Cross River Rail Project

[ozbob]

Channel 10 News, Channel 7 News have followed up.  Thanks for the interest.

[ozbob]

From the Brisbanetimes click here!

Cross River Rail future still rests on federal cash

Cross River Rail future still rests on federal cash
Daniel Hurst and Marissa Calligeros
June 20, 2012 - 1:15PM

Brisbane's crucial Cross-River Rail project will not go ahead if the federal government fails to provide the majority of funding, a minister has warned while unveiling a cut-price version of previous plans.

Queensland Transport Minister Scott Emerson today also flagged interim measures to deal with inner-city capacity problems looming in 2016, including rearranging train seats to ensure more people have to stand up.

"I don't say it's going to be popular for passengers to have to stand for longer and I'm sorry about that but the reality is this is what we have inherited from the previous government," he said of the imminent capacity bottleneck over the city's Merivale Bridge, the only CBD rail river crossing.

"If we bury our heads in the sand ... there will be a crisis ... by 2016."

Mr Emerson unveiled the government's revised long-term solution, similar to the former Bligh government's proposal, 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.

However, the new proposal, costed at nearly $4.5 billion, no longer includes upgrades to other existing rail stations and removes plans to boost freight capacity south of the city, changes the government says will save between $2 billion and $3.9 billion compared with previous costings.

A three-person expert panel, employed by the Liberal National Party 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''.

Under its "leaner" Cross-River Rail project, the LNP would 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.

Mr Emerson told reporters the revised project would lose some freight capacity but would still deliver the same capacity increase for passengers.

He said the Newman government would be seeking about 80 per cent of the funds from Canberra, adding that the federal government and funding advisory body Infrastructure Australia had been kept in the loop during the review process.

Mr Emerson tied the future of the project to the federal government, saying it would not proceed if Canberra did not provide the required funding.

"It's now up to the federal government," he said.

The former Labor state government was also chasing federal funds for the project, but in December last year Campbell Newman branded Labor's version an "$8 billion unfunded fantasy".

Mr Emerson said the state was seeking up to about $3.6 billion from the federal government, with the remaining $900 million to be found by the state, potentially with help from the private sector, which could help fund train stations in return for commercial retail space in such locations.

"We see this around the world where the private sector does get involved in building stations," he said.

However, Mr Emerson said given the budgetary position of the state, it would be a "challenge" for the Queensland government to find the money to fund its portion of the project costs.

He declined to say how the money would be found except to say the first step would be getting the federal government funding commitment.

Mr Emerson was reluctant to directly say whether the loss of freight capacity would affect the federal government's assessment of the project's cost-benefit score, given national economic imperatives are part of Infrastructure Australia's assessment process.

Mr Emerson focused instead on the cost savings and said most people were concerned most about commuters.

He also confirmed the cost of new trains to accompany the project had not been included in the price-tag, saying Labor had also not factored such costs into the plans.

Mr Emerson did not say how many new train sets would be needed, but said a three-car set under the previous government cost about $12 million to buy and the LNP believed it could deliver such trains more cheaply.

He said if the federal government did not come up with the cash to fund the majority of the project, the state would have to go back to the drawing board and look for alternatives.

Robert Dow, spokesman for commuter lobby group Rail Back On Track, said he was confident the project stood a strong chance of securing federal funding.

He 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 the Cross River Rail could be built by 2020, with interim measures set to buy the government more time to deal with capacity issues.

The LNP, in the lead up to the election, vowed to build extra platforms at South Bank and South Brisbane stations and run trains closer together as part of interim measures to stave off the 2016 capacity problem ahead of a long-term solution being found.

Mr Emerson confirmed the South Bank and South Brisbane platform upgrade idea was now off the table, with the proposal failing to find favour with the expert panel.

"That's not one of the ones they recommended," he said, adding he had appointed the expert panel to look at a raft of options and find the best ways forward.

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.

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.

In a statement released this morning, Mr Emerson said the LNP's $4.5 billion proposal for the Cross-River Rail project would effectively halve the cost of Labor's ''gold-plated'' plans, which carried a price tag of $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.

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

Read more: http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/cross-river-rail-future-still-rests-on-federal-cash-20120620-20mpb.html

[HappyTrainGuy]

Or more Roma Street terminators getting turned around at the platforms.

[somebody]

You've lost me with the problem near Bowen Hills.

Just have the northbound tunnel trains continue on the mains, southbound trains on the mains continue into the tunnel, with Ipswich trains attaching to the suburbans at Albion.  It's unclear what that flyover around the FG flyover is/was for.

[colinw]

That causes a conflicting move somewhere if Gold Coast trains via CRR then continue to Airport.  You would have to route 'em somewhere else (Caboolture, Kippa-Ring, Landsborough/Nambour via duplicated NCL tracks).

[HappyTrainGuy]

Landsbrough/Nambour me thinks as its supposed to tie into that duplication.

[O_128]

Seems like the original CRR was like a german car, Over engineered.  While the new proposal is more like an american car, Skimping on certain parts. There is no point spending however many billion it is this week if the whole mess is pushed from roma street to bowen hills. Id be happy to see the cost rise and for the northern section to be built properly from the start.

[somebody]

That causes a conflicting move somewhere if Gold Coast trains via CRR then continue to Airport.  You would have to route 'em somewhere else (Caboolture, Kippa-Ring, Landsborough/Nambour via duplicated NCL tracks).

Absolutely.  But that was always a requirement of CRR.

[colinw]

Hmmm.  So another possibility might be re-engineering Airport Jct to give a flyover connection to the mains.

Although for my money I'd rather see Beerburrum to Landsborough fixed and a "coast to coast" operating pattern.

[Fares_Fair]

Hmmm.  So another possibility might be re-engineering Airport Jct to give a flyover connection to the mains.

Although for my money I'd rather see Beerburrum to Landsborough fixed and a "coast to coast" operating pattern.

Agree, I'm pushing for it through to Nambour, for the associated freight benefits of the elimination of the 's' bends through Mooloolah to Palmwoods, and for passenger frequency improvements.

[Golliwog]

You've lost me with the problem near Bowen Hills.

Just have the northbound tunnel trains continue on the mains, southbound trains on the mains continue into the tunnel, with Ipswich trains attaching to the suburbans at Albion.  It's unclear what that flyover around the FG flyover is/was for.

I can see the junction north of Bowen Hills being a bit of a mess. Where the Ekka line joins the Mains is a flat junction and is south of where the Mains can cross onto the Subs (unless you're crossing Mains to Subs between the FG flyover and Bowen Hills which would have just as many issues).

[ozbob]

612 ABC Brisbane Drive host Tim Cox followed up with an interview.  Thanks for the interest.

[somebody]

I think there would need to be a sextup past the FG flyover.  If that is not included, I agree it would be very problematic.

[Golliwog]

I think there would need to be a sextup past the FG flyover.  If that is not included, I agree it would be very problematic.

Yeah, thats the simplest thing I can see happening, but so far all I've heard is that theres to be no new surface tracks north of Victoria Park.

[BrizCommuter]

I think there would need to be a sextup past the FG flyover.  If that is not included, I agree it would be very problematic.

Up to 8 tracks are required to be parallel at the point of the FG Line ramp. CRR/exhibition line skewed to mains, mains skewed to suburbans, and subs connecting to Ferny Grove (with access still possible to subs via existing tracks). More information is required on this solution, but if no extra track is being built outside of the tunnel connections as per media release, then this won't be happening without conflicting moves and huge capacity limitations. Also, if CRR traffic is mixed with exhibition line traffic (e.g freight/out of service trains to Roma Street) then this severely limits the number of trains that can run from the mains to CRR.

Anyway, a blog post here with the positives and negatives of CRR Mk2.
http://brizcommuter.blogspot.com.au/2012/06/slasher-newmans-cross-river-rail-2.html

[Mr X]

As usual the media are painting this as Campbell Newman's idea... what short memories people have!

[somebody]

Up to 8 tracks are required to be parallel at the point of the FG Line ramp.

I wasn't counting the Ferny Grove line tracks.

[colinw]

I don't actually consider this to be much change at all.  It is really just an exercise in re-branding & spin.

What I see happening:

1. With the core "CRR" under construction, the limitations from Yeerongpilly to Salisbury (Kuraby), and at Bowen Hills to Albion will be clearly highlighted.
2. The Government will say that "core CRR" gave us sufficient capacity to stave off the crunch, but that more upgrades that logically follow on from CRR are required.
3. New projects will be announced, with bland names like "Bowen Hills to Albion capacity enhancement" or "Yeerongpilly to Salisbury quadruplication project".  These projects will complete the scope of "CRR original", while allowing the Government to claim that they are separate projects and that they were able to deliver CRR for "half price".

End result. We get the full scope of CRR delivered maybe 8 years behind original schedule, and for something like $2 billion more than if they had just bitten the bullet and done it now.  But politically the LNP will be seen to have "cut costs" and "done it cheaper" even though the reverse is true.

That is my jaundiced, cynical 10 cents worth.

P.S. and I note that something similar appears to have just happened in NSW, where the NWRL has just morphed into something remarkably like the axed North West Metro.

[Gazza]

There is a lot of benefit in doing it everything up front, but at the same time I wonder what would work out more.

-Paying the interest on "CRR Heavy" up front.
-Paying the interest on "CRR Lite" now, and building the north and south track capacity, possibly without any lending, as future budgets dictate.

You'd hope in 20 or so years time that debt would be under control and building the rest of CRR when the need arises would be cheap. You could even package the upgrades with those other projects.

Sorry while I see the ease of operation running coast to coast, taking the GC train off the airport run is pure madness.

What is the "Concrete" price you put on making sure airport remains linked with the GC though?

[colinw]

There is a lot of benefit in doing it everything up front, but at the same time I wonder what would work out more.

-Paying the interest on "CRR Heavy" up front.
-Paying the interest on "CRR Lite" now, and building the north and south track capacity, possibly without any lending, as future budgets dictate.

I'm relaxed & comfortable with doing it the "CRR Lite" way.  The core tunnel is the critical bit that must not be half baked. Get it right, and the rest can follow as & when required. I'd much rather have just the tunnel and a few conflicts than no tunnel and 2TPH forever.

Once the tunnel is in place, the logic for things like an extra track to Salisbury, junction improvements at Mayne/Albion, etc., will be irresistible.

In any case, as RTT_Rules says above, a heck of a lot can happen between now and 2020 - nearly 3 electoral cycles and a lot of economic change.

[Gazza]

I guess too the options for things like extra tracks to Salisbury can be put with the projects they belong to...Eg do that bit when we send trains down to Flagstone.

[wbj]

rtt

I can see that you have swallowed the Costello "audit" and LNP spin hook, line and sinker.  The prospect of majority funding of this sort of infrastructure project by Federal sources is a once-in-a-generation opportunity.  If a project is approved under the current Infrastructure Australia program before the next federal election then it will be funded until completion of the project, unless both State and Federal governments agree to scrap it.  An Abbott government after the next election will not be interested in such projects.  It's now or never.

So, if Newman is going to go with CCR lite, then it will probably still get federal funding (although 80% seems optimistic).  However the subsequent add-ons at either end which will be needed at a future date will not get future federal funding because they are minor add-ons to existing infrastructure.  So, under the CCR lite and add-ons scenario, we will get a more expensive, later result.  The blight of short-termism looms large.

[O_128]

Considering labor wanted 4.5 billion for CRR and LNP only wants 3.5 I see no issue why the money won't be given. the other billion will be easy considering how much the albert street plot may be worth alone.

If the feds approve it this year or next there is no issue why construction can't start circa 2014 with completion 2019.

[Fares_Fair]

rtt

I can see that you have swallowed the Costello "audit" and LNP spin hook, line and sinker.  The prospect of majority funding of this sort of infrastructure project by Federal sources is a once-in-a-generation opportunity.  If a project is approved under the current Infrastructure Australia program before the next federal election then it will be funded until completion of the project, unless both State and Federal governments agree to scrap it.  An Abbott government after the next election will not be interested in such projects.  It's now or never.

So, if Newman is going to go with CCR lite, then it will probably still get federal funding (although 80% seems optimistic).  However the subsequent add-ons at either end which will be needed at a future date will not get future federal funding because they are minor add-ons to existing infrastructure.  So, under the CCR lite and add-ons scenario, we will get a more expensive, later result.  The blight of short-termism looms large.

It's a prudent move given the state of the economy.
The best we could have hoped for really.

[Fares_Fair]

Hansard Speech
20 Jun 2012 Legislative Assembly 801
WEDNESDAY, 20 JUNE 2012

Cross River Rail
Hon.  SA  EMERSON  (Indooroopilly—LNP)  (Minister  for  Transport  and  Main  Roads)  (2.20 pm):
One of the major challenges the Newman government faces as we try to rebuild confidence in our public
transport  network  is  a  looming  capacity  constraint  on  our  inner-city  rail  network.  Capacity  for  trains
across the Merivale Bridge and through the inner city is due to be reached by 2016. It is a challenge that
those opposite have known about since 2005, but for seven years they failed to act and chose to ignore
the inevitable.
As  I  advised  the  House  last  month,  I  appointed  an  expert  panel  to  urgently  review  both  the
capacity constraints along with the unfunded Cross River Rail proposal and a number of alternatives. I
had  grave  misgivings  about  the  Cross  River  Rail  project  because  the  former  transport  minister  and
current Leader of the Opposition produced three different project costs in the space of six weeks during
the election campaign. Let us recap: $8.3 billion before the campaign, $7 billion when asked on ABC
Radio's Steve Austin program and, finally, $6.4 billion just days out from the election.
That review was completed and handed to me last week. It found that the Cross River Rail gold
plated option was 'beyond the scope required to address the immediate rail capacity problem from the
southern  side  of  the  river'.  In  other  words,  the  same  result  for  passengers  could  be  achieved  by
delivering  the  core  of  the  original  proposal,  including  two  tunnels  between  Yeerongpilly  and  Victoria
Park, saving almost $4 billion on Labor's original proposal.

20 Jun 2012 Ministerial Statements 805

The  panel  also  presented  the  state  government  with  a  number  of  short-  and  medium-term
measures to deliver additional capacity. These ranged from reconfiguring seats on trains to encouraging
passengers  to  use  off-peak  or  shoulder-peak  services,  better  signalling  and  stabling,  and  removing
interstate trains out of the peak. Combining these measures has the potential to increase peak-hour
capacity by about 40 per cent and stretch the deadline to somewhere between 2018 and 2024. Even
with these measures, we will need to push the network to its absolute limits. This means that even minor
incidents will have the potential to cause major disruption. Unfortunately, that will be a cost that we will
all pay because Labor failed to deliver.
I thank the panel for its input and recommendations. It validates what the LNP had been saying all
along—that is, this project can only be delivered if it is affordable. Demands on the rail network are not
going to go away, so this government will be seeking assistance from the federal government through
Infrastructure Australia to get this more realistic project happening. The reality is that when it comes to
dealing with this issue we have achieved more in the past 12 weeks than the Leader of the Opposition
achieved in the previous 12 months when she was the minister for transport.

[Stillwater]

Interesting, one of the findings of the Costello Audit is that the growth in take-up of rail travel by Sunshine Coast commuters is higher than the coast's overall population growth.  Even with a single track, the SCL is a popular, and growing, form of travel.

[Fares_Fair]

Interesting, one of the findings of the Costello Audit is that the growth in take-up of rail travel by Sunshine Coast commuters is higher than the coast's overall population growth.  Even with a single track, the SCL is a popular, and growing, form of travel.

Hello SW,
Could you find that statement in the audit, and please add it to our Beerburrum to Nambour rail duplication post, for future reference purposes?

[colinw]

Interesting, one of the findings of the Costello Audit is that the growth in take-up of rail travel by Sunshine Coast commuters is higher than the coast's overall population growth.  Even with a single track, the SCL is a popular, and growing, form of travel.

Imagine what rail could do up there with a Gold Coast standard line and without 15% fare rises!

Actually, we don't need to imagine it. Its called the Mandurah Line. (Ok, I know its shorter).

[Golliwog]

I agree with what most seem to be saying, that given the state of our finances that splitting the project like they have is the way to go.

What I am finding absolutely appalling though is the shear quantity of spin being put on this by the LNP. As far as I can see, they haven't actually changed anything about the project (or even shown that the $6.5B price was incorrect) other than to grab some scissors and cut the plans into 3 sections. Given that the previous government had already been looking at how to stage CRR, none of this is anything particularly new. As far as I can tell, the review pretty much came out and said the whole of the CRR project as planned under Labor is what we want, but budget constraints mean we can't do all of it, so lets just do the tunnel for now. But what the LNP are saying the review says is that the whole of Labors original plans is over the top and rubbish and totally unneccesary.

[colinw]

I agree with what most seem to be saying, that given the state of our finances that splitting the project like they have is the way to go.

What I am finding absolutely appalling though is the shear quantity of spin being put on this by the LNP. As far as I can see, they haven't actually changed anything about the project (or even shown that the $6.5B price was incorrect) other than to grab some scissors and cut the plans into 3 sections. Given that the previous government had already been looking at how to stage CRR, none of this is anything particularly new. As far as I can tell, the review pretty much came out and said the whole of the CRR project as planned under Labor is what we want, but budget constraints mean we can't do all of it, so lets just do the tunnel for now. But what the LNP are saying the review says is that the whole of Labors original plans is over the top and rubbish and totally unneccesary.

That is what I find so funny about this. It really is "no change" and "business as usual".  Its simply a re-branding exercise.

The "non Core" bits will get built anyway, because without them the core CRR tunnel won't perform to spec.

Given the state of our finances, it actually is the right thing to do. And Labor, if re-elected, would have done it as well.

[ozbob]

From the Couriermail click here!

State to 'buy some time' for public transport network in crisis as plans unveiled for cheaper Cross River Rail project

State to 'buy some time' for public transport network in crisis as plans unveiled for cheaper Cross River Rail project
Robyn Ironside, Brittany Vonow
From: The Courier-Mail
June 20, 2012 3:20PM

COMMUTERS will have to stand for longer during journeys and be asked to travel outside of peak times as the state government desperately tries to "buy some time" and add capacity to the public transport network.

While the state government is pleading with the federal government to foot at least 75 per cent of the cost for the CrossRiver link, transport minister Scott Emerson said interim measures would have to be put in place before 2016 to avoid a commuter "crisis."

"We need to buy some time," he said.

"When they use the word 'crisis' they're not exaggerating."

Mr Emerson said the interim measures, which include removing some seats to allow for more commuters to stand, would increase train capacity by 40 per cent.

He said the measures, while not perfect, would push back the looming 2016 date when experts have predicted public transport would hit capacity.

Meanwhile, Mr Emerson said he was hopeful the federal government would "come to the table" in the next month and support the $4.45 billion CrossRiver plan.

"If I was the federal government and got to pick between a Labor project of $8.5 billion and a project from an LNP government for $4.5 billion, I know which one I would pick."

Mr Emerson said the LNP's proposal to cut back the CrossRiver train to just four underground stations would not affect the success of the project.

Earlier, The Courier-Mail reported that a budget version of Cross River Rail would be unveiled by the State Government today as it looked to head off a major capacity crisis on Brisbane's public transport network.

Costed at almost half the amount of the previous government's proposal, the plan offers chances for the private sector to contribute in return for commercial space at train stations.

Transport Minister Scott Emerson said the $4.5 billion proposal would still deliver the two underground tunnels of the original, "gold-plated'' plan which carried an $8.3 billion price tag.

It will also include four underground stations at Roma Street, Albert Street, Boggo Road and Woolloongabba  but there will be no station upgrades nor extra train lines south of Yeerongpilly or north of Victoria Park.

Mr Emerson said the plan  prepared by a three-person panel of experts appointed to review the project  would still need substantial funding from the Federal Government.

"We'll be seeking 75 to 80 per cent (from Canberra), which is standard for projects like this,'' Mr Emerson said. ``Then we have to look at how the private sector can get involved.''

He said the State Government would consider commercial opportunities for investors in the project at new train stations, even in the form of paid parking.

"We have to consider what delivers the best result for the dollars we spend,'' Mr Emerson said.
The project cannot be delivered before 2020, so the State Government is also looking at interim measures to increase capacity on the train network before 2016.

By that time, the CityTrain network will be unable to carry any more cross-river services on the Merivale Bridge to meet demand without additional infrastructure.

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

"It's about steps all the way through as we try to build capacity into what's already there,'' he said.

The "short-term'' solutions would cost between $200 million and $300 million to achieve, he said, but deliver an extra 40 per cent capacity.

"We've got to get a solution  there's no point doing what Labor did and bury our heads in the sand, hoping 2016 will go away,'' Mr Emerson said.

"It was the elephant in the room (that) Labor failed to acknowledge.''

He said he would now prepare a submission for Cabinet to consider and continue to engage with Federal Minister Anthony Albanese and Infrastructure Australia.

[Golliwog]

I agree with what most seem to be saying, that given the state of our finances that splitting the project like they have is the way to go.

What I am finding absolutely appalling though is the shear quantity of spin being put on this by the LNP. As far as I can see, they haven't actually changed anything about the project (or even shown that the $6.5B price was incorrect) other than to grab some scissors and cut the plans into 3 sections. Given that the previous government had already been looking at how to stage CRR, none of this is anything particularly new. As far as I can tell, the review pretty much came out and said the whole of the CRR project as planned under Labor is what we want, but budget constraints mean we can't do all of it, so lets just do the tunnel for now. But what the LNP are saying the review says is that the whole of Labors original plans is over the top and rubbish and totally unneccesary.

That is what I find so funny about this. It really is "no change" and "business as usual".  Its simply a re-branding exercise.

The "non Core" bits will get built anyway, because without them the core CRR tunnel won't perform to spec.

Given the state of our finances, it actually is the right thing to do. And Labor, if re-elected, would have done it as well.

Well the quote below is from Mr Emerson's own media release:
http://www.scottemerson.com.au/media-releases/panel-delivers-rail-capacity-options.html

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)

Underlining and italicising is mine, but that line says it all really. No change, just not doing it all at once.

[somebody]

Sorry while I see the ease of operation running coast to coast, taking the GC train off the airport run is pure madness. Without seeing the numbers I'm going to guess from previous observation that a large chunk of AP traffic is actually GC bound. If the airport line had been say a seperate branch from city not using any existing infrastructure, I'd run the Sunny coast trains to airport as well. I'd also challenge that Airtrain have a contract for the GC services.

Well separating Gold Coast and Airport has been an unstated part of the CRR plans for as long as I can remember.

EDIT: clarity

[HappyTrainGuy]

It might be madness but that's what the infrastructure dictates. If AP trains operated as a stand alone line its not the end of the world as there aren't enough passengers to fill a service between Roma Street-Bowen Hills making rollingstock utilisation better ie 3 car services. Not every train that runs to the AP is an IMU and has space for luggage. SMU260s frequently make the trip. EMUs and the older SMUs have space incorporated into the rollingstock. The SMU220s have 6 wheelchair bays per 3 car set so finding space for luggage isn't the end of the world. Got luggage? board the first and rear cars and utilise the sideways seats. The main AP contract is between the Airport and Roma Street hence why they don't stop at Wooloowin/Albion (QR/Translink can not change that running pattern without the Aiport group signing off on it).

I agree that they should continue to the Gold Coast but its not always a possability due to funding, track infrastructure and rollingstock number constraints.

[SurfRail]

Changing trains at Roma Street is not the end of the world.  You have to do it to get anywhere in Sydney except for the East Hills line...

[mufreight]

Or more Roma Street terminators getting turned around at the platforms.

HTG you are sadly missing the plot, one of the few things that is right with the operating management of train services here in Brisbane is that trains are through routed.
Turn back services occupy platforms for longer times and require more crews and platforms.  Additional crews to operate the same number of services is less than a sensible move, the additional rollingstock requirements all add to operating costs and where at Roma Street would you place the additional platforms or turnback sidings that would be required.
For commuter rail services to be effective it requires an increased level of service and to do so that requires it to be as efficent as possible and as cost effective as possible, turnbacks in the CBD are a potential disaster from an operating viewpoint.
Less foam, less tunnel vision and more practical reality makes for more credible reading.

[Gazza]

^Surely It's ok to turn back some services as necessary if using those platforms next to the busway?
Since they sit idle for most of the day and, except when the XPT is there, and its not blocking the through lines.

[somebody]

Changing trains at Roma Street is not the end of the world.  You have to do it to get anywhere in Sydney except for the East Hills line...

I agree.  More significant is that CRR will not allow any improvement for northern lines.

[HappyTrainGuy]

Turn backs at Roma Street aren't really an issue depending on how its configured.

[somebody]

It will save about 10 minutes via CRR or whatever it is now to be called.  Arguing that maybe it shouldn't use the tunnel is a typical QLD attitude: Build it, but don't use it!

For the love of God, don't build this tunnel and then send any train via South Bank past Moorooka!