Cross River Rail Project

[Golliwog]

Thats what engineers are for!

[frereOP]

Thats what engineers are for!

Aaaaaaarrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrgggggggggghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[mufreight]

Thats what engineers are for!

What are they for, spending exorbitant amounts of time and money to delay projects, drink coffee, justify their existence and complicate any simple process.

[Golliwog]

We only get coffee if the coffee van comes and visits the site. And yes, thats right, we love wasting time and money. It's not like we have anything better to do, like making sure things get built properly and to specification.

[#Metro]

What happened since I last posted here?

[O_128]

Acually Mr RACQ, the Sunshine Coast should Line be on there at no#2.

Totally agree!!! A very noticable absence. Plus the Gateway Motorway, Bruce Highway and Pacific Motorway should be crossed off the list. Roll on the mass rail upgrades instead.

F**K the gateway, Ive lived in qld for 7 years and that monstrosity has been being upgraded the entire time, everytime its  finished they go back and add another lane. Its a massive black hole

[Gazza]

We only get coffee if the coffee van comes and visits the site. And yes, thats right, we love wasting time and money. It's not like we have anything better to do, like making sure things get built properly and to specification.

Agreed.....Dunno why Australia has such disrespect for people that have actually gone out and worked hard to become professionals in this field.
It's attitudes like the ones seen above that have resulted in the "brain drain" in Australia, that drives them all to go work offshore in the Europe/Asia/Middle East, because at least their skills are actually valued over there, and subsequently those countries enjoy a higher standard of infrastructure and infrastructure delivery, because they have the cream of the crop.

[frereOP]

We only get coffee if the coffee van comes and visits the site. And yes, thats right, we love wasting time and money. It's not like we have anything better to do, like making sure things get built properly and to specification.

Agreed.....Dunno why Australia has such disrespect for people that have actually gone out and worked hard to become professionals in this field.
It's attitudes like the ones seen above that have resulted in the "brain drain" in Australia, that drives them all to go work offshore in the Europe/Asia/Middle East, because at least their skills are actually valued over there, and subsequently those countries enjoy a higher standard of infrastructure and infrastructure delivery, because they have the cream of the crop.

Probably because engineers believe you can solve a problem by building an ediface which ends up not solving the problem but adding to it leaving the cause unaddressed.  eg

Why invest in public transport to relieve congestion when you can build a new tollway?
Why invest in catchment restoration when you can build a new water treatment plant?
Why invest in energy saving technologies when you can build a new power station?

QED

[#Metro]

To be fair, the decisions are made at the control level- politicians and their advisers.

If the government is willing to pay for the construction of not-so-useful infrastructure, then the engineers simply do the job and get paid for it. Thank you very much.

[Golliwog]

We only get coffee if the coffee van comes and visits the site. And yes, thats right, we love wasting time and money. It's not like we have anything better to do, like making sure things get built properly and to specification.

Agreed.....Dunno why Australia has such disrespect for people that have actually gone out and worked hard to become professionals in this field.
It's attitudes like the ones seen above that have resulted in the "brain drain" in Australia, that drives them all to go work offshore in the Europe/Asia/Middle East, because at least their skills are actually valued over there, and subsequently those countries enjoy a higher standard of infrastructure and infrastructure delivery, because they have the cream of the crop.

Probably because engineers believe you can solve a problem by building an ediface which ends up not solving the problem but adding to it leaving the cause unaddressed.  eg

Why invest in public transport to relieve congestion when you can build a new tollway?
Why invest in catchment restoration when you can build a new water treatment plant?
Why invest in energy saving technologies when you can build a new power station?

QED

Uhhh, we don't always get that much say in what goes on. In some cases we do, but we also get things like those above where we get told, "We want to build [this]". I would hope we would suggest alternatives, but at the end of the day you're not going to disobey your employer.

[Gazza]

Agree with above, I said something similar in the Goodna station topic..... Ultimately it's not our money, and it's not our say what gets built. We can try to push our agenda along with everyone else, but if an engineer gets hired to design a road tunnel, then they just have to design the best tunnel they can in the given constraints.
There was a post on Human Transit on this issue actually.

Why invest in public transport to relieve congestion when you can build a new tollway?

You need an engineer to do the PT infrastructure too.

[ozbob]

From the Brisbanetimes click here!

Underground rail 'flood proof'

Underground rail 'flood proof'
Tony Moore
May 16, 2011 - 3:00AM

Read more: http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/underground-rail-flood-proof-20110428-1dyi7.html#ixzz1Kq3cZoAy

It may have been submerged in the January floods, but the state government says there is no need to change the design of the Albert Street entrance Brisbane's planned underground rail system.

However, the government has agreed to raise the level of rail land near Rocklea that was flooded in January.

A prominent Brisbane engineer yesterday said losing power to the floodgates was a "potential danger" that would have to be avoided to stop water flowing into the tunnels.

Professor David Williams, from University of Queensland's school of civil engineering, said it was crucial to keep the power source for the heavy steel floodgates out of the water.

"The floodgate would be hydraulically moved into position and that is a potential danger if the power is lost," he said.

"It is a system based on the need for power, and in times of flood you could lose power."

However, Professor Williams expected early flood warnings would prevent power loss to the station before the floodgates were closed.

Many Brisbane riverside hotels and car parking stations were closed for months after January's floods because their power supplies were destroyed.

Brisbane City Council made changes to development application guidelines in this area.

However, the Cross River Rail Project team insisted specially-designed floodgates would protect the Albert Street entrance and the "southern portal" at Yeerongpilly.

They say the design can withstand flood water higher than that experienced during the January floods.

"The January 2011 floods would not have required the floodgates at Yeerongpilly and Albert Street to be activated," a spokeswoman said.

"Furthermore, the proposed raised entry points at Albert Street Station would have prevented the January floodwaters from entering the station.

"Even if the water had been higher, the tunnel would have still been protected by the floodgates – which have been designed to withstand water levels seven metres higher than those experienced during the January floods."

Design diagrams show the floodgates are designed to protect against a 'one in 10,000' flood.

But Professor Williams said the wall construction would need to be strengthened.

"You would need to make the wall sufficiently stiff to withstand whatever water pressure it might have against it," he said.

"But that is certainly do-able."

Photographs from the roof of a nearby inner-city hotel clearly show at least a half metre of water in the area near the Albert Street entrance.

However, the project team insisted there was no need to change the plans for the Albert Street entrance.

"Had it been necessary to activate flood controls procedures at Albert Street Station, the station could have been closed off without affecting trains from servicing the other stations along the Cross River Rail network," the project spokeswoman said.

However, she said the level of the rail line near Rocklea, to the south of the southern portal at Yeerongpilly, would be raised.

"The Cross River Rail reference design released in November 2010, includes raising the tracks at Clapham Rail Yard higher than the January 2011 flood level," she said.

Other design changes are likely after community and industry feedback is assessed, she said.

"Community and stakeholder feedback received on the reference design in late 2010 is now being used to refine the design, where possible, and details of the refinements are expected to be released as part of the environmental impact statement for Cross River Rail later this year."

Professor Williams said the floodgates appeared to be heavy steel doors, set into guides, that were sealed on all four sides under hydraulic pressure.

At Albert Street, the floodgates are positioned at the first level under the road level.

This protects the vast majority of the station from inundation, even if the top level was temporarily flooded.

At Yeerongpilly, they appear to be housed inside a "flood" building and dropped into position.

None of the project engineers were available to be interviewed by brisbanetimes.com.au.

Read more: http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/underground-rail-flood-proof-20110428-1dyi7.html#ixzz1Kq39Cj6z

[Golliwog]

A well researched article. I'm just not quite sure why, of all the engineers at UQ (and the rest of Brisbane) they went with Prof Williams. His expertise is in mining. Still valid points though.

[Stillwater]

Doesn't mining require tunnels?

[Fares_Fair]

did I see a light bulb just come on ?   

Regards,
Fares_Fair.

[Golliwog]

Yes mining requires tunnels. But this article has almost nothing to do with the tunnel itself, but with its flood proofing systems. He talks about the waters impact on the power system and the hydraulic mechanism to operate flood gate, so wouldn't discussing with a hydro, mechanical or electrical person make sense as well, moreso than a soils person. http://www.uq.edu.au/uqresearchers/researcher/williamsdj.html?uv_category=bio

[Golliwog]

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/underground-evacuation-route-not-protected-from-flood-20110429-1dzzt.html

The main southside evacuation route from Brisbane's proposed underground rail project was submerged under 10 metres of water in January's flood and would not have been protected by floodgates.

The Cross River Rail project team conceded the design flaw this afternoon after Tennyson councillor Nicole Johnston demanded they move the evacuation route.

The project team yesterday claimed the underground rail project was "flood-proof".

Advertisement: Story continues below "That area was fully underwater. Yeronga and Fairfield flooded up to the 10-metre mark," Cr Johnston said.

"This is just not a sensible place to put a piece of emergency access infrastructure."



Read more: http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/underground-evacuation-route-not-protected-from-flood-20110429-1dzzt.html#ixzz1KtdGAyWU

[ozbob]

Another beat up. It has been known since the design inception that the evacuation point was in a flood area.  The fact is if that is flooded then so is Brisbane, nothing is moving, it is simply sealed. 

Maybe we should move the whole of Brisbane ...

[#Metro]

Maybe the exit point should be moved. It is a real possibility that people would have to be evacuated during a flood, and if flood water were to somehow seep down into the tunnel via that exit, then there would be a lot of horrible silt-pumping and cleaning to be done in a confined space.

Fairfield Gardens last time I saw it a few weeks ago was still closed. Maybe they need a longer evacuation tunnel to exit out at Fairfield Station?

With all respect, I think the local councillor is just having a bit of a NIMBY over-reaction there.
It's in a tunnel buried underneath the ground! Whats next? No buried gas, sewerage, telephone and water pipes near my house?

And isn't Cr Johnson the one who called for cars on the busway and the Eleanor Schonell Bridge to be opened to car traffic? Are you serious??!!?!

[ozbob]

I think the possibility of people being evacuated in a flood is zero.

But they will probably move it now, along with the rest of Brisbane ...  LOL  How can we have a metro in a flood plain?  Horror!!

I think the CRR is looking increasing unlikely, this Government couldn't organise a birthday party at the Golden Arches, nor could the opposition based on their recent track record.  Scary future isn't it?

[colinw]

I think the CRR is looking increasing unlikely, this Government couldn't organise a birthday party at the Golden Arches, nor could the opposition based on their recent track record.  Scary future isn't it?

Sadly I believe you are correct, both about the chance of it proceeding and the organisational skills of either Government or Opposition.

Without CRR, it is hard to see what future there is for the rail system as a major part of our public transport system. It simply will not be able to keep up with demand.

What lower cost alternatives to CRR are there, that might bring 75% of the benefit at less than half of the cost?

I'm thinking about combinations of smaller projects, e.g.

- next generation signalling (CBTC: in-cab signalling with virtual blocks to reduce headways, as used on Madrid Metro and elsewhere)
- track amplifications (e.g. duplicating the Merivale Bridge and quad from South Brisbane to Salisbury).
- grade separations (Park Road in particular, but what about Roma St?)
- a lower cost 2nd rail crossing of the river (resurrect some of the 1970s plans?)

What else?

We need to continue to lobby for CRR as priority #1, but should consider alternatives for a world without CRR.

Unfortunately I just do not see any of these things providing the enormous benefits that CRR with stations at Boggo Road, 'Gabba, Albert St & Ekka did.  A lot of urban renewal plans are going to go pear shaped as a result of delaying CRR, even the Yeerongpilly TOD looks a bit dodgy with only a half hourly rail service.

[ozbob]

Yes, unless they put the case forward for CRR pronto, it is a funding improbability.  The will be trumped by the southerners I feel ..

I have always thought that there is a lot more than can be done with flyovers and so forth.  Everytime I pass through Melbourne or Sydney, you see what can be achieved.  Here it is always too hard, and when they do get the opportunity more than likely botched.  The classic example of late being the bizarre up sub between Corinda and Darra and Darra station layout itself.  I think the rail operator wants to do things, the clowns up above just don't get it IMHO.

[Stillwater]

There is a window of opportunity to get CRR right and mount a convincing case to Canberra for IA funding before Victoria and NSW plonk their big projects list on the table.  And ... we need to establish a good benefit-cost ratio for CRR, or else IA will look to projects in other states with better benefit-cost analysis.  And the cost of CRR, whatever its final design, should be accurate, with little chance for future cost overrun surprises.

All IA funding has been allocated to 2015.  The state government  must position CRR to start immediately in 2015-16.  For that to happen, it must have a thorough and comprehensive business case, not just a note saying 'please Julia, can we have some money for a rail project because it is Queensland's turn to have a really big thing'.

The May federal budget will give some clues as to where the Commonwealth is heading.  Infrastructure bonds offered to super funds, perhaps?  Although, super funds would be wary of investing in projects such as the Clem 7.  That's why the finance and business case must be realistic and iron-tight.

[somebody]

What lower cost alternatives to CRR are there, that might bring 75% of the benefit at less than half of the cost?

I'm thinking about combinations of smaller projects, e.g.

- next generation signalling (CBTC: in-cab signalling with virtual blocks to reduce headways, as used on Madrid Metro and elsewhere)

That one has merit, but may not be cheaper than CRR, and does not speed up the Gold Coast and Beenleigh line trains.

- track amplifications (e.g. duplicating the Merivale Bridge and quad from South Brisbane to Salisbury).

Duplicating the Merivale Bridge is a sadly flawed idea which was dismissed by the ICRCS.

- grade separations (Park Road in particular, but what about Roma St?)

Don't support Park Rd.  It would be a largely stranded investment post CRR.

Roma St I'm a bit more ambivalent about.  I assume you are referring to the conflicting move heading towards Milton on the suburbans vs from South Brisbane.  This would not be an issue without CRR as you could not use the suburbans for the Ipswich line due to capacity reasons.

We need to continue to lobby for CRR as priority #1, but should consider alternatives for a world without CRR.

Disagree.  World without CRR is doom and gloom.  We should consider it only to show how important it is.

Unfortunately I just do not see any of these things providing the enormous benefits that CRR with stations at Boggo Road, 'Gabba, Albert St & Ekka did.  A lot of urban renewal plans are going to go pear shaped as a result of delaying CRR, even the Yeerongpilly TOD looks a bit dodgy with only a half hourly rail service.

You could increase the service to Yeerongpilly, probably to an 8 minute service standard if you really wanted to, with no new infrastructure and no scheduled delays to other trains, such as the Gold Coast ones.  Add 4tph via Tennyson + my Coopers Plains plan.  Problem is that it would still be an infuriatingly slow service.  Journey times roughly double the drive time do not promote patronage.

[colinw]

Thanks Somebody, your response to my post drives home just how futile the situation would be if CRR was axed.

Your response shows what I suspected my post might draw out, which is that the alternatives to CRR are all 3rd rate partial or non solutions to the problem and there really is no alternative to building CRR.

A system-wide rollout of CBTC would have merit, as you say, but it is going to be expensive and will not alleviate junction bottlenecks, etc.

I agree that Park Rd grade separation only makes sense if there is no CRR, and the Merivale Bridge remains the primary southside route.

Alternatives like running more trains via Milton & Tennyson don't stack up either, as you just exchange one set of flat junction conflicts with another, as well as greatly increasing freight conflicts and potentially impacting the performance of the Ipswich/Springfield line as well.

Projected increases in coal traffic from west of Toowoomba are likely to make the Tennyson line and the dual gauge between Yeerongpilly & Park Rd less available for passenger services anyway.  Coal & freight traffic increases alone mandate additional passenger tracks from Yeerongpilly inward to get the passenger services of the dual gauge line, once again making the case for CRR.  No CRR and we're up for quad track or more from Yeerongpilly inward, with potentially major disruption to the suburbs along the line.

I agree with your point about the slow journey time as well.  Recently I had cause to use the Illawarra line in Sydney, to go to Waterfall.  No problem with service frequency, but by the time we reached Sutherland I was nearly ready to tear my few remaining hairs out.  That service is a crawl - if you thought the Beenleigh Line was slow just try catching the Waterfall train.

[somebody]

Illawarra line, Sutherland to Central on a train from Waterfall:
Rail distance: 24.64km.
Peak service time: 34mins
Peak service speed: 43km/h
Off peak service time: 41mins
Off peak service speed: 36km/h
Whereis by road is 24.7km in 36mins

Beenleigh line to Beenleigh:
Rail Distance: 41.1km
Peak limited stops service time: 60mins
Peak limited stops speed: 41km/h
All stops service time: 62mins
All stops speed: 40km/h
Whereis by road is 35.6km in 27mins


Fast train from Cronulla time: 30mins
Fast train from Cronulla speed: 59km/h
Gold Coast train service time: 46mins
Gold Coast train speed: 54km/h

The Cronulla fast trains are faster than the Gold Coast trains!  This is bad because CityRail are acknowledged by many as being one of the slowest (if not the slowest) train services in the developed world.

The competition to road by the Beenleigh line is completely laughable, and even for the Gold Coast trains, whereas the Illawarra line is at least in the ballpark.  This is affected by the quality of the roads involved though.

As for increased coal, I say that appropriate crossovers would have made the DG not required in the PM peak.  This could extend to the AM too, and that probably doesn't need extra crossovers.

[colinw]

The competition to road by the Beenleigh line is completely laughable, and even for the Gold Coast trains, whereas the Illawarra line is at least in the ballpark.  This is affected by the quality of the roads involved though.

Offpeak this is probably true, in peak definitely not the case.  The Beenleigh Line is also distinctly faster than driving along the adjacent main road (Logan Road -> Kingston Road -> whatever it becomes after Waterford West) at any time of day.

It is a real shame that the Gold Coast line was built off the end of the Beenleigh Line, rather than along the motorway corridor.  The Gold Coast line is seriously degraded by the suburban trundle.

Interesting that the Cronulla trains get a much better run than Waterfall ones do.  The Waterfall service I took was excruciating, although getting my mate to drive up the freeway from Wollongong and pick me up was still much faster than catching a train right through to the Gong.  We got an extra hour on the flying field with our models by doing that.

Even with CRR in place, the Beenleigh Line is going to be a dog in terms of travel time, although taking out the horribly indirect route from Park Road to Roma St will help.

[somebody]

The competition to road by the Beenleigh line is completely laughable, and even for the Gold Coast trains, whereas the Illawarra line is at least in the ballpark.  This is affected by the quality of the roads involved though.

Offpeak this is probably true, in peak definitely not the case.  The Beenleigh Line is also distinctly faster than driving along the adjacent main road (Logan Road -> Kingston Road -> whatever it becomes after Waterford West) at any time of day.

I can go along with that.  I was really only meaning to pillory the off peak performance.

It is a real shame that the Gold Coast line was built off the end of the Beenleigh Line, rather than along the motorway corridor.  The Gold Coast line is seriously degraded by the suburban trundle.

Fix up the bit through Trinder Park, resuming 10 houses or so, and tunnel from Runcorn to near Sunnybank or beyond and these issues aren't really a problem anymore after CRR though.  You also need to do something to protect the platform faces in the surface parts, I guess.

Interesting that the Cronulla trains get a much better run than Waterfall ones do.  The Waterfall service I took was excruciating, although getting my mate to drive up the freeway from Wollongong and pick me up was still much faster than catching a train right through to the Gong.  We got an extra hour on the flying field with our models by doing that.

Not surprising.  Waterfall trains only pick up 4 stations south of Sutherland and these are low density areas.  The Cronulla branch has 6 stations and much higher density.

The bit down the hill from Waterfall is a real shocker, so I would agree that would be better.  It may have been better to get a Cronulla train and get picked up from Sutherland, unless the Waterfall train was coming sooner.

What did annoy me about this one was the reluctance to make the trains fast and ask Cronulla people for Kogarah to change at Sutherland.  Although at least they had a theory.  A number of infrastructure projects in SEQ it isn't entirely clear at all what their theory is.

Even with CRR in place, the Beenleigh Line is going to be a dog in terms of travel time, although taking out the horribly indirect route from Park Road to Roma St will help.

To Holmview this would be true.  But there are other places served, like Moorooka where the road alternative is not good at all.

[mufreight]

As for increased coal, I say that appropriate crossovers would have made the DG not required in the PM peak.  This could extend to the AM too, and that probably doesn't need extra crossovers.

Even removing the coal movements all together has little effect on the peak operations.
The Southern freight bypass if/when built will actually further reduce the availability of the DG post the construction of CRR unless the provision is made for additional ng tracks between Yeeroongpilly and Coopers Plains due to the operation of ng freight/coal services over the dual gauge lines from Kagaru through to Dutton Park.

[somebody]

As for increased coal, I say that appropriate crossovers would have made the DG not required in the PM peak.  This could extend to the AM too, and that probably doesn't need extra crossovers.

Even removing the coal movements all together has little effect on the peak operations.
The Southern freight bypass if/when built will actually further reduce the availability of the DG post the construction of CRR unless the provision is made for additional ng tracks between Yeeroongpilly and Coopers Plains due to the operation of ng freight/coal services over the dual gauge lines from Kagaru through to Dutton Park.

I was trying to say that freight probably could use the DG in peak, with a few changes.

I thought the southern freight bypass would take freight off the Ipswich line and DG?  Not so?

[colinw]

I thought the southern freight bypass would take freight off the Ipswich line and DG?  Not so?

It'll take it off the Ipswich line, but if it is going to the port it will have to traverse the entire DG line from Acacia Ridge inwards.

[somebody]

I thought the southern freight bypass would take freight off the Ipswich line and DG?  Not so?

It'll take it off the Ipswich line, but if it is going to the port it will have to traverse the entire DG line from Acacia Ridge inwards.

I though it included something along the Gateway motorway to prevent this?  Or is it too indirect that way?

[Jonno]

The future of CRR lies in redirecting existing freeway or main road expansion funding to pay for it.  The harsh reality is that our economy cannot afford to fund both.  We know that freeway and road expansion only makes traffic problems worse so that funding must be redirected. This will make the case to Canberra much much smaller.  Canberra also needs to direct funding to rail and metro transit away from freeway expansion/extension.

[colinw]

I though it included something along the Gateway motorway to prevent this?  Or is it too indirect that way?

There was, at one point, a proposal to build a standard or dual gauge freight line along the Logan and Gateway motorways, but AFAIK that has never been anything more than kite flying.

The Southern Freight Rail Corridor in its present form is a proposal to build a line from west of Rosewood across to near Kagaru on the interstate line.  It would allow freight from the west to access Acacia Ridge and the proposed dual gauge intermodal yard at Bromelton, but access to the Port of Brisbane would still be via the current line from Acacia Ridge to the port.

http://www.tmr.qld.gov.au/Projects/Name/S/Southern-Freight-Rail-Corridor-Study.aspx

In any case, as is clear on the above site, it is one of the QLD Governments "2031" projects and as such probably not to be taken seriously.

[SurfRail]

I though it included something along the Gateway motorway to prevent this?  Or is it too indirect that way?

There was, at one point, a proposal to build a standard or dual gauge freight line along the Logan and Gateway motorways, but AFAIK that has never been anything more than kite flying.

The Southern Freight Rail Bypass in its present form is a proposal to build a line from either west of Rosewood, or from the Ebenezer spur, across to near Kagaru on the interstate line.  It would allow freight from the west to access Acacia Ridge and the proposed dual gauge intermodal yard at Bromelton, but access to the Port of Brisbane would still be via the current line from Acacia Ridge to the port.

There was stuff floating around a while back about what is now the Southern Freight Rail Corridor extending further east to the Yatala Enterprise Area (ie another brewery with a freight line close by). I don't recall seeing anything concrete about a Gateway corridor, but to be perfectly honest, I think it wouldn't go astray - as long as it linked from the existing corridor in the Drewvale area.  (It would probably require Acacia Ridge to be closed down and replaced with the proposed outer intermodal terminals at Bromelton and out west to make any sense, although it would give a much better alignment than the current route to the port.)

I have also seen concept work for railyards coming into the north eastern part of the precinct off the Gold Coast line - that would go down really well with my fellow travellers who still bandy the "Bombay Express" epithet around.

[Golliwog]

More development proposed around the 'Gabba precinct:

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/rising-from-the-chalk-20110518-1et0c.html

The owner of Brisbane's Chalk Hotel has unveiled his plans to build three residential highrises in Woolloongabba.

BT Hotels and Property Group director Steve Hammond has lodged an application with Brisbane City Council to develop three towers of 20, 25 and 30 storeys.

Mr Hammond hopes to build the three towers behind the existing Chalk Hotel on land he has progressively accumulated over seven years.

Read more: http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/rising-from-the-chalk-20110518-1et0c.html#ixzz1MkrGogbu

[Zoiks]

There are a large number of new proposals and developments in the area. The government should be getting a cut from developers to go into a CRR fund

[O_128]

There are a large number of new proposals and developments in the area. The government should be getting a cut from developers to go into a CRR fund

I agree with the amount of proposals in the area even 1 million from each development would be enough for the cost of the station

[colinw]

The Courier-Mail -> 90-storey building planned for Vision Tower site

Just a stone's throw away from the proposed Albert St CRR station.

THE site of the failed Vision Tower in the Brisbane CBD has been earmarked for what is being touted as Brisbane's tallest building.

The new owners of the property which spans between 111 Mary Street and 222 Margaret Street, have lodged a development application with the Brisbane City Council for a 90-storey or 297 m-tall development.

It proposes two towers for the site featuring a five-star hotel, commercial and residential development. The project will be known as 111+222.

...

[SteelPan]

Let's get on with it (crr) - then we can look to stage two, Newman's subway concept and the inner orbital tunnel WITH RAIL.....     I think IF the politics falls right, Brisbane at long last, could be in for some serious infrastructure!  Yes we CAN DO it!