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

[Golliwog]

Is it really necessary to know the vehicles that will be used to approve station locations?

We are taking about a big bus.

Can the vehicles be run on the existing infrastructure, and to what extent?

Again, we are taking about a big bus.

Ummm. Yes vehicle spec's are important!

Can it make the required turns? Is the tail end of the double artic going to swing across the inside lane, which may have traffic traveling in the opposite direction? How big of an arc will it need to turn safely? How long is your bus? How many can you / do you need to fit on a platform at the same time? How big does your platform need to be?

What is the tare weight of the bus, and how much will it weight fully loaded? How close are your buses axles? In fact, how many axles is that weight spread over? What is the loading impact on your pavements? On your bridges?

While you're right that it's probably not going to be much different to the current scenario, all of the above are valid concerns and you'd be negligent to sign off on something without knowing what it is you're actually signing off on.

If the Lord Mayor and the Minister could quit their public p%ssing contest and actually just work through their issues and concerns, I think you'd get a much better outcome.

[SurfRail]

Just surprised why 150 pax was put as the limit.

A new fleet of 60 high-capacity Brisbane Metro
vehicles will be introduced, each able to carry
up to 150 passengers.

Note the limiting word 'up to'. page 22.

https://www.brisbane.qld.gov.au/sites/default/files/20170530_-_brisbane_metro_business_case_key_findings_may_2017.pdf

It's ridiculous.  Artics in Perth (virtually identical to the newer Council models) can legally carry nearly the same figure at (IIRC) 130.

[ozbob]

https://twitter.com/MarkBaileyMP/status/1176738082487291905

[Cleveland Line]

Brisbanetimes -->

"There was a guarantee that report would be provided within a week and so we can confirm that exactly, that is exactly what will happen," he said.

"The report, full report, including all the information that has been given to them verbally, will be provided within the week, as we said we would do."

Cr Schrinner said he was happy to release that report to the public.

So the Lord Mayor has just been all faux outrage and hot air, demanding the government sign off a plan full of 'to be determined' sections and hand over their busway for BCC to rip up and cause unknown disruptions for unspecified length of time.

And for what? $1 billion for 150 seat bendy buses.

This is so far from a 'metro' it isn't funny. It is really just about inner city busway capacity. Cross River Bus...

If the Lord Mayor and the Minister could quit their public p%ssing contest and actually just work through their issues and concerns, I think you'd get a much better outcome.

 

Yes, some competence and interest in actual outcomes for the public would be nice from our leaders.

[#Metro]

And for what? $1 billion for 150 seat bendy buses.

I think this is way too low a capacity. Consider the Gold Coast tram - it is full most times of the day.

150 seems far too low.

[ozbob]

Brisbanetimes --> No Metro meeting in motion for mayor and minister

Transport Minister Mark Bailey has accused Brisbane lord mayor Adrian Schrinner of refusing to meet him directly to discuss the Brisbane Metro, as the state government and council continue to spat over the $944 million project.

In response to the claim, deputy mayor Krista Adams said her own request for a meeting with Mr Bailey was rejected by the minister.

Mr Bailey's opening salvo came in the form of a tweet sent on Wednesday afternoon.

"Mayor Schrinner always has time to do media regularly on Metro but just refused a meeting with me to resolve outstanding issues & discuss his report. 'Regrettably due to pre-existing diary commitments in coming weeks the Lord Mayor is simply not available'," Mr Bailey tweeted, apparently quoting an email from the lord mayor's office.

The minister and mayor have been at odds over the status of the council's mass transit project since June, when the state government requested the council reconsider its planned underground station at the Cultural Centre.

Cr Schrinner this week released a council report that he said showed the state's preferred option for a metro station in South Brisbane, under the Brisbane Convention and Exhibition Centre, was not feasible.

He called on the state to confirm the council's preferred option of an underground station at the Cultural Centre and to start issuing approvals.

Mr Bailey in turn questioned why the lord mayor had not called him directly to discuss the situation, and said he could not give approvals until he had more information on the proposed metro vehicles.

The council will finalise the metro vehicle tender by the end of the year.

Cr Schrinner did not respond to a question from Brisbane Times asking why he had not cleared room in his diary to meet Mr Bailey, but Cr Adams said the council was "proactively" seeking a resolution.

"If the minister was serious about progressing this project he would not be snubbing an opportunity to meet with myself, the person responsible for the Brisbane Metro," she said.

"I stand ready to meet with the minister at his earliest convenience."

Cr Adams wrote to Mr Bailey on Wednesday saying the council had explored the state's request "in good faith" and given him the final report.

"I have now sent you the findings of this work and I wanted to properly brief you on our findings," she wrote.

Cr Adams summarised the report, and concluded: "Your in-principle support is no longer sufficient, we require you to now make a decision."

The report investigating the alternative options for the South Brisbane metro station found the total costs for a deep station under the Convention Centre would cost $708 million, nearly $400 million more than the original Cultural Centre station.

A second option with a shallow station, one level down rather than two, under the Convention Centre was estimated to cost $641 million.

A third option was an underground Cultural Centre station with a connection beneath the Convention Centre for West End bus services.

That third option was estimated to cost $406 million, or $91 million more than the calculated costs for the original council design under the Cultural Centre.

Under option two, the report found there would be "significant impacts" to the Convention Centre, permanently losing car parks and affecting several of the building's convention halls during construction.

It also found that larger flood gates would be required for those options.

The report said travel times for West End commuters would be increased under the alternative options.

The council's technical advisers, Jacobs, prepared the technical assessment and transport modelling in the report, while Rider Levett Bucknall prepared the capital cost estimates.

[ozbob]

https://twitter.com/ozbob13/status/1176880830553083906

[Cleveland Line]

And for what? $1 billion for 150 seat bendy buses.

I think this is way too low a capacity. Consider the Gold Coast tram - it is full most times of the day.

150 seems far too low.

The current tag axles have a total capacity of 98? So $1 billion for vehicles with up to a max of 52 extra pax...

Putting aside the politics, this has got to be the most fundamental technical issue with the proposal.

[SurfRail]

It's more of a legal and industrial one.  There is no technical reason why bi-articulated buses of the kind being contemplated can't carry something closer to 200 people apiece, depending on how they are to be laid out.

[#Metro]

Which law/Act is this?

[SurfRail]

Whole host of them.  Industrial rules will affect how many people drivers can be required to take (which will depend on the EBA, the operator's own policy etc), ADRs will affect maximum loads and layouts.  Various pieces of legislation at State and Commonwealth level affect what the registration permits the operator to do including max capacity for standing passengers.  There isn't a simple list.

[#Metro]

Sounds like a legal review is required.

Route 66 needs more than 150 pax.

[verbatim9]

Sounds like a legal review is required.

Route 66 needs more than 150 pax.

^^Legal Review LoL As long as it's electric and runs at high frequency of every few mins it should be ok?

At the end of the day the full specs of the vehicles have not been released. So it's all speculation.

[#Metro]

At the end of the day the full specs of the vehicles have not been released. So it's all speculation.

Actually, it's not. The laws and policies are already there and would limit what could be bought. We need to know which ones are incompatible with say a 250 pax bus.

[Gazza]

Why not establish a subsidiary that operates only Metro out of the new depot? Separate EBAs etc.

Th

[#Metro]

Why not establish a subsidiary that operates only Metro out of the new depot? Separate EBAs etc.

This is a worthwhile idea worth exploring. Ferries are operated this way by BCC.

Cue privatisation scare campaign though.

[verbatim9]

Why not establish a subsidiary that operates only Metro out of the new depot? Separate EBAs etc.

Th

I thought that how it's going to run. Private led but with BCC branding.

[achiruel]

I've been saying for some time the capacity of "Metro" is inadequate. The SEB should really be converted to light rail. Buses simply don't have the required capacity. It would also maker future automation simpler.

[Cleveland Line]

At the end of the day the full specs of the vehicles have not been released. So it's all speculation.

Actually, BCCs documents have already specified a max of 150 pax.

A new fleet of 60 high-capacity Brisbane Metro
vehicles will be introduced, each able to carry
up to 150 passengers.

Note the limiting word 'up to'. page 22.

https://www.brisbane.qld.gov.au/sites/default/files/20170530_-_brisbane_metro_business_case_key_findings_may_2017.pdf

That is the strange part. Surely the tender would be better directed by identifying the legal and technical parameters and then letting suppliers respond with best fit to these, as well as identify where reasonable changes could be made to achieve even better outcome? Tender assessment then considers this to select best option rather than state 150 pax max. Is a vehicle with 155 pax capacity automatically non confirming?!

[verbatim9]

I've been saying for some time the capacity of "Metro" is inadequate. The SEB should really be converted to light rail. Buses simply don't have the required capacity. It would also maker future automation simpler.

That would be nice I really wanted that as well. Skip the interim Bi articulated bus plan and go straight to a LRT solution. Similar to Seattle with shared tunnels with buses.

Looks like this interim measure will go ahead though.

[James]

I've been saying for some time the capacity of "Metro" is inadequate. The SEB should really be converted to light rail. Buses simply don't have the required capacity. It would also maker future automation simpler.

You're never going to get LRT down the SEB. The geometry is inadequate through the core sections, particularly around Roma Street & KGSBS. You also have a 10% downgrade in several parts of the busway (including the new BCC-idea Cultural Centre station), not terribly suitable for LRT. I did an extensive post on this one a while ago.

Automation also requires dedicated Class A ROW, something which won't be achieved without fencing off North Quay / Adelaide St where the metros are on the surface.

Finally - the busway is already carrying close to 18,000 pax/hr in peak - it is just about squeezing the air out of those buses by forcing a transfer. I am doubtful of the merits of converting the busway to LRT - it would need to deliver a significant capacity improvements to be worth the $$$ IMHO.

[verbatim9]

^^A rubber tyre track guided metro is achievable like in Montreal and Paris. The North Quay turn will be eliminated with the long term goal of a metro tunnel under the river connecting Melbourne and Adelaide Street tunnel portals. So if the the new station at the Convention Centre goes ahead? It will be possible due to the station already being two storeys deep. So the dive under the river won't be as drastic.

[#Metro]

The SEB question is settled. It's going to be a banana bus upgrade.

Not a steel wheel metro, not a train on rubber tyres, not light rail.

[timh]

^^A rubber tyre track guided metro is achievable like in Montreal and Paris. The North Quay turn will be eliminated with the long term goal of a metro tunnel under the river connecting Melbourne and Adelaide Street tunnel portals. So if the the new station at the Convention Centre goes ahead? It will be possible due to the station already being two storeys deep. So the dive under the river won't be as drastic.

We've been through this before. There are plenty of other bends/grades along the busway that are unsuitable for light rail.

[verbatim9]

^^A rubber tyre track guided metro is achievable like in Montreal and Paris. The North Quay turn will be eliminated with the long term goal of a metro tunnel under the river connecting Melbourne and Adelaide Street tunnel portals. So if the the new station at the Convention Centre goes ahead? It will be possible due to the station already being two storeys deep. So the dive under the river won't be as drastic.

We've been through this before. There are plenty of other bends/grades along the busway that are unsuitable for light rail.

I am not talking about LRT I was just agreeing. I am now referring to upgrading to rubber tyre metro track grade in the future along with new lines.

I am pretty sure the bi articulated bus plan won't be sufficient in a decade. So they will either keep it or convert it in the future to a rubber tyre track metro with new East West SW and NE lines.

[Gazza]

IMO if the SE Metro starts getting full in decades time, then stop trying to squeeze blood from a stone with vehicle upgrades, and build a relief line under Logan Rd.

[aldonius]

IMO if the SE Metro starts getting full in decades time, then stop trying to squeeze blood from a stone with vehicle upgrades, and build a relief line under Logan Rd.

Agree 100%. It also has the benefit of being where the development actually is.

Not sure how it'd go at the northern or southern ends though.

[ozbob]

https://twitter.com/MarkBaileyMP/status/1178411476647739392

[#Metro]

Here's an idea. Get them both in the studio with the presenter at the same time.

[achiruel]

Here's an idea. Get them both in the studio with the presenter at the same time.

Good luck with that. Queensland ministers are notorious for being "unavailable" for interviews on ABC Brisbane.

[ozbob]

https://twitter.com/team_schrinner/status/1186513839698767872

[verbatim9]

^^That depot design looks like a 1970's youth prison. Surely a better design would eliminate vehicles driving in front of the admin building and straight into holding areas.

[Gazza]

Wouldn't that pic be the back of the building?

[timh]

I don't think any of these renders are anywhere near the final design. We are still a long way off for that.

[ozbob]

Brisbanetimes --> Cyclists flag Brisbane Metro design flaw

A potential design flaw in Brisbane City Council's $944 million Brisbane Metro could see cyclists and buses forced to cross each other's paths at the proposed South Brisbane station.

The council resumed a debate around the planned designs for Brisbane Metro and safety risks for cyclists on Tuesday, after the debate was paused in August as councillors waited to hear from a cycling representative.

CBD Bicycle Users Group co-convener Donald Campbell addressed the council about design details released months ago that alarmed cyclists, who had repeatedly petitioned the council with their concerns.

Mr Campbell said the design was "not world's best practice" and cyclists wanted to see the design changed to remove cycling lanes from next to the buses, and relocated to behind floating bus stops to better protect cyclists.

He asked the council to alter its design for protected bikeways along Melbourne Street in South Brisbane.

A fly-through video of the proposed Brisbane Metro station at the Cultural Centre in South Brisbane showed green cycling lanes running to and from Victoria Bridge from under the South Brisbane railway bridge.

But under the railway bridge, in the existing design buses would have to cross the green cycling lane to pick up and drop off passengers, meaning "hundreds" of cyclists and buses would have to navigate each other each day.

Deputy mayor Krista Adams told the public and active transport committee, and the council chamber, on Tuesday that the design was a "base design" that could still be changed, particularly as the council still did not have approval from the state government for its preferred station location at the Cultural Centre.

Cr Adams said the project had gone through multiple designs throughout its development.

"It's important to remember that we are still in that base case stage, so that base design ... we had decided on separated two-way cycling across Victoria Bridge," Cr Adams said.

"But in developing the design for Melbourne Street we undertook an options assessment process that included the consideration of two-way cycleway and it wasn't actually preferred due to the conflict between bus stop users, pedestrians and cyclists beneath the South Brisbane rail bridge.

"In saying that, that is our base case design at the moment."

Cr Adams noted the state government's requirement for the council to consider different design options for the South Brisbane Metro station so the design could still change in the future.

Lord mayor Adrian Schrinner said the design would change going forward as procurement began for the metro.

Independent Tennyson ward councillor Nicole Johnston moved an amendment for the petition response to remove a reference to the current design being the "preferred design option", referencing the death of a cyclist in Woollongabba.

Cr Johnston also criticised the council for starting tender processes for Brisbane Metro before approvals were issued by the state government.

Labor supported the motion, which was dismissed as "ridiculous" by Cr Adams and not supported by the LNP administration.

"I think it does send a very clear message to cyclists, to bus drivers who have skin in the game on this issue, they are deeply concerned about the interaction between cyclists and buses," Labor opposition leader Jared Cassidy said.

"We know what the devastating outcome can be when large heavy vehicles are interacting with cyclists. We've seen that over in [The Gabba ward councillor Jonathan Sri]'s ward already once, we don't need to see that again.

"This sends a very clear message that the arrangements in the current preferred design will not be the basis going forward."

Cr Johnston's motion was voted down and the petition response, which acknowledged the safety concerns, was approved by the council.

Share on Facebook

Facebook ...

[ozbob]

https://twitter.com/cbdbug/status/1186809682607763456

[verbatim9]

Brisbanetimes.com.au-----> Planning of Brisbane Metro stalls until after the 2020 Council Election

More than 500 buses on average per week were too full to take on passengers in September, the latest data shows, as Brisbane City Council complains its key mass transit project, Brisbane Metro, is still delayed.

The council began releasing the monthly "bus full standing load" data again earlier this year, after repeated questions about why the data had stopped being released, pointing to the data as proof the city needs its $944 million Brisbane Metro project.

Lord mayor Adrian Schrinner's decision to release the data again each month has furthered a spat between the LNP administration and the state government, after the council did not inform TransLink they were releasing the data.

Under contractual obligations governing Brisbane's buses, data releases must be signed off by both council and TransLink.

Across September, more than 240,000 bus trips were taken, of which 2049 reported being too full to stop and take on more passengers.

The busy route 66, from the University of Queensland to the Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, again topped the list of the routes with the highest full standing loads.

Route 66 alone reported 248 buses too full to take on passengers, down from 416 in August, and down from 291 in September last year.

Deputy mayor Krista Adams released the September data in council chambers on Tuesday afternoon, saying the number of buses full each month was "appalling".

"Last month there were a total of 2039 full standing loads - that is 510 bus loads a week, an increase of 133 on September last year.

"The problem is only getting worse.

"Importantly, 65 per cent of the bus loads were during peak hours, but that's still a 35 per cent that occurred during off-peak, so it's not just daily work commuters who are copping the brunt of the problem.

"It's shift workers, it's school kids, it's carers, it's anyone travelling in Brisbane during the day."

Cr Adams said the Brisbane Metro would help solve the full standing load issue for residents, but said the state government was still dragging their feet on approving the $944 million public transport project.

Cr Adams said the Transport Minister was "refusing" to meet her in her role as public and active transport committee chairwoman, or respond to her letters, and said she would be making a complaint to the Integrity Commiss

She said the council no longer expected to see any approvals for the start of Brisbane Metro before March, which is when the local government elections take place.

It means the council's LNP administration will go to the polls with their key transport project in limbo after design, location and approval disputes with the state.

"[Mr Bailey] has agreed for me to accompany the lord mayor to a meeting in a couple of weeks' time, but hopefully now we've cracked the 300-meeting mark we might get some decisions from the Minister," Cr Adams said.

Mr Bailey said residents were "tired of this out-of-touch blame game".

"Patrick Condren obviously has our unelected lord mayor Schrinner's long-term LNP council worried," he said.

"These bizarre rants from the unelected lord mayor and his deputy are happening more often as undealt with issues at City Hall pile up."

[verbatim9]

^^I am not surprised, as the type of vehicle is a very important factor in this, as well as the power source and proposed design of the integrated station at South Brisbane.^^It would be very disappointing if Bne Metro is not going to be electric? It will be cheaper to run overhead power cables to power metro, than import fuel and set up fuel logistics and storages etc ....Electric vehicles are cheaper to make than the deisel counterparts. Less moving parts, less servicing etc ..

[timh]

^^I am not surprised, as the type of vehicle is a very important factor in this, as well as the power source and proposed design of the integrated station at South Brisbane.^^It would be very disappointing if Bne Metro is not going to be electric? It will be cheaper to run overhead power cables to power metro, than import fuel and set up fuel logistics and storages etc ....Electric vehicles are cheaper to make than the deisel counterparts. Less moving parts, less servicing etc ..

Overhead power cables have already been ruled out, and we've verified that. The vehicles up for tender are 2 battery electrics and one diesel.

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

[verbatim9]

^^I am not surprised, as the type of vehicle is a very important factor in this, as well as the power source and proposed design of the integrated station at South Brisbane.^^It would be very disappointing if Bne Metro is not going to be electric? It will be cheaper to run overhead power cables to power metro, than import fuel and set up fuel logistics and storages etc ....Electric vehicles are cheaper to make than the deisel counterparts. Less moving parts, less servicing etc ..

Overhead power cables have already been ruled out, and we've verified that. The vehicles up for tender are 2 battery electrics and one diesel.

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

Previous recent articles stated that traditional trolley electric vehicles haven't been ruled out. I can't see "battery electric" quoted just "fully electric" in this last article about the vehicle.types.

On Friday we had our last submissions received from the three shortlisted vehicle tenderers for Brisbane Metro, I'm pleased to confirm that out of that we now have two fully electric vehicles and one Euro-60 diesel vehicle under consideration," he said.

Cr Schrinner said the council was investigating the "whole of life" costs for the three versions, and did not provide information on the difference in cost between the electric and diesel engines.

He said the two electric versions were "still under assessment" and could not provide details on their points of difference in design or cost.