Cross River Rail Project

[verbatim9]

I remember the untangling our railways program back in 2007 in Sydney. I guess it did work for a while and was definitely needed. Trains to Cronulla are more reliable since duplication and express trains can pass all stop trains when approaching Hornsby.  The number of trains that can cross the harbour into the city has reached its peak. The city circle loop can't take anymore trains during peak.

Brisbane basin can do with more duplication out to Cleveland and quad track to Redbank. A new rail station and interchange at Beenleigh with 2km of Quad track approaching from both sides with 4 platforms at Beenleigh. Plus Sunshine Coast Duplication. Pretty sure all this has been mentioned a few times on this forum!?

[BrizCommuter]

Have a look at the planned operating model.  Your belief isn't relevant, the available information says 12tph from south of Beenleigh.

I think given the current state of infrastructure, 12tph on the opening of CRR south of Beenleigh is fanciful. 12tph seems like one of those 'Connecting SEQ 2041' plans where everything materialises in 2040.

Even if we get all the trains in the world and all the fully-trained drivers and guards in the world, fundamentally there is a track capacity issue between Beenleigh and Kuraby where an express train is unable to pass an all-stops train. Unless GC trains are going to stop all stations to Kuraby, I can't see how 12tph will work. Perhaps all stops to Loganlea and express from there inbound could negate this problem, but try selling an extra 6 stops to someone travelling from Robina (3 new infill stations + Holmview/Eden's Landing/Bethania).

I mentioned this above, but it didn't receive much comment, but Brisbane is in desperate need of a Sydney-style Clearways program. No new infrastructure, just key duplications, triplications and quad track as required.

The proposed CRR service frequencies are not possible without multiple infrastructure projects out of scope of CRR. The lack of mention of these by authorities is concerning.

[kram0]

The other thing that is concerning is the lack of information for off peak and weekend services. When will we be at a service standard similar to Perth on all lines both off peak weekday and weekends? The CRR will have a minimum service level to justify the infrastructure. 15 minutes frequency off peak won't cut it.

[James]

The other thing that is concerning is the lack of information for off peak and weekend services. When will we be at a service standard similar to Perth on all lines both off peak weekday and weekends? The CRR will have a minimum service level to justify the infrastructure. 15 minutes frequency off peak won't cut it.

Not until a government which is committed to public transport comes to power.

15 minute frequency to Springfield Central, Airport and Ferny Grove can happen today as the track capacity is there and there is no freight on these lines. As it stands, the old peak Cleveland line timetable showed that it was possible to run 15 minute frequency to both Cleveland and Shorncliffe - there wasn't much buffer in there timewise, but it was possible. Freight could be an issue though to Cleveland.

The major issue is the Beenleigh Line south of Altandi, Caboolture line between Northgate and Caboolture, and the Ippy west of Darra. The former due to GC expresses, the latter due to the freight task of those lines.

Oh, and the obvious one - the lack of trains and lack of drivers.

[not_available]

Would a Flagstone - Strathpine (or beyond), via CRR till Roma St then Trouts Rd, be possible/feasible?

[SurfRail]

Have a look at the planned operating model.  Your belief isn't relevant, the available information says 12tph from south of Beenleigh.

I think given the current state of infrastructure, 12tph on the opening of CRR south of Beenleigh is fanciful. 12tph seems like one of those 'Connecting SEQ 2041' plans where everything materialises in 2040.

Even if we get all the trains in the world and all the fully-trained drivers and guards in the world, fundamentally there is a track capacity issue between Beenleigh and Kuraby where an express train is unable to pass an all-stops train. Unless GC trains are going to stop all stations to Kuraby, I can't see how 12tph will work. Perhaps all stops to Loganlea and express from there inbound could negate this problem, but try selling an extra 6 stops to someone travelling from Robina (3 new infill stations + Holmview/Eden's Landing/Bethania).

I mentioned this above, but it didn't receive much comment, but Brisbane is in desperate need of a Sydney-style Clearways program. No new infrastructure, just key duplications, triplications and quad track as required.

It's possible to carry out overtaking moves in the peak direction at Bethania, and would also be possible at Kingston with some modest investment.  It's considerably easier to implement than CRR itself.

I don't offer any assessment about the likelihood this operating model will work or will be the one we end up with, but it is being explicitly planned for.

[Cazza]

Would a Flagstone - Strathpine (or beyond), via CRR till Roma St then Trouts Rd, be possible/feasible?

I think I mentioned it before somewhere but what should have happened with CRR is that it be a double decker tunnel (like the City Loop in Melbourne or am I just making that up?) so there are two sets of tracks running through, not just a single pair. Then, the bottom level will branch off around Normanby and follow KG/Enoggera Rds in a tunnel (with stations at QUT, Newmarket and 2 new underground platforms at Alderley) and then pop out just south of Stafford Rd at the beginning of the corridor.

It will then future proof (dare I say) the whole CBD with trains for years and years to come. Yes would be a lot more expensive. But, I think the unanimous motto around here is along the lines of "half-baked projects have long term consequences".

I'm not saying that CRR is a trash project, I'm saying that there is more potential to it. Having that extra funding boost could have gone a long way so capacity improvement works won't need to occur in the short term.

[#Metro]

I think I mentioned it before somewhere but what should have happened with CRR is that it be a double decker tunnel (like the City Loop in Melbourne or am I just making that up?) so there are two sets of tracks running through, not just a single pair. Then, the bottom level will branch off around Normanby and follow KG/Enoggera Rds in a tunnel (with stations at QUT, Newmarket and 2 new underground platforms at Alderley) and then pop out just south of Stafford Rd at the beginning of the corridor.

It will then future proof (dare I say) the whole CBD with trains for years and years to come. Yes would be a lot more expensive. But, I think the unanimous motto around here is along the lines of "half-baked projects have long term consequences".

I'm not saying that CRR is a trash project, I'm saying that there is more potential to it. Having that extra funding boost could have gone a long way so capacity improvement works won't need to occur in the short term.

Hi Cazza,

Double deck tunnel was proposed before (BaT) and also on this forum (yours truly) but with the project now set and the bus component dealt with by Brisbane Metro the time to review the tunnel design is closed IMHO.

At this stage I do not support the expenditure of $2-3BN+ on a line to Flagstone and beyond as I think the money is better spent closer to home on the existing network on things like ATP and changes that will permit DOO. Many areas of the city have already gone past the "rapid growth phase" and still do not have good service (i.e. trouts rd corridor, need for duplications etc and level crossing removals).

[not_available]

I think I mentioned it before somewhere but what should have happened with CRR is that it be a double decker tunnel (like the City Loop in Melbourne or am I just making that up?) so there are two sets of tracks running through, not just a single pair. Then, the bottom level will branch off around Normanby and follow KG/Enoggera Rds in a tunnel (with stations at QUT, Newmarket and 2 new underground platforms at Alderley) and then pop out just south of Stafford Rd at the beginning of the corridor.

It will then future proof (dare I say) the whole CBD with trains for years and years to come. Yes would be a lot more expensive . But, I think the unanimous motto around here is along the lines of "half-baked projects have long term consequences".

I'm not saying that CRR is a trash project, I'm saying that there is more potential to it. Having that extra funding boost could have gone a long way so capacity improvement works won't need to occur in the short term.

That's what I've been thinking about ever since I actually started looking at CRR. CRR seems to currently only be thought of as a way of freeing up Merivale Bridge, when (dare I say it) it also can be used as a good excuse to do quite a lot of things, such as Flagstone/Trouts Rd, send GC trains down along the M1, and maybe even CAMCOS/2tracks with a better Nambour - Brisbane alignment.

(As a side note, I really do hope the Gabba Station is going to be designed to actually handle peak/events)

[Cazza]

Double deck tunnel was proposed before (BaT) and also on this forum (yours truly) but with the project now set and the bus component dealt with by Brisbane Metro the time to review the tunnel design is closed IMHO.

At this stage I do not support the expenditure of $2-3BN+ on a line to Flagstone and beyond as I think the money is better spent closer to home on the existing network on things like ATP and changes that will permit DOO. Many areas of the city have already gone past the "rapid growth phase" and still do not have good service (i.e. trouts rd corridor, need for duplications etc and level crossing removals).

That's why I said "what should have happened".

I for one, and I'm sure many others not just on this forum, do not like urban sprawl at all and I have no idea why developers want to build huge housing developments all the way out in the middle of nowhere (such as Flagstone). I guess cheap land is probably the best bet but then that costs the economy big time in building infrastructure out there (as you mentioned) and travel times etc.

I was fanaticising a bit there but if thought through properly in the design stage, could have been implemented from the get go.

Also, by having CRR double deck wasn't just about a possible line out to Flagstone, but just to have that extra capacity when required.

[matlock]

The region around Flagstone is being developed anyway. We need the line there and we need Trouts Road and Sunshine Coast CAMCOS.

You don't build a line there, and the generation to settle there will never use the train. Behavioural studies show that people become reliant on a mode of transport and stick with it, so if that region becomes developed we've got to wait 30 years before the Flagstone line becomes well used. If it's there from the get-go it'll be a success.

Of course I'd prefer CRR to be double-decker, but right now even the Merivale alone isn't at capacity. It's anticipated to reach capacity by 2021 or 2024 - CRR will more than double the cross-river trains per hour.

[#Metro]

The region around Flagstone is being developed anyway. We need the line there and we need Trouts Road and Sunshine Coast CAMCOS.

You don't build a line there, and the generation to settle there will never use the train. Behavioural studies show that people become reliant on a mode of transport and stick with it, so if that region becomes developed we've got to wait 30 years before the Flagstone line becomes well used. If it's there from the get-go it'll be a success.

Of course I'd prefer CRR to be double-decker, but right now even the Merivale alone isn't at capacity. It's anticipated to reach capacity by 2021 or 2024 - CRR will more than double the cross-river trains per hour.

Sorry, at this stage I don't support it.

Generally, I prefer increasing the quality of rail over expanding the raw quantity (km) of rail  (e.g. network expansion).

People move there knowing full well that there is no train service there and it will cost BILLIONS and take decades to extend rail to serve their hamlet. We have areas that have been long established with high population that have poor or no service already. The southern portion of the Gold Coast line is one of them. The entire Sunshine Coast is another.

Service frequency on large parts of the network is abysmal, particularly when compared to the Perth network in WA. It is highly likely that Flagstone would get 30 minute off peak trains and supplementary peak hour services for the billions to be spent on it. A bit like Springfield and Kippa ring at the moment. Brand new infrastructure but grossly underutilised.

Then there are all the "little" things that make running trains frustrating on the existing network - things like too many level crossings, duplications required, track amplification, disability upgrades.

Flagstone et al is waaaaay down the list of priorities.

[James]

I think I mentioned it before somewhere but what should have happened with CRR is that it be a double decker tunnel (like the City Loop in Melbourne or am I just making that up?) so there are two sets of tracks running through, not just a single pair. Then, the bottom level will branch off around Normanby and follow KG/Enoggera Rds in a tunnel (with stations at QUT, Newmarket and 2 new underground platforms at Alderley) and then pop out just south of Stafford Rd at the beginning of the corridor.

There is no need for a double decker tunnel. A double decker tunnel would provide capacity for 40tph - double over the current capacity passing through the CBD as is. You might see it as 'future proofing', I see it as duplicating and over concentrating capacity where it isn't needed.

Once CRR1 is done, a second tunnel, CRR2, would have been built from around Corinda through to Morningside-ish or something like that, freeing up the Merivale to take 20tph from the Beenleigh line, not to mention providing Ipswich a faster trip into the CBD and allowing for Springfield to go to 20tph.

At this point you have:
- Shorncliffe - Flagstone via Merivale (12tph)
- GC/outer Beenleigh - Sunshine Coast/Caboolture via CRR1/Trouts Rd (20tph)
- Springfield - Kippa-Ring via Roma St (20tph)
- Ipswich - Cleveland via CRR2 (20tph)
- Inner south train - Doomben/Airport (8tph)

At this level of capacity, there's no particular need to provide more capacity - 20tph is more than enough capacity for Brisbane in 50 years time.

[techblitz]

Flagstone et al is waaaaay down the list of priorities

ideally flagstoners would be encouraged to work either on the GC or preferably springfield...NOT in Brisbane....

[BrizCommuter]

Flagstone et al is waaaaay down the list of priorities

ideally flagstoners would be encouraged to work either on the GC or preferably springfield...NOT in Brisbane....

Realistically Flagstoners work in Brisbane, were attracted by cheap and large plots of land, and after a year will realise they made a mistake by moving to the middle of nowhere.

[Cazza]

There is no need for a double decker tunnel. A double decker tunnel would provide capacity for 40tph - double over the current capacity passing through the CBD as is. You might see it as 'future proofing', I see it as duplicating and over concentrating capacity where it isn't needed.

Once CRR1 is done, a second tunnel, CRR2, would have been built from around Corinda through to Morningside-ish or something like that, freeing up the Merivale to take 20tph from the Beenleigh line, not to mention providing Ipswich a faster trip into the CBD and allowing for Springfield to go to 20tph.

At this point you have:
- Shorncliffe - Flagstone via Merivale (12tph)
- GC/outer Beenleigh - Sunshine Coast/Caboolture via CRR1/Trouts Rd (20tph)
- Springfield - Kippa-Ring via Roma St (20tph)
- Ipswich - Cleveland via CRR2 (20tph)
- Inner south train - Doomben/Airport (8tph)

At this level of capacity, there's no particular need to provide more capacity - 20tph is more than enough capacity for Brisbane in 50 years time.

I do think that a single pair will be fine as you have mentioned. This was just a thought bubble after all.

It's just times where say there is a signal fault or an issue with one of the tunnels or even just one train delayed 5 mins due to an uncooperative passenger. Trains can be easily diverted onto the other level. Also, on games days at the Gabba, will dwell times from loading and unloading large amounts of spectators (especially on Friday night games in the middle of peak times) delay regular services?

I know these are just some little things. I'm aware that they are rare and you probably have better odds in winning the raffle on a Saturday night at your local RSL club. But things like these do pop up.

I suppose a 10 min delay isn't probably worth an extra 2-3 billion, but you know, no harm in sharing an idea.

[Cazza]

There is no need for a double decker tunnel. A double decker tunnel would provide capacity for 40tph - double over the current capacity passing through the CBD as is. You might see it as 'future proofing', I see it as duplicating and over concentrating capacity where it isn't needed.

Once CRR1 is done, a second tunnel, CRR2, would have been built from around Corinda through to Morningside-ish or something like that, freeing up the Merivale to take 20tph from the Beenleigh line, not to mention providing Ipswich a faster trip into the CBD and allowing for Springfield to go to 20tph.

At this point you have:
- Shorncliffe - Flagstone via Merivale (12tph)
- GC/outer Beenleigh - Sunshine Coast/Caboolture via CRR1/Trouts Rd (20tph)
- Springfield - Kippa-Ring via Roma St (20tph)
- Ipswich - Cleveland via CRR2 (20tph)
- Inner south train - Doomben/Airport (8tph)

At this level of capacity, there's no particular need to provide more capacity - 20tph is more than enough capacity for Brisbane in 50 years time.

I do think that a single pair will be fine as you have mentioned. This was just a thought bubble after all.

It's just times where say there is a signal fault or an issue with one of the tunnels or even just one train delayed 5 mins due to an uncooperative passenger. Trains can be easily diverted onto the other level. Also, on games days at the Gabba, will dwell times from loading and unloading large amounts of spectators (especially on Friday night games in the middle of peak times) delay regular services?

I know these are just some little things. I'm aware that they are rare and you probably have better odds in winning the raffle on a Saturday night at your local RSL club. But things like these do pop up.

I suppose a 10 min delay isn't probably worth an extra 2-3 billion, but you know, no harm in sharing an idea.

[Gazza]

I reckon if you want extra capacity though, having the 2nd track pair on a different alignment serving different stations would get a better return.

Once CRR is nearing capacity in future decades, the next north south line could run via Eagle St and Central, which would leave the CBD reasonably well covered for the long term.

[James]

I do think that a single pair will be fine as you have mentioned. This was just a thought bubble after all.

It's just times where say there is a signal fault or an issue with one of the tunnels or even just one train delayed 5 mins due to an uncooperative passenger. Trains can be easily diverted onto the other level. Also, on games days at the Gabba, will dwell times from loading and unloading large amounts of spectators (especially on Friday night games in the middle of peak times) delay regular services?

I know these are just some little things. I'm aware that they are rare and you probably have better odds in winning the raffle on a Saturday night at your local RSL club. But things like these do pop up.

I suppose a 10 min delay isn't probably worth an extra 2-3 billion, but you know, no harm in sharing an idea.

I don't think the economic cost of such delays outweights the additional cost of building the tunnel.

It is worth discussing, although when you boil it down, the content in Connecting SEQ 2031 was actually very sound. It is just sad that the ideas put forward in this document have been scrapped and replace with a new document, which was then replaced with a new document.

[matlock]

Once CRR1 is done, a second tunnel, CRR2, would have been built from around Corinda through to Morningside-ish or something like that, freeing up the Merivale to take 20tph from the Beenleigh line, not to mention providing Ipswich a faster trip into the CBD and allowing for Springfield to go to 20tph.

Is CRR2 still a consideration?

A second train tunnel would realistically have to work with Trouts Road I'd imagine. The corridor is necessary for the Sunshine Coast Rapid Rail to be viable (and allows for some development along the corridor in Brisbane), but obviously the most glaring issue is at the southern end section where it needs to use the Ferny Grove Line between Alderley and Roma Street. Especially considering most existing conceptions of Trouts Road Rail argue for the necessity of land resumptions around Alderley anyway, why not a tunnel from here to the city?

[kram0]

The best solution in my opinion would be have a system as outlined in the below link, with seamless connections to the existing infrastructure. The metro type solution really does cover the heavily populated areas of inner city Brisbane.

https://brisbanedevelopment.com/brisbane-needs-an-east-west-mass-rapid-transit/

[ozbob]

https://twitter.com/jackietrad/status/965762089154371584

[ozbob]

Media Statements

Deputy Premier, Treasurer and Minister for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Partnerships
The Honourable Jackie Trad

Tuesday, February 20, 2018

Strong local and global field lines up to build Cross River Rail

The Palaszczuk Government has today announced the shortlisted companies for the contract to build Queensland's highest priority infrastructure project, Cross River Rail.

Acting Premier Jackie Trad said the announcement followed a comprehensive evaluation by the Cross River Rail Delivery Authority of the Expressions of Interest received for the project's two major works packages: The Tunnel, Stations and Development (TSD) public-private partnership and the Rail, Integration and Systems (RIS) alliance.

"Cross River Rail is a transformational project that will unlock the bottleneck at the core of our transport network and increase its capacity to deliver 'turn-up-and-go' public transport," Ms Trad said.

"It will also generate 7,700 jobs during construction, and stimulate decades of economic development opportunities right across South East Queensland.

"Shortlisted companies will now be required to prepare detailed bids that demonstrate innovation and offer Queenslanders the highest possible value for money.

"Once the assessment process is complete, the consortia selected from these shortlists will be building this project.

"This is a big milestone in the delivery of this critical project and is another demonstration of the Palaszczuk Government's commitment to Cross River Rail

"We are getting on with delivering this project and the calibre of the shortlist and the enthusiasm from the industry demonstrates how important Cross River Rail is to Queensland.

"It is the Palaszczuk Government that has fully funded this project and we are hitting exciting new milestones, on time, all the time.

"In August we held an Industry Briefing and announced to over 500 industry representatives that we were fully-committed to the project, calling for partners to work with us to deliver it. 

"In September we opened the Expressions of Interest process and in November the rigorous evaluation started.

"Today, we are proudly announcing the shortlisted consortia, with a strong field of national and multinational companies - yet another project milestone delivered on time.

"We promised to build Cross River Rail and that is exactly what we are doing."

Tunnel, Stations and Development public-private partnership consortia shortlist:

Pulse

CIMIC Group-led consortium, including Pacific Partnerships, CPB Contractors, UGL, BAM, Ghella and DIF

Qonnect

QIC, Capella Capital, Lendlease, John Holland and Bouygues

CentriQ Partnerships
   
Plenary Group, ACCIONA, GS Engineering & Construction, Salini Impregilo and Spotless Group


The Rail, Integration and Systems alliance shortlist:

River City Alliance
   
Laing O'Rourke Australia Construction Pty Limited, GHD Pty Ltd, Aurecon Australasia Pty Ltd, SYSTRA Scott Lister Australia Pty Ltd

Unity Alliance
   
CPB Contractors Pty Limited, UGL Engineering Pty Limited, Jacobs Group (Australia) Pty Ltd, AECOM Australia Pty Ltd

[kram0]

Media Statements

Deputy Premier, Treasurer and Minister for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Partnerships
The Honourable Jackie Trad

Tuesday, February 20, 2018

Strong local and global field lines up to build Cross River Rail

The Palaszczuk Government has today announced the shortlisted companies for the contract to build Queensland's highest priority infrastructure project, Cross River Rail.

Acting Premier Jackie Trad said the announcement followed a comprehensive evaluation by the Cross River Rail Delivery Authority of the Expressions of Interest received for the project's two major works packages: The Tunnel, Stations and Development (TSD) public-private partnership and the Rail, Integration and Systems (RIS) alliance.

"Cross River Rail is a transformational project that will unlock the bottleneck at the core of our transport network and increase its capacity to deliver 'turn-up-and-go' public transport," Ms Trad said.

"It will also generate 7,700 jobs during construction, and stimulate decades of economic development opportunities right across South East Queensland.

"Shortlisted companies will now be required to prepare detailed bids that demonstrate innovation and offer Queenslanders the highest possible value for money.

"Once the assessment process is complete, the consortia selected from these shortlists will be building this project.

"This is a big milestone in the delivery of this critical project and is another demonstration of the Palaszczuk Government's commitment to Cross River Rail

"We are getting on with delivering this project and the calibre of the shortlist and the enthusiasm from the industry demonstrates how important Cross River Rail is to Queensland.

"It is the Palaszczuk Government that has fully funded this project and we are hitting exciting new milestones, on time, all the time.

"In August we held an Industry Briefing and announced to over 500 industry representatives that we were fully-committed to the project, calling for partners to work with us to deliver it. 

"In September we opened the Expressions of Interest process and in November the rigorous evaluation started.

"Today, we are proudly announcing the shortlisted consortia, with a strong field of national and multinational companies - yet another project milestone delivered on time.

"We promised to build Cross River Rail and that is exactly what we are doing."

Tunnel, Stations and Development public-private partnership consortia shortlist:

Pulse

CIMIC Group-led consortium, including Pacific Partnerships, CPB Contractors, UGL, BAM, Ghella and DIF

Qonnect

QIC, Capella Capital, Lendlease, John Holland and Bouygues

CentriQ Partnerships
   
Plenary Group, ACCIONA, GS Engineering & Construction, Salini Impregilo and Spotless Group


The Rail, Integration and Systems alliance shortlist:

River City Alliance
   
Laing O'Rourke Australia Construction Pty Limited, GHD Pty Ltd, Aurecon Australasia Pty Ltd, SYSTRA Scott Lister Australia Pty Ltd

Unity Alliance
   
CPB Contractors Pty Limited, UGL Engineering Pty Limited, Jacobs Group (Australia) Pty Ltd, AECOM Australia Pty Ltd

At least this is strong progress in the right direction.

What are your thoughts OzBob on the consortia selected?

[matlock]

Great news. Now build it.

The best solution in my opinion would be have a system as outlined in the below link, with seamless connections to the existing infrastructure. The metro type solution really does cover the heavily populated areas of inner city Brisbane.

https://brisbanedevelopment.com/brisbane-needs-an-east-west-mass-rapid-transit/

Looks quite complex. Where would the trains be stabled?

Other than that, I fully support that. Areas like Hamilton and Teneriffe need more than just buses.

[ozbob]

At least this is strong progress in the right direction.

What are your thoughts OzBob on the consortia selected?

No idea 💡

Some of our ginger beers may know more.

[ozbob]

Brisbanetimes --> Final five in the running to build Brisbane's Cross River Rail

The digging of tunnels for Brisbane's Cross River Rail will begin in the second quarter of 2019, heralding the start of south-east Queensland's biggest infrastructure project for more than a decade.

Five companies from the 89 that registered "expressions of interest" are now competing to design the tunnels, the stations and the rail and information systems for Cross River Rail.

Combined, the short-listed companies have considerable experience in tunnel projects in Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane as well as Europe, the US and South America.

On the short list are companies responsible for the construction of the Sydney and Melbourne Metro underground rail projects, Sydney's CBD light rail, the Gold Coast light rail, Newcastle's light rail as well as Brisbane's Legacy Way and Airport Link tunnels.

The winning consortia will be announced in late 2018.

The underground rail system is expected to be finished in 2024, generating 7700 jobs during construction.

It will be the first major underground infrastructure built in Brisbane since Brisbane City Council finished the Legacy Way car and bus tunnel in June 2015.

Acting Premier Jackie Trad and Cross River Rail Delivery Authority chief executive Graeme Newton, Queensland's former co-ordinator general, announced the short-listed companies on Tuesday.

"This is a very detailed process which will take around 12 months," Ms Trad said.

Mr Newton said the preferred rail and rail signal alliance would be named in late 2018 and the preferred tunnel and stations contractor would be named in early 2019.

"They will set up their site, they will start excavating over at the GoPrint site, order their TBM [tunnel boring machines] and start to install them," Mr Newton said.

Woolloongabba's old Sunmap Centre – now the Department of Natural Resources and Mines Landcentre - and the old dental clinic will be demolished this year.

Ms Trad rejected criticism on Tuesday from Opposition Leader Deb Frecklington, whose LNP called on the state government to "get on with it".

"Let's be frank. If Deb Frecklington thinks building a $5.4 billion project can be built in the space of a year then I think she needs to go back and refresh herself on how you actually make big infrastructure project happen."

The Palaszczuk government in the 2017 state budget promised $2.81 billion over the next four years to get the underground project under way when the federal government refused to help fund the project, citing problems with passenger estimates in the business case.

The Queensland LNP did not support the project and chose to withdraw funds from it.

Infrastructure Association Queensland's chief executive Steve Abson welcomed the milestone in announcing national and international firms bidding for the work.

"The shortlisted proponents comprise companies having a strong track record and who have
delivered some of Australia's largest and most complex transport projects," he said.

"This should mean bidder innovation and strong input into the design solution to the benefit of taxpayers."

The short-listed tenderers for the tunnels, stations and associated development are:

1. Pulse, which includes the CIMIC companies (formerly Leightons); Pacific Partnerships, CPB Contractors, its underground rail engineering company UGL, Ghella, which worked on Legacy Way, Israeli civil engineering group DIF, which has an Australian arm, and BAM;

2. Qonnect, which includes the Queensland Investment Corporation (QIC), Capella Capital, Lendlease, John Holland and French civil engineers Bouygues, which has an Australian arm;

3. CentriQ Partnerships, which includes civil engineers ACCIONA, which worked on Legacy Way,  civil engineering public private partnership group Plenary Group, GS Engineering, Italian infrastructure giant Salini Impregilo and the Spotless Group.

Tenderers for the rail and the rail signalling systems:

1. River City Alliance, which includes Laing O'Rourke Australia Construction, GHD, Aurecon Australasia Pty Ltd and engineering project managers SYSTRA Scott Lister Australia Pty Ltd;

2. Unity Alliance, which includes CPB Contractors, UGL Engineering, infrastructure managers Jacobs Group Australia and AECOM Australia.

[SurfRail]

A second train tunnel would realistically have to work with Trouts Road I'd imagine. The corridor is necessary for the Sunshine Coast Rapid Rail to be viable (and allows for some development along the corridor in Brisbane), but obviously the most glaring issue is at the southern end section where it needs to use the Ferny Grove Line between Alderley and Roma Street. Especially considering most existing conceptions of Trouts Road Rail argue for the necessity of land resumptions around Alderley anyway, why not a tunnel from here to the city?

Notwithstanding what was in Connecting SEQ 2031, I think most people are approaching Trouts Rd on the basis it will have no physical interaction with the Ferny Grove line and that Alderley would just be an interchange.  You'd just tunnel straight to the Ekka Loop, pull up around the Victoria Park land bridge, and then swing into the CRR tunnels.  That would give you maximum flexibility for minimum cost, and also notionally lets you run at least the Rocky Tilt Trains via Trouts Rd (diesel extraction might be an issue for the Cairns sibling).

[aldonius]

That would strand Exhibition and still require 4 tracks if there's to be local service.

[Gazza]

You could run Exhibition into platform 9 post trouts rd...It would become the bastard child service though.

[ozbob]

Cross River Rail --> State investment fund puts hand up for Cross River Rail job

THE Government's own state investment fund has emerged as one of the shortlisted companies to build the Cross River Rail.

The Government fund manager, QIC (formerly Queensland Investment Corporation), is part of a five-company consortium, which also includes Lendlease and Capella Capital, bidding to construct the 5.9km tunnel and four underground stations.

Acting Premier Jackie Trad played down their inclusion, saying: "This will be a completely competitive process, there will be probity process implemented in relation to the whole tender process, it will be at complete arm's length to government."

It would take 12 months to award the $5.4 billion contract, with work due to begin midway through next year and trains expected to be operational by 2024.

The QIC's major clients include the defined benefit superannuation scheme for Queensland public servants along with substantial stakes in Brisbane Airport and Port of Brisbane.

The LNP criticised the project, saying it was a year behind schedule already, but Ms Trad accused the Opposition of trying to block it in the last hung parliament.

"If the LNP Opposition didn't oppose every single piece of major infrastructure that the Palaszczuk Government wanted to put forward then it would be a different conversation we are having," she said.

Ms Trad said the project would generate 7700 construction jobs and stimulate decades of economic development opportunities.

Infrastructure industry leaders welcomed the consortia shortlist as proof the long-awaited project "is happening" — and a stimulus for more development.

"What industry most wants is certainty. This provides it," Infrastructure Association of Queensland CEO Steve Abson said.

SHORTLISTED CONSORTIA

PULSE

Leader: CIMIC Group (CPB Contractors, Pacific Partnerships, Leighton Asia, UGL)

Partners: BAM, Ghella and DIF

QONNECT

Leader: QIC

Partners: Capella Capital, Lendlease, John Holland and Bouygues

CENTRIQ PARTNERSHIPS

Leader: Plenary Group

Partners: ACCIONA, GS Engineering & Construction, Salini Impregilo and Spotless Group

RIVER CITY ALLIANCE

Leader : Laing O'Rourke Australia Construction Pty Limited

Partners: GHD Pty Ltd, Aurecon
Australasia Pty Ltd, SYSTRA Scott
Lister Australia Pty Ltd

UNITY ALLIANCE

Leader: CPB Contractors Pty Ltd

Partners: UGL Engineering Pty
Limited, Jacobs Group (Australia)
Pty Ltd, AECOM Australia Pty Ltd

[Monster]

.... SHORTLISTED CONSORTIA

PULSE

Leader: CIMIC Group (CPB Contractors, Pacific Partnerships, Leighton Asia, UGL)

Partners: BAM, Ghella and DIF

QONNECT

Leader: QIC

Partners: Capella Capital, Lendlease, John Holland and Bouygues

CENTRIQ PARTNERSHIPS

Leader: Plenary Group

Partners: ACCIONA, GS Engineering & Construction, Salini Impregilo and Spotless Group

RIVER CITY ALLIANCE

Leader : Laing O'Rourke Australia Construction Pty Limited

Partners: GHD Pty Ltd, Aurecon
Australasia Pty Ltd, SYSTRA Scott
Lister Australia Pty Ltd

UNITY ALLIANCE

Leader: CPB Contractors Pty Ltd

Partners: UGL Engineering Pty
Limited, Jacobs Group (Australia)
Pty Ltd, AECOM Australia Pty Ltd

Given the current performances in other infrastructure spaces for these 2.... this is concerning

[SurfRail]

That would strand Exhibition and still require 4 tracks if there's to be local service.

Why would there need to be a separate local service?

[kram0]

.... SHORTLISTED CONSORTIA

PULSE

Leader: CIMIC Group (CPB Contractors, Pacific Partnerships, Leighton Asia, UGL)

Partners: BAM, Ghella and DIF

QONNECT

Leader: QIC

Partners: Capella Capital, Lendlease, John Holland and Bouygues

CENTRIQ PARTNERSHIPS

Leader: Plenary Group

Partners: ACCIONA, GS Engineering & Construction, Salini Impregilo and Spotless Group

RIVER CITY ALLIANCE

Leader : Laing O'Rourke Australia Construction Pty Limited

Partners: GHD Pty Ltd, Aurecon
Australasia Pty Ltd, SYSTRA Scott
Lister Australia Pty Ltd

UNITY ALLIANCE

Leader: CPB Contractors Pty Ltd

Partners: UGL Engineering Pty
Limited, Jacobs Group (Australia)
Pty Ltd, AECOM Australia Pty Ltd

Given the current performances in other infrastructure spaces for these 2.... this is concerning

Can you elaborate on your concerns and organisations in particular?

[Monster]

.... SHORTLISTED CONSORTIA

PULSE

Leader: CIMIC Group (CPB Contractors, Pacific Partnerships, Leighton Asia, UGL)

Partners: BAM, Ghella and DIF

QONNECT

Leader: QIC

Partners: Capella Capital, Lendlease, John Holland and Bouygues

CENTRIQ PARTNERSHIPS

Leader: Plenary Group

Partners: ACCIONA, GS Engineering & Construction, Salini Impregilo and Spotless Group

RIVER CITY ALLIANCE

Leader : Laing O'Rourke Australia Construction Pty Limited

Partners: GHD Pty Ltd, Aurecon
Australasia Pty Ltd, SYSTRA Scott
Lister Australia Pty Ltd

UNITY ALLIANCE

Leader: CPB Contractors Pty Ltd

Partners: UGL Engineering Pty
Limited, Jacobs Group (Australia)
Pty Ltd, AECOM Australia Pty Ltd

Given the current performances in other infrastructure spaces for these 2.... this is concerning

Can you elaborate on your concerns and organisations in particular?

Organisations were in bold.

I understand that a QLD Govt Dept is having issues with the less than stellar performance of both. With a significant cost impact to Operational Budget in rectifying errors made by them. Massive risk push back to The Dept in question. No accountability, less then acceptable due diligence, little understanding of the brief, all to the detriment of the QLD taxpayer.

Let's just say, they promise a lot, but deliver little.

[aldonius]

That would strand Exhibition and still require 4 tracks if there's to be local service.

Why would there need to be a separate local service?

Trouts Rd doesn't need 24tph in stopping services, but if you only have two tracks...

[SurfRail]

Yeah, but I don't think you'd end up with 24tph via Trouts Rd.  Kippa-Ring trains would most likely still be going via Northgate and feeding into CRR via Exhibition.  You'd get maybe 14 tph in the peak overlaid with 10 from Exhibition.  Of those, 4tph would continue to the Sunshine Coast, and I suspect you can slot those in so they don't need to stop between Alderley and Strathpine - if we're only talking stops at Everton Park, McDowall, Aspley and Bridgeman Downs at most, shouldn't be that hard.

The current plan talks about 28tph on a single track in peak, but that seems to include a stupidly high number of Kippa-ring trains travelling via both Exhibition/CRR and also being fed through the current route, which I don't accept as being at all sensible.  It would be:

- 14tph Caboolture / Sunshine Coast and 10tph Kippa-Ring with room for a little growth owing to ETCS allowing closer separation south of Victoria Park, so maybe 26-27 tph in the core.  Additional capacity would come from lengthening all trains to 9 cars and running the peak timetable for a longer period.  Through-routed to Beenleigh and Gold Coast.  ("Sector 1")

- Shorncliffe and Airport trains through-routed to Ipswich and Springfield. ("Sector 2")

- Ferny Grove and Doomben trains through-routed to Cleveland and Kuraby.  ("Sector 3")

The only 2 conflicts between operating sectors above arise between Sector 2 and Sector 3 at Eagle Junction where Doomben trains share tracks with Shorncliffe and Airport trains on the eastern track pair between Eagle Junction and Mayne, and between Sector 1 and Sector 3 between Dutton Park and Kuraby. 

At Mayne, the Kippa-ring trains slew over to the CRR lines, and the Shorncliffe and Airport trains slew over to end up on the main lines (ie Central platform 5).  Doomben stays on the same pair and is joined by Ferny Grove trains at Bowen Hills coming off the flyover.  For the southside issue, quad track to Kuraby is possible (there is room for it) and it would fix this issue completely.  It would still be a useful investment at least as far as Salisbury, even if Salisbury to Kuraby would be a bit stranded if an alternative Brisbane - GC eventually happens.

There are other conflicts even leaving aside freight, departmental trains and the like.

Sector 1 - it should be possible to do this without any conflicts.  Needs 4 tracks from Petrie to Strathpine and careful design of the Strathpine junction including how freight interacts with it.  (I think I have a rough idea which would only require a single flyover for southbound Caboolture / Sunny Coast trains to get to the NWTC, which I still need to sketch up.)  NWTC / Ekka Loop can be implemented to merge with the CRR tracks.  No intra-sector conflict between this point and anywhere else all the way to Beenleigh, which would need to be rebuilt and preferably have 4 platforms, although there would be limitations on the number of trains that can operate given the mixed stopping patterns.

Sector 2 - flat crosses at the Airport line junction and at Eagle Junction where outbound Doomben and Airport trains cross over inbound trains, and at Milton where you would split trains headed to Ipswich and Springfield into fully separate pairs to enable the Ipswich trains to run express.  Springfield trains would be the ones diverging to be on the eastern side, so they end up at platforms 1-2 at Darra.

Sector 3 - only at Park Road, but with the reduction in traffic due to the removal of GC and Beenleigh services this should be much more manageable, and might even allow the station to be properly rebuilt into a 2-platform station with no or at least much less curvature, with a passing track for the XPT.

[kram0]

Yeah, but I don't think you'd end up with 24tph via Trouts Rd.  Kippa-Ring trains would most likely still be going via Northgate and feeding into CRR via Exhibition.  You'd get maybe 14 tph in the peak overlaid with 10 from Exhibition.  Of those, 4tph would continue to the Sunshine Coast, and I suspect you can slot those in so they don't need to stop between Alderley and Strathpine - if we're only talking stops at Everton Park, McDowall, Aspley and Bridgeman Downs at most, shouldn't be that hard.

The current plan talks about 28tph on a single track in peak, but that seems to include a stupidly high number of Kippa-ring trains travelling via both Exhibition/CRR and also being fed through the current route, which I don't accept as being at all sensible.  It would be:

- 14tph Caboolture / Sunshine Coast and 10tph Kippa-Ring with room for a little growth owing to ETCS allowing closer separation south of Victoria Park, so maybe 26-27 tph in the core.  Additional capacity would come from lengthening all trains to 9 cars and running the peak timetable for a longer period.  Through-routed to Beenleigh and Gold Coast.  ("Sector 1")

- Shorncliffe and Airport trains through-routed to Ipswich and Springfield. ("Sector 2")

- Ferny Grove and Doomben trains through-routed to Cleveland and Kuraby.  ("Sector 3")

The only 2 conflicts between operating sectors above arise between Sector 2 and Sector 3 at Eagle Junction where Doomben trains share tracks with Shorncliffe and Airport trains on the eastern track pair between Eagle Junction and Mayne, and between Sector 1 and Sector 3 between Dutton Park and Kuraby. 

At Mayne, the Kippa-ring trains slew over to the CRR lines, and the Shorncliffe and Airport trains slew over to end up on the main lines (ie Central platform 5).  Doomben stays on the same pair and is joined by Ferny Grove trains at Bowen Hills coming off the flyover.  For the southside issue, quad track to Kuraby is possible (there is room for it) and it would fix this issue completely.  It would still be a useful investment at least as far as Salisbury, even if Salisbury to Kuraby would be a bit stranded if an alternative Brisbane - GC eventually happens.

There are other conflicts even leaving aside freight, departmental trains and the like.

Sector 1 - it should be possible to do this without any conflicts.  Needs 4 tracks from Petrie to Strathpine and careful design of the Strathpine junction including how freight interacts with it.  (I think I have a rough idea which would only require a single flyover for southbound Caboolture / Sunny Coast trains to get to the NWTC, which I still need to sketch up.)  NWTC / Ekka Loop can be implemented to merge with the CRR tracks.  No intra-sector conflict between this point and anywhere else all the way to Beenleigh, which would need to be rebuilt and preferably have 4 platforms, although there would be limitations on the number of trains that can operate given the mixed stopping patterns.

Sector 2 - flat crosses at the Airport line junction and at Eagle Junction where outbound Doomben and Airport trains cross over inbound trains, and at Milton where you would split trains headed to Ipswich and Springfield into fully separate pairs to enable the Ipswich trains to run express.  Springfield trains would be the ones diverging to be on the eastern side, so they end up at platforms 1-2 at Darra.

Sector 3 - only at Park Road, but with the reduction in traffic due to the removal of GC and Beenleigh services this should be much more manageable, and might even allow the station to be properly rebuilt into a 2-platform station with no or at least much less curvature, with a passing track for the XPT.

How do you suppose the shorncliffe and airport lines slew over to the mains without impacting northbound trains?

[bretto82]

.... SHORTLISTED CONSORTIA

PULSE

Leader: CIMIC Group (CPB Contractors, Pacific Partnerships, Leighton Asia, UGL)

Partners: BAM, Ghella and DIF


You can add CPB to that list as well
QONNECT

Leader: QIC

Partners: Capella Capital, Lendlease, John Holland and Bouygues

CENTRIQ PARTNERSHIPS

Leader: Plenary Group

Partners: ACCIONA, GS Engineering & Construction, Salini Impregilo and Spotless Group

RIVER CITY ALLIANCE

Leader : Laing O'Rourke Australia Construction Pty Limited

Partners: GHD Pty Ltd, Aurecon
Australasia Pty Ltd, SYSTRA Scott
Lister Australia Pty Ltd

UNITY ALLIANCE

Leader: CPB Contractors Pty Ltd

Partners: UGL Engineering Pty
Limited, Jacobs Group (Australia)
Pty Ltd, AECOM Australia Pty Ltd

Given the current performances in other infrastructure spaces for these 2.... this is concerning

Can you elaborate on your concerns and organisations in particular?

Organisations were in bold.

I understand that a QLD Govt Dept is having issues with the less than stellar performance of both. With a significant cost impact to Operational Budget in rectifying errors made by them. Massive risk push back to The Dept in question. No accountability, less then acceptable due diligence, little understanding of the brief, all to the detriment of the QLD taxpayer.

Let's just say, they promise a lot, but deliver little.

[SurfRail]

How do you suppose the shorncliffe and airport lines slew over to the mains without impacting northbound trains?

Crude diagram attached.

At Albion, Kippa-Ring trains are on the mains, Shorncliffe/Airport/Doomben trains are on the subs.

At the northern end of Mayne, Kippa-Ring trains are routed into the CRR connection which means the mains south of the CRR connection are basically unused.  (Freight and long distance would likely use the CRR connection too I guess.)

South of that point, Shorncliffe and Airport trains flat cross over to the mains.  As there is no Kippa-Ring traffic on this stretch, there is no clash.

The only clash is that Doomben trains are sharing the subs until the other services slew over.  Northbound Doomben services are obstructed, but not southbound.  There is no clash between Doomben and FG because of the flyover.