Kuraby to Beenleigh capacity improvement (Logan - Gold Coast Faster Rail)

[ozbob]

Rail Express --> Queensland fires starter's gun on faster rail

... The ARA's Faster Rail Report, released in 2021, confirmed the need for urgent action to deliver faster, more reliable and more frequent services between capital cities and regional centres.

"Investment in faster rail on routes like Brisbane to Gold Coast will make it easier for people to leave the car at home for their daily commute or weekend away," Wilkie said.

"It will not only speed journey times, but increase flexibility for customers by enabling more trains, more often along the route.

"The global experience tells us faster rail drives urban renewal along the rail corridor, creating the opportunity for new housing and business precincts beyond capital city centres.

"With the Olympics just around the corner, faster rail will help showcase the very best Queensland has to offer and drive new development and growth long after the Games are over."

Consumer research conducted by the ARA in 2021 confirmed 75 per cent of Gold Coast residents surveyed would travel to the city by train if it took the same or less time than driving. The survey also highlighted the growth opportunities that came with investment in faster rail, with 78 per cent of Gold Coast participants believing faster rail links would make moving to the region more attractive.

[timh]

NOT exactly the vision anyone had when it came to fast/er rail.......
Maybe one day.....one day........   

4min saving on the Bris/GC corridor........   

This project isn't really aimed at improving speeds IMO, it's aimed at capacity. If the government spun it that way and used more "more trains more often" style language, promising a train every X minutes from some GC station, that would probably make it seem like better value for money. A lot of the news media has also picked up on this "4 minute time saving" factoid, and have basically run hit pieces highlighting how $2.5bn is way too much for such a time saving. But they are ignoring the capacity this will allow for.

Mind you, the triple track section north of Kuraby still severely hinders any capacity upgrade south of there, but we make do with what we have!

Still, the entire project falls very short of any kind of actual "Fast Rail" project for the Gold Coast. It's clear the government is not interested in this, as it would absolutely require a new alignment. Quadding the existing corridor is not appropriate for an intercity Fast Rail project. It's a big shame, and this was highlighted a huge amount of times in the online submission interactive map, how additional track straightening should be done in order to improve travel times and speeds, and yet it seems like this is all largely ignored.

It's half arsed compared to what a proper Fast Rail project could be, but yet I'm still just happy they chose a full Quad and not just a triplication!

I would very much like to see the completed business case though. Does anyone know if this is due for public release at some point?

[SurfRail]

The following should be doable with only minimal resumption requirements:

- quad from Yeerongpilly to Beenleigh
- convert the lines to up-up-down-down
- rebuild all local stations to remove redundant platforms (to save room in the corridor for quadding)
- rebuild all stations at which express trains would ever need to sop to have double islands allowing cross-platform interchange - these stations probably only need to be Yeerongpilly (only for the tennis so not normally used), Salisbury, Loganlea and Beenleigh
- provision for a grade-separated connection at Salisbury from the up-up (southbound) tracks in the direction of Acacia Ridge

That leaves the mess between Yeerongpilly and Dutton Park, but that is easier to deal with having the benefit of the rest of the corridor basically working properly.

A few things you would do:
- Build a new island platform at Yeerongpilly and leave the to-be-built 3rd platform (5th platform in this set up) as a spare.
- Redo Moorooka from scratch so it can be built on a straight a little south of its current position.
- No fourth platform at Rocklea, and close off the to-be-built 3rd platform.
- Remove the Beaudesert Road LX and reconfigure the tracks to get all 4 through  (leave a road surface there but put chain-link fences across so a crossing remains in place for emergency flood egress, like the crossing built just south of Bethania)
- Demolish Salisbury and do it properly with 2 islands on a straight stretch - maybe close off Dollis St north of the wrecking yard, resume all the properties immediately north and reposition the corridor to get rid of the kink
- Do the Salisbury-Acacia Ridge outbound connection as a fly-under.  Turnouts from both outbound tracks just after the Salisbury outbound platform leading to a track in between, which then goes under the other running lines.  Grade separate Musgrave Road as part of that work.
- The western-most track north of Salisbury would continue to be dual gauge.
- Rebuild stations from Coopers Plains to Fruitgrove inclusive to suit the new track layout, including:L
-- Demolish Coopers Plains to fit 4 tracks and an island in the existing footprint.
-- Demolish Banoon and Sunnybank, build one station just south of the existing Banoon station and relocate the heritage shed from Sunnybank to the new station.  Relocate the works depot to the Sunnybank station site and use the depot site for a bus interchange and park and ride.
-- Demolish the low-level side platforms at Altandi, Runcorn and Fruitgrove.
-- Expand the side platform at Kuraby into an island platform and reconfigure the area around it to suit.
-- Close the Stones Rd and Bonemill St LXs without replacing.
-- Grade separate the Boundary Rd, Nathan Rd and Warrigal Rd LXs.

[verbatim9]

The following should be doable with only minimal resumption requirements:

- quad from Yeerongpilly to Beenleigh
- convert the lines to up-up-down-down
- rebuild all local stations to remove redundant platforms (to save room in the corridor for quadding)
- rebuild all stations at which express trains would ever need to sop to have double islands allowing cross-platform interchange - these stations probably only need to be Yeerongpilly (only for the tennis so not normally used), Salisbury, Loganlea and Beenleigh
- provision for a grade-separated connection at Salisbury from the up-up (southbound) tracks in the direction of Acacia Ridge

That leaves the mess between Yeerongpilly and Dutton Park, but that is easier to deal with having the benefit of the rest of the corridor basically working properly.

A few things you would do:
- Build a new island platform at Yeerongpilly and leave the to-be-built 3rd platform (5th platform in this set up) as a spare.
- Redo Moorooka from scratch so it can be built on a straight a little south of its current position.
- No fourth platform at Rocklea, and close off the to-be-built 3rd platform.
- Remove the Beaudesert Road LX and reconfigure the tracks to get all 4 through  (leave a road surface there but put chain-link fences across so a crossing remains in place for emergency flood egress, like the crossing built just south of Bethania)
- Demolish Salisbury and do it properly with 2 islands on a straight stretch - maybe close off Dollis St north of the wrecking yard, resume all the properties immediately north and reposition the corridor to get rid of the kink
- Do the Salisbury-Acacia Ridge outbound connection as a fly-under.  Turnouts from both outbound tracks just after the Salisbury outbound platform leading to a track in between, which then goes under the other running lines.  Grade separate Musgrave Road as part of that work.
- The western-most track north of Salisbury would continue to be dual gauge.
- Rebuild stations from Coopers Plains to Fruitgrove inclusive to suit the new track layout, including:L
-- Demolish Coopers Plains to fit 4 tracks and an island in the existing footprint.
-- Demolish Banoon and Sunnybank, build one station just south of the existing Banoon station and relocate the heritage shed from Sunnybank to the new station.  Relocate the works depot to the Sunnybank station site and use the depot site for a bus interchange and park and ride.
-- Demolish the low-level side platforms at Altandi, Runcorn and Fruitgrove.
-- Expand the side platform at Kuraby into an island platform and reconfigure the area around it to suit.
-- Close the Stones Rd and Bonemill St LXs without replacing.
-- Grade separate the Boundary Rd, Nathan Rd and Warrigal Rd LXs.

Good idea around Sunnybank.  To get rid of the 50 kph section, what is the best option? Proposed tunneling or land resumption?

With the consolidation and station relocation the high frequency bus services will no longer connect to the train along Mains Road. Could there be a possibility of having a new station just North of the school?

Therefore, it could service the school and the high frequency services along Mains road.

[nathandavid88]

- rebuild all stations at which express trains would ever need to sop to have double islands allowing cross-platform interchange - these stations probably only need to be Yeerongpilly (only for the tennis so not normally used), Salisbury, Loganlea and Beenleigh

I would argue for keeping an express stop at Altandi to retain a high frequency link between the GC Line and the SE Busway.

[SurfRail]

^ I wouldn't. Loganlea is the most important intermediate stop.  Putting the other stop at Salisbury catches the rail junction and likely the point where GC and Beenleigh services assume the same express stopping pattern.  Too many stops otherwise.  There's no point in stopping at Salisbury right now of course.

In the longer run I think we might see Brisbane Metro extend as far as Loganlea in some form, which would make the connection easier.

There's also nothing stopping a bus route akin to the old 556 to connect Loganlea station to the busway, even now.

[aldonius]

Altandi's value as a node is for Mains Rd more than the busway per se.

[SurfRail]

I agree, but it is considerably less relevant once all trains need to stop at Salisbury.

[verbatim9]

Altandi's value as a node is for Mains Rd more than the busway per se.

I agree, but it is considerably less relevant once all trains need to stop at Salisbury.

We don't want to see where you can no longer transfer to different modes like in the 70s and 80s where train operations were managed in isolation to other modes.

Hence by suggestion focusing on Salisbury just as a train transfer hub.

[Gazza]

I think the transfer should be at Yerongpilly, not Salisbury.

[SurfRail]

Altandi's value as a node is for Mains Rd more than the busway per se.

I agree, but it is considerably less relevant once all trains need to stop at Salisbury.

We don't want to see where you can no longer transfer to different modes like in the 70s and 80s where train operations were managed in isolation to other modes.

Hence by suggestion focusing on Salisbury just as a train transfer hub.

We also don't want to see 3-4 intermediate stops on what is meant to be an intercity express service.

If people need to access Mains Road, they can transfer onto an all stops train at Loganlea.  By this time this actually becomes an issue, both patterns will be running every 15 minutes in the off-peak.

[ozbob]

GCB --> Fast train cuts 20 minutes off Gold Coast run to Brisbane for 2032 Games $

New upgrades combined with Cross River Rail has the potential to shave off at least 20 minutes from the Gold Coast to Brisbane train ride.

... "This will allow for more frequent Gold Coast express services and save several minutes on travel times, although the precise time savings will be determined through the detailed design phase and timetable design. More frequent services also mean less time waiting on platforms."

Estimates during design for the Cross River Rail suggested the $5.4bn project could cut 15 minutes from Coast trips.

"These savings are based on the new station at Albert Street, which is more centrally located and will significantly reduce journey times for customers travelling to the southern CBD," the TransLink spokesman said.

Customers currently need to walk from South Bank or stay on the train to Central and walk to the southern CBD.

A train will leave for Brisbane every five minutes on average in the morning peak on the Coast line, with capacity for an extra 3150 seats

Rail Back on Track spokesman Robert Dow welcomed the government rail funding but hoped more could be done to complete the connection with Cross River Rail.

He said the four-track upgrade from Beenleigh to Kuraby could be extended in the longer term to Dutton Park to connect with new city rail underground system under the Brisbane River.

"The Gold Coast line will benefit from the removal of those five level crossings. There will be no chance of conflict (with vehicles), it's more safer," Mr Dow said.

He said the other improvement was the introduction of an improved signalling system for Cross River Rail to be extended to the Coast stations.

"It's called a European train control system. That will allow trains to be in an automatic mode in the tunnels, faster and closer together, and more frequent," Mr Dow said.

[#Metro]

What are the fastest run times if we took all reasonable measures to optimise rail services and infrastructure to the GC and Beenleigh?

Would it be possible to run trains at or above 100 km/hr average speed between Brisbane - Beenleigh? What about raising

the maximum line speed to 160-200 km/hr between Brisbane and the GC? What needs to happen to enable that?

We can assume two scenarios - one where the GC line stays as an extension of the Beenleigh line, and another scenario where it is separated as R1 (or similar).

I might attempt to do a spreadsheet with stations and minutes to estimate.

[Gazza]

Hey metro, we did an extensive analysis of these measures in the RBOT submission on the project.
Did you have a chance to read it?

[nathandavid88]

GCB --> Fast train cuts 20 minutes off Gold Coast run to Brisbane for 2032 Games $

New upgrades combined with Cross River Rail has the potential to shave off at least 20 minutes from the Gold Coast to Brisbane train ride.

... "This will allow for more frequent Gold Coast express services and save several minutes on travel times, although the precise time savings will be determined through the detailed design phase and timetable design. More frequent services also mean less time waiting on platforms."

Estimates during design for the Cross River Rail suggested the $5.4bn project could cut 15 minutes from Coast trips.

"These savings are based on the new station at Albert Street, which is more centrally located and will significantly reduce journey times for customers travelling to the southern CBD," the TransLink spokesman said.

Customers currently need to walk from South Bank or stay on the train to Central and walk to the southern CBD.

A train will leave for Brisbane every five minutes on average in the morning peak on the Coast line, with capacity for an extra 3150 seats

Rail Back on Track spokesman Robert Dow welcomed the government rail funding but hoped more could be done to complete the connection with Cross River Rail.

He said the four-track upgrade from Beenleigh to Kuraby could be extended in the longer term to Dutton Park to connect with new city rail underground system under the Brisbane River.

"The Gold Coast line will benefit from the removal of those five level crossings. There will be no chance of conflict (with vehicles), it's more safer," Mr Dow said.

He said the other improvement was the introduction of an improved signalling system for Cross River Rail to be extended to the Coast stations.

"It's called a European train control system. That will allow trains to be in an automatic mode in the tunnels, faster and closer together, and more frequent," Mr Dow said.

Now THIS is how the Government Spin Doctors should have promoted the project in the first place! A 4 minute saving doesn't mean much to the public and IMO was a stupid point to try and focus on. However, a combined 20 minute saving (even if the majority of that would come from CRR) is a more tangible saving for both commuters and the public in general, and together with higher frequency services, an extra 3150 seats and the removal of level crossings makes for a much more worthwhile result for the money spent.

[verbatim9]

The only significant time saving will be reduced waiting at train stations due to enhanced frequency.

[SurfRail]

I think they have sneakily used the difference in journey time to get to somewhere like Gardens Point from Albert St vs Central, and whacked a few minutes onto that.  Some of that will be wiped out by the 3 new infill stations.

The trip time from Boggo Road / Park Road to Varsity Lakes I expect will be no more than 4-5 minutes faster, and again a lot of that is probably just trains not having to dodge each other at Beenleigh anymore.

To get any more significant savings the track geometry has to change a lot more substantially than just getting rid of the Trinder Park curve.

[nathandavid88]

I think they have sneakily used the difference in journey time to get to somewhere like Gardens Point from Albert St vs Central, and whacked a few minutes onto that.  Some of that will be wiped out by the 3 new infill stations.

Oh they definitely have, but aren't really being that sneaky about it - the GC Bulletin article outright states it:

Estimates during design for the Cross River Rail suggested the $5.4bn project could cut 15 minutes from Coast trips.

"These savings are based on the new station at Albert Street, which is more centrally located and will significantly reduce journey times for customers travelling to the southern CBD," the TransLink spokesman said.

Customers currently need to walk from South Bank or stay on the train to Central and walk to the southern CBD.

[Derailed2]

What are the fastest run times if we took all reasonable measures to optimise rail services and infrastructure to the GC and Beenleigh?

Would it be possible to run trains at or above 100 km/hr average speed between Brisbane - Beenleigh? What about raising

the maximum line speed to 160-200 km/hr between Brisbane and the GC? What needs to happen to enable that?

We can assume two scenarios - one where the GC line stays as an extension of the Beenleigh line, and another scenario where it is separated as R1 (or similar).

I might attempt to do a spreadsheet with stations and minutes to estimate.

Maybe others are already aware of this, but the GC Line track geometry, from the M1 overpass at Yatala, to just north of Robina, is already good for 160 km/h, except for the Up track curve through Nerang, which is a little slower at 140 km/h. This happy fact came about because the line was designed before the ugly urban sprawl that followed. The geometry of the extension from Robina to Varsity Lakes is limited to 100 km/h because it's squeezed in between the M1 and the adjacent sprawl.
From Yatala to Robina the line is only speedboarded to 140km/h, as it was decided that because all trains would stop at all stations, there was no need for the higher speed, plus the higher geared trains were more expensive! The original IMUs were geared for 140km/h but I think they were regeared lower to 130km/h some time ago, but I can't vouch for the accuracy of this claim. I think all trains on the line now are limited to 130 max.
I guess it would theoretically be possible to run regeared express EMUs at 16o and, dare I say it, tilt trains, at 200, with 25% overspeed, but I'm pretty sure you be up for significant, and expensive, resignalling issues.
The highest speed possible on the existing "goat track" between Brisbane and Beenleigh is 100, and only at a few places.
I'm happy to be corrected for any of the info I've provided here.

[HappyTrainGuy]

160/260 were regeared and software limited because they were damaging traction motors under acceleration. This was in general and not based on network running. EMUs will never be regeared. Traction motors and electronics won't allow it and the cost to do so would prevent it from happening. Over speed isn't a good thing either. HS-SMUs had their mtce costs sky rocket instantly in the short time they were used (software changes to enable faster running). Massive accelerated wear and tear along with vibrations being a real problem. Some trains started to have shuddering when hitting top speed.

IIRC The electric tilt has already done 170-180kph on it in testing. The biggest hurdle is passenger comfort. So with tilting trains you can run faster but your costs go up with the running costs. The higher top speed also isn't better anyway as the gearing means slower acceleration. Train weights also increase plus passenger loading which can negate the fact of the more powerful motors. Also station spacing then plays a part etc etc. basically no point really.

[achiruel]

I think the transfer should be at Yerongpilly, not Salisbury.

What's the benefit of transferring at Yeerongpilly? Wouldn't it just make the trip longer for Beenleigh/GC <-> Beaudesert?

We also don't want to see 3-4 intermediate stops on what is meant to be an intercity express service.

If people need to access Mains Road, they can transfer onto an all stops train at Loganlea.  By this time this actually becomes an issue, both patterns will be running every 15 minutes in the off-peak.

Won't Beenleigh trains likely be running on an express pattern by this time as well, with all stoppers terminating at Kuraby? Would you have Altandi on the Beenleigh pattern but not Gold Coast, in which case 4 platforms will still be required at Altandi, and timetabling organised so Beenleigh trains don't slow down GC trains by stopping there.

3-4 intermediate stops isn't entirely unprecented, though, e.g. in NSW, the 'slow' Central Coast/Newcastle trains (and Wyong short workings via Strathfield) stop at Berowra (T1 North Shore terminus), Hornsby (T9 Northern terminus), Epping (metro interchange) & Strathfield (T1 Western/T2 Inner West interchange). A few stop at Redfern as well. That's 4-5 stops in the suburban area, all significant interchanges, and a far longer trip than Varsity Lakes to the Brisbane CBD.

[SurfRail]

All of those are rail interchanges, which woildn't be the case for Altandi.

[Gazza]

Basically, if you have an interchange stop, it can be advantageous to put it in a location of activity so that they get the advantage of the double frequency and choice of services.

Or on the flip side, focus urban development at the interchange.

Darra is a poor example because its a minor center and concrete batching plant.

Boggo Rd will be good in the long term due to the urban village.

Petrie will be good in the long term with the USC and broader petrie mill development.

Salisbury will be poor in the long term because it is industry and flood plain.

But Yeerongpilly has Yeerongpilly Green urban village, the tennis center (And possibly the Tennyson shuttle could return post crr)

So what's more advantageous?
Making the interchange faster for pax, or making Yeerongpilly a hub?

The second aspect to my thinking is that Both GC and Flagstone trains should be running express to Dutton Park, thus Yeerongpilly could be a useful common stop.

[SurfRail]

No objection by me to Yeerongpilly.  There just has to be a common stop north of Loganlea and south of Boggo Road for all 3 patterns.

(I suspect we will end up with Salisbury.)

[achiruel]

Is there some potential for Salisbury to have increased density/TODs? There's quite a lot of residential on the eastern side of the station, but I don't know how flood-prone that area is.

I think the station needs to be moved north a bit as well, so that there can be better interchange with buses. I don't think there'll be a full interchange, but being able to walk out of the station and straight to a bus stop would be a big improvement over the current situation.

I did contemplate the idea of a HF bus from Salisbury to Garden City to improve connectivity between the southern lines and SEB, but the traffic is horrendous during peak hours. The attached map was about the best I could come up with. It's set with a departure time from Salsibury of 8:15am on a Monday. I went via MacGregor for two reasons: it was quicker than Kessels Rd, and for a suburb within such close proximity to Garden City, it's bus service is pretty terrible (the mostly hourly 123, with no night or Sunday service). I think the residents deserve better.

It still might be a sensible option in the future though; on the current patterns you could stay on the train to Southbank, and change to a bus there, and it might take similar time depending on traffic on 2, but when CRR opens, it would mean having to make an extra train transfer to get to Southbank, perhaps increasing the appeal of this bus route.

[aldonius]

There's a few possible futures but I think something is very clear to all of them: there's too much Merivale capacity and demand through South Bank and South Brisbane to leave it for the Cleveland line alone.

Whether that comes from northern lines terminating at Park Road or from southern lines going via Merivale isn't super clear, but there's plenty of demand from the middle Beenleigh line for South Bank and South Brisbane. I think if we have a three tier setup (i.e. Kuraby all stops, Helensvale express from K; Coolangatta express from H) then the Kuraby service should go via Merivale. (Flagstone would go via CRR.)

[ozbob]

Response from the Minister for Transport and Main Roads (Hon. Bailey), to an ePetition (3663-21) sponsored by the Clerk under provisions of Standing Order 119(4) from 349 petitioners, requesting the House to use the existing rail corridor between Kuraby and Wembley Road until such time to allow for proper community awareness and the conduct of an independent assessment on the proposed new rail corridor at Trinder Park [Petitions - responses]

OBJECTION TO THE RELOCATION OF TRINDER PARK STATION
https://www.parliament.qld.gov.au/Work-of-the-Assembly/Petitions/Petition-Details?id=3663

====

https://documents.parliament.qld.gov.au/tp/2022/5722T355-1E19.pdf

25 March 2022

Mr Neil Laurie
The Clerk of the Parliament
Parliament House
George Street
BRISBANE QLD 4000

Dear Mr Laurie

I refer to petition 3663-21, lodged with the Legislative Assembly on 23 February 2022 about
the objection to the relocation of Trinder Park station.

The proposed Trinder Park station relocation, along with the straightening of the section of
track between Kuraby and Woodridge near Trinder Park, is part of an essential upgrade to
the Beenleigh and Gold Coast lines. The project will support growing population and rail
patronage demand between Brisbane, Logan and the Gold Coast by increasing the number
of tracks between Kuraby and Beenleigh from two to four, with modernised rail systems,
station upgrades and level crossing removals. Currently, trains between Kuraby and
Beenleigh share a single track in each direction, limiting the number of peak services and
causing some Beenleigh services to stop and wait at passing loops while express trains go
past. Additional tracks will require a wider corridor and track straightening in some areas.
The section of track between Kuraby and Woodridge has one of the tightest curves on the
South East Queensland rail network, limiting the speed of trains passing through. It is
proposed to straighten the alignment in order to achieve faster train journeys and meet
modern rail and safety standards. This realignment involves impacts on local properties and
the Acacia Forest Park.

The Department of Transport and Main Roads (TMR) conducted an eight-week community
consultation process on the Logan and Gold Coast Faster Rail (LGCFR) project in
September and October 2021, which resulted in more than 2200 interactions with the
community. TMR received valuable community feedback regarding possible alternative
locations for Trinder Park station to minimise environmental impacts and increase its public
transport catchment area.

Further design work and consultation will now be undertaken as a result of this community
feedback to determine the best location for Trinder Park station, before the LGCFR project
design is finalised later in 2022.

I trust this information is of assistance.

Yours sincerely
MARK BAILEY MP
Minister for Transport and Main Roads

[verbatim9]

Good to see funds directed to this upgrade in this year's Federal Budget. The Courier Mail today also reports that the project should be completed by 2028.

[ozbob]

Bipartisan support a must for faster rail to Sunshine Coast and Gold Coast

30th March 2022

RAIL Back On Track welcomes funding in the Federal budget for both a rail extension to Maroochydore ($1.6 billion), and for the Logan to Gold Coast Faster rail project ($1.1 billion).

We urge all parties to commit to funding both of these projects at the coming federal election.

Rail to Maroochydore will be a game changer. For years the Sunshine coast has seen proportionally less public transport investment than Brisbane or the Gold Coast.

Currently the main rail stations on the Sunshine coast are a significant distance inland at Nambour, Landsborough and Beerwah, well away from the bulk of the population on the booming coastal strip. The rail project long known by the acronym 'CAMCOS' will thread right through the centre, putting new stations on the doorstep of hundreds of thousands of residents at places like Caloundra, Birtinya and Maroochydore. It will also support the growing Aura development, ensuring the new city grows sustainably around the rail line.
The new line will be built to fast interurban standards, potentially achieving speeds of 140 km/h or more.

Also significant is the Logan to Gold Coast faster rail project. The rail line south of Kuraby is only one track in each direction, with many slow curves. Gold Coast Express trains have no way to overtake all stops Beenleigh trains.
The current setup slows down maximum speeds and limits the total number of trains that can be run. The faster rail project will expand the corridor from two tracks to four, and straighten out some of the slow curves.
This will ultimately segregate Gold Coast trains and give them a clear run through Logan and into Brisbane.

These projects will better connect the Gold and Sunshine Coasts to Brisbane, will relieve pressure on the overloaded Bruce and Pacific Highways, support the shift to net zero emissions and aid the movement of people across SEQ for the 2032 Olympics.

Finally, its important to acknowledge the need for Toowoomba to also be included in this 'faster rail fever' to complete the regional vision.
The coming inland rail project will provide new tunnels bypassing the currently slow range sections up to Toowoomba.
With careful design, freight trains and regular passenger services could share these tunnels, slashing the journey time, potentially meaning Toowoomba and Brisbane could be linked in under 90 minutes.

References:

1. Budget 2022-23 https://budget.gov.au/index.htm

2. Rail Express Budget boost for rail infrastructure https://www.railexpress.com.au/17-9-billion-budget-boost-for-australian-infrastructure/

3. Caboolture to Maroochydore Corridor Study  https://www.tmr.qld.gov.au/projects/caboolture-to-maroochydore-corridor-study

4. Logan and Gold Coast Faster Rail https://www.tmr.qld.gov.au/projects/logan-and-gold-coast-faster-rail

Robert Dow
Administration
admin@backontrack.org
RAIL Back On Track https://backontrack.org

[#Metro]

Would it be possible to move Altandi closer to Pinelands Shopping Centre? It would be much better used then.

One option would be to do cut-and-cover underneath Beenleigh road. It could also be possible to merge
Sunnybank and Banoon stations. This would also get rid of the Stones Rd level crossing which did have a crash incident between a BCC bus and QR train (https://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=2108.0)

A new combined station could be set on Jackson/Beenleigh Road. This alignment with a local arterial would allow buses to travel directly to the station from Algester in a beeline for the train station.

Even better - a short section of road could be added from Jackson Rd roundabout to connect with Troughton Road, which would allow the bus to continue after dropping pax at the rail station, to drive right up to QEII Hospital and Griffith University then into the busway station. Both would be big demand pullers so it would be a good route.

      

[ozbob]

^

https://www.tmr.qld.gov.au/projects/altandi-train-station-park-n-ride-expansion-business-case

[#Metro]

https://www.tmr.qld.gov.au/projects/altandi-train-station-park-n-ride-expansion-business-case

Well, there is a stranded investment! Clearly, if the car park is full start charging for access like Perth does.

This is where massive amounts of PT funding is going - on car parks and not actual services!

[ozbob]

Where is the 10 year rail strategy?   

[ozbob]

Queensland Parliament

https://documents.parliament.qld.gov.au/tableOffice/questionsAnswers/2022/514-2022.pdf

Question on Notice
No. 514
Asked on 25 May 2022

MR L MILLAR ASKED MINISTER FOR TRANSPORT AND MAIN ROADS (HON M BAILEY)

QUESTION:

With reference to the Logan and Gold Coast Faster Rail proposal—

Will the Minister advise the time it will take for a Gold Coast train to travel between Beenleigh
station and Altandi station once all elements of the project are delivered?

ANSWER:

I thank the Member for Gregory for the question.

The Logan and Gold Coast Faster Rail (Kuraby to Beenleigh) project will complement Cross River
Rail by addressing track and rail system constraints south of the tunnel, towards Logan and the
Gold Coast.

Currently, all services on the Gold Coast and Beenleigh line are constrained by single tracks in
each direction. This leads to a pinch point between Kuraby and Beenleigh where express services
compete with all-stops services, resulting in some all-stops services being delayed so that
express services can pass. These constraints also prevent more peak services from being added.
The section of the alignment between Kuraby and Beenleigh is also amongst the oldest on the
SEQ network with sharp curves requiring trains to slow down to 40 km/h at certain points, slowing
express and all-stops services.

By removing sharp curves from the alignment and doubling track capacity from two to four tracks,
the Kuraby to Beenleigh project aims to allow the free movement of all trains on the Gold Coast
and Beenleigh line so that services can run more frequently and more reliably and with greater
speed.

More frequent services also means less time waiting at stations for customers. The project will
improve rail station accessibility by upgrading nine stations, relieve road congestion by removing
five level crossings, add around 950 park 'n' ride spaces and provide new active travel paths
connecting to stations and suburbs along the 20-kilometre section of upgraded tracks.

While it is anticipated that the project will result in travel time improvements, the key benefits will
be the increased frequency and reliability for services on the Gold Coast and Beenleigh line. The
exact travel time savings from the project will be determined at the point of timetable redesign.

[#Metro]

Will trains have the ability to terminate and turnback at Kuraby? Might be a good point for 4 platforms at this station and possibly space for trains to turn back.

[HappyTrainGuy]

Already do.

[#Metro]

I am aware they already turn back at Kuraby, I was thinking more along the lines of 4 platforms at Kuraby and termination sidings that does not block any lines.

[HappyTrainGuy]

I wouldn't bother. There's no real benefit in doing so.

[ozbob]

In Queensland --> Right on track: Brisbane Olympics drives Gold Coast rail link expansion

While the political bickering over the organisation of the Brisbane 2032 Olympics continues to hog the headlines, the transport infrastructure associated with the event is quietly taking shape.

The Palaszczuk Government has taken a further step towards building its $2.6 billion Logan Gold Coast Faster Rail project, formally designating the expanded corridor needed to duplicate and straighten the existing track between Kuraby and Beenleigh stations.

Transport and Main Roads bureaucrats detailed the route the corridor will take, designating a 19.74 kms ribbon of land between the Beenleigh Road Overpass and the Beenleigh Connection Road as "railway land". ...

[ozbob]

Logan and Gold Coast Faster Rail - Project update September 2022

LGCFR_newsletter_sep22.pdf