Cross River Rail Project

[Fares_Fair]

LOL, I am reading in all the papers with statements like

As train services begin to return to normal, attention has now turned to how a single power line could bring down such a major part of the transport network.

If this same fault were to happen in London, Paris or Toronto, the impacts would be limited to that specific line and cascading failure would not occur. These cities, while they run services to the CBD, don't have a single bundle of lines and a central core. If something goes wrong, pax use the other lines.

This also implies only one solution - to fix the problem and lessen the impact, isn't just more maintainence, funds etc... you have to change the shape of the network and decentralise it. And how do you do that - CROSS RIVER RAIL.

Which is about 3-4 years away even if IA approved funding this Qtr and Qld govt borrows from the Chinese to pay for it.

In the mean time the two routes through the city should be upgraded to be fully independent as far as IT, power and other common facilities are concerned. Probably completed within 6-18mths and would provide ongoing reliability regardless of future extensions. Just because they are in same corridore doesn't mean they cannot operate as though they are not. The exception being massive derailment, flooding etc.

In the mean time, is this the first time this or related happened in how many years? If its say 1:10 year mean time to failure frequency the best option would probably come under "do nothing". Next time might be middle of night or Sunday morning?

regards
Shane

It last occurred on 1 February, 2012, this month.
Remember the pigeon incident, took out the entire network, that was Thursday September 22, 2011.
Becoming more common.

Regards,
Fares_Fair,

[#Metro]

It last occurred on 1 February, 2012, this month.
Remember the pigeon incident, took out the entire network, that was Thursday September 22, 2011.
Becoming more common.

Yes, but this just demonstrates my point about the geometry of 'everything to the centre' convergent networks
versus decentralised networks. A pidgeon isn't a maintainence issue! A pidgeon doesn't check the maintainence budget,
who is in power - labor or liberal, blah blah...

And the entire network shut down due to the pidgeon PLUS because of the geometry of the system and the location of the fault within the critical core...

Change the geometry and you will get a different impact! - A much lesser one.
More reason to build CRR, in addition to the capacity benefits. Indeed, the wilbur smith plan 1970 had the current merivale bridge as a redundancy measure...

Doesn't matter if other issues are present - if a hippopotamus fell out of a plane and onto a train at Roma Street, the entire network would shut down too, just simply due to how a fault, ANY fault within the core section will impact the entire network due to the geometry of the system.

[Fares_Fair]

It last occurred on 1 February, 2012, this month.
Remember the pigeon incident, took out the entire network, that was Thursday September 22, 2011.
Becoming more common.

Yes, but this just demonstrates my point about the geometry of 'everything to the centre' convergent networks
versus decentralised networks. A pidgeon isn't a maintainence issue! A pidgeon doesn't check the maintainence budget,
who is in power - labor or liberal, blah blah...

And the entire network shut down due to the pidgeon PLUS because of the geometry of the system and the location of the fault within the critical core...

Change the geometry and you will get a different impact! - A much lesser one.
More reason to build CRR, in addition to the capacity benefits. Indeed, the wilbur smith plan 1970 had the current merivale bridge as a redundancy measure...

Doesn't matter if other issues are present - if a hippopotamus fell out of a plane and onto a train at Roma Street, the entire network would shut down too, just simply due to how a fault, ANY fault within the core section will impact the entire network due to the geometry of the system.

Don't doubt what you are saying TT,

Problem is the Qld Government expects the Commonwealth Government to pick up 100% of the tab for CRR until the state gets back into surplus in 2014/15.
and that surplus is also highly questionable, and most likely ephemeral.

THAT is the big problem.

Regards,
Fares_Fair.

[#Metro]

Oh well. Such is life!

Ugh, I am not looking forward to the LNP's cross river rail faux solution will be. It will have to pop out within the next 3 weeks or so. What are the chances it will be something absurd and crazy? Time will tell!

[SurfRail]

Cross River Rail won't be operating until 2020 at the earliest it would seem, so any excuses the State has to offer about not being able to pay for it are bunk.  Resource revenues will keep propping things up until then and we will be back in black, particularly if we gut some less cost-effective things like persistent upgrades (other than basic safety upgrades) to major arterial roads.

It only really matters that the Commonwealth provide the initial tranche of funding to get it started in the next 3-4 years.  Private sector capital, and State (maybe even BCC once they are both the same political flavour) resources will take care of the rest, just as they have for GCRT.

[Mr X]

Oh well. Such is life!

Ugh, I am not looking forward to the LNP's cross river rail faux solution will be. It will have to pop out within the next 3 weeks or so. What are the chances it will be something absurd and crazy? Time will tell!

If it's anything like this, can I claim royalty payments?

[paulg]

Hi all,

I support CRR 100%, and think it is the only true solution to the capacity crunch.

However, if the LNP is determined to find a "CRR Lite" solution, it seems to me that there are better options than the Cleveland Non-Solution.

e.g. here is a "CRR Lite", with bridge crossing the river and a central tunnel via Roma St and Central, connecting with a quadruplicated Exhibition Loop:



Would be much cheaper than both the Cleveland Solution and CRR - both because of the cross river bridge and much shorter tunnel.

Cheers, Paul

[O_128]

Pual G while the idea is good it seems to be a band aid solution. To do this you would need to at least quad to park road and fix the park road junction. Easily another billion. Digging out a station at central would also be an absolute nightmare, that station alone would cost an astronomical amount.

It also does nothing to address woolongabba

[Mr X]

There's a lot of development around Central, would be quite expensive to resume a lot of it and redirect Turbot Street.

[ozbob]

The RACQ have rolled out a campaign for the election.

Interesting -  Cross River Rail is on their list ..

http://www.racq.com.au/promotions/motoring-matters

RACQ Target Ten Queensland
tra nspor t pro jec ts:
1. Bruce Highway – Cooroy to Curra Sections A, C
and D, including Gympie Bypass, to address safety,
capacity and flood immunity
2. Bruce Highway – Yeppen Floodplain at Rockhampton,
upgrade to improve flood immunity, freight efficiency
and capacity
3. Warrego Highway – construct second Toowoomba
Range Crossing to address capacity and safety
4. Gateway Motorway North – Nudgee to Bruce Highway,
additional lanes
5. Pacific Motorway – Nerang to Tugun, additional lanes
6. Warrego Highway – Toowoomba to Miles, additional
overtaking lanes and rehabilitate and strengthen
pavement to address safety, capacity and flood
immunity
7. Bruce Highway – southern approach to Cairns,
upgrade to improve capacity, safety and flood immunity
8. Bruce Highway – Sarina to Mackay, additional
overtaking lanes and ultimately duplicate to address
safety and capacity
9. Cross River Rail – Brisbane
10. Brisbane railway level crossing upgrade program:
Telegraph Road (Bald Hills), Boundary Road
(Coopers Plains), Newman Road (Geebung), South
Pine Road (Alderley), Cavendish Road (Coorparoo)

http://www.racq.com.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0020/86150/RACQ_Motoring_Matters_V5.pdf  page 6

[Stillwater]

Page 9 of the RACQ document includes as priority projects for the Sunshine Coast rail duplication between Beerburrum and Nambour.

[Fares_Fair]

Page 9 of the RACQ document includes as priority projects for the Sunshine Coast rail duplication between Beerburrum and Nambour.

Yesss !


Regards,
Fares_Fair.

[ozbob]

From the Brisbanetimes click here!

Big-ticket rail project 'ready to proceed'

Big-ticket rail project 'ready to proceed'
Daniel Hurst
March 1, 2012 - 5:25AM

Campbell Newman insists he would not turn down federal funds to deliver the multi-billion-dollar Brisbane cross-river rail project, but would still want to rework the plans to find savings.

The Queensland Liberal National Party leader's comments came as the federal government's advisory body, Infrastructure Australia, confirmed it now believed the flagship underground rail project was "ready to proceed", meaning a decision on funding could be imminent.

The state government also yesterday revealed it had cut the expected cost of the project by a billion dollars, to just over $7 billion, following design changes believed to include reductions to the size of underground train station cavities.
Mr Newman, who last year denounced the state government's underground rail plan as an "$8 billion unfunded fantasy" that would never proceed as planned, yesterday indicated he was open to a federal funding offer when asked whether he would turn down cash.

"If the federal government, which have been incredibly wasteful in spending our money as well, put money on the table, I guarantee to them and to the people of Queensland, indeed taxpayers across Australia that an LNP government under my leadership will spend what's needed to fix the rail capacity issue," he said.

"We'll take any money gratefully from them but we will deliver the outcome more efficiently and economically."

The cross-river rail project, which would include several new stations including underground stops at Boggo Road, Woolloongabba, Albert Street and Roma Street, has previously failed to pass the hurdle for federal funding.

In June 2010, Infrastructure Australia found the cross-river rail project had "real potential" but was not yet ready to proceed.

In June 2011, the federal advisory body acknowledged extensive work had been done since the last submission and upgraded the project's status to "threshold", meaning it was still not quite ready to go ahead but the nod was a step closer.

The Infrastructure Australia board was to consider the project again at a key meeting last week, as reported by brisbanetimes.com.au.

Yesterday, Infrastructure Australia national infrastructure co-ordinator Michael Deegan said the organisation was pleased with the progress made by the Queensland government in the planning for "this important rail link".

"Infrastructure Australia's assessment of the project over the past few years has seen it progressively move up the 'pipeline' of projects in the national infrastructure priority list," he said.

"Last year, Infrastructure Australia assessed the project as being at the 'threshold' for an investment decision.

"The Queensland government has undertaken further work on the project, and I have recommended to Infrastructure Australia that it be rated as 'ready to proceed'.

"Infrastructure Australia has since taken an in-principle decision, subject to final advice, that the project be rated as 'ready to proceed'."

Mr Deegan said Infrastructure Australia was finalising its assessment and advice to the federal government on the cross-river rail project, which he labelled as "an important project for the development of southeast Queensland and the nation".

"This project has the potential to transform the development of Brisbane and southeast Queensland. It could be the catalyst for balanced development in the region for some decades to come," he said.

Mr Deegan said Infrastructure Australia would provide advice to the federal government about what priority cross-river rail should have, compared with other projects around the country that had also been assessed as ready to proceed.

Mr Newman said it was possible the federal government would announce an election-eve funding deal in a bid to help Premier Anna Bligh.

"We'll see what federal Labor does to bail Anna Bligh out," he said.

"Clearly there'll be some of that sort of stuff going on, you know a bit of behind the scenes we'll help you out of a jam, better help them out.

"What we'll do is we'll commit to spend that money wisely and far more efficiently."

Mr Newman, who has previously suggested cut-price measures such as running trains closer together and building extra platforms at South Bank and South Brisbane, has vowed to release a specific cross-river rail policy in the lead up to the March 24 election.

Robert Dow, from lobby group Rail Back on Track, said the inner-city rail woes on Tuesday morning showed why a second CBD river crossing was required, providing flexibility and capacity across the southeast Queensland network.

"If we had had that second rail route [on Tuesday] the effects of that core meltdown would have been greatly mitigated," he said.

Mr Dow welcomed the "ready to proceed" verdict as a good sign in the push for federal funding.

"Now it's a matter for the federal government and how they prioritise the funding for the various projects, but they'll certainly take a lot of notice of IA's recommendations," he said.

Transport Minister Annastacia Palaszczuk told 612 ABC Brisbane yesterday the state government was strongly committed to the project.

"We just have to wait and see," she said of the prospect of securing federal funding.

Ms Palaszczuk said the project could be delivered for about a billion dollars less than originally thought.

LNP transport spokesman Scott Emerson said his party had believed the project was "unaffordable and overpriced" and would look at cross-river rail and alternatives if it formed government.

"The LNP has been saying all along $8.3 billion is a rolled-gold, Rolls Royce version of a solution," he told 612 ABC Brisbane.

"We think we can do it cheaper. What the minister has just announced today is it can be done cheaper, exactly what the LNP has said."

Ms Bligh has described the flagship cross-river rail project as critical in resolving looming capacity constraints on southeast Queensland's passenger rail network.

In its January 2011 post-floods budget update, the state pushed back its proposed construction schedule by two years, with completion now slated for around 2012.

Read more: http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/state-election-2012/bigticket-rail-project-ready-to-proceed-20120229-1u3c0.html

[ozbob]

1 March 2012

SEQ: Cross River Rail is ready to proceed

RAIL Back On Track (http://backontrack.org) a web based community support group for rail and public transport and an advocate for public transport passengers has welcomed confirmation that Cross River Rail has now reached the 'ready to proceed' status as assessed by Infrastructure Australia (1).

Robert Dow, Spokesman for RAIL Back On Track said:

"RAIL Back On Track congratulates the Cross River Rail project development team on the confirmation that the project is now at the ready to proceed threshold."

"As we have long argued, Cross River Rail is a critical project for Queensland and Australia.  It will transform the rail network and provide the opportunity for capacity and frequency improvements on all lines, and improve redundancy on the rail network."

"As we saw with last Tuesday's total transport meltdown, when the train system can't cope, people flood buses which then fill, and that spills over to the road network bringing more congestion. The problem is that the present geometry of the network where all lines come together and are funnelled through a single core -  Roma Street, Central, Fortitude Valley and Bowen Hills - makes the network fault intolerant and vulnerable to cascading failures. Cross River Rail is the ultimate fix for this, as it will allow trains to bypass the critical four core stations."

"Cross River Rail is a state-building project. It will unlock the entire network and allow the region to have frequent services like Perth, WA already has, and to grow and new developments for affordable housing in places like Yarrabilba to have public transport."

"RAIL Back On Track members are wary of 'too good to be true' schemes such as the 'Cleveland Solution', which dissapointingly engaged in what we have come to call 'cost-only analysis', which unlike reputable and proper cost-benefit analysis, is based purely on comparing costs and ignoring any comparative appraisal of the benefits. Not only do we believe the Cleveland Solution to be undercosted, but even if it were cheaper, it would also have lower benefits too."

"Bipartisan support for Cross River Rail is now needed (2). Cross River Rail will deliver a positive economic and transport future for Queensland.  Even the RACQ the peak motoring body in Queensland acknowledges the importance of Cross River Rail (3)."

References:

1.  http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/state-election-2012/bigticket-rail-project-ready-to-proceed-20120229-1u3c0.html

2.  Cross River Rail bipartisan support is the way forward  http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=7523.0

3.  http://www.racq.com.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0020/86150/RACQ_Motoring_Matters_V5.pdf  page 6

Contact:

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

[mufreight]

Well they can further reduce the costs and improve the redundency capability of the system overall by moving the entrance portals back up to a point between Yeerongpilly and Yeronga which then restores the access to the Tennyson line to and from the CRR

[Fares_Fair]

Last line..
Completion around 2012, that has to be a typo in the Brisbane Times story.
Isn't it 2021?

Regards,
Fares-Fair.

[ozbob]

yes, 2021 ...

[Fares_Fair]

I was expecting an announcement on funding for CRR.
Is that the next step?

This is a good news announcement, but the big question hinges on the money.
How much, when and from whom?

Regards,
Fares_Fair.

[STB]

I hope that there is some legal attachment to this expected money from the Feds that it must be built for CRR as designed.  I'd hate to see the LNP try and use it for their own little ideas, eg: underground freeway anyone - like Clem 7 but not.

[Mr X]

The LNP's bandaid solutions of South Brisbane terminators and running trains at tighter headways will only decrease system reliability.
I hope that they are not planning to use IA's funding for these solutions + any CRR alternative (cleveland type non solutions) as that money should ONLY be for CRR and not any other project.
Any CRR alternative would take another 3-5 years or so of planning, community consultation and design to reach the current "ready to proceed" status of CRR, only compounding our rail woes.

MR Newman should drop the "alternative" line whenever he speaks of CRR. It's critical infrastructure that is ready to proceed and if fully funded by IA, he should get a grip and BUILD IT.

[dwb]

When qld tenders the project the the private construct tender companies with review the design looking for savings and efficiencies. This is standard practice, I'd assume LNP could do the same, just like the project team has already been doing.

[Golliwog]

Do love Scott Emerson's line that the LNP said $8.3B was gold plated and that the new price of ~$7B shows that the LNP was right. If that's the case now, what else do they expect to cut from it, and what do they think it would do to any funds the Fed's promise?

[Gazza]

They could get rid of that  Southern Cross Station style wavy roof they want to do over Roma St's above ground platforms. I reckon that's a good $50 million at least.

[#Metro]

Insert Quote
Do love Scott Emerson's line that the LNP said $8.3B was gold plated and that the new price of ~$7B shows that the LNP was right. If that's the case now, what else do they expect to cut from it, and what do they think it would do to any funds the Fed's promise?

Maybe they will cut the trains and put in buses! Thought of that one?

[Fares_Fair]

How long until the level of funding will be announced?

Regards,
Fares_Fair.

[Golliwog]

How long until the level of funding will be announced?

Regards,
Fares_Fair.

Most likely not until after IA finish writing up their recommendations which I believe they are still doing. After that, probably at a conveniant point in the media/election cycle...

[Stillwater]

Mr Newman must be very careful in pushing the line that an LNP government will find further savings by reworking the CRR proposal.  If he can make savings, they are savings that accrue to the federal government (which is likely to fund the project), and not to the state.  Or perhaps he is hoping to find savings that would reduce any money the feds hope the state might contribute.

If Mr Newman is frugal, the federal government will have every right to expect the savings will be handed back to Canberra.

Should Mr Newman be planning to make savings on CRR and redirect that saved sum to a Brisbane metro, or an upgrade of the Doomben Line, then he is dreaming.  Any use of money trimmed from CRR would need to be approved by IA, and any additional project would need to be worked up in the same way that CRR was.  Any savings would not be a 'windfall' to Queensland, to spend at will.  The windfall would have to be returned to Canberra.

[Gazza]

If it so happens that the state is co-contributing, then savings could equally come off Qld's portion only right? Or are they split?

[Stillwater]

In circumstances where Qld was co-contributing, then any savings would be proportionate.  Say a 5 per cent saving could be achieved overall, the 5 per cent would apply to the federal government portion and the same to the qld government portion.  Queensland, however, could not lay claim to the fed's 5 per cent saving.

[somebody]

I am sure there is no way this project will proceed without a state contribution.

[#Metro]

Campbell Newman is talking out of his hat.

100% of the cost of CRR is coming from 'ATM' Australia

It doesn't matter if he makes it cheaper. It will have zero effect because the ATM is paying for it.

[Jonas Jade]

Campbell Newman is talking out of his hat.

100% of the cost of CRR is coming from 'ATM' Australia

It doesn't matter if he makes it cheaper. It will have zero effect because the ATM is paying for it.

This isn't necessarily true. The government said they won't contribute until they have a surplus.

[somebody]

Campbell Newman is talking out of his hat.

100% of the cost of CRR is coming from 'ATM' Australia

It doesn't matter if he makes it cheaper. It will have zero effect because the ATM is paying for it.

This isn't necessarily true. The government said they won't contribute until they have a surplus.

And then why should the Feds contribute?  It's pretty rich.

[#Metro]

This isn't necessarily true. The government said they won't contribute until they have a surplus.

Do you have a reference?

[Fares_Fair]

This isn't necessarily true. The government said they won't contribute until they have a surplus.

Do you have a reference?

Yes, in correspondence from Andrew Fraser, Deputy Premier and Paul Lucas to the Federal Government, dated 11 November, 2011.
SW has posted the link to it.
http://www.dlgp.qld.gov.au/resources/infrastructure-funding/letter-transmittal-minister-albanese.pdf


Read Financial considerations on p5, para's 3 and 4 in particular.

[O_128]

Campbell Newman is talking out of his hat.

100% of the cost of CRR is coming from 'ATM' Australia

It doesn't matter if he makes it cheaper. It will have zero effect because the ATM is paying for it.

This isn't necessarily true. The government said they won't contribute until they have a surplus.

And then why should the Feds contribute?  It's pretty rich.

Why shouldn't they?

I really hope IA gives the cash and CRR ca be built without newman changing it.

[SurfRail]

And then why should the Feds contribute?  It's pretty rich.

Because it's a project of national significance.  A budget surplus (or effectively a balance budget with the surplus properly allocated) isn't necessarily going to be able to fund this.

The correspondence makes it quite clear that IA is only being asked for seed capital to start it and then to substantially fund it.  There is no way known the State would not contribute to it.

There will no doubt be private sector funding too.  GCRT involves quite a substantial chunk of private equity (which people seem to keep missing), and it is also BCR positive.

Then there is BCC.  Once the political divide is bridged and the conservatives are running both levels, maybe they can be encouraged to cough up something through a differential levy on properties in the CBD (fat chance though - BCC is massively in debt and obssessed with its bus network rather than the PT network taken as a whole).

[#Metro]

Cross river rail has a BCR of around 1.30, a little low in my opinion. BCR is not the only metric to be used though - an public transport promoting e-mail to everyone in SEQ might be cheap but it would also have far lower benefits, could show an identical BCR to Cross River Rail, for example. We need a measure that describes the magnitude of the benefits as well...

So, the NPV should also be taken into account - which is around $9 billion from what the letter says.

So any competing project must also not only have a similar or better BCR but also manage to generate around $9 billion dollars worth of benefits in the form of travel time savings etc.

Does the Cleveland Solution generate $9 billion in benefits.... doubt it....

I'm sure further information will come to light as time goes by... what is the LNP's alternative plan?

[Fares_Fair]

Cross river rail has a BCR of around 1.30, a little low in my opinion. BCR is not the only metric to be used though - an public transport promoting e-mail to everyone in SEQ might be cheap but it would also have far lower benefits, could show an identical BCR to Cross River Rail, for example. We need a measure that describes the magnitude of the benefits as well...

So, the NPV should also be taken into account - which is around $9 billion from what the letter says.

So any competing project must also not only have a similar or better BCR but also manage to generate around $9 billion dollars worth of benefits in the form of travel time savings etc.

Does the Cleveland Solution generate $9 billion in benefits.... doubt it....

I'm sure further information will come to light as time goes by... what is the LNP's alternative plan?

To be fair the 'Cleveland Solution' was a stop gap measure to get past the 2016 congestion limit wasn't it?
Not a total alternative to CRR?

[ozbob]

To be fair, the "Cleveland Solution" is a non-sense and will actually cost almost as much as CRR with only a fraction of the benefit ....  the rest of the network including the Sunshine Coast line still stranded ...

Tim Fischer was interviewed on 612 ABC Brisbane last evening on a wide range interview on rail.  Interesting points made including this  in effect ' Cross River Rail should have been built 20 years ago ... '


Get a grip guys.  IA was set up to facilitate the funding processes exactly for  the type of project CRR is.  Get with it or get out ...

The last hurdle has been achieved.  An OUTSTANDING effort by all on the Cross River Rail development team, a process that has taken around 5 years ...

It is now a funding decision based on IA recommendations.  If it doesn't get up from here, Queensland will never have a budget surplus as the cost of transport failure climbs exponentially in costs ..