Cross River Rail Project

[Jonno]

I have discussed public transport and rail with him directly and he sees it as a community service.  He is a roads first bloke through and through.  Any mention of successful cities, that we discuss, and the discussion stops with claim's of number fabricating.

[Golliwog]

I have discussed public transport and rail with him directly and he sees it as a community service.  He is a roads first bloke through and through.  Any mention of successful cities, that we discuss, and the discussion stops with claim's of number fabricating.

Number fabricating?

[O_128]

I have discussed public transport and rail with him directly and he sees it as a community service.  He is a roads first bloke through and through.  Any mention of successful cities, that we discuss, and the discussion stops with claim's of number fabricating.

So the station in piccadilly London that was so full I had to wait 20 mins in a line to get on a train running ever 90 seconds it was that busy, yet what was easily 5000 people going through the station in 20mins was not real??

[Jonno]

Apparent not in his eyes.  His road blinkers are very very big!

[SurfRail]

I think we need to sit Campbell in a room with Bob, Fares_Fair and colinw (at a minimum).  That would be fun.

[Jonno]

No doubt he would end the discussion when he got uncomfortable, out of his depth and unable to handle the truth...just like his media interviews!!!!

[colinw]

Apparent not in his eyes.  His road blinkers are very very big!

Let me get this straight - you have had communication with Campbell where he outright denies the benefit of urban rail and claims the figures backing successful rail systems are fabricated
That sounds like the kind of thinking behind some of those extreme anti-transit "think tanks" in the US.

Mind you, I have encountered exactly the same kind of statements from a currently sitting LNP member who I corresponded with on the topic of LRT.

In your opinion, is there going to be ANY kind of CRR type project with Campbell as Premier?

[Jonno]

Apparent not in his eyes.  His road blinkers are very very big!

Let me get this straight - you have had communication with Campbell where he outright denies the benefit of urban rail and claims the figures backing successful rail systems are fabricated
That sounds like the kind of thinking behind some of those extreme anti-transit "think tanks" in the US.

Mind you, I have encountered exactly the same kind of statements from a currently sitting LNP member who I corresponded with on the topic of LRT.

In your opinion, is there going to be ANY kind of CRR type project with Campbell as Premier?

No.

[colinw]

Explains the complete absence of any LNP policies with respect to the Sunshine Coast Line duplication or the NCL for freight.  Their answer: duplicate the Bruce Highway the whole darn way to Cairns.  Same thing west on the Main Line.  Toowoomba Range Crossing, what Toowoomba Range Crossing?  Oh, that's right, we'll build a new ROAD over the range.

At this rate it appears the only rail upgrade the LNP is interested in peddling is the higher frequency service on the FG line to pork barrel the electorate of Ashgrove.

Transferring to our Melbourne office sure seems attractive at this point. Trams at the front door of the office, and an easy walk to Spencer St, ahem, Southern Cross Station.

[Arnz]

If it's true, at this point I'd personally hope that Springborg or Nicholls mounts a leadership challenge against Newman (assuming he gets the seat of Ashgrove) within 18 months.

[BrizCommuter]

http://brizcommuter.blogspot.com.au/2012/03/can-do-newman-cant-do-cross-river-rail.html
What we've been fearing all along!

[SteelPan]

I don't think Newman is against CRR - he is simply not prepared to make an ill-informed and unnecessary commitment, to a MAJOR piece of infrastructure, until he, as Premier and the Commonwealth Govt, as a contributor of funding, are fully across all the issues - that simply is NOT the case at this time.

As has been said on a number of occasions, an absolute commitment to CRR is NOT a requirement for this election.

I personally have no real fear for the future of CRR at this time.  

[SurfRail]

Transferring to our Melbourne office sure seems attractive at this point. Trams at the front door of the office, and an easy walk to Spencer St, ahem, Southern Cross Station.

Wash your mouth out!  Everyone knows there's only one Southern Cross Station (I visited it in January)  :

http://maps.google.com.au/maps?q=southern+cross+railway+station+wa&hl=en&ll=-31.2186,119.308176&spn=0.036921,0.084543&sll=-31.234124,119.327531&sspn=0.018458,0.042272&t=h&gl=au&hq=southern+cross+railway+station+wa&z=14

[SteelPan]

Might I make a suggestion to Ozbob and my fellow members of BOT.  (No doubt this matter is indeed already well in hand)

1) Next week, BOT issue a brief press release, congratulating the winner of the campaign and those leaving existing office - whatever the outcome may be.

2) The Release includes a statement stating BOT's desire to work with the new administration, to advance further a balanced PT sector for SE Qld.  Including, working toward the long-term goal of increasing heavy-rail capacity through the Brisbane CBD, which is critical to the overall growth of Greater Brisbane's increasingly strained rail network in which the community has already invested billions of dollars.

3) BOT form a delegation to meet with the new Premier, Treasurer and Transport Minister in the near future, to discuss the long-term development of CRR options [and other important PT matters].

(optional 4) invite the new Premier to address a gathering of BOT members to have an open and honest discussion regards the future of SE Qld's heavy rail/PT network and possible major projects).

As I said, these matters are no-doubt already well in hand and I'm not trying to stick my nose in, but I believe the above approach keeps things positive and would be a good and frank way to engage with any new administration.

Best wishes to all.  

[Stillwater]

Agree. 

[SurfRail]

Treasury in particular is important.  They are the ones who generally put a clog on everything, and they will be under the pump more than ever when the LNP get in.

[#Metro]

I have a question:

WHERE IS NEIL SCALES???

[BrizCommuter]

I don't think Newman is against CRR - he is simply not prepared to make an ill-informed and unnecessary commitment, to a MAJOR piece of infrastructure, until he, as Premier and the Commonwealth Govt, as a contributor of funding, are fully across all the issues - that simply is NOT the case at this time.

As has been said on a number of occasions, an absolute commitment to CRR is NOT a requirement for this election.

I personally have no real fear for the future of CRR at this time.  

BrizCommuter bets you a freddo frog, that Can't Do will kill off CRR in it's current form.

[colinw]

I don't know.  Put it this way, I have grave fears for CRR under Newman, but can't read the man well enough to be sure how things will pan out with him in office.

I'd say the best thing to do is take a chill pill and follow Steelpan's very constructive suggestion above.

One thing for sure, for Cross River rail capacity doing nothing is not an option. Only the most hard core of anti public transport parties would do that. I do not think the LNP is by nature anti public transport. After all it was the Nats & Libs who delivered us an electric rail system in Brisbane (albeit with seed funding from the Whitlam Government), otherwise our situation today would be more like Adelaide.

I don't think Newman could possibly be enough of a boofhead to think Brisbane could do without a functional rail system.

Just wish I could read the politics here. With the Beattie & Bligh Governments at least I had some sense of what they stood for and what the longer term plans are, but with the LNP I just can't figure out what their vision (if any) is.

One thing I am confident of is that any sensible (re)evaluation will come up with something much like CRR. Every study since Wilbur Smith has done so.

[somebody]

It certainly seems like Campbell Newman's opposition to CRR has been softening.

[Mr X]

I personally think he likes the idea but he is forced to reject it because of the state's finances.

Probably under a lot of pressure from the party to tow the party line and not say anything that could risk re-election. If he said he supports it then big questions would be asked about how he proposes funding it, while at the same time achieving a budget surplus.

[SurfRail]

It could simply be the case they want to avoid the fairly idiotic policies of the last election (eg adding extra trailers to the IMU160s and SMU260s by taking them off trains yet to be built at the time).  The LNP as a party tend not to "get" public transport, so the less they say the better for their chances - then they can just unleash the public service on the problem.

[somebody]

It certainly seems like Campbell Newman's opposition to CRR has been softening.

Has he ever actually opposed it in principle?

He's commented on its unaffordability.  Said he wanted to turn trains around at South Brisbane.

[curator49]

I am still not sure where the space is available at South Brisbane Station for extra platform/s and the ability to turn back trains from South Brisbane that are proposed to terminate there.

The LNP want to "turn back the clock". As early as 1885 there was talk of linking the then Stanley Street Station with Roma Street Station via a new bridge. Instead the Melbourne Street Extension was built to what is now South Brisbane Station which opened in December 1891. Trains terminated here until November 1978 when the Merivale Bridge was opened. Up until 1969 passengers would disembark from the terminating trains to either catch a tram outside the station or walk across the Victoria Bridge to get to work or go shopping in the city or Fortitude Valley.

Imagine the chaos that will ensue with people arriving today on a train terminating at South Brisbane to either catch a bus from the Cultural Centre bus station or walk across the Victoria Bridge into the city. The volume of people will be far more than that seen in 1891 or even in 1969. I can envisage people wanting to catch the "through" trains which will make these services over-crowded. Just recently some trains were terminated at South Brisbane due to a fault at Roma Street. The platforms at South Brisbane just barely coped.

I think the LNP have given themselves an "escape clause" on CRR however (I hope). They say they are "going to review the CRR project for cheaper options". Perhaps that review may still come out in favour of CRR. The LNP can then say they have had a comprehensive review of the project and by "tweaking" this and that they can do it cheaper. Wishful thinking?

[SurfRail]

I am still not sure where the space is available at South Brisbane Station for extra platform/s and the ability to turn back trains from South Brisbane that are proposed to terminate there.

The ICRCS documents show a proposal (including maps) of how you could have 4 tracks between South Bank and Roma Street.  It was largely ignored because this option costs around $4bn and delivers virtually none of the benefits of CRR except for actually providing another crossing of the river.  From what I could see there was no actual work done on what happens once your 2 extra tracks (to be located south of the current Roma St platforms and underground) once they continue further north, so the cost could be even greater - either with more tunnels or by jamming more trains into the existing suburban track pair.

[somebody]

Another possibility is to just get on another train.  There's enough people getting off at Sth Bris & Sth Bank to justify it in theory.

[colinw]

"South Brisbane, South Brisbane Station.  PassengersCustomers for Roma St, Central, Fortitude Valley and Bowen Hills please change here.  Customers for the Rosewood, Ipswich, Springfield, Ferny Grove, Nambour, Caboolture, Kippa-Ring, Shorncliffe, Airport and Doomben lines please change here and catch an onward service."

Sod it, I'll drive.

[Jonno]

"South Brisbane, South Brisbane Station.  PassengersCustomers for Roma St, Central, Fortitude Valley and Bowen Hills please change here.  Customers for the Rosewood, Ipswich, Springfield, Ferny Grove, Nambour, Caboolture, Kippa-Ring, Shorncliffe, Airport and Doomben lines please change here and catch an onward service."

Sod it, I'll drive.

Come on!! For Public Transport close enough is good enough.  Smart people drive that why we have to build so many roads.

[SteelPan]

I don't think Newman is against CRR - he is simply not prepared to make an ill-informed and unnecessary commitment, to a MAJOR piece of infrastructure, until he, as Premier and the Commonwealth Govt, as a contributor of funding, are fully across all the issues - that simply is NOT the case at this time.

As has been said on a number of occasions, an absolute commitment to CRR is NOT a requirement for this election.

I personally have no real fear for the future of CRR at this time.  

BrizCommuter bets you a freddo frog, that Can't Do will kill off CRR in it's current form.

Well, killing it off in its present form may be a bad move [in general terms, I too think it would be bad], maybe some people might come up with a better plan (NOT necessairly the ad hoc "Cleveland solution" of recent past).

Again, the key point for all is final decisions regards CRR do not have to be taken at this time - for or against.

Most important, I believe, is a face-to-face with NEWMAN (not his assistant-to-the-assistant) - NEWMAN himself, ASAP!

Freddo hey... 

[SteelPan]

Let's all remember, putting more services through EXISTING infrastructure is simply stupid for two reasons:

1) It's very short-term

2) It still puts all services - indeed if it were done, even more services, through one corridor further congesting the already congested CBD leg.

The ONLY medium/long-term solution is CRR.  Making sure any and all future Qld and Fed Govts know this is crucial!

It's just politics fella's [and of course ladies] and it's to that game our minds must further turn.  (well your minds, mine checked-out years ago  ]

[Gazza]

Go check out the ICRCS, it actually has pics of how a 9 car platform set would be done at south Bris. Doable, but quite sub optimal.

[Jonno]

What bugs me is that the Brice Highway get a thumbs up for $1B without a plan, business case or even an idea of where it will be spent whilst CRR with a detailed business case about to be endorsed by IA needs to be reviewed.  That is just hypocritical!!!

[Mr X]

Because unclogging congested cities with high speed highways is the LNP way

[curator49]

I don't know what width "narrow" platform will fit at South Brisbane but there is an absolute minimum that Queensland Transport will allow for safety reasons. You need room for an additional track as well as the platform, the steps and a lift for disabled people and other infrastructure required on a platform even if it is a dead-end track - that is it actually finishes at South Brisbane. The terminating unit can then do a turn-back from there. Then there is the need for crossovers across from track four to track one so as to head back from South Brisbane.
Even if it is possible it it is still going to cost a lot of money and bearing in mind it is proposed to be only a "temporary solution". "Temporary Permanent" more likely.

As I stated this morning the South Side is going back to pre-1978 (the 1891 to 1978 era) if trains start terminating at South Brisbane. It doesn't matter if it is one train, five trains or ten trains. Some people may want to go to a station on the Ipswich line. They are going to have to change trains at South Brisbane for one that goes through to Roma Street then change trains to go towards Ipswich, Absolutely, pathetic.

What about afternoon peak services. Who is going to catch a train from the city and get off at South Brisbane to change trains?

The South Side are going to be treated as second-class citizens again just like 1891 to 1978 when we had all the hand-me-down rolling stock from the north-side suburban system.

[ozbob]

... making increased use of existing infrastructure/rollingstock is one way to reduce the operating cost ...

Too right!  Bring back the PB15s on the south side.  Lets go the full monty, and recreate history properly.  South Brisbane had 5 platforms for the 3'6" why stop at 4?

Tram from South Brisbane over the river into the CBD proper too.  WTG!!



South Brisbane here we come!!  Yee Haa!!

(it has been a long day ... LOL    )

Tram -->

[curator49]

It will be a lot of money to spend for puportedly one train per morning peak. We are talking about 2016 when there will be a need for the likes of CRR. The line does not terminate at Beenleigh it goes to the Gold Coast and is intended to be extended further than its current terminus.

We need to have a greater frequency of train services from the Gold Coast, Beenleigh and Cleveland and there are other lines in the planning stages such as Flagstone. That means more trains will need to cross into the city unless you terminate them all at South Brisbane. Isn't it about time we spent money with a view to the future not just what is required today and by future I don't mean fifty or sixty years away, I am thinking perhaps ten years away. When you consider how long these projects take to plan and go through all the environmental investigations not to mention community consultations ten years is not very long.

It is not just the Merivale Bridge that is becoming a bottle neck it is the Roma Street, Central, Fortitude Valley corridor that is an even bigger problem. Can Do's idea of 15 minute frequency on the Ferny Grove Line sounds all very well and good but where are these trains going to? Currently Ferny Grove trains start at Beenleigh. I presume that Can Do will terminate them at Roma Street. These trains will put additional stress on the inner city network.

CRR addresses the issue to relieve the Roma Street to Fortitude Valley corridor in that it goes under Roma Street and comes out at the Exhibition which is currently undergoing a major housing/business redevelopment.

[curator49]

BTW Airport trains do not stop at Sunnybank in either direction at any time of the day.

Time distance between trains at Sunnybank are usually more than twice your 3-4 minutes wait between trains in morning peak. Starting with the first train of the day it is 31 minutes / 28 minutes / 9 minutes / 22 minutes / 13 minutes / 5 minutes (7:12 am to 7:17 am) / 12 minutes / 15 minutes / ahh we have one at 4 minutes (7:44 to 7:48 am ) / 11 minutes / 11 minutes and so on. Frequency to my way of thinking is poor.

[ozbob]

Cross River Rail has actually been raised many times by media and others during the campaign. Discussed on radio as well a number of times.  Blog feedback has also been significant, it is an issue all right.

Federal budget in May will give us the direction the CRR project will go.  It is quite conceivable that if funding is forthcoming it could be started in the next financial year.

[curator49]

Sorry, but Airport trains do not stop at Coopers Plains during Peak Hour.

The first Airport train to stop at Coopers Plains is at 9:17 am. I do believe that "Peak" is supposed to be finished by then.

[Golliwog]

Cross River Rail has actually been raised many times by media and others during the campaign. Discussed on radio as well a number of times.  Blog feedback has also been significant, it is an issue all right.

Federal budget in May will give us the direction the CRR project will go.  It is quite conceivable that if funding is forthcoming it could be started in the next financial year.

The problem with the discussions in the media though were that theres only so much that can be said if one of the key candidates says "watch this space, we'll make an announcement" so media leave it alone, waiting for the announcement, until days out from the election "watch this space, AFTER the election"

I think that if Campbell had come out with 'wait until after the election' when he kept saying 'watch this space' the media would have pushed a fair bit more to find out his opinion and likely course of action. Dissappointing really, especially when it looks like we're going to have at least 3 years of this.