential operator pool for all buses is much larger than for trams.

Comparison to motorbuses

Better hill climbing - Trolleybuses are better than motorbuses on hilly routes, as electric motors provide much higher static torque at start-up, an advantage for climbing steep hills. Unlike internal combustion engines, electric motors draw power from a central plant and can be overloaded for short periods without damage. San Francisco and Seattle, both hilly American cities, use trolleybuses partly for this reason. Given their acceleration and braking performance, trolleybuses can outperform diesel buses on flat stretches as well, which makes it better for routes that have frequent stopsEnvironmentally friendly - Trolleybuses are usually more environmentally friendly in the city than fossil fuel or hydrocarbon-based vehicles (petrol/gasoline, diesel, alcohol, etc.). Power from a centralized plant, even taking into account transmission losses, is often produced more efficiently, is not bound to a specific fuel source, and is more amenable to pollution control as a point source, unlike individual vehicles with exhaust gases and particulates at street level. Trolleybuses are especially favoured where electricity is abundant, cheap, and renewable, such as hydroelectric. Systems in Seattle and in Vancouver, BC draw hydroelectric power from the Columbia River and other Pacific river systems. San Francisco operates its system using hydro power from the city-owned Hetch Hetchy generating plant.Trolleybuses can generate electricity from kinetic energy while braking, a process known as regenerative braking. For regenerative braking to function, there must be another bus on the same circuit needing power, an electric storage system on the vehicle or the wire system, or a method to send the excess power back to the commercial electric power system. Otherwise the braking energy must be dissipated in resistance grids on the bus; this is is called "dynamic braking". For routes that have more frequent stops, usage of trolley buses eliminate pollution during idling, thus improving air qualityMinimal noise pollution - Unlike trams or gasoline and diesel buses, trolleybuses are almost silent, lacking the noise of an engine or wheels on rails. Most noise comes from auxiliary systems such as power steering pumps and air conditioning. Early trolleybuses without these systems were even quieter and, in the UK at least, were often referred to as the "Silent Service". The however, can also be seen as a disadvantages, with some pedestrians falling victim to what was known as "Silent Death" (in Britain) or "Whispering Death" (in Australia)[citation needed].Usable in enclosed space - The lack of exhaust allow trolleybuses to operate underground. In Cambridge, Massachusetts, trackless trolleys survived because Harvard Station, where several bus lines terminate, is in a tunnel once used by streetcars. Although diesel buses do use the tunnel, there are limitations due to exhaust fumes. Also, the trackless trolleys continue to have popular support.Longevity and maintenance - Electric motors typically last longer than internal combustion motors, and cause less secondary damage from vibration, so electric buses tend to be very long-lived compared to motorbuses. As the basic construction of buses has not changed much in the last 50 plus years, they can be upgraded such as when air conditioning was retrofitted to many trolleybuses. Such upgrades are often disproportionately expensive. Wheelchair lifts are relatively simple to add; kneeling front suspension is a common feature of air suspension on the front axle in lieu of springs. In comparison to battery-powered buses, the lack of specially designed battery or fuel cell (typically with expensive patents) decrease the price and its weight, and in locations with a sufficient power delivery network, is cheaper and easier to maintain in comparison to charging stations

[ozbob]

Trolley buses can move off their path a little due to extendable power poles - they are passive so do not stabilise.

Trolley buses same problem as trams failure cannot run around.

Trolley buses are not being considered - will be self contained bi-artics hopefully battery electric with rapid charge.

[OzGamer]

If the system uses trolleybuses then it would be much more expensive to expand it off the busway in the future.

Battery-powered with fast charging stations and most charge occurring overnight at the depot would support the entire fleet, not just the "metro" buses eventually.

[verbatim9]

The rapid charge system is a  good option But the new trolley Articulated Buses use a combination of Catenary and rapid recharge to allow the buses to turn where appropriate to change direction. As well as use mains power for continual runs. Both can be applied.  There would be less likely of disconnection from the overhead wiring along a Busway to that of a regular street, as the busways are mostly straight.

[OzGamer]

Some bits of catenary on the well-used bits of the busway might make sense, so long as the bus had a decent range on its own and could also do fast-charging at terminal stops.

I'm slightly concerned about the system becoming complex, however. I think the future is battery-powered.

[verbatim9]

When ACT were going through the same debate when eventually settling for LRT but in this case Rubber Tyred Metro Bus Vehicles

Public transport should be powered by electric motors and not diesel (or LPG) motors.
Electrical power provides cleaner air, lower greenhouse gas emissions and less noise. It can
be sourced from renewable schemes. Also, the future price of diesel fuel & LPG are likely
to escalate faster than electricity prices. In today's age reticulation can be AC (not DC) with
the rectification on-board the vehicles. Variable voltage & variable frequency electronic
supplies can be on-board. AC traction motors need have no electrical connections to their
rotors - only their bearings wear. This makes motor maintenance much less than for diesel
motors. It is the commutator/brush combination that gave the maintenance problems and
manufacturing expense that DC motors had in the past. Thus I believe there is a valid case
for public transport to be electrically powered.

[SurfRail]

Trolley buses same problem as trams failure cannot run around.

Depends on the circumstances - I certainly did see this in Wellington a month ago, although it involved a combination of multiple buses coming off the wires and getting poles tangled, and the power then going out.  Fortunately we were able to get back down the hill on battery power with regen to the point where the power was still plugged in, I don't like the chances of doing the same up the hill in reverse.  (In ordinary course - no, trolleys can't overtake each other, even by intentionally taking one off the grid and moving it around.)

I think battery tech is going to be sufficiently advanced within a matter of a few short years that trolley wires and recharging infrastructure away from the depot simply won't be necessary.  CNG buses are running around Brisbane with only 200km or so worth of gas in them (albeit much reduced from their design pressure due to issues with the tanks), yet we don't need any special refuelling infrastructure for them at terminuses or in the CBD. 

There might be an advantage in trolley operation if you had enough trolleys and were only running trolleys on certain routes kitted out for them.  I think it is far from a fait accompli that the busway alignment will always be for buses, even whizzbang ones like those now being planned, so I view it as having serious potential for being a stranded investment.

[dancingmongoose]

LNP Opposition Media release

http://www.timnicholls.com.au/statement-brisbane-metro/

STATEMENT: Brisbane Metro

"The Liberal National Party is a strong supporter of the Metro business case process being led by Brisbane City Council.

"This project will deliver better public transport services for the people of Brisbane and visitors to our city by getting more capacity out of our existing busways.

"The Metro will get hundreds of buses off the road that currently choke the Brisbane CBD and inner city suburbs impacting all road users.

"Nearly 70% of people who use public transport to get to the Brisbane CBD use buses.

"The Metro solves a current infrastructure bottleneck while the cross river rail seeks to address a bottleneck that 'may' occur in 2026.

"The LNP looks forward to Brisbane City Council finalising the Metro business case in May 2017.

"We urge Annastacia Palaszczuk to stop ruling out the Metro, get on board and work with Brisbane City Council."

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

It is a shame the LNP put out such rubbish at times.  It does them no good at all in the end.

This saddens me. Council LNP get it. They've completely reformed their plan to provide a properly integrated solution. Trad stated her support for the integrated solution so this release is inaccurate anyway. Time for the state opposition to grow up, especially with #RailFail there is no better time to try and capitalise on the situation and they way to do that is to help get the right solution(s) underway, not this childish misguided politics

[Stillwater]

It would do the LNP credit if it announced its support for the 'integrated transport solution' for Brisbane (CRR-Metro), saying that both are needed.  (Note that LNP says CRR 'may' address a commuter bottleneck that could occur in 2026.)  It is still discrediting CRR.

If it wanted to distinguish itself politically, the LNP could say it offers bi-partisan support for a combined rail-metro solution and, in government, it would instigate plans for Metro to proceed as the first stage, with CRR to follow.

In this media statement, it basically still sticks to its politics of Metro good, CRR bad.  What it appears to be saying too is that a decision on CRR can be put off another 10 years!   

[ozbob]

Brisbanetimes -->  'Twin-bend' electric buses that will drive Brisbane's metro

Electric-powered buses almost 30 metres in length could move Brisbane commuters in the new "metro" service that Brisbane City Council announced on Saturday as their new people mover.

While Brisbane City Council calls it a "metro" service, it is new-generation buses that shift the people.

And they are most likely to be electric – or at the least hybrid power – which will be "charged" at stops as passengers hop on and off the new buses.

They are called "bi-articulated" buses and common throughout Europe and South America.

Brisbane City Council is looking at two concepts as they finalise a business case by May 2017 for the two new routes.

Work could start in 2018 and be finished by 2022.

The new routes

              Bus every three minutes: Eight Mile Plains to Roma Street;
              Bus every three minutes: Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital to the University of Queensland;
              Total 21 kilometres.


What will the buses look like?

Example one: Van Hool's Exquicity 24



They will look like modern "bi-articulated buses" with three passenger sections and two rubber-lined joints, with the driver sitting in the front section.

Brisbane City Council is still reluctant to call them buses, arguing that while they are new rubber-tyred buses, they will operate more like trams.

Deputy Mayor Adrian Schrinner did not think the term "metro" was confusing commuters.

"Metro is not a particular type of vehicle," Cr Schrinner argued.

"If you look around the world, 'metro' is used a whole range of different circumstances in a whole range of different kinds of vehicles," he said.

"Metro is about high frequency, high capacity so people don't have to rely on a timetable. People just need to turn up."

What the experts say

Robert Dow from Rail: Back on Track said Brisbane City Council has begun to explore two models of bi- articulated buses as they shape the tender. No decision has been made.

Example 2: AutoTram Extra Bus



He said Brisbane commuters would be familiar with the "articulated" buses, or banana buses with one "bendy" section because there will about 30 still operating in Southeast Queensland.

He said the "bi-articulated" buses had two "bendy banana sections" plus the front section with the driver.

"The largest running at the moment carries around 270 passengers and that is running in South America," he said.

"There's another one in Sweden which carries 258," he said.

"So they can easily reach 200 passengers."

"They're (BCC) saying 150 passengers, but we think they will easily end up with something carrying 200 passengers per articulated bus."

Mr Dow said the two routes were practical.

The first between Royal Brisbane Hospital, QUT's Kelvin Grove campus, the CBD, the Mater Hospital and the University of Queensland was already popular.

"It connects all the knowledge precincts up," he said.

Mr Dow said the second route between Roma Street and Eight Mile Plains was also a "workhorse" along the South East Busway.

"The buses that the bi-articulated buses displace will go out into the suburbs to feed the busways and provide better suburban connections and reduce the number of buses running through the city."

Will they be conventional diesel or gas, hybrid or electric?

Mr Dow said Brisbane City Council is exploring the use of electric buses, an idea it has investigated since 2011.

"These days rapid electric charging technology has really developed tremendously," he said.

"And they are certainly going to look at it."

Mr Dow said he believed the business case would look at conventional diesel or gas, rapid-charge electric buses, or hybrid.

"The way I see it happening here in Brisbane if they went full electric: at Royal Brisbane Hospital, UQ Lakes, Eight Mile Plains and Roma Street Station they would set up rapid-charging stations," he said.

"So when they go out to lay-off, they would go in, charge up for a few minutes and then go back onto the route."

Chris Warnock from Engineers Australia

Mr Warnock said the new Brisbane Metro was a better fit with the changed Cross River Rail project announced last Sunday by the state government.

But he warned there were difficulties with using the extra buses on the Southeast Busway, the Northern Busway and the Boggo Road Busway to University of Queensland.

"Just keep in mind that all of those busway that they have mentioned will end up having capacity problems," he said.

"My perennial question is 'what are you going to do then?'"

Mr Warnock said even though the "metro" planned to put 121 buses out into the suburbs, the effectiveness depended on commuters switching buses.

"So, if you travel in from the outer suburbs, if you come in by bus, you would have to get off (one bus) and get onto this system."

Mr Warnock said while "changing modes" was popular in Europe, it was less popular in Australia.

"It is something that Australians are going to have to get used to as our network expands."

When will it be built?

Brisbane City Council plan to build it in 2018 and have it finished by 2022.

What needs to happen?

           A new bus interchange built under the QPAC;
          Slight modifications to South East Busway and Inner Northern Busway;
          Some corners may need modification for tight turning circles;
          Possible modifications to the busway stations;
          Money in the 2017-18 Brisbane City Council budget for the tender to be called;
          Victoria Bridge becomes a 'green'; no cars and buses and pedestrians only.

[ozbob]

It would do the LNP credit if it announced its support for the 'integrated transport solution' for Brisbane (CRR-Metro), saying that both are needed.  (Note that LNP says CRR 'may' address a commuter bottleneck that could occur in 2026.)  It is still discrediting CRR.

If it wanted to distinguish itself politically, the LNP could say it offers bi-partisan support for a combined rail-metro solution and, in government, it would instigate plans for Metro to proceed as the first stage, with CRR to follow.

In this media statement, it basically still sticks to its politics of Metro good, CRR bad.  What it appears to be saying too is that a decision on CRR can be put off another 10 years!   

They really are a worry the LNP.  The ' Cleveland Solution ' was an attempt to sabotage CRR.

Then the infamous BAT tunnel (not an acronym by the way  )  pushed when Senior LNP sources said it was very unlikely that it would ever be built post election loss.

Very hard to trust them now I am afraid.  Not worthy ...

The BRT Metro is a sound plan, as is CRR. Together they will work well.  The LNP is becoming irrelevant.

The LM and DM are smart politicians but they are really starting to get bus reform. 
They want CRR to proceed ( and why not BCC will do very well out of it ).  This is all very welcome.

[#Metro]

I think that now BCC has solved the bus issue, they will not be contributing to CRR (though they will get some level of windfall from improvements within the CBD land values).

Looks like the asset sales borrowing land taxation federal gov't tooth fairy / magic pudding will have to be tapped for funds.

[ozbob]

I think it is reasonable that the Feds tip in $$ for both BRT Metro and CRR.  BCC fund the diff for Metro, State the fund diff for CRR.

Do not forget the other states have had billions for various projects.  It is Queensland's turn for some of the money!