Cross River Rail Project

[curator49]

Wasn't the "final costing" by the ALP given about the time the Feds said they considered the project ready costed down to $6.4 billion (from the original $8.4 billion)? That occurred in the month or so leading up to the election.

Now the "gold plated" $8.4 billion (the original estimate) has been dredged up by the LNP to make their project look like they are saving over $4 billion. I suppose beggars can't be choosers at least the LNP have FINALLY acknowledged CRR has to be built. The additional track and facilities at either end can be provided later. Perhaps the commercial redevelopers of the RNA Showgrounds will be "encouraged" to build the new facilities there. There may even be an opportunity for an air-space development at Yeerongpilly with a shopping centre and accomodation high rise that could provide the new Yeerongpilly station.

I envisage at least one problem at Yeerongpilly and that is the lack of additional platforms which will surely have to be provided with or without a new station.

[ozbob]

Media release 20 June 2012

SEQ: Cross River Rail review welcomed

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 the announcement by the Minister for Transport and Main Roads that Cross River Rail is to proceed (1).

Robert Dow, Spokesman for RAIL Back On Track said:

"The benefits of Cross River Rail are network wide, as well as bringing safe mass transit to new CBD locations and inner suburbs.  It will help relieve pressure on the bus network and provide more redundancy for the rail network."

"We have been very strong supporters of Cross River Rail as the benefits are long term and will position the rail network for the future."

"We congratulate the expert panel on the review and their recommendations."

Reference:

1. http://www.scottemerson.com.au/media-releases/panel-delivers-rail-capacity-options.html

Contact:

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

http://www.scottemerson.com.au/media-releases/panel-delivers-rail-capacity-options.html

Panel delivers rail capacity options

Wednesday, 20 June 2012 05:54

Cross River Rail's gold-plated option has been rejected by an expert panel commissioned to review the project.

Minister for Transport and Main Roads Scott Emerson acknowledged the panel for providing clear short- and long-term strategies to address the looming train capacity crisis for the Merivale Bridge and inner city.

"The panel concluded that the full Cross River Rail project was 'beyond the scope required to address the immediate rail capacity problem from the southern side of the river'," Mr Emerson said.

"In other words, the same result could be achieved by delivering the core of the original proposal, involving two tunnels between Yeerongpilly and Victoria Park," he said.

"The earliest this could be delivered would be in 2020 for about $4.445 billion – almost $4 billion less than Labor's proposal prior to the March 2012 election campaign.

"After seven years Labor came up with a gold-plated version of Cross River Rail that was unaffordable and undeliverable with costings ranging from $8.3 billion to $7 billion to $6.4 billion over the six weeks of the election campaign."

The panel was also asked to report back on potential measures to extend the capacity through the CBD beyond 2016.

"The LNP Government has been left with a budget diving towards a $100 billion debt by 2018/19 and a train network driving towards a capacity crisis," Mr Emerson said.

"Unlike the previous government we won't be avoiding the issue, rather we'll be looking at the short-to-medium term options the panel identified."

The short-term options would allow up to 12 per cent increase in capacity during the busiest peak period and require changing the configuration of seating and short starter turn-backs.

"The panel has recommended some additional interim measures, costing $200 to $300 million, which would improve capacity by an additional 28 per cent," Mr Emerson said.

"These included upgrading signalling, additional stabling, and fare incentives for the shoulder peak.

"Timetabling the Sydney to Brisbane XPT away from the morning peak would also create two additional train paths.

"I will now prepare a submission for Cabinet to consider and continue to engage Federal Minister Anthony Albanese and Infrastructure Australia."

Interim Solutions to be considered by the State Government

    Seat reconfiguration to increase capacity by approximately 5%
    Real time information to encourage passengers to choose less crowded services
    Station platform management to control station dwell times in order to maintain a maximum number of trains per hour in association with seating reconfiguration
    Demand management using targeted off-peak discounts to encourage passengers shift to the off-peak and shoulder peak services
    Turning back around 7% of trains to achieve another trip in the 2 hour peak period
    Timetabling the XPT away from the morning peak to create two extra train paths for Gold Coast or Beenleigh services
    Increasing the shoulder services around the AM peak one-hour and encouraging a reduction from 65% of trips in the peak one hour to approximately 60% of peak trips in the peak one hour
    Adding more peak period services up to the limit of the infrastructure which will add capacity but negatively impact reliability
    Undertaking targeted signalling system enhancements to improve the reliability of increased peak services
    Constructing targeted stabling facilities for additional trains at locations that reduce junction conflicts and improve capacity
    Sufficient new trains to support peak spreading and additional peak services

  Long term solution to be considered by the State Government

    Priority delivery of 'Core' Cross River Rail works followed by northern and southern surface works
    'Core' includes
        Construction of two running tunnels from the southern to the northern portal
        Development of four new underground stations at Woolloongabba, Boggo Road, Albert Street and Roma Street
        Connections to the existing northern and southern rail network
    'Core' delivers
        Double capacity of the rail network from the south and improved service and reliability
        Reduced passenger crowding
        Halved inner city journey time (Yeerongpilly to CBD in 10 minutes)
    'Core' costs
        $4.445 billion (2010$s, P90)

[ozbob]

From the Brisbanetimes click here!

Cross River Rail given green light, but on a budget

Brisbane's Cross River Rail project will go ahead, but a budget version will replace the original design, the state government has revealed.

Transport Minister Scott Emerson has unveiled the government's revised plans to build two rail tunnels between Yeerongpilly and Victoria Park Golf Complex and four new underground stations at Woolloongabba, Boggo Road, Albert Street and Roma Street.

A three-person expert panel, employed by the LNP to review the previous Labor government's plans for Cross River Rail, found the original project was ''beyond the scope required to address the immediate rail capacity problem from the southern side of the river''.

In a statement released this morning, Mr Emerson said the LNP's $4.5 billion proposal for the project would effectively halve the cost of Labor's ''gold-plated'' plans, which carried a price tag of up to $8.3 billion at one stage.

''In other words, the same result could be achieved by delivering the core of the original proposal,'' Mr Emerson said.

''After seven years Labor came up with a gold-plated version of Cross River Rail that was unaffordable and undeliverable, with costings ranging from $8.3 billion to $7 billion to $6.4 billion over the six weeks of the election campaign.''

The two new tunnels, expected to be built by 2020, will run underground from Yeerongpilly to a station north of the river - most likely near the Normanby Hotel and Victoria Park Golf Complex - stopping at Boggo Road, Woolloongabba, Albert Street and Roma Street.

The private sector will be asked to contribute to the project in return for commercial space at train stations, but substantial funding will still be needed from the Federal Government.

It is understood the State Government will be seeking 75 to 80 per cent of the funds needed from Canberra, which Mr Emerson said was standard practice.

Under its "scaled-back" Cross River Rail project, the LNP will not construct additional above-ground tracks south of Yeerongpilly or north of Victoria Park, nor upgrade existing stations as Labor had intended, a spokesman for the minster explained this morning.

Rail consultants in 2005 identified Brisbane had a major problem with inner-city rail congestion, because it has only one inner-city rail bridge across the Brisbane River, the Merivale Bridge at South Brisbane.

The previous Labor government began planning the Cross River Rail project and submitted a business case for funding to Infrastructure Australia.

However, at the March state election Premier Campbell Newman promised to pursue a more affordable alternative to Labor's project.

Robert Dow, spokesman for commuter lobby group Rail Back On Track, welcomed the new proposal, saying it would help relieve pressure on the bus network and provide more redundancy for the rail network.

"The benefits of Cross River Rail are network wide, as well as bringing safe mass transit to new CBD locations and inner suburbs,'' he said.

''We congratulate the expert panel on the review and their recommendations.''

Mr Emerson said he would now prepare a submission for cabinet and continue to liaise with Federal Minister Anthony Albanese and Infrastructure Australia.

With Cross River Rail at least eight years away, Mr Emerson said the government would introduce a series of short-term measures to increase capacity on the existing rail network.

The short-term measures proposed by the expert panel include, removing some seats from trains to provide more standing room for commuters and rescheduling interstate services out of peak periods.

The interim measures, which Mr Emerson said would increase capacity by 28 per cent, will cost the Government between $200 and $300 million, and also include making available ''real time information'' to commuters to encourage them to choose less crowded services.

"[The recommendations] include upgrading signalling, additional stabling, and fare incentives for the shoulder peak," Mr Emerson said.

He said about seven per cent of trains travelling at peak times could be turned back to achieve another trip in the two-hour peak period.

Read more: http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/cross-river-rail-given-green-light-but-on-a-budget-20120620-20mpb.html

[ozbob]

... fare incentives for the shoulder peak ...

Discussion on this  here --> http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=8574.0

[Derwan]

Great news!  Now can we put the Cleveland solution where it belongs?

We've been saying all along that the private sector should contribute for commercial space at the new stations.  As well as reducing the cost, it will make the stations more interesting than holes in the ground.

[ozbob]

[achiruel]

So, what's actually changed from the original proposal?

I thought CRR was always from Yeerongpilly to Herston/Bowen Hills?

Are the stations cheaper or something else I'm missing?  Or have they just worked out a way to dig tunnels more cheaply?

And will there be any way for trains from CRR to travel via Tennyson?

[ozbob]

Further works north and south of the tunnel have been put on hold.  Nothing much different with respect to the core, although I expect some revision of Yeerongpilly and hopefully that might re-enable a patent Tennyson loop connection.  Still more detail  to come I expect.

There was some changes made to the station design and the boxes (smaller) and this lead to some savings as well.

[Golliwog]

As far as I can tell, they haven't really changed anything. They're just not going to build it all up front, which is probably acceptable given the apparent financial woe of the state.

From the sounds of it, the report recommends the whole thing be built, Mr Emerson seems to focus a lot on one sentence that basically says that the whole project isn't going to be needed to fix the bottleneck across the river, which is true.

Though I want to see what they now propose for the Mayne junction seeing as that's only quad is probably now the next bottleneck as it's the merge point of every line.

I'd also like to see what the overall cost is to eventually do the whole thing. I'm going to bet it's probably over Labor's reduced $6.4B figure seeing as the new government is going back to quoting the $8.4B figure.

[#Metro]

We've been saying all along that the private sector should contribute for commercial space at the new stations.  As well as reducing the cost, it will make the stations more interesting than holes in the ground.

Private sector funds will probably make up a negligible fraction of the cost - probably less than 1-5%.

I have a feeling that the project will cost the same ANYWAY, just that someone has played with some assumptions in the cost modelling and time will tell that it will probably cost about $6-7 billion.

[Jonno]

No change to the Exhibition Station though?  That cannot be skipped!

[techblitz]

These are all things we have suggested .... and it took an ' expert ' committee to conceptualise ...  oh dear ...

yep and i bet they have been given a nice pay packet for it as well. So where does this leave things with the redcliffe solution and sunshine coast duplication?

[Stillwater]

Hopefully, the scaled-back design will still allow for another tunnel and connection to rail in the Trouts Road Corridor.  There are new moves to use the TRC for a freeway, hopefully not in a way that crowds out prospects for a passenger rail connection in future.

[somebody]

I´m a bit disappointed they seem to be leaving the Yeerongpilly portal alone and trimming track enhancement south of the portal.  Although the former proposal did really achieve the worst of all possible worlds.  Spend most of the money, but knacker it at Salisbury so that a large portion of the capacity cannot be used easily.  Better to either spend a bit more money and fix up Salisbury, or do what this review has proposed.

[ozbob]

Big sigh of relief!

At least they won't be half-baking the "good" bit (underground).  The rest can be done a lot more easily than this over time, without anything like the cost or disruption.

Pretty much what we predicted then.

+1  yes, far better to get the core done than not at all, in time that will drive the rest.

Yes Derwan, excellent news!

[ozbob]

Removing seats is not going to help in loading capacity much, but might improve dwells slightly. 

Because the design limits for the units is already being exceeded when crush loaded ....

[techblitz]

i can see the sales pitch already to the private sector investors.The catchline is `Invest in Qlds Public Transport Future!`
The pitch to canberra will be the intersting part.

[somebody]

A positive is them developing a focus on doing stabling properly.  *cough* Robina *cough* Clapham *cough*

[ozbob]

Some lessons are being well learnt with value capture and the light rail on the Gold Coast.  This is the beginning of some smarter approaches ...

Look at KGS bus station?   Hello, time to fill it with shops.

[techblitz]

An interesting snippet from courier mail comments

James of Varsity Posted at 4:52 AM Today

Commercial Opportunities for Investors? Rubbish. QR had the same plans for Commercial development at Varsity Lakes Station, the newest station on the network. Now after two years there is 8 hectares of fenced off vacant land with no development whatsoever. Commuters cannot even buy a newspaper

Comment 6 of 37

This true or not?

[ozbob]

Might well be.  There seems to have been some sort of legislative block with commercialisation of transport infrastructure in Queensland.  I raised this directly at the last PTAG meeting as to why there were no shops in KGS bus station.  I was told that there were legal reasons.  My rebut was well fix it and move forward with the commercialisation. Heck, different dynamic I know, but MTR Hong Kong makes their dough, not from moving the masses on trains but the associated commercial infrastructure, shops, businesses etc.

[SurfRail]

An interesting snippet from courier mail comments

James of Varsity Posted at 4:52 AM Today

Commercial Opportunities for Investors? Rubbish. QR had the same plans for Commercial development at Varsity Lakes Station, the newest station on the network. Now after two years there is 8 hectares of fenced off vacant land with no development whatsoever. Commuters cannot even buy a newspaper

Comment 6 of 37

This true or not?

Most you can buy is a ticket, or something out of a vending machine.  (Coomera, Helensvale, Nerang and Robina have all had walk-in kiosks basically since opening.)

Richlands has a tenancy space ready for fitting out, and there was a tender put out for an agent to let it out which apparently went nowhere.

The comment about Varsity Lakes specifically relates to this I would say, which does appear to have gone staggeringly slow:

http://www.tmr.qld.gov.au/Projects/Name/V/Varsity-Station-Village.aspx

[O_128]

Well finally some common sense. Project goes ahead while LNP still gets to bag out labor. Everyone wins. I assume in the final revision we will still get a new yerongpilly and new exhibition station ( no way in hell is the current one useable) while the northern track to the river would still go ahead. Hopefully the southern stabling goes ahead as well. Also finally some shoulder peak initiatives. Lets say 6am to 10am and 3pm to 7pm !!

[Stillwater]

We owe much to Luke Franzmann and the team who put togethet the business case for CRR.  Obviously, it was a solid document that could not be faulted by the razor gang of three -- their only option being to scale back what was there.  Mr Franzmann and Co must have fought hard within the bureaucracy to keep the project alive.

[Fares_Fair]

Great interim solution   

Now for the Sunshine Coast rail duplication ... 

[ozbob]

Great interim solution   

Now for the Sunshine Coast rail duplication ... 

You bet, on the both counts 

Just completed interview @4BC host Chris Adams on the CRR 2.   Excellent positive interview.  Thanks for the interest 4BC.

[colinw]

This is an acceptable outcome, and I welcome this announcement. Provided the core infrastructure (Yeerongpilly to Vic. Park tunnel) goes ahead and is not "half baked", then the other bits (Ekka Station upgrade, extra track to Salisbury, etc.) will come as logical upgrades to maximise the benefit of investment in CRR.

The review panel is to be congratulated, even if parts of it do resemble things that were said on this forum already. Over all, I think the review panel has done its job diligently and come up with the best possible solution given the obvious financial restrictions.

Now, to my questions:

- Is the proposal to skip Ekka station entirely, or just tart up the existing Ekka a bit & use it. (Raise the platforms, stick in a S2K upgrade style station, and it'll do).

- What kind of service frequency to Kuraby/Beenleigh/Gold Coast does "CRR lite" permit, given the constraint that the line remains "as is" beyond Yeerongpilly?

- Is the Moolabin stabling still going ahead?

- Are the CRR stations still going to be designed for 9 car trains, or is one of the savings cutting them back to 6 car?

- With the Ekka to Albion bit canned, won't this just create a great big flat junction conflict somewhere around Mayne and shift the system's major problem to Bowen Hills -> Albion?

- Would I be correct in presuming that the Cleveland Line will have to be paired with Ferny Grove to maximise benefit from this plan?

- Is Infrastructure Australia sufficiently apolitical that this will get up without that twerp Albanese vetoing it because its now an LNP project?

cheers,
Colin

[Stillwater]

lol, if you put the rose coloured glasses on, then there is now money 'left over' for Sunny Coast Line duplication   

[ozbob]

This is an acceptable outcome, and I welcome this announcement. Provided the core infrastructure (Yeerongpilly to Vic. Park tunnel) goes ahead and is not "half baked", then the other bits (Ekka Station upgrade, extra track to Salisbury, etc.) will come as logical upgrades to maximise the benefit of investment in CRR.

The review panel is to be congratulated, even if parts of it do resemble things that were said on this forum already.

Now, to my questions:

- Is the proposal to skip Ekka station entirely, or just tart up the existing Ekka a bit & use it. (Raise the platforms, stick in a S2K upgrade style station, and it'll do).

- What kind of service frequency to Kuraby/Beenleigh/Gold Coast does "CRR lite" permit, given the constraint that the line remains "as is" beyond Yeerongpilly?

- Is the Moolabin stabling still going ahead?

- Are the CRR stations still going to be designed for 9 car trains, or is one of the savings cutting them back to 6 car?

- With the Ekka to Albion bit canned, won't this just create a great big flat junction conflict somewhere around Mayne and shift the system's major problem to Bowen Hills -> Albion?

- Would I be correct in presuming that the Cleveland Line will have to be paired with Ferny Grove to maximise benefit from this plan?

cheers,
Colin

Spot on Colin.

Re questions.  Attempting to get some further information.  Hopefully later today.

[ozbob]

We owe much to Luke Franzmann and the team who put togethet the business case for CRR.  Obviously, it was a solid document that could not be faulted by the razor gang of three -- their only option being to scale back what was there.  Mr Franzmann and Co must have fought hard within the bureaucracy to keep the project alive.

Well said. 

As we have stated publicly, the project has years of rigour.  It was always going to trump the 'Cleveland Solution'  as much I as I like light rail. 

[ozbob]

lol, if you put the rose coloured glasses on, then there is now money 'left over' for Sunny Coast Line duplication   

Woof!

[somebody]

This is an acceptable outcome, and I welcome this announcement. Provided the core infrastructure (Yeerongpilly to Vic. Park tunnel) goes ahead and is not "half baked", then the other bits (Ekka Station upgrade, extra track to Salisbury, etc.) will come as logical upgrades to maximise the benefit of investment in CRR.

The review panel is to be congratulated, even if parts of it do resemble things that were said on this forum already. Over all, I think the review panel has done its job diligently and come up with the best possible solution given the obvious financial restrictions.

Now, to my questions:

- Is the proposal to skip Ekka station entirely, or just tart up the existing Ekka a bit & use it. (Raise the platforms, stick in a S2K upgrade style station, and it'll do).

- What kind of service frequency to Kuraby/Beenleigh/Gold Coast does "CRR lite" permit, given the constraint that the line remains "as is" beyond Yeerongpilly?

- Is the Moolabin stabling still going ahead?

- Are the CRR stations still going to be designed for 9 car trains, or is one of the savings cutting them back to 6 car?

- With the Ekka to Albion bit canned, won't this just create a great big flat junction conflict somewhere around Mayne and shift the system's major problem to Bowen Hills -> Albion?

- Would I be correct in presuming that the Cleveland Line will have to be paired with Ferny Grove to maximise benefit from this plan?

- Is Infrastructure Australia sufficiently apolitical that this will get up without that twerp Albanese vetoing it because its now an LNP project?

cheers,
Colin

Good questions.  I'm most concerned with the Ekka-Albion bit.  I would guess that Ipswich needs to paired with the suburbans after the FG flyover and the south with Caboolture.  This is not a bad outcome IMO so long as there are no conflicts involved - no worse than the CRR proposal of a flyover.  Perhaps there was value in the flyover which wasn't apparent.

As for service frequency - I don't think any different to CRR in the PM peak given that the former proposal apparently had capacity to burn at Salisbury.  Although CRR did keep more of the capacity on the Merivale Bridge, something I for one am against.

I guess the reduction in amplification means Gold Coast will compete with Beenleigh more than the original CRR.

[Cam]

Hopefully all services to/from Kuraby, Beenleigh & the Gold Coast will use CRR. A 15 minute off peak service to/from Corinda should service stations between Yeerongpilly & Roma Street.

[somebody]

Hopefully all services to/from Kuraby, Beenleigh & the Gold Coast will use CRR. A 15 minute off peak service to/from Corinda should service stations between Yeerongpilly & Roma Street.

+1

[Gazza]

I never actually realised the project was going to include rebuilding Moorooka etc:
http://www.crossriverrail.qld.gov.au/images/stories/EIS/vol2/4-Station-Site-Plans-and-Cross-Sections/Pdf-crr-eis-station-site-plans-17.pdf

Ah well, no great loss if all that gets put off for a little while.

The thing I'm worried most about at the moment is whether the underground stations will still be 9 cars long.

[SurfRail]

The thing I'm worried most about at the moment is whether the underground stations will still be 9 cars long.

Ultimately I'm not even that concerned by this not happening.  It always struck me as being about as likely as tilting trains for the "CoastLink" services.

[somebody]

The thing I'm worried most about at the moment is whether the underground stations will still be 9 cars long.

Ultimately I'm not even that concerned by this not happening.  It always struck me as being about as likely as tilting trains for the "CoastLink" services.

Seems to me like it might be achievable.

[Mr X]

9 car capacity stations are a bit of a waste if none of the other stations on the network can handle them

[somebody]

9 car capacity stations are a bit of a waste if none of the other stations on the network can handle them

Of course, but with the Gold Coast there are only a few stations needing to be upgraded.

[Gazza]

9 car capacity stations are a bit of a waste if none of the other stations on the network can handle them

Because they can't currently handle them, that means they'll never be able to handle them, right? 

Point is, lengthening a above ground platform can be done at any time, but lengthening an underground one would be very difficult after the fact.

All the stuff that has been cut from the current proposal, like surface tracks and upgrades, can all be done in the future progressively.
But if they don't do the 9 car tunnel platforms now, it will never be done.