Cross River Rail Project

[#Metro]

Yes - we'll need a metro one day.  No - it shouldn't be in the same tunnel as another mode of transport.  It should service a different route with different stations.  Yes it will cost more money in the long run but it'll improve the public transport network instead of duplicating part of it unnecessarily.

This I disagree with. Nobody had demonstrated any corridor anywhere that comes anywhere near to 12 000 pphd at the moment. The busway would be running trains every 5 minutes in peak right now if it were converted. It is no more duplication than having the busway and railway run parallel between Mater Hill and South Brisbane now. This is just the geometry of a circular city.

In addition to this, even if every bus was converted to a superbus, you would still have a bus every 45 seconds down the busway and it is likely that platforms would cope with perhaps two vehicles (19 m buses) and require some extension or wait to enter the platform. Over time if population increases 2x-3x (justification for CRR) even this solution may not be enough in the medium - long term.


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v294/ooompaloompa123/transport/maps-schematic/oslo.jpg
Network Map. Oslo Metro, Norway showing Common Tunnel (duplication?) section through downtown.

It's ridiculous that Quirk is willing to fund a Metro but not CRR.  The metro would've been used by plenty of people travelling from Ipswich, the Gold Coast or Logan - so he can't use the excuse that it's only for Brisbane residents.

It makes perfect sense from their perspective. There is no incentive for BCC to tip in money because it will not have a political say on the tunnel and it has its own problem with the bus network. You can agree or disagree on that aspect, but the fact remains that they are their own political entity with their own budget who have decided that there is no benefit to them if they do not get a say in it.

BCC was willing to tip in for BaT because it did something about their buses. CRR MkIII does little for that from their perspective, so there is little reason for them to agree.

The Council should acknowledge this and offer funding for the greater good of its constituents instead of attempting to build a different piece of infrastructure (that isn't required yet) that would require funding from state and federal government anyway

The politics in this are ridiculous.  It's clear what the priority should be and all levels should be supporting it instead of stupid squabbling

Quid Pro Quo. Try the combined solution and see if it works.

[tazzer9]

There will never be dual gauge. So get that annoying idea out of your head.

How is moving towards standard gauge using baby steps an annoying idea.  QR is the only rail network in the entire world not moving towards standard gauge.  It is a fact that standard gauge is superior to our 1067mm gauge in nearly every aspect.

Perth and much of Japan say hello.  Japan seems happy with their narrow gauge bullet trains.

Japan arent really building anymore 1067 gauge, unless its to provide linkage between other 1067 lines.   perth is not staying with 1067.  apart from the perth passenger trains, everything else is or has moved to standard gauge

[tazzer9]

There will never be dual gauge. So get that annoying idea out of your head.

How is moving towards standard gauge using baby steps an annoying idea.  QR is the only rail network in the entire world not moving towards standard gauge.  It is a fact that standard gauge is superior to our 1067mm gauge in nearly every aspect.

Because it means a fundamental change in the current railway operations in which that money could be spent elsewhere for what effectively is a small gain in the passenger network. There's not a big population in SEQ and the existing narrow gauge can handle that quite fine. Even down the line 9 car trains will replace the 6 car trains on select lines anyway ie Sunny Coast-Gold Coast lines via CRR/Trouts road corridors where station mods are minimal. If you can get a seat on the caboolture train in peak hour then why does the network need to go up a gauge just so we could say "Hey, we are like you too". Ferny Grove has a overcrowding problem at times but that's due to rollingstock numbers. Freight is the only winner in the wider gauge arena and there are plans and options out there to bypass the majority of freight from the Brisbane network. Oh but what about MSR or whatever. That's never going to happen. The majority of the current rollingstock can pass 160 easily. And we have the tilts that have passed 200 in testing config on the gold coast line/further up north so we can produce rollingstock in narrow gauge capable of some good speeds. But yes. Lets modify the existing network so it can run a wider gauge. Lets also get some new faster 250kph trains with composite bodies. And lets all run them through the same tracks into the city with the suburban rollingstock. What's that? Following signals? Slow speeds due to the alignment? Sorry, we p%ssed  the money away on getting these wider trains, changing the gauge, new stabling and new mtce facilities that we didn't have any money left to build a new corridor for the trains to run.

Try to explain a good reason as to why the Brisbane network should have any wider gauge trains and we can easily look into why it won't be a good idea unless you just want to p%ss away money. Really the only time wider gauge trains should be on our network is the current xtp in the early morning or a new hsr rail that goes into brisbane via a tunnel from waaayyyyyy back.

Passenger trains wouldn't even be the main beneficiary of gauge conversion.   Its the freight.  wider gauge = higher axle loads, plus higher speed for everything. 
Im not saying gauge convert everything at once but it should be on the horizon (adelaide will be though, they have it a bit easier but it wouldnt be impossible for us).  Freight can run in and out of the state with ease.  we are going to spend alot of money on a freight terminal in which most of the freight is just passed from one train to another.  Rockhapmton, mackay, toowomba are not small places.   
For freights locomotives can be far larger and powerful, they have the advantage of being able to double stack and make better use of well wagons.  The wagons themselves are larger.   
For passenger trains it is far for comfortable journey, can allow the trains to be wider, can allow them to go faster. 
Integrates the entire nations railway networks better.

There is no doubt that inland rail will be built between Melbourne and brisbane, possibly extending further north.   There is also no doubt that the mt isa line will one day connect with the adelaide-darwin line as well.   

Your example of the tilt being able to reach well over 200 isn't very easily achieved on narrow gauge, has to be very high quality track and train.   

[#Metro]

Not sure if I should have it separate, as it is to do with CRR, but I place it in Wacky Dude Corner anyway.

Combined CRR / Metro Tunnel
http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=12162.msg172219#msg172219

[ozbob]

ABC News --> Brisbane Cross River Rail may need 'innovative funding' to help cover $5.2b cost

[ozbob]

Sent to all outlets:

8th April 2016

Fact Check: Anything the Quirk Metro can do Cross River Rail can do Better

Greetings,

Rail Back on Track highlights exactly why the proposed BCC Metro system is a poor alternative to the long proposed Cross River Rail project.

The stated goal of the BCC Metro is that buses would feed into interchanges Woolloongabba and Herston, with passengers catching a metro train into the CBD, thereby removing the need for buses to enter the CBD, and freeing up buses for the suburbs. But with Cross River Rail having the same start and end point (Woolloongabba and Herston) , and having bus interchanges proposed at these locations anyway, with an hourly passenger capacity 2 to 3 times higher, it begs the question as to why a separate metro system is needed right now.

Cross River Rail can do exactly the same job as the Metro, in addition to the wider benefits it will have for trains travelling in from all points of SEQ.

With these facts considered, there is no reason BCC can't help co-fund Cross River Rail, and piggyback off the benefits it will bring.

However, Graham Quirk has taken the opposite position, and refuses to contribute funding!

BCC has been willing to fund roads, tunnels, bicycles, buses, ferries and more, but seems to have an allergic reaction to the suggestion of funding rail.

This position makes no sense when the Moreton Bay and Gold Coast councils have helped get rail projects happening in their cities with funding, in partnership with the state and federal government.

- Cross River Rail increases net Public Transport Capacity through the CBD, whilst the BCC Metro offers zero increase in capacity compared to the current bus way.

- Cross River Rail can also be built without any disruption to the inner city bus way system, whilst the BCC Metro will require years of shutdowns whilst the conversion takes place, and uses more land.

- Cross River rail has had extensive planning take place, with technical issues resolved, whilst the BCC Metro is very much an incomplete plan.

- With limited transport funding, it makes no sense for different levels of government to be pulling in opposite directions, yet proposing things so similar.

Rail Back on Track calls on all levels of government to stop the games, work together, and get cross river rail happening before the network hits its capacity crunch.

Best wishes
Robert

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

[Gazza]

This I disagree with. Nobody had demonstrated any corridor anywhere that comes anywhere near to 12 000 pphd at the moment.

In Brisbane, there is a great deal of latent demand for public transport that doesn't "show up" because the lines don't exist.
It is like in Perth with the Mandurah line. Previously the highway coaches from Mandurah would have seen some usage, but that level of usage was not in the same universe as the eventual success of the rail line when it was actually provided.

Or imagine if Chermside had a full on rail line/metro going under/over Gympie Rd. It would easily be one of the busiest in brisbane, compared to the attractiveness of the current buses.

In some locations, a bit of duplication is fine if it doesn't cost too much. Think of the springfield and kippa ring lines. They had quad/triples almost to the branching point, so hooking in, and then doing the extension to new areas wasn't really a expensive or disruptive process.
But if you can run a brand new route that builds up the network, you should go for it!
(this is why RBoTers like the idea of the Trouts rd line compared to alternatives like track amplifications  through Virginia and beyond)

It is no more duplication than having the busway and railway run parallel between Mater Hill and South Brisbane now. This is just the geometry of a circular city.

In addition to this, even if every bus was converted to a superbus, you would still have a bus every 45 seconds down the busway and it is likely that platforms would cope with perhaps two vehicles (19 m buses) and require some extension or wait to enter the platform. Over time if population increases 2x-3x (justification for CRR) even this solution may not be enough in the medium - long term.

But, there is considerable evidence to suggest that when a certain corridor is reaching capacity, you are better off building a new, parallel one, a bit away from it. The benefits of this are threefold.
-Less disruption to the original line.
-Brings public transport access to new areas.
-Caters to 'true' latent demand, which will take pressure off the existing infrastructure.

For example, with CRR, we could have done a bridge next to the merivale, and quadded through south bris and through central, but the benefits were found to be much less, so we got the route via Wooloongabba. Keying into my dot points above.

-Wont be disruptive, and such a squeeze through south bris and the CBD.
-We get high capacity transit to the Gabba and Albert St
-It relieves pressure off Central. Central isn't necessarily popular because it's well located, its popular because it's there. If Albert st opens, you'll find a lot of passengers that currently use central will switch to albert street, because they always wanted to get to that bit of the cbd, but put up with Central because that was the closest option.

If we were to run a new metro line through the CBD at some point in the 2030s, there are heaps of corridors that you know would go gangbusters and have high benefit, if they were built, so we don't need to resort to double decking CRR.

When we talk about the high usage of the busway, is it because.
-The stations are well located and 12000 pph flow into them

or is it because

-Its the fastest way for buses into the CBD, and routes in fact go out of their way to use it, bumping up the patronage

ill let you answer that one 

Network Map. Oslo Metro, Norway showing Common Tunnel (duplication?) section through downtown.

Lol. Oslo doesn't have 6 track pairs running in parallel through Stortinget. Its only one track pair, shared between 6 lines
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Tunnel

This its not like this map of BART means there are five track pairs though west Oakland.
http://unionsquareshop.com/assets/img/directions/bart-system-map-exit-powell.png

Quid Pro Quo. Try the combined solution and see if it works.

I think I speak for a lot of people on here where I'd say I'd
-Rather not see the money spent at all.
-Spend it on other transport initatives

Than tip money into a t%rd metro / sub optimal double deck proposal.

[aldonius]

-It relieves pressure off Central. Central isn't necessarily popular because it's well located, its popular because it's there. If Albert st opens, you'll find a lot of passengers that currently use central will switch to albert street, because they always wanted to get to that bit of the cbd, but put up with Central because that was the closest option.

More accurately, we'll find a lot of passengers who currently use Central will now need to use Albert St, because CRR doesn't go through Central. But Albert St is much better for a lot of people.

The interesting question for me is will people going to QUT stop going via South Bank and the Goodwill Bridge?

[HappyTrainGuy]

There will never be dual gauge. So get that annoying idea out of your head.

How is moving towards standard gauge using baby steps an annoying idea.  QR is the only rail network in the entire world not moving towards standard gauge.  It is a fact that standard gauge is superior to our 1067mm gauge in nearly every aspect.

Because it means a fundamental change in the current railway operations in which that money could be spent elsewhere for what effectively is a small gain in the passenger network. There's not a big population in SEQ and the existing narrow gauge can handle that quite fine. Even down the line 9 car trains will replace the 6 car trains on select lines anyway ie Sunny Coast-Gold Coast lines via CRR/Trouts road corridors where station mods are minimal. If you can get a seat on the caboolture train in peak hour then why does the network need to go up a gauge just so we could say "Hey, we are like you too". Ferny Grove has a overcrowding problem at times but that's due to rollingstock numbers. Freight is the only winner in the wider gauge arena and there are plans and options out there to bypass the majority of freight from the Brisbane network. Oh but what about MSR or whatever. That's never going to happen. The majority of the current rollingstock can pass 160 easily. And we have the tilts that have passed 200 in testing config on the gold coast line/further up north so we can produce rollingstock in narrow gauge capable of some good speeds. But yes. Lets modify the existing network so it can run a wider gauge. Lets also get some new faster 250kph trains with composite bodies. And lets all run them through the same tracks into the city with the suburban rollingstock. What's that? Following signals? Slow speeds due to the alignment? Sorry, we p%ssed  the money away on getting these wider trains, changing the gauge, new stabling and new mtce facilities that we didn't have any money left to build a new corridor for the trains to run.

Try to explain a good reason as to why the Brisbane network should have any wider gauge trains and we can easily look into why it won't be a good idea unless you just want to p%ss away money. Really the only time wider gauge trains should be on our network is the current xtp in the early morning or a new hsr rail that goes into brisbane via a tunnel from waaayyyyyy back.

Passenger trains wouldn't even be the main beneficiary of gauge conversion.   Its the freight.  wider gauge = higher axle loads, plus higher speed for everything. 
Im not saying gauge convert everything at once but it should be on the horizon (adelaide will be though, they have it a bit easier but it wouldnt be impossible for us).  Freight can run in and out of the state with ease.  we are going to spend alot of money on a freight terminal in which most of the freight is just passed from one train to another.  Rockhapmton, mackay, toowomba are not small places.   
For freights locomotives can be far larger and powerful, they have the advantage of being able to double stack and make better use of well wagons.  The wagons themselves are larger.   

Yes. That's exactly what I said in the same post. I'll quote it below.

Freight is the only winner in the wider gauge arena and there are plans and options out there to bypass the majority of freight from the Brisbane network.

But why build the tunnel for dual gauge if freight trains won't be using it. There are other options out there. If the inland rail line gets up that would be a wider gauge. There is also the surat basin rail project. If that gets built its as simple as extending so that it connects with the inland rail project. Coalies from Toowoomba have a straight run into Gladstone or the port of Brisbane. You can build that dual gauge. It might be longer but the benefits are that you have now opened a Gladstone to NSW/south link on the same gauge. You can take freight off the NCL which happens to share the same network with passenger trains. That allows you to place additional restrictions on when freight trains can run on the passenger network which in turns allows more free train paths for passenger services. Train lengths has opened up due to the shot loops just north of Brisbane. Freight trains bound for Brisbane from the North and West suddenly have a route to bypass all passenger railway lines. Those trains also now have no restrictions imposed on when they can enter and leave the brisbane area which currently affects running times as the inland rail will have its own new corridor into the port of Brisbane/Acacia Ridge. And not a single extra dollar spent on converting any of the seq passenger network to allow for a wider gauge.

PS: The Tilt Train also currently holds the highest top speed record for a train in Australia at 210+kph and many of the current qr passenger rollingstock now can easily push into the 150-160kph bracket which is the most that you've ever need on the current network.

[dancingmongoose]

Is it likely Express trains via CRR will still stop at Yeerongpilly? Or is it going to bypass it and stop only at Boggo Rd?

Unlikely I'd expect, unless the TOD generates enough demand. There's no real reason to stop there without trains running through Tennyson, and with the dive at Dutton Park I don't think there will be enough capacity to fit them in.

So.

Looks like Dutton Park station will be demolished after all IMHO

They'd have to be pretty stupid to propose this really. Yes Boggo Road makes it easier, but I'm sure we all remember the uproar when they tried to do it with the BaT. They may have to make some technical compromises to keep it open just so it can actually get off the ground, because we really can't afford that to happen again.

[#Metro]

I would hope the State Government and Brisbane City Council move to the negotiation table because the project won't happen without BCC on board (unless there is a miracle). BCC is right that there is little CRR would do for the busway.

A contribution from BCC obviously will not be forthcoming unless their needs are met. This is a reasonable thing when amounts such as $500 million + are involved.

I'm on record as supporting the investigation of a combined tunnel option to break the deadlock for this reason. Now I can't know whether this is the best option or whatever, but it is worth exploring it.

Brisbane's busways were always intended to be upgraded to a larger mode at another time in the future, which is why a stub tunnel exists between Mater Hill and South Bank busway stations. So I dismiss the idea that we should come in at 'some future time' and do a separate metro alignment. Maybe one day we could do that, but that will of course be after the busway is converted to higher capacity such as a metro.

[#Metro]

In addition to the busway being set up for upgrade at some future point, a clear mark that TMR intended to have it upgraded before any separate metro alignment, there is also an engineering precedent for busway converstion.

John Bonsall from Ottawa, Canada was involved in the South East Busway. Indeed, the SE Busway is directly modelled on the Ottawa transitway, which has been experiencing much the same issues as the SE Busway has. In Ottawa, rather than spend money on a separate line (expensive) the existing busway has been converted to light metro (metro using extremely long light rail consists).

You can see the process here. Light Metro is replacing the busway by placing directly into the busway alignment.

So not only is there a precedent for a combined rail over rail tunnel in San Franciso, but there is also an engineering precedent for the upgrade of a busway to light metro directly relevant to the SE busway, rather than a separate alignment.

[#Metro]

Here is the busway conversion in Ottawa to light metro. There is no engineering reason I can see that would preclude conversion of the SE Busway to metro and combination with CRR through the CBD.

[Golliwog]

I would hope the State Government and Brisbane City Council move to the negotiation table because the project won't happen without BCC on board (unless there is a miracle). BCC is right that there is little CRR would do for the busway.

A contribution from BCC obviously will not be forthcoming unless their needs are met. This is a reasonable thing when amounts such as $500 million + are involved.

I'm on record as supporting the investigation of a combined tunnel option to break the deadlock for this reason. Now I can't know whether this is the best option or whatever, but it is worth exploring it.

Pretty sure behind the scenes that TMR/Qld Government are trying hard to get BCC on side. Have you read through the newsletter on the CRR website? How many references do that make to having things consistent with BCC's city plan? Basically State Gov sitting there saying "hey guys, we'll help you deliver your own city plan by building this project." It wouldn't surprise me if you could find via RFI a similar set of documents as were found with the bus review showing BCC transport/town planners being directed not to co-operate with TMR again. I'm also not sure how you can apparently say with a straight face that BCC has no incentive to help get CRR going. It's a piece of transport infrastructure that would do wonders to unlock the rail network in Brisbane, which YES benefits the city. So what if BCC isn't a rail operator, they benefit in reduced congestion, more rates from higher land values around stations, unlocking the development potential around key precincts, the list goes on.

I don't see why you're pushing so hard for your BAT/Quirk Metro hybrid LD. Yes, State and BCC need to negotiate, but that also doesn't mean the state needs to hang themselves just to appease the powers that be at BCC. BCC also needs to be willing to compromise, because I can guarantee you their metro will never happen without TMR being on side. Which isn't an easy task to do when you announce said plans to TMR via the media.

Plus, before you even consider shutting the busway to convert it to some form of light rail/metro you need to plan your alternative transport system while that link is offline, and until CRR is built, there's not going to be any spare capacity on the rail network to run extra services so you can run the buses to hub stations like Altandi and elsewhere.

[#Metro]

Pretty sure behind the scenes that TMR/Qld Government are trying hard to get BCC on side. Have you read through the newsletter on the CRR website? How many references do that make to having things consistent with BCC's city plan?

Yes Golliwog, but the Lord Mayor has come straight out and point blank refused to fund it. I don't think it can be any clearer than that.

Negotiation and compromise is voluntary and actually means that changes are made to the proposal. The State Government simply coming out and saying 'here is our plan, it is good for you, now fund it' isn't working together, isn't negotiation or co-operation but persuasion and selling.

So it is not at all surprising the mayor has simply come out and said 'No'.

Basically State Gov sitting there saying "hey guys, we'll help you deliver your own city plan by building this project." It wouldn't surprise me if you could find via RFI a similar set of documents as were found with the bus review showing BCC transport/town planners being directed not to co-operate with TMR again

Yes, it wouldn't surprise me at all! BCC has extremely poor record.

I'm also not sure how you can apparently say with a straight face that BCC has no incentive to help get CRR going. It's a piece of transport infrastructure that would do wonders to unlock the rail network in Brisbane, which YES benefits the city. So what if BCC isn't a rail operator, they benefit in reduced congestion, more rates from higher land values around stations, unlocking the development potential around key precincts, the list goes on.

I don't doubt that there are all of these benefits. But simply stating a list like that is not a negotiation. That is selling. When two parties negotiate they make mutual changes. They do a deal, there is an exchange.

What changes has the Queensland Government made to their proposal that meets BCCs needs? None. This is the difference between the BaT tunnel that BCC was willing to fund and the CRR MkIII that BCC is not willing to fund. Nobody can expect BCC to hand over huge amounts of funds for a project where they have had zero influence on the design etc.

I don't see why you're pushing so hard for your BAT/Quirk Metro hybrid LD. Yes, State and BCC need to negotiate, but that also doesn't mean the state needs to hang themselves just to appease the powers that be at BCC. BCC also needs to be willing to compromise, because I can guarantee you their metro will never happen without TMR being on side. Which isn't an easy task to do when you announce said plans to TMR via the media.

I don't know whether my proposal will fly or not. But I am not afraid to be wrong.
It is a proposal that has something in it for BCC and something in it for the State Government.

The mayor gets his metro, Queensland Government  gets CRR and both issues with the railway and busway are fixed up with one bang. I don't expect anybody to agree with it, however, if someone wants to come up with their own ideas, that is fine also.

The current impression I am getting from what I am reading on this forum is that people just expect The State Government to hold a metaphorical gun to BCC and demand that they hand over the cash. That is not going to happen, and the Lord Mayor already ruled it out.

So either the State + Feds fund the whole thing or the project goes to negotiation with BCC.

[#Metro]

CRR Newsletter April
http://www.crossriverrail.qld.gov.au/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/160322-CRR_Newsletter-FINAL-APRIL-WEB.pdf

[#Metro]

Plus, before you even consider shutting the busway to convert it to some form of light rail/metro you need to plan your alternative transport system while that link is offline, and until CRR is built, there's not going to be any spare capacity on the rail network to run extra services so you can run the buses to hub stations like Altandi and elsewhere.

This is a valid point. What I would say is that because the metro is contained within the CRR tunnel, construction of the Roma Street - CBD - Wooloongabba section would not have much impact on the existing busway. Where impacts would become apparent is after Roma Street: Normanby, QUT etc. But I am sure something can be worked out there. After all, there is a diversion ramp between RCH and RBWH which allows buses to flow into the CBD via the Valley. Other options may be possible.

Impacts on the SEB from metro construction would not occur until Stage 2 of the metro, where the metro would extend out of the combined tunnel at Wooloongabba and into the SE Busway alignment. By that time CRR would already be operational, so it would be possible to divert buses and run extra services on the rail line to allow tracks to be laid between Wooloongabba and Eight Mile Plains.

[#Metro]

I post this here to demonstrate the problem, not because I support what LM Quirk is doing.
(I don't - I am on record as supporting bus reform, not supporting Quirk Metro etc).

It is easy to see the issue from BCC perspective:
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/lord-mayor-graham-quirk-announces-brisbane-metro-plan-20160131-gmi2xx.html

Cr Quirk said the state government's cross river rail project was not going to answer the "broader transport issues" in Brisbane that have been "looming for several years", with the metro system proposal to act as a "supplement".

"The cross river rail project can stand alone and it will service the rail needs in the future, I support a further rail crossing, but what I am saying is that a further two thirds of the public transport function in our city is handled by buses so just doing a cross river rail is not the total answer, we need to do something to supplement that," Cr Quirk said.

And here is a video from this week, in case there was any doubt:

LNP Brisbane Mayor Graham Quirk wont support Cross River Rail with any council funding

"We don't fund rail - Bottom line" - Quirk

[ozbob]

BCC is the problem for PT in Brisbane and SEQ.

No responsible government can allow this situation continue. 

The Quirk Metro as proposed is nonsense.  I expect Quirk to retire in the not too distant future. He has hand-balled the ' metro ' to the deputy Mayor ... this will ultimately give an out to all.  Schrinner is a bit smarter than Quirk and will realise that the present proposal cannot be justified or be deliverable.  I do expect both the BCC and State Government will end up negotiating a mutually acceptable outcome. I suggested a rubber tyre metro was an option in 2014 for the B of BaT.  This whole situation has a long way to go yet.

Until we start getting more detail on CRR3 and the proposed metro (2 years away at least)  I would relax.

[ozbob]

" BCC also needs to be willing to compromise, because I can guarantee you their metro will never happen without TMR being on side. Which isn't an easy task to do when you announce said plans to TMR via the media. "

Spot on Golli !  Watch this space ... as they say!   

[ozbob]

Couriermail --> Cross River Rail could lay the tracks for major rail corridor extensions in southeast

BRISBANE'S Cross River Rail could pave the way for major rail corridor extensions across the southeast, boosting the reach of the network in growth areas outside the state's capital.

Beaudesert, Flagstone, the Sunshine Coast and the Ripley Valley could end up with bolstered services as the project potentially opens up new options for rail projects in the future.

The Palaszczuk Government argues the multi-billion-dollar project is vital to stem increasing congestion and crowding of rail networks.

By 2018, when delivery of the last of the new trains on order is expected, the southeast rail network will be clogged and unable to fit any more trains.

By 2026, an extra six trains an hour from the north would be needed, along with another three trains an hour from the south.

But the State Government is adamant the extra services will not be possible if the Cross River Rail project does not proceed, because the inner-city network will be at capacity.

If the four-track corridor that runs through Brisbane's CBD remains congested, rail corridor extensions into areas such as the Sunshine Coast and Caloundra, Flagstone, Beaudesert and the Ripley Valley, will not be possible.

The State Government believes that the relief the Cross River Rail project would provide to the overall network would open up more opportunities for rail expansion.

Transport Minister Stirling Hinchliffe said the project would benefit every commuter in the southeast corner from Gympie to the Gold Coast.

"Cross River Rail will be the catalyst for more frequent rail and bus services across southeast Queensland and extend the reach of rail and bus across for the entire region," he said.

"(It) will deliver improved economic and productivity opportunities across southeast Queensland, significant transformation of land use around the transport corridor and lead to less reliance on private vehicles."

[ozbob]

Couriermail --> Editorial: Jump aboard to make Brisbane's Cross River Rail tunnel a reality

FOR many Brisbane residents, the announcement of the latest cross-river rail tunnel proposal is likely to elicit reactions along the lines of "I'll believe it when I see it".

This is understandable given the project – which successive governments have described as absolutely critical to the city's already strained rail network – was first raised by former premier Peter Beattie more than a decade ago.

He committed $4.5 million to investigate solutions for a second rail crossing, warning that the existing Merivale St link would reach capacity by 2016.

Here we are in 2016, the rail link is in its third incarnation – and on the best estimates if the project is funded and approved this year we are looking at an operational date of 2023.

This means our network will require further tweaks, longer trains and more crowding if we are to push out that peak capacity date even further.

In this context yesterday's announcement by the State Government that it will finally commit to building the project is as welcome as it is overdue.

This is an investment in the future growth and prosperity of Brisbane. Without it, as the Productivity Commission has identified, we are looking at a $9 billion cost over the next 15 years, attributable to congestion and reduced efficiencies.

The next few months will be absolutely critical to ensuring this latest proposal actually proceeds rather than being relegated once again to the pipe dream department, and the Government should be congratulated for at least trying to take some of the petty politics out of the equation by charging a new statutory authority with its delivery.

Most importantly this is a project that requires not only bipartisan co-operation, but support from all tiers of government and the private sector.

It is also too important for political pointscoring of the sort we saw with the State Opposition immediately dismissing it as unplanned, unfunded and one that carries flood risks.

Brisbane residents just want a modern, efficient public transit system that will cope with the demands of a growing city, and are likely to view such partisan sniping as acting against the interests of the state when now is the time to pull together and support a positive development.

It would be hoped that in the very near term the State Government can finalise a business case for the project, which already has the backing of Infrastructure Australia.

With a tight federal election looming, and with Opposition Leader Bill Shorten having declared the project an infrastructure funding priority for a federal Labor government, now is the time to convince both sides of politics in Canberra once and for all that this plan makes political as well as economic sense.

And here maximum leverage can be exerted if the argument has not only bipartisan support, but also the backing of Brisbane City Council – a level of government that stands to benefit enormously from both the modernisation of the city and the congestion-busting impact the infrastructure will provide.

In the medium term it is not only a transport solution, but will also provide a catalyst for further development of key near-CBD hubs such as Woolloongabba and Boggo Road on the southside, and the Showgrounds precinct in the inner north.

While the State Government would talk about funding only in the most oblique terms yesterday – arguing that it is part of the Budget process and obviously dependent on council and federal contributions – the money must be found if our capital city wants to continue selling itself as Australia's New World City.

Both sides of politics have stressed this project is a priority, and we have a Prime Minister who is supportive of public transport investment.

The best political mileage to be gained in this scenario is not squabbling or carping from the sidelines, but actually co-operating to get this thing built.

^ Even the CM has seen the light!   

[ozbob]

" ... Most importantly this is a project that requires not only bipartisan co-operation, but support from all tiers of government and the private sector.

It is also too important for political pointscoring of the sort we saw with the State Opposition immediately dismissing it as unplanned, unfunded and one that carries flood risks ...

... And here maximum leverage can be exerted if the argument has not only bipartisan support, but also the backing of Brisbane City Council – a level of government that stands to benefit enormously from both the modernisation of the city and the congestion-busting impact the infrastructure will provide.

In the medium term it is not only a transport solution, but will also provide a catalyst for further development of key near-CBD hubs such as Woolloongabba and Boggo Road on the southside, and the Showgrounds precinct in the inner north ... "

Fascinating ...   

[ozbob]

Ten News: Cross River Rail: Min Stirling Hinchliffe hasn't given up on LNP Brisbane Mayor Graham Quirk

Stirling Hinchliffe is smarter than Graham Quirk ...

Hey Graham, a rubber tyre metro is rail.

[ozbob]

Twitter

Robert Dow ‏@Robert_Dow now Brisbane, Queensland

Hey @Team_Quirk a rubber tyre metro is rail. You're welcome!

> http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=2034.msg172249#msg172249 ... #qldpol @StirlHinchliffe

[Stillwater]

It should be noted that Brisbane has gone beyond what state governments have told us is a 'world clarse city' to now being a 'New World City'.   It could be if all levels of government cooperated on PT services and reform.    

[kram0]

Anna2 is so lite on detail with CRR3, I doubt it will be built in there first (and probably last) term of government. The budget they hand down will be the real tester to see what is allocated to the project. I suspect (and hope I am wrong) the gossy brochure is a delaying tactic to make people think they are doing something!!

[#Metro]

Anna2 is so lite on detail with CRR3, I doubt it will be built in there first (and probably last) term of government. The budget they hand down will be the real tester to see what is allocated to the project. I suspect (and hope I am wrong) the gossy brochure is a delaying tactic to make people think they are doing something!!

There isn't much detail. For example, we do not know the length of trains or platforms, and the specifics of how it will connect at portals. We do know that Park Road will be served, which is great news.

More detail will come with the business case. An election is coming which is probably good for funding.

[#Metro]

I think if the State Government asks BCC for funding, Quirk will simply point to the power network and say 'See that, $30 BN right there'.

[kram0]

Anna2 is so lite on detail with CRR3, I doubt it will be built in there first (and probably last) term of government. The budget they hand down will be the real tester to see what is allocated to the project. I suspect (and hope I am wrong) the gossy brochure is a delaying tactic to make people think they are doing something!!

There isn't much detail. For example, we do not know the length of trains or platforms, and the specifics of how it will connect at portals. We do know that Park Road will be served, which is great news.

More detail will come with the business case. An election is coming which is probably good for funding.

Will Dutton Park remain open?

What surface track upgrades are planned south of Dutton Park and north of Exhibition?

Is there provision for Trouts Rd connection and extension of the tunnel south? Which should be happening from the start.

6 or 9 car trains?

Without track upgrades south, we will be limited to how many trains per hour can be accommodated.

Maybe Robert could ask these question through his channels?

[ozbob]

All will be revealed in due course.

[ozbob]

Sent to all outlets:

9th April 2016

Alannah MacTiernan our choice to head Cross River Rail Authority

Greetings,

Federal MP and former Perth State Government Transport Minister Alannah MacTiernan will resign at the next federal election which could happen within the next few months.

Alannah MacTiernan MP would be an excellent candidate to head the new Queensland Cross River Rail Authority. In her role as Western Australian minister for Planning and Infrastructure (2001-2008), she personally oversaw the doubling of the Perth rail network. Perth's rail network is considered one of the best run railways in Australia. Perth's rail network uses the same models of trains, same track gauge and electrification as Queensland Rail.

In addition to her experience as a local councillor for Perth City Council, Alannah also oversaw the design, planning and delivery of twin rail tunnels bored underneath the Perth CBD as part of the New Metro Rail Project. This project has many similarities with Brisbane's Cross River Rail project, which will take trains from the southern line at Dutton Park, underneath Woolloongabba, under the Brisbane CBD and through to Roma Street and on to Exhibition and the northern line.

We call on Deputy Premier Jackie Trad to formally consider Alannah MacTiernan to lead the new Cross River Rail Authority. The timing is right and her experience on a very similar rail project would be invaluable to Queensland.

We need Alannah!

Best wishes,
Robert

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

References:

1. Perth NewMetroRail Tunnels with Alannah MacTiernan
   

2. Alannah MacTiernan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alannah_MacTiernan

3. Perth New Metro Rail Project (2007) Video
   

[Golliwog]

It should be noted that Brisbane has gone beyond what state governments have told us is a 'world clarse city' to now being a 'New World City'.   It could be if all levels of government cooperated on PT services and reform.    

Isn't "New World City" the BCC tagline for Brisbane?

All will be revealed in due course.

I think as PT advocates, we need to push for this project to be as future compatible as possible. Spurs for Trouts Rd, thoughts about whether another tunnel south from Dutton Park is feasible or if the best we can now hope for is curve easing. Another question to be asked is an operational one as as much as we talk pairings, there still should be balanced numbers of trains using each route - no point doubling capacity if some of your new track pairings are still going to be full from day 1.

Not to mention getting BCC onside and discussing how to change the bus network so that both rail and bus complement each other.

[ozbob]

There will be ample opportunity to comment on the plan.

This site is being watched I assure you.  Just post away ...

If you feel the need email > crossriverrail@tmr.qld.gov.au

It is understood that CRR3 needs future proofing, station cavities need to be able to accommodate 9 car trains (NGR are 9 car capable http://www.qtectic.com/the-trains/ ).

Specific details are simply not available yet as still in planning stages.  Operational assessments need to be done, and these will in turn lead to the optimal track plans and so forth.

[ozbob]

Also, if you haven't already you can sign up for the CRR Newsletter here > http://www.crossriverrail.qld.gov.au/  down at the bottom of the page.

[#Metro]

This is possibly how a combined option could work (concept only)

The main thing is to set it up so that future stages can be set up along the SE Busway and Nth Busway.

Depending on the setup, you could have it so that cross-platform transfer was possible. Simply walk across from CRR into the SEB or Nth Busway Metro at any combined CBD CRR/Metro stations. That possibility is a powerful reason to combine the alignments through the CBD and another mark against putting in the metro as a separate alignment.



Apologies, but I can't seem to save the image in a larger format.

[Gazza]

Is there any reason a metro couldn't be built from the outside in, as is being done in Sydney?

In Sydney, the metro finishes several kilometers north of the CBD, and passengers will change onto a conventional double deck train to reach the CBD....Until stage 2 of the metro under the harbour via Barangaroo to Central and Waterloo is built.

If BCC were keen to do the metro, they could do one from 8mp to Wooloobgabba, with passengers using VRR3 to reach the cbd.

No tunnelling needed, and the busway through mater hill remains for certain routes.

[#Metro]

Is there any reason a metro couldn't be built from the outside in, as is being done in Sydney?

I have not explored this possibility, but if you or others wish to, I will not stop you of course

[tazzer9]

Is there any reason a metro couldn't be built from the outside in, as is being done in Sydney?

In Sydney, the metro finishes several kilometers north of the CBD, and passengers will change onto a conventional double deck train to reach the CBD....Until stage 2 of the metro under the harbour via Barangaroo to Central and Waterloo is built.

If BCC were keen to do the metro, they could do one from 8mp to Wooloobgabba, with passengers using VRR3 to reach the cbd.

No tunnelling needed, and the busway through mater hill remains for certain routes.

I think that is only happening in sydney due to political bungling and bouncing between where it should go through the city and how it should run towards the south.   Although before the new harbour tunnel is built, epping (especially the newcastle express trains) and chatswood are going to be very busy places.  There isnt going to much increase in capacity before the tunnel is built, and the noth shore is just going be more crazy.

[#Metro]

Is it worth putting the combined concept on FB and seeing what comments people have?