Queensland UTC +10
Terms of use Privacy About us Media Contact

Links

Poll

Should TRUE METRO be installed in Brisbane as per 2031 plan?

YES
1 (9.1%)
NO
10 (90.9%)
Don't know
0 (0%)

Total Members Voted: 8

Voting closed: September 13, 2010, 03:32:01 PM

Author Topic: SEQ 2031: Metro  (Read 2866 times)

Offline #Metro

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 19525
  • DON'T SIGN! DON'T RENEW!!
SEQ 2031: Metro
« on: September 06, 2010, 03:32:01 PM »
SEQ 2031: Metro

Please say why/why not

Brisbane Subway
An extra 100 000 people are forecast to live in inner Brisbane (CBD, Spring Hill, Milton, South Brisbane and Fortitude Valley) by 2031, bringing the total population to 288 000. Coupled with doubling of employment in the area from 209 000 in 2006 to 403 000 in 2031, this will mean about 2.4 million trips a day in the inner city (up from about one million in 2006).
The Brisbane Subway will be delivered as an entirely new network, with completely separate operations to the existing rail network. The London Underground and New York City subway are well- known examples of this style of rail operation.

Features of a Brisbane subway would include:
• ultra high frequencies, with only 90 seconds needed between services for safe operations

• closely spaced stations for higher accessibility

• ability to turn more sharply and tackle steeper grades than the present suburban rail.

from connectingseq.qld.gov.au
Negative people... have a problem for every solution.
Posts are commentary and are not necessarily endorsed by RAIL Back on Track or its members. Not affiliated with, paid by or in conspiracy with MTR/Metro.

Offline #Metro

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 19525
  • DON'T SIGN! DON'T RENEW!!
Re: SEQ 2031: Metro
« Reply #1 on: September 06, 2010, 03:35:21 PM »
I wonder how they will tunnel, avoiding the very conveniently placed Clem 7 tunnel which is in the way...
Negative people... have a problem for every solution.
Posts are commentary and are not necessarily endorsed by RAIL Back on Track or its members. Not affiliated with, paid by or in conspiracy with MTR/Metro.

somebody

  • Guest
Re: SEQ 2031: Metro
« Reply #2 on: September 06, 2010, 03:37:13 PM »
• ability to turn more sharply and tackle steeper grades than the present suburban rail.
Who says?

To be honest, I am still of the opinion that the last thing Brisbane needs is for there to be two rail networks competing for funding.

Offline nikko

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1021
Re: SEQ 2031: Metro
« Reply #3 on: September 06, 2010, 03:54:34 PM »
What if the operations of the proposed metro were contracted to QR? That would eliminate any duplicity of funding as the metro would essentially just be another line on the network.

I think my position is fairly well known on this issue. I feel that if there is ever any hope of the car-free lifestyle taking off in Brisbane, we need the sort of infrastructure commesurate with such a paradigm shift.


somebody

  • Guest
Re: SEQ 2031: Metro
« Reply #4 on: September 06, 2010, 04:03:00 PM »
What if the operations of the proposed metro were contracted to QR? That would eliminate any duplicity of funding as the metro would essentially just be another line on the network.

I think my position is fairly well known on this issue. I feel that if there is ever any hope of the car-free lifestyle taking off in Brisbane, we need the sort of infrastructure commesurate with such a paradigm shift.
Do you mean with QR style rollingstock and systems?  What would be the difference between that and new QR lines?

If you mean with different and incompatible stock, then that would still have the same problem.

Offline #Metro

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 19525
  • DON'T SIGN! DON'T RENEW!!
Re: SEQ 2031: Metro
« Reply #5 on: September 06, 2010, 04:32:41 PM »
I'm generally of the view that Light rail or Light rail built to metro standard would be enough.

But I could be swayed- see Toronto runs metro and they connect all their buses to it. It works like a charm, although in recent years they have moved away from that and have plans for upgrading Light Rail as you can get more LRT track length than metro track length for the same cost.

The alignment is the thing that worries me. It seems illogical. Why do you need a metro going from Toowong to Bowen Hills when the railway does that already? And you have bus stops along Coronation Drive served by BUZ?

The mode choice and demand for it has not been released, and it would be interesting to look at that. If the metro went from the CBD to Indooroopilly, then maybe, but even then it doesn't sit well. Then there is the CRR2 through West End.

Negative people... have a problem for every solution.
Posts are commentary and are not necessarily endorsed by RAIL Back on Track or its members. Not affiliated with, paid by or in conspiracy with MTR/Metro.

Offline Stillwater

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5977
Re: SEQ 2031: Metro
« Reply #6 on: September 06, 2010, 04:43:13 PM »

The Metro would be self-contained and a tight little circuit with lots of patronage -- just the thing to package up into a private-public partnership, but they have been on the nose of late.  Think of all the coffee stations and fast food cocessions you could pack into each station on the Metro.  The CRR remains critical to the whole thing.  Get far more people onto the QR UrbanLink, ExpressLink etc, then dump those people at points on the (above ground) network where they switch to the private Metro.  Someone (in the private sector) might see $$$s.

Offline ozbob

  • Administrator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 79316
    • RAIL Back On Track
Re: SEQ 2031: Metro
« Reply #7 on: September 06, 2010, 04:45:05 PM »
http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=4362.msg33251#msg33251

I am of the view that Light Rail is a serious future option for Brisbane.   I am not confident that a subway (true metro) will be built, although flagged in the draft Connecting SEQ 2031.  More likely is a continued underground expansion of the heavy rail network, augmented by bus and light rail.

The Greens Light rail proposal for Brisbane, although interesting is possibly not going to get up on the busways as flagged.  The busways will be left intact for BRT.

What is a possibility is a combination surface and underground (cut and cover) light rail network on existing roads.  I would not be surprised to see progressive car restrictions on access to inner areas of Brisbane. 

Vision --> Canada Line

Quote
Canada Line is a rapid transit line in the Metro Vancouver region of British Columbia, Canada. Opened in August 2009, it is the third line in TransLink's SkyTrain metro network, servicing Vancouver, Richmond, and the Vancouver International Airport. It is coloured turquoise on route maps.

The Canada Line comprises 19.2 kilometres (11.8 mi) of track; the main line goes from Vancouver to Richmond, while a 4 km spur line from Bridgeport Station connects to the airport.[1] Originally scheduled to open on November 30, 2009, it opened fifteen weeks ahead of the original schedule, well in advance of the 2010 Winter Olympics in February.[2]

The Canada Line was anticipated to see 100,000 boardings per day in 2013, and 142,000 boardings per day by 2021, but it has exceeded these targets.[3] Ridership has grown steadily since opening day, with average ridership of 83,000/day in September 2009;[4] 93,000/day in December 2009; [5] and 105,000/day in March 2010.[6] During the 2010 Winter Olympics, the line's ridership increased a further 118 per cent to an average of 228,190 per day over the 17-day event.[7]

Quote
The Canada Line begins in Downtown Vancouver at Waterfront Station (0.0 km) in a cut-and-cover subway tunnel beneath Granville Street. It quickly transitions into twin bored tunnels, heading southwest beneath Granville Street, then curving southeast to follow Davie Street through Yaletown. The tunnels then dive deeper to pass below False Creek before rising back up to Olympic Village Station  (2.7 km). There, the line transitions back to a cut-and-cover tunnel (which is noted by the tunnel going from being circular to square shaped) heading south under Cambie Street, some portions of which have the two sets of tracks stacked vertically on separate levels. The line finally emerges from the ground just south of 64th Avenue, climbing to an elevated guideway.[11]
Canada Line bridge over the Fraser River.

The line continues elevated across the North Arm Bridge over the North Arm of the Fraser River, leaving Vancouver and entering Richmond. Just beyond Bridgeport Station (11.1 km), the line splits, with the Richmond branch heading south on elevated tracks along No. 3 Road and terminating at Richmond–Brighouse Station (14.5 km). The airport branch turns west and crosses the Middle Arm Bridge over the Middle Arm of the Fraser River, connecting to stations on Sea Island and terminating at YVR–Airport Station (15.0 km). Portions of the airport branch are at-grade in order to accommodate a future elevated taxiway for aircraft over the line. Both branches narrow to a single track as they approach their respective terminus stations. Just before the Bridgeport Station is the OMC (Operations and Maintenance Centre) facility which houses the trains when not in use.

What this demonstrates is the flexibility in route options (tunnels, surface, elevation) and the sheer capacity. 


Half baked projects, have long term consequences ...
  Bob's Blog

Offline nikko

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1021
Re: SEQ 2031: Metro
« Reply #8 on: September 06, 2010, 04:59:33 PM »
What if the operations of the proposed metro were contracted to QR? That would eliminate any duplicity of funding as the metro would essentially just be another line on the network.

I think my position is fairly well known on this issue. I feel that if there is ever any hope of the car-free lifestyle taking off in Brisbane, we need the sort of infrastructure commesurate with such a paradigm shift.
Do you mean with QR style rollingstock and systems?  What would be the difference between that and new QR lines?

If you mean with different and incompatible stock, then that would still have the same problem.

Different rollingstock and systems obviously as a metro has different requirements to a suburban network (i.e. standing vs seating room, acceleration/deceleration speeds). A new QR line would just keep the old suburbs>city commuter paradigm alive.

somebody

  • Guest
Re: SEQ 2031: Metro
« Reply #9 on: September 06, 2010, 05:12:37 PM »
Why not just higher acceleration/braking rolling stock, and a timetable which takes advantage of that for QR then?  The latter point is what we lack.

Offline #Metro

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 19525
  • DON'T SIGN! DON'T RENEW!!
Re: SEQ 2031: Metro
« Reply #10 on: September 06, 2010, 06:39:46 PM »
Wouldn't the benefits from higher acceleration/braking be canceled out by the increased number and closeness of stops?

It might be higher capacity, but then again, the Yamanote line (a line in Japan that carries an unbelievable number of pax) isn't a metro- It's heavy rail on narrow gauge 1067 mm track. Trains run every 2.5 minutes in peak and every 4 minutes outside those times (if Wiki is to be believed), with 10+ car configurations.

Would increasing the platform length to 9 car be a possibility?
It might be hard to do at the stations and be expensive, but so is a metro.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yamanote_Line
Negative people... have a problem for every solution.
Posts are commentary and are not necessarily endorsed by RAIL Back on Track or its members. Not affiliated with, paid by or in conspiracy with MTR/Metro.

Offline nikko

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1021
Re: SEQ 2031: Metro
« Reply #11 on: September 07, 2010, 06:57:45 PM »
Wouldn't the benefits from higher acceleration/braking be canceled out by the increased number and closeness of stops?

I wouldn't say it cancels it out. Faster acceleration/deceleration compensates for the frequent stopping patterns of metros.

I would love to hear an alternative option which provides a transport system for the inner city itself.
Light Rail and buses are severely limited due to lack of road space and bus infrastructure which is already reaching capacity and clearly will not be able to cope with the population explosion set for the inner 5km of Brisbane.

Building the alignment as a regular suburban line, it would be no differrent to the current set up. Of course you could limit this by making it a 'shuttle' service between two Inner City stations (i.e. Bowen Hills/Newstead-Toowong) but of course this would fly in the face of Chris Hale's ideal of the right transport mode for the right outcome; In this case the outcome is creating a rapid transit system specifically for transportation within the inner 5km of the City.

Suburban rail is just that - suburban. Good to operate as a trunk route for commuters but not that great at metro-type operations.

somebody

  • Guest
Re: SEQ 2031: Metro
« Reply #12 on: September 07, 2010, 07:09:58 PM »
I would love to hear an alternative option which provides a transport system for the inner city itself.
Foot?

Increased frequency and operating hours of city loop buses?

Offline #Metro

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 19525
  • DON'T SIGN! DON'T RENEW!!
Re: SEQ 2031: Metro
« Reply #13 on: September 07, 2010, 07:27:04 PM »
I might be swayed with a metro, Toronto has one where it links all the buses to it.
It works well.

But Light Rail, even in a tunnel for the CBD areas, might be good too.
And you can build light rail to metro standard and automate it or semi-automate it. You would need longer platforms, but unlike a metro, it could exit up into surface roads to continue as a service in the road median (however this must be well segregated, otherwise reliability problems might happen).

I am worried about the "other big cities over population X have it, therefore we should have a metro".
This is what I call the "Let's copy Paris" approach to (non-)planning.
Last time we copied Paris, Clem Jones had us rip out the trams!

The route might be better off going UQ-St Lucia-199 route-CBD-New Farm-Tenneriffe. Whether it should be Light Rail, faux metro, or true metro needs to be chosen after the requirements are made. In other words, it seems like the mode was chosen first and then the route, when it should be the other way around.

Something like that would be more likely to convince me, than a duplication of the Toowong-Bowen Hills section of the Ipswich Line.


From the Mass Transit Report (2007)

Quote
*  The primary purpose of a new public transport service must be to satisfy transport demand. Without this primary purpose the service will not be economically viable.

* The public transport service should be designed to optimally service the demand within the constraints of the environment and budget. The choice of mode or technology should be chosen because of its ability to provide the required service within the constraints, not vice versa.
Negative people... have a problem for every solution.
Posts are commentary and are not necessarily endorsed by RAIL Back on Track or its members. Not affiliated with, paid by or in conspiracy with MTR/Metro.

Offline #Metro

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 19525
  • DON'T SIGN! DON'T RENEW!!
Re: SEQ 2031: Metro
« Reply #14 on: September 07, 2010, 07:29:28 PM »
Quote
Foot?

Increased frequency and operating hours of city loop buses?

Light Rail in the CBD? (This is how it is done in Melbourne, and Toronto- more than copes).

Bicycles! If it is within the inner 5km radius, most trips will be less than 5km.
More bike facilities, bike lanes and bike parking. Extremely cheap to do. Works in Copenhagen.

You would need to do something about the huge numbers of buses on Adelaide St and Elizabeth Street though.
« Last Edit: September 07, 2010, 07:32:49 PM by tramtrain »
Negative people... have a problem for every solution.
Posts are commentary and are not necessarily endorsed by RAIL Back on Track or its members. Not affiliated with, paid by or in conspiracy with MTR/Metro.

somebody

  • Guest
Re: SEQ 2031: Metro
« Reply #15 on: September 07, 2010, 07:40:17 PM »
You would need to do something about the huge numbers of buses on Adelaide St and Elizabeth Street though.
Why?

Offline nikko

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1021
Re: SEQ 2031: Metro
« Reply #16 on: September 08, 2010, 10:09:37 AM »
I would love to hear an alternative option which provides a transport system for the inner city itself.
Foot?

Increased frequency and operating hours of city loop buses?

That works for our current CBD but what about in 20 years when suburbs like Wooloongabba, Bowen Hills, Milton etc. will be considered neighbourhoods of the CBD?

somebody

  • Guest
Re: SEQ 2031: Metro
« Reply #17 on: September 08, 2010, 10:13:18 AM »
Still, just having a good frequency to those stations would be adequate, IMO.

Offline Markus

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 56
Re: SEQ 2031: Metro
« Reply #18 on: September 08, 2010, 01:42:32 PM »
I am of the opinion that BNE requires an extensive heavy rail system first along with frequent, efficient & alternative routes.
THEN & only then lets consider any need for other modes.

Offline #Metro

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 19525
  • DON'T SIGN! DON'T RENEW!!
Re: SEQ 2031: Metro
« Reply #19 on: September 08, 2010, 02:17:42 PM »
Too much focus on high cost projects that require lots of concrete, when simpler quicker solutions might do.
Negative people... have a problem for every solution.
Posts are commentary and are not necessarily endorsed by RAIL Back on Track or its members. Not affiliated with, paid by or in conspiracy with MTR/Metro.

somebody

  • Guest
Re: SEQ 2031: Metro
« Reply #20 on: September 08, 2010, 02:25:37 PM »
Too much focus on high cost projects that require lots of concrete, when simpler quicker solutions might do.
Yes, it's been quite a shock for this southerner.  Welcome to Brisbane.

Offline #Metro

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 19525
  • DON'T SIGN! DON'T RENEW!!
Re: SEQ 2031: Metro
« Reply #21 on: September 08, 2010, 10:40:31 PM »
http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/opinion/big-dollars-needed-to-turn-a-visionary-regional-transport-plan-into-reality/story-e6frerdf-1225916026107

Sigh, it is in the courier mail.  :(
How will it be funded. If it is not funded, it just will not happen!
Negative people... have a problem for every solution.
Posts are commentary and are not necessarily endorsed by RAIL Back on Track or its members. Not affiliated with, paid by or in conspiracy with MTR/Metro.

Offline #Metro

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 19525
  • DON'T SIGN! DON'T RENEW!!
Re: SEQ 2031: Metro
« Reply #22 on: September 12, 2010, 03:50:18 PM »
This poll will be closing soon.
Negative people... have a problem for every solution.
Posts are commentary and are not necessarily endorsed by RAIL Back on Track or its members. Not affiliated with, paid by or in conspiracy with MTR/Metro.

 

Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 


“You can't understand a city without using its public transportation system.” -- Erol Ozan