Northern Link tunnel

[#Metro]

Well it could :-). But allow me to explain.

If 468 it continued to the city, then you would have to pull more buses into service (with funding that may not be forthcoming) to pick up passengers on that route to maintain the same frequency. By turning the 468 bus back at Indro, it causes a quicker turnaround time, which means the same or higher frequency along the 468 route using less buses.

Let's take the extreme case where the bus was full. When it got to Indoroopilly, passengers would transfer (i.e. be fed) to a 444 megaBUZ which would take them to the city. This allows the 468 to turn around immediately (empty) and grab more passengers quickly. Any empty seats on the 444 or any other bus going to the city would also be filled up too.

The saving lies in:
Taking passengers from multiple routes which have fewer passengers and pooling them.
Making sure that buses going to the city aren't almost empty and have a minimum of empty seats. Transporting empty seats to the city is inefficient and costly. Think IKEA.
Maintaining service or increasing frequency to people who live far from the CBD but want to catch PT.

If overcrowding results, you just put more 444 buses on. (444 megaBUZ is just an articulated bus, sure beats the name 'CityGlider').

[somebody]

tramtrain, there are only 2 problems with what you have outlined.  (1) Pax despise it, and (2) if you have to transfer, it would be faster on a train at least 80% of the time.  I don't think I can add anything to this.

[#Metro]

(1) and (2) are right, but there are no ideal solutions are there? Building a busway, or a rail line will take a while. NIMBY groups and consultation will extend that further. One could ask and lobby for more funding to extend the service, but that would require an undefined or indefinite wait.

In the meantime, i guess we ought to make better use of what there already is, until the lobbying works and the pollies see the light and realise that more PT funding is worthwhile. Giving a full city service to the people catching 468 means that someone waiting for a 333 or 66 or any other route simply will have to wait a bit longer to get relief. An extra 333 or 66 would do more good than a extra 468 given the overcrowding issue. But it isn't my decision to make.

And there would be more empty seats transported to the city, which is no use to anyone. 

[david]

Just to add to the conversation regarding the 468:

I am a regular user of this service and I tend to catch the service in the middle of its route (which means that it won't matter whether I go out to Indooroopilly or Oxley Station as the travel time is similar). I am firmly against extending this route into the City. This bus is very reliable at the moment, and extending it into the City would cause all sorts of reliability issues, not to mention adding even more buses into an already bus-congested CBD. More routes like these should be introduced, as over time, I believe people will warm up to the idea of changing services to reach your destination (I certainly have). Feeder services are definitely the way of the future, as it is not sustainable (financially and environmentally) to continuously create tunnels/roads in the CBD for buses.

The connections are almost perfect for the 468 at Indooroopilly and Oxley. Why mess with it now?

Futuristically, all bus services should feed into either a busway station or a train station. Then the trunk route (111, 222, 333, 444) would take passengers into the city at a ridiculous frequency (i'm talking every 1-2 minutes). Some services could be extended to service Adelaide St and the City Precincts. If the busways are ever converted into light rail, then only a select few buses would service the city, leaving plenty of spare buses for very frequent feeder services. Of course, that will probably never happen, but it's always good to dream

[ozbob]

From Brisbanetimes click here!

Revealed: Link between bus drivers and tunnel

Revealed: Link between bus drivers and tunnel
TONY MOORE
September 9, 2009 - 5:49AM

Be the first to comment

More than 2000 of Brisbane City Council's 9800 staff are bus drivers.

And why is that important, other than helping us all get to work? Because bus drivers' wage increases are driving a bigger than predicted employee expenses bill for Brisbane City Council.

After last night's council meeting the Northern Link tunnel - which is to run from the Toowong roundabout to the Inner City Bypass at Kelvin Grove - will now go ahead.

It is to generate $69 million in toll revenue and QTC estimates there is potential to cover a slow uptake on traffic numbers through "higher rates and utility charges".

However, while the Northern Link project is guaranteed QTC also points out that if staff wages are not controlled, council may have some problems keeping other projects on track.

The QTC report says: "Brisbane City Council's commitment to Northern Link may limit its ability to fund other expenditure and could result in deferral of projects related to core activities.

"Brisbane City Council will need to exercise tight control to limit employee expense growth to the 0.6 per cent forecast for 2009-2010."

At last night's meeting it was revealed that employee costs had already increased 1.27 per cent, from $739 million to $749 million, in the first three months of the 2009-10 financial year.

Earlier, before the exact figures were known, Lord Mayor Campbell Newman identified bus driver wages as the deciding factor, but said it was not a problem because savings would be found.

"Well, the staffing costs are being driven primarily by the increasing number of bus drivers to provide new bus services," Cr Newman said.

"And generally we receive funding from the State Government to support those.

"Elsewhere in the organisation however we need to control very carefully staff numbers and things like that."

Independent consultants AT Kearney found savings of about $30m a year in the council and had recently been called in again, Cr Newman said.

BCC Opposition Leader Shayne Sutton said the wage increases had to be considered carefully.

"That is important. Employee costs for the council have gone up 1.27 per cent in the first quarter and that is something that both Cr [Adrian] Shrinner and the Lord Mayor need to have an explanation about," she said.

Cr Shrinner, the Finance Committee chairman, agreed that bus driver wages were causing part of council's staff cost increases.

"There has also been a EBA rollover and that has been a 4.5 per cent increase in terms of the staff and that has had an impact on the budget," Cr Shrinner said.

The next phase of the EBA is slightly more to what was originally forecast, he said.

"Every organisation has to watch its employee costs but certainly the increase in bus drivers and the cost that come with that is the primary factor here," Cr Shrinner said.

"And we are doing everything we can to keep other areas of council under tight control in terms of employee expenses."

Expressions of interest to built the Northern Link tunnel will be called shortly and a preferred builder will be named in mid-2010.

Work will be underway by Christmas 2010.

Just watch those 2000 bus drivers.

[somebody]

Just to add to the conversation regarding the 468:

I am a regular user of this service and I tend to catch the service in the middle of its route (which means that it won't matter whether I go out to Indooroopilly or Oxley Station as the travel time is similar). I am firmly against extending this route into the City. This bus is very reliable at the moment, and extending it into the City would cause all sorts of reliability issues, not to mention adding even more buses into an already bus-congested CBD. More routes like these should be introduced, as over time, I believe people will warm up to the idea of changing services to reach your destination (I certainly have). Feeder services are definitely the way of the future, as it is not sustainable (financially and environmentally) to continuously create tunnels/roads in the CBD for buses.

The connections are almost perfect for the 468 at Indooroopilly and Oxley. Why mess with it now?

Futuristically, all bus services should feed into either a busway station or a train station. Then the trunk route (111, 222, 333, 444) would take passengers into the city at a ridiculous frequency (i'm talking every 1-2 minutes). Some services could be extended to service Adelaide St and the City Precincts. If the busways are ever converted into light rail, then only a select few buses would service the city, leaving plenty of spare buses for very frequent feeder services. Of course, that will probably never happen, but it's always good to dream

Following on from this, should we then abandon the idea of the 454/450/455 and the Riverhills City Precints service (can't remember the number) and just make the Riverhills service which connects to the train at Darra the full time service?  Even to get to Indooroopilly shops the train might be faster than the 450.  Same for the 460/461.

There is some argument for this if there is no bus priority, but I really think we should have the bus priority and have the single seat service.  Even when there was a bus lane on Coro, it wouldn't really have been enough.


One more thing, given that the "ridiculous frequency" thing isn't going to happen in the foreseeable future, isn't the right now answer to co-ordinate the routes to increase frequency as much as possible?  I really hate the idea of the spine service with the change for all pax at the end of the run, like the 111/160.  It's dumb.  These 111s/160s could easily become the 5xx services which now start from Garden City, except for the problem of the different operator.  At least the 444 runs to the end without expecting pax to change.

[somebody]

For an interesting read on the merits of bus/rail connections, have a look at this link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beeching_axe

While it admits that it could have been managed better, it is reasonable to infer that if decreasing the single seat journeys is a negative, than increasing the single seat journeys is a positive.  Bus congestion in the CBD is a whole lot better than car congestion.

[ozbob]

Very interesting read.


This article referenced in the Beeching story  is quite a turn around.

From the BBC News click here!

Move to reinstate lost rail lines

Move to reinstate lost rail lines
Commuters on train
Atoc says record demand has led to the need for investment

Train operators are calling for widespread expansion of the rail network in England, with 14 extra lines and about 40 new stations proposed.

The Association of Train Operating Companies said there was a need for expansion to cope with rising demand.

It said the expansion, which would cost ?500m and possibly reuse lines closed under the 1960s Beeching cuts, could serve more than 1m extra passengers.

Any decisions on future expansion rest with government and Network Rail.

Atoc chief executive Michael Roberts said: "Record passenger numbers and rising demand require us to plan for the long term, while climate change and population growth make it vital that in doing so, we adapt the rail network to meet tomorrow's needs.
   
Any expansion should be publicly-owned and free from the chaos and profiteering of the privatised franchise system
Bob Crow, Rail Maritime and Transport

Lines that connected communities
Rail links to the past

"Providing attractive new services and easier access to the rail network will encourage passengers to switch to rail from other, less green, modes of transport.

"We have established that there is a strong business case for investment to bring a number of towns back on to the rail network.

"Now we need to safeguard these routes and develop the detailed case for investment."

The Beeching report by Dr Richard Beeching in the 1960s resulted in the railway network being cut by a third, closing 2,000 stations and 5,000 miles of track.

The Atoc report says 40 towns not currently on the rail network could benefit from the 14 new lines.

Freight potential

It says the new stations could be operational within five to 10 years.

Any decision on whether any of the plans get the go-ahead would be taken by local and regional government, Network Rail and the Department for Transport.

Atoc argues infrastructure from some of the old lines closed in the 1960s could be refurbished to form part of the new network.

Freight lines could also be adapted to serve commercial routes, it said.

Transport Minister Chris Mole said the government would consider the findings of Atoc's report.

"The government's priority is to bring about changes, such as capacity improvements, which will deliver benefits for rail passengers now," he said.

"For the longer term, we will work with local authorities who want to improve links to the rail network, and will plan to make funding available from 2014 for successful schemes which demonstrate value for money."

Financial constraints

Shadow transport secretary Theresa Villiers said the research was "interesting" and made "an impressive case" for reopening disused rail lines.

She added: "Conservatives recognise the value of these transport corridors, which is why we have called for a moratorium on building on any disused rail lines still in public ownership.

"Certainly, housing growth and the need to cut emissions from transport and tackle road congestion means that all political parties should look seriously at the ideas put forward in this report, though it is clear that the state of the public finances will put constraints on what is possible over the next few years."

Bob Crow, general secretary of the Rail Maritime and Transport union, said: "RMT has repeatedly called for an expansion of rail services to create green jobs and green transport options as part of our campaign for a people's railways.

"However, any expansion should be publicly-owned and free from the chaos and profiteering of the privatised franchise system."

[#Metro]

Bus congestion is something that should be avoided. It annoys passengers, wastes fuel and time.
Having direct services to the city is an option available to Brisbane now, but one that is likely to progressively become unavailable in the future. The Mass Transit report explains this (boldening is added)

The South East Busway is rapidly reaching its vehicle carrying capacity under the present
operational approach. Figure 9-1 illustrates the current peak-hour bus volumes on the South
East Busway.

The South East Busway is constrained by the capacity of the intersections of the South East
Busway and Melbourne Street, its intersection with North Quay, and the Cultural Centre
Busway Station. The busiest section of the South East Busway is just north of
Woolloongabba prior to some services exiting the busway to cross into the city on Captain
Cook Bridge.

If traffic congestion on Stanley Street or the Captain Cook Bridge delays buses exiting the
busway, congestion can occur. As illustrated in Figure 9-1 the current volumes of in-bound
buses at the Cultural Centre station in the peak hour is 179 buses per hour or a bus every
20 seconds during the peak hour. At the busiest point of the busway, north of
Woolloongabba, 294 in-bound buses pass in the peak hour. This equates to a bus every 12
seconds. This is approaching the maximum vehicle carrying capacity of the South East
Busway (using the currently available bus fleet).
Clearly there is an urgent need to provide additional capacity to address existing capacity
constraints and short-term growth. The infrastructure capacity of the busways will, however,
soon be exceeded if additional capacity is only provided by providing more standard buses.

The reason why is that the system will overload. The CBD is only so big. So is Queen St and KGS Stations. It is also less efficient, as there will be more empty seats on the bus when there could be a passenger sitting in it, and require more buses (more cost to govt).

Currently Brisbane?s bus network is largely radial with the majority of bus services providing
direct service to the CBD. The capacity of stations and roads within the inner city will be
exceeded if the current service structure continues through to 2026.

http://www.brisbane.qld.gov.au/bccwr/about_council/documents/sept07_optionsaddressdemand_brisbane_mass_transit_investigation_lmt.pdf


I actually caught 468 again this weekend. As others have said, it is extremely reliable, coming within 1 minute of the timetable when I was there. The bus was about 35-45% full. Changing at Indooroopilly for a city bus only took a few minutes. If the transferring service is frequent, the waiting is reduced.

[somebody]

Bus congestion is something that should be avoided.

I do agree with this point.  But what I've been trying to say, is that if you force people to change services, they are likely to avoid public transport altogether.

I actually caught 468 again this weekend. As others have said, it is extremely reliable, coming within 1 minute of the timetable when I was there. The bus was about 35-45% full. Changing at Indooroopilly for a city bus only took a few minutes. If the transferring service is frequent, the waiting is reduced.

It's not too bad heading inbound, but what if your outbound bus hits some traffic?  You've just missed your connection and have an hour wait, or something like that.

[#Metro]

It depends on frequency I guess.

Direct Service
Lets say you miss the 435. You're stuck in the city until the next one arrives. That might be half an hour or an hour.

Feeder
Now let's say you miss the 444. You catch the next one which is only a few minutes away.
You get to Indro, and miss your 435 connection.

You can:
- Wait for the next one to come (short routes can turn around faster, but let's say 15 min or half an hour wait)
- You can go into Indro and have a coffee if the next one really is an hour away
- You can call a taxi if it's that urgent (easy to do, Indro, Chermside, Garden City, Carindale are all major centres) which is cheaper than doing the same thing from the CBD and getting stuck in outbound traffic jams.
- Call someone to pick you up (again, easier and shorter than doing the same from the CBD)

- Vow not to catch the bus again, in which you would have to pay for petrol all the way from Brookfield to the CBD and get stuck in traffic (6km/hr or less), and pay $30 for parking (if you find one).

If the CBD stations can't physically fit the buses (2026+), what is the alternative? You can't run a direct route without busjam.
If you don't force some people to transfer, then you will have to force them to sit in busjam.

I think that there isn't solution that inconveniences nobody;
Feeders put the inconvenience on the smaller number of people. I think that is fairer than inconveniencing everyone who uses the network through a bus jam. You could make the feeder services free, given that the trips are now shorter and trips don't have to travel all the way to the CBD.

This system uses feeder buses, where passengers then transfer to trunk bus lines.
*It carries more passengers per hour (up to 67 000 pax/hour) than heavy rail and the London metro.
*Transfer times are minimal (max 3 minutes wait)
*A trip costs just US 0.64c
*The system is actually profitable; Trips on feeder buses are free.
* Paper ticketing has been abolished

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TransMilenio
http://www.transmilenio.gov.co/WebSite/English_ExploreTheTopics.aspx

[somebody]

It depends on frequency I guess.

That's probably the critical point.  If saving money by truncating the routes allows frequency to be increased, then you might be making 2 forward steps with the 1 backward step.

It is possible to increase the CBD's bus capacity.

[#Metro]

How?

[ozbob]

How?

Restrict private motor vehicles in the CBD.  This is inevitable IMHO.  Limited access to vehicles for deliveries etc. and disabled access.  The days of driving to and through the CBD are coming to an end.

This in turn will free up the streets for buses and dare I suggest light rail  

When the cross river rail project is in place there will be more options to travel to and from the CBD precincts as well.

[david]

People people...

Please remember that we do have a rail network present. There is easily spare capacity on most lines (especially those still serviced by 3-car units in peak hour). Feeder buses to not necessarily have to feed into BUZ services. Places like Sunnybank/Altandi, Tarragindi/Rocklea, Yeronga, The Gap/Keperra and Bracken Ridge could all have feeder services into train stations, hence minimising bus capacity issues in the CBD. Also the use of articulated buses can also help alleviate constraints on the bus network. Better yet, a CBD toll, to discourage motor vehicles from the CBD, however, the PT system would need to be tip-top before considering such an idea.

If we ever do have feeder services, they need to be a minimum of 30 minutes frequency, and have a good coordination with the buses coming from the city or to the city. This can be easily done though BT Bus Control - If the 444 was running late, for example, a quick call to Bus Control to notify them, followed by Bus Control relaying the message to the services waiting at Indooroopilly could easily work. A similar system would need to exist at major bus-rail interchanges.

[#Metro]

The way the system is managed in Bogota, has bus control resemble that of an airport control operation  
Too much restriction on private vehicles in the CBD isn't going to be popular IMHO. I would imagine groups like the RACQ and The Property Council would oppose it.  A toll might pass, but a vehicle ban would not get through the BCC/QGov.

David, you are very right about the rail feeder services.   Trains are huge, and an increase in their frequency could do the trick- every 5 to 10 minutes. (I am not waiting 30 minutes if I miss the train though). Proper interchanges are needed (and I don't mean a casual bus stop- it has to have a bus bay under shelter or similar).Toowong and Indro and maybe Corinda? RailBOT has been asking for rail feeder services for a while!

I dare spruik my tramtrain idea, but I wont...

[somebody]

It is possible to increase the CBD's bus capacity.

Here's a couple of right now suggestions: terminate the 330 & 340 at KGSBS.  I don't suggest any other routes as that would violate the definition of BUZ services, but you could change the definition.  Extend the 333 to Woollongabba to reduce dwell times at the Cultural Centre.  Combine the 109+66 to free up about 12 peak paths/hour.  Use the extra stop in KGSBS for Kelvin Grove Rd services.  Re-instate the bus lane on Ann St.

In the long term, a new cross river tunnel to a new bus station from Buranda; or a Western Busway to a new bus station.  And/or an expanded Cultural Centre station.  At one time there was talk of expanding the QSBS east under the mall.

Please remember that we do have a rail network present. There is easily spare capacity on most lines

That's true, but not very much depending on who you ask.  Without the cross river link or upgraded signalling we will gobble up the remaing capacity soon enough.

[#Metro]

I had an idea. I know that it won't be implemented.

Can the NL tunnel for cars. Instead of having the tunnel exit into the ICB, just have it exit into Roma St Busway.
Then sink shafts along the alignment down to the tunnel. In these shafts, install lifts and escalators. Put a park and ride at the far Western Exit.

Western Busway complete.

An alternative would be to have the above + cars in some unique dual busway/freeway configuration.

[somebody]

I had an idea. I know that it won't be implemented.

Can the NL tunnel for cars. Instead of having the tunnel exit into the ICB, just have it exit into Roma St Busway.
Then sink shafts along the alignment down to the tunnel. In these shafts, install lifts and escalators. Put a park and ride at the far Western Exit.

Western Busway complete.

An alternative would be to have the above + cars in some unique dual busway/freeway configuration.

Can I modify your proposal into something a bit more reasonable?

If the NL tunnel is to be built, make it 6 lanes with a 24 hour bus lane in each direction and a connection to the Northern busway at Normanby.  Then widen the Western freeway to 6 between Moggill Rd and the NL link, again with a 24 hour bus lane in each direction, and a bus interchange at Chapel Hill including for freeway services.  Then the 425/430/433/435/445/450/453/454/460/443 could avoid Milton Rd & Coronation Dr entirely and just stick to the freeway.  You'd still have the 444 running along the Indooroopilly corridor.

Probably wouldn't happen either, but it's a bit more likely than your proposal.

[#Metro]

  I like! I'd rather not modify the idea, but create a new "option" if that makes sense.

Widening freeway is probably not going to happen given the $ situation (or will it? nothing seems to get in the way of a big road project). But designating one lane in the NL tunnel as a HOV or HOT lane would do the same. And seems simple.

And speeds up buses
And keeps them direct to the city

Does anyone else have any further suggestions? A new BUZ might be needed for that route- Mt Ommaney  BUZ?

[Jon Bryant]

Why is canning the Northern Link not a reasonable proposal?  Building the Northern link for cars (4 lanes) whilst doing nothing or the minimum for PT (2 lanes) will only ensure that people drive first and only take public transport once the congestion returns which it will within 2-3 years, if that.   I think converting the Northern Link proposal into a busway is a great idea.  2 lanes of busway moves the same number of people to 6 lanes of freeway.  That alone makes converting it to a busway a great idea.   

We must stop providing capacity for 80% of trips to be by road because "planners" believe PT demand will only reach 15-20%.  By building the road capacity to handle 80% of trips at peak hour we guarantee that PT will never reach 20%.  We are making the competion to PT (i.e. driving) so attractive even finanacial and environmental concerns are put aside.  Existing roads space needs to be converted to public transport as it is more efficent at moving people. Even if we don't include the secondry cost factors such as increase health burden, road deaths, etc., etc.    It is time the RACQ and the Property Council remove their blinkers and wake up to the mess created by a road focused road system which they have promoted for over 40 years.  "Deal with it" I say. 

The cities that have achieved upwards of 60% active and public transport like Berlin, Zurick, Vienna, Vancouver, etc, have a network that cross-crosses the city, 5 min service in peak hour and people do jump on and off lines to get around the city.  Theyu have also not built freeways and limit car parking.  I visited and lived in these cities and a car is just not required. Even better they have invested far less in their transport sytem over the last 40 years beacuse they fixed their transport problems form the start rather than keep build roads in the blind hope that congestion will be cured. 

To achieve a similar system here in SEQ the following must happen:
1. our busways need to be converted to light rail and become trunk routes (e.g. the 333 from Aspley to Beenligh, Cleveland to Ipswich, etc);
2. each major road to have light rail in it own dedicated lane;
3. our existing rail network to be operating at max including new cross-river tunnels;
4. a number of new heavy rail lines built to allow people to move around the city and not always throuh the CBD;
5. each and every major stop needs to be a TOD or a mixed use commerical centre at a minimum to make them safe and enjoyable urban environments rather than unsafe car parks.
6. all routes need to operate at a max 5 minute frequency in peak hour and 10-15 in off peak.   

If the money spent on the NSBT, Airport Link, Gateway and now Northern Link was spent on PT instead we could have been a long way down this path.  It is a path that we will go down as Peak Oil and Climate Change impacts are felt.

Doing anything else is just throwing good money after bad... and it is our money. 

[somebody]

Why is canning the Northern Link not a reasonable proposal?  Building the Northern link for cars (4 lanes) whilst doing nothing or the minimum for PT (2 lanes) will only ensure that people drive first and only take public transport once the congestion returns which it will within 2-3 years, if that.   I think converting the Northern Link proposal into a busway is a great idea.

Because, politically, it would never happen.  The electorate just wouldn't swallow it.  On the other hand, the SE busway, Northern & Eastern busways all are eventuating, but are any of them tunnel for their entire length?

I actually think that the Northern link probably won't happen, at least not for a while.  So, we must reinstate the transit/bus lane on Coro or Milton Rd in the meantime.

[#Metro]

Boggo Road Busway in in a tunnel for a large part (not entire) length.

Busway carries more passengers than inefficient road lanes, where there is one person in a car and the four other seats transport air. Not to mention all the space in front and behind the vehicle to keep safe distance and prevent tailgaiting/crashes.

BT's mode share (i.e. the proportion of the transport pie that a mode (bus/train etc) takes up for 2026 is 13%.
While it would be convenient to criticise the BCC and push for something closer to 100%, it real change has to happen in individuals who make the decision to drive (horse to water analogy).

Despite all the overloadings and increases in bus usage, mode shares have made modest gains. More people are coming to Brisbane and I think that PT increases more reflect the people influx and ticketing structures (same people catching more, different modes) than proportionately new passengers.

The problems are made more challenging as the cheap land is in places like Ipswich, Springfield, Beenleigh, Browns Plains and there is a low-density 'heritage core' of Queenslander houses in the inner city suburbs (low density). Rail can reach all these places, but even if they do, it would be a fraction of the people that take a car.

'Somebody' is right. Its about votes and giving people what they want (entrenched car culture). Spending big on roads while not including bus lanes/busways/entry-exit portals or comparitive studies...

[mufreight]

Obviously the message is that political expediency to cater for the car oriented cultute overides practical solutions to transport solutions, a fact that has been obvious to commuters for years.

[Jon Bryant]

Tramram your comment

it would be a fraction of the people that take a car

assumes that we have supplied enough road space for 80% of trips by road.  If we only supply road space for 20% of trips and public, active and rail freight transport for 80% then the shift will be massive as the alternative is quicker and cheaper.

As for making decisions based on popular choices if this was the case then we would still be promoting smoking and asbestos.  Yet we don't.  A stance must be taken and it needs to be taken now. 

[david]

I caught the 455 Rocket during PM peak yesterday, which travels along Milton Road. It took a whole 22 minutes to get from Roma Street to the Toowong roundabout! (Total journey time to Mt Ommaney was a little over 35 minutes - the bus flew down the Western Freeway when it eventually reached it)

For comparison, the 5:21pm Ipswich express train takes 18 minutes to get from Roma Street to Darra

Bring on those bus lanes!

[#Metro]

So NL costs $1.7 Billion eh?

Look what one can do with $1.7 billion (actually slightly less) in PT:
http://www.pta.wa.gov.au/scripts/viewoverview_contact.asp?NID=2430

project overview

The $1.66 billion New MetroRail project - the largest public transport infrastructure project ever undertaken in Western Australia - has effectively doubled Perth's metropolitan rail network.

New MetroRail was the division of the Public Transport Authority responsible for planning and overseeing the construction of the project.

Construction commenced in 2002.  Works to extend the Joondalup Line and the new Thornlie spur line, have been completed, 93 new railcars have been delivered, and a major new railcar depot is already in operation.

The centrepiece of the project was the Mandurah Line (formerly known as the Southern Suburbs Railway) from Perth to Mandurah, which was opened on Sunday 23 December, 2007.

The Mandurah Line comprises 72 route kilometres of double-track railway, 11 stations, 774m of twin tunnels under the Perth CBD, 20 bridges and structures, significant road and civil works, a 25kV overhead wiring system, and two electrical substations.

The project has successfully met complex engineering challenges including the design and construction of underground tunnels in Perth's CBD.  This has opened up opportunities to revitalise shopping and business areas. The project provides people with better access to the Swan River foreshore and a doorstop service to the Perth Convention and Exhibition Centre.

New MetroRail ceased operations following the opening of the Mandurah Line. 

The Mandurah Line is part of the Transperth network and all enquiries relating to the new train and bus services should be directed to Transperth.

[somebody]

I caught the 455 Rocket during PM peak yesterday, which travels along Milton Road. It took a whole 22 minutes to get from Roma Street to the Toowong roundabout! (Total journey time to Mt Ommaney was a little over 35 minutes - the bus flew down the Western Freeway when it eventually reached it)

For comparison, the 5:21pm Ipswich express train takes 18 minutes to get from Roma Street to Darra

Bring on those bus lanes!

Not to mention the 8 minutes or so to get from QSBS to Roma St Station.  That's also something they should do something about.

[ozbob]

From the Brisbanetimes click here!

Third Brisbane tunnel attracts foreign interest

Third Brisbane tunnel attracts foreign interest
TONY MOORE
November 2, 2009 - 5:32PM

Companies from Spain, Italy, Korea, Singapore, Switzerland and France are among the seven consortia who now want to build Brisbane's Northern Link tunnel.

Once a tender is chosen construction could start before Christmas 2010 and run through until October 2014.

Last year Brisbane City Council shelved the project after being dissatisfied with the tenders it received, prompting an overseas trip by Lord Mayor Campbell Newman to find more bidders.

At that stage, Brisbane City Council proposed the Northern Link tunnel - running from Toowong to the Inner City Bypass - would be a public private partnership (PPP), funded by a toll.

But after the local development industry cooled in the past 12 months, council reached agreement with the Queensland Government to restructure the project, making Northern Link effectively council's largest roadworks project.

Lord Mayor Campbell Newman said he was "absolutely thrilled" with the overseas firms expressing interest in building the five-kilometre tunnel.

"Between now and Christmas we will be considering these expressions of interest and we will be announcing a short list," Cr Newman said.

"These (consortia) will be permitted to proceed to the tender process. That tender process will take place in the New Year, up until July 2010.

"And then we intend to seek contract close between September and December next year.

"With construction activity potentially starting before Christmas in 2010."

Australian consortia include TunneLink; a joint venture between Thiess John Holland and Abigroup contractors; and LBRJV, a consortium including Leighton Contractors and Baulderstone, who are now building the Clem 7 tunnel.

Overseas consortia include: Northern Direct including the company building the Go-Between Bridge with companies from France and the United Kingdom; Laing O'Rourke and Transfield; TransCity including Brisbane-based developers BMD Constructions plus firms from Spain and Italy; Dragados Northern Link with business interests from Spain; and Korea's Daelim and Korea Expressway Joint Venture.

Campbell Newman said the overseas companies had been approached when he and Brisbane City Council's Major Projects team both travelled overseas.

[O_128]

From the Brisbanetimes click here!

Third Brisbane tunnel attracts foreign interest

Third Brisbane tunnel attracts foreign interest
TONY MOORE
November 2, 2009 - 5:32PM

Companies from Spain, Italy, Korea, Singapore, Switzerland and France are among the seven consortia who now want to build Brisbane's Northern Link tunnel.

Once a tender is chosen construction could start before Christmas 2010 and run through until October 2014.

Last year Brisbane City Council shelved the project after being dissatisfied with the tenders it received, prompting an overseas trip by Lord Mayor Campbell Newman to find more bidders.

At that stage, Brisbane City Council proposed the Northern Link tunnel - running from Toowong to the Inner City Bypass - would be a public private partnership (PPP), funded by a toll.

But after the local development industry cooled in the past 12 months, council reached agreement with the Queensland Government to restructure the project, making Northern Link effectively council's largest roadworks project.

Lord Mayor Campbell Newman said he was "absolutely thrilled" with the overseas firms expressing interest in building the five-kilometre tunnel.

"Between now and Christmas we will be considering these expressions of interest and we will be announcing a short list," Cr Newman said.

"These (consortia) will be permitted to proceed to the tender process. That tender process will take place in the New Year, up until July 2010.

"And then we intend to seek contract close between September and December next year.

"With construction activity potentially starting before Christmas in 2010."

Australian consortia include TunneLink; a joint venture between Thiess John Holland and Abigroup contractors; and LBRJV, a consortium including Leighton Contractors and Baulderstone, who are now building the Clem 7 tunnel.

Overseas consortia include: Northern Direct including the company building the Go-Between Bridge with companies from France and the United Kingdom; Laing O'Rourke and Transfield; TransCity including Brisbane-based developers BMD Constructions plus firms from Spain and Italy; Dragados Northern Link with business interests from Spain; and Korea's Daelim and Korea Expressway Joint Venture.

Campbell Newman said the overseas companies had been approached when he and Brisbane City Council's Major Projects team both travelled overseas.

why not build to second stage of the cross river study at the same time...........o wait QLD gov and BCC are in constant war

[#Metro]

I just saw the above article in on Brisbanetimes, there is heaps of interest from engineering companies, so it is going to be built.

Though there should be bus priority measures built in and *something* to make an easy connection to the Roma St/INB busway system dedicated for buses (even if it is painted bus lanes).

[ozbob]

From the Brisbanetimes click here!

Firms shortlisted for Northern Link tunnel

Firms shortlisted for Northern Link tunnel
TONY MOORE
December 8, 2009 - 6:03AM

Three firms have been chosen to prepare bids for the Northern Link tunnel, which will connect Toowong to the Inner City Bypass at Bowen Hills.

"We are working hard to get this tunnel open in 2014, rather than its scheduled opening date of 2016," Lord Mayor Campbell Newman said last night of the five-kilometre project. .

"In addition to easing traffic congestion in Brisbane it is anticipated that this project will also provide 5000 jobs and provide $10.5 billion in economic benefits to Brisbane."

The short-listed firms were Northern Direct, Transcity and a joint venture partnership between Leighton, Baulderstone and Razel.

Each company will have until May next year to submit their bids.

Northern Direct included Bouygues Travaux Publics, Laing O'Rourke and Transfield Services.

Bouygues Travaux was the French company building the Go Between Bridge project.

Transcity blended international tunnel construction expertise from Spanish engineering firm Acciona and Italian engineering firm Ghella, with local construction firm BMD.

The Leighton joint venture partnership included Leighton Contractors Pty Limited, Baulderstone Pty Ltd and Razel.

Council has set aside $6.6 million in the 2009-10 Budget and allocated $43 million over four years for its contribution when the $2 billion project was going to be a public private partnership. It will now be fully funded by council borrowings, with the debt to be serviced by the toll revenue.

Cr Newman has indicated council would borrow further to build the underground toll project, which received Queensland Treasury Corporation approval for further borrowings earlier this year.

The Federal Government has promised $500 million, but Cr Newman has also lobbied for an additional $350 million from the Rudd Government.

The Lord Mayor said Northern Link was on track to start two years ahead of schedule, in 2010 instead of 2012.

This morning, Cr Newman will unveil where private consultants AT Kearney suggest savings can be found in a second efficiency drive through Brisbane City Council.

More than $100 million was identified in the last AT Kearney report in Cr Newman's first term in office.

[Jon Bryant]

Any of our taxes spent on this is a complete and utter waste of my hard earned dollars.  Why are our Government's continuing to construct freeways and tunnels when it is clearly recognised that

it is now generally accepted, including by road authorities, that urban traffic congestion cannot be solved by building roads and that building roads encourages the growth of traffic and entrenches patterns of urban development that create high car use. They also noted that past transport studies and experience have shown that building freeways does not solve congestion, and they will in fact increase congestion in the long term.?

Why is it so hard for them to accept that they are flogging a dead horse!!!!!  The more we spend the worse it will get.  With all the road work across brisbane under construction congestion is going to be so bad that our air will be toxic, our city ugly and unsafe and our economy hostage to Peak oil price rises.  beyond belief....   

[O_128]

i cant believe that there is no consideration for a busway or train line as part of the tunnel...WHY?

[Jon Bryant]

or instead of it!!!!!

[#Metro]

Had an idea today.

Rather than build 2x tunnels carrying 3 lanes of traffic, build one tunnel carrying a busway.
It would be much cheaper as you don't have to bore a second tunnel. Subway like stations could be sunk down to the tunnel for stations. The capacity would also be far far in excess of the road option.

Western Busway Now!

[somebody]

Western Busway Now!

Would this be in a tunnel the whole way?  I can't see another way of building it.  I'd be reasonably happy if they brought back the transit lane on Coro.

This really deserves it's own thread.

[longboi]

Had an idea today.

Rather than build 2x tunnels carrying 3 lanes of traffic, build one tunnel carrying a busway.
It would be much cheaper as you don't have to bore a second tunnel. Subway like stations could be sunk down to the tunnel for stations. The capacity would also be far far in excess of the road option.

Western Busway Now!

Who would use it? The point of the Northern Link is to get traffic from the M5 off surface streets.

[#Metro]

What will $1.9 billion dollars for NL buy?

* 3800 buses, or the entire Brisbane City Council bus fleet 3.5 times over. (at 0.5 million per bus)
* ~ 30 kilometers of double track light rail & stations
* ~ 10 kilometers of busway at 200 million/kilometre

If NL goes ahead, I would suggest:
Sections of Coronation Drive reclaimed for exclusive use of mass transit vehicles.
Busway Rockets routed to use the NL tunnel much like rockets use the Captain Cook Bridge however this will not remove the need for a mass transit trunk route "spine" which run the majority of the day; Coronation Drive is the way to go for this.
Coronation drive has six lanes all up, more than enough space for even the boldest public transport initiatives.

[Jon Bryant]

If NL goes ahead then there really is no true cost benefit analysis is being carried out.  Building it goes against all modern economic (see Clem7 pending bankruptcy and 7 billion dollars in road trauma alone), social or environmenta. Thinking. It will spell the end of Brisbanecas we know it.  Los Angeles here we come!!!!!!