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

Links

Author Topic: Roads - articles and discussion  (Read 152100 times)

Online ozbob

  • Administrator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 78673
    • RAIL Back On Track
Roads - articles and discussion
« on: November 02, 2010, 03:50:57 AM »
From the Courier Mail click here!

Southeast Queensland motorists stuck at 40km/h in peak hour on clogged major roads

Quote
Southeast Queensland motorists stuck at 40km/h in peak hour on clogged major roads

    * by Ursula Heger
    * From: The Courier-Mail
    * November 02, 2010 12:00AM

BUMPER TO BUMPER: Brisbane's Kingsford Smith Drive suffered the worst decrease in average speeds.
Source: The Courier-Mail

MOTORISTS using southeast Queensland's largest arterial roads and highways barely reach an average speed of 40km/h during rush hour, the latest travel time survey shows.

New data from the Department of Transport and Main Roads showed congestion on Brisbane's motorways worsened last year, the most recent period for which there is data, compared with 2008.

Many of the major arterials saw only marginal improvement in 2009.

Peak-hour congestion in Brisbane reduced speeds on the city's motorways to an average of just 56km/h, while those using arterial roads barely made it out of second gear to average 35km/h.

Main Roads Minister Craig Wallace said overall, 89 per cent of travel speeds across the southeast improved or remained steady.

Wardell St and Jubilee Terrace in Brisbane's inner north had the slowest driving speed, averaging only 19km/h in the morning peak.

Perennial trouble spots Lutwyche Rd and Gympie Rd also worsened. Daily inbound speeds slowed to a painful 34km/h crawl.

Kingsford Smith Drive recorded the worst decline in average speeds, dropping 20 per cent to just 36km/h in the morning peak hour, down from 45km/h in 2008. The largest improvement was made on southern sections of the Gateway Motorway and the Pacific Motorway, both of which saw speeds increase by more than 20 per cent in the morning peak.

The drive home was also not as frustrating for motorists last year, with average speeds higher on many roads.

The data showed Gold Coast drivers were worse off than their Sunshine Coast counterparts, where only 17 per cent of roads improved.

Mr Wallace said the survey showed the roads network was keeping up with population expansion. "Overall, speed across all surveyed motorways and arterials for peak periods, both in and outbound, increased slightly from 39km/h to 40km/h," he said.

"While this is only a minor improvement, it's important to remember these results come despite the associated works of a massive road-building program in the region during the past few years, as well as a growing population."

He said it was "promising" considering delays caused by the Clem7 and Airport Link projects.

Just one quarter of Brisbane's 469km road network delivered comfortable driving conditions to motorists in the morning rush hour while one-third, or 165km, of the city's roadways were considered "stop start".
Half baked projects, have long term consequences ...
  Bob's Blog

Offline Jonno

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1942
Re: Roads - articles and discussion
« Reply #1 on: November 02, 2010, 06:24:58 AM »
Not a lot of return if any for a massive financial investment!!!! Current approach has failed!

Online ozbob

  • Administrator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 78673
    • RAIL Back On Track
Re: Roads - articles and discussion
« Reply #2 on: November 02, 2010, 07:24:21 AM »
From the Brisbanetimes click here!

Gympie Road tunnel option

Quote
Gympie Road tunnel option
Tony Moore
November 2, 2010 - 5:00PM

Brisbane City Council will ask the Queensland Government to approve a Gympie Road tunnel to ease future traffic congestion at Chermside.

The future of the north Brisbane suburb, including plans for 15-storey buildings, will be debated in this afternoon's council meeting.

"One option is that Brisbane City Council will petition the Queensland Government to change the Hamilton Road and Gympie Road intersection, for example by tunnelling under Hamilton Road for Gympie Road traffic to pass through," a study report says.

"A public plaza could be created above to liven up the retail and commercial areas and to improve pedestrian and cyclist access."

The planning zone runs from Edinburgh Castle Road in the south to Ellison Road at Geebung in the north.

Features of the Chermside plan include:

    * 'stepped-back' buildings to 15 storeys in the central Chermside shopping centre area;
    * high density unit buildings to 15 storeys to take advantage of the Northern Busway;
    * buildings will be stepped back from the edge of the road, so they don't overshadow the streets;
    * the plans are for retail shops, cafes and restaurants on the ground floor with office and residential space on the upper level; and
    * an upgrade of John Patterson Park at Kedron, with a new road to its immediate north.

The plan includes short-term accommodation for hospital workers and an area around Wheller Gardens for higher density aged care housing and special needs accommodation for seniors.
Half baked projects, have long term consequences ...
  Bob's Blog

Offline #Metro

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 19490
  • DON'T SIGN! DON'T RENEW!!
Re: Roads - articles and discussion
« Reply #3 on: November 02, 2010, 07:27:56 AM »
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/gympie-road-tunnel-option-20101101-17adb.html

Interesting things to happen in chermside--- don't know about this one though.

Quote
"One option is that Brisbane City Council will petition the Queensland Government to change the Hamilton Road and Gympie Road intersection, for example by tunnelling under Hamilton Road for Gympie Road traffic to pass through," a study report says.

Why not tunnel under that intersection and put Light Rail in it instead of cars, cars cars?
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.

Online ozbob

  • Administrator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 78673
    • RAIL Back On Track
Re: Roads - articles and discussion
« Reply #4 on: November 02, 2010, 07:51:46 AM »
From the Brisbanetimes click here!

Peak-hour traffic now crawling 1km/h faster: govt

Quote
Peak-hour traffic now crawling 1km/h faster: govt
Courtney Trenwith
November 2, 2010 - 7:28AM

Peak-hour travel times on southeast Queensland roads were cut by 1km/h in the past two years, according to government figures released today.

Commuters in2009 drove at an average speed of just 40km/h across all major motorways and arterial roads, during the busiest morning and evening periods, the Department of Transport and Main Roads survey says.

That was slightly faster than in 2007, when the average speed was 39km/h.

Minister for Main Roads Craig Wallace said 89 per cent of the surveyed network travel speeds improved or remained steady between 2007 and 2009.

However, a survey conducted by the state’s peak motoring body RACQ earlier this year revealed a much slower picture.

The Travel Times report released last month showed drivers struggled to move faster than 35km/h on Brisbane’s major arterial roads, during the morning and evening peak periods. That survey was conducted during May and June this year.

At the worst spots, traffic moved less than 20km/h and one kilometre took more than three minutes to travel.

The situation had worsened for most outbound routes since the last review in 2007, but the average inbound trip had improved.

Twenty of 24 comparable routes showed a decline in average speeds since 1993,the RACQ said.

The State Government has praised today’s figures, saying speeds had managed to remain virtually the same despite increased population and roadworks.

“While this is only a minor improvement, it’s important to remember these results come despite the associated works of a massive road building program in the region during the past few years, as well as a growing population,’’ Mr Wallace said.

‘‘In that two-year period, southeast Queensland’s population grew 5.6 per cent, from 2.9 million in 2007 to 3.06 million in 2009,’’ Mr Wallace said.

“And it occurred during the biggest road construction boom in Queensland history.

“Given the amount of work going on last year on projects like the Ipswich Motorway upgrade, the Gateway Upgrade Project, and projects like Clem7 and Airport Link, this is a promising result.”

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

Offline #Metro

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 19490
  • DON'T SIGN! DON'T RENEW!!
Re: Roads - articles and discussion
« Reply #5 on: November 02, 2010, 08:01:17 AM »
Travel times of rail need to be competitive with the car.
The Beenleigh line is too slow vs Pacific Motorway.
More bus priority is required on major arterials now.
Rail frequency must be increased and expresslink introduced.

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: Roads - articles and discussion
« Reply #6 on: November 02, 2010, 09:43:42 AM »
expresslink introduced.
No point if current run times of express services persist!  So there.

colinw

  • Guest
Re: Roads - articles and discussion
« Reply #7 on: November 02, 2010, 10:24:08 AM »
I really wonder what some people out there are smoking.  ???

In response to the Brisbane Times article I wrote:
Quote
Beating congestion by building roads .... EPIC FAIL!

The answer is obvious.

1. Run our existing rail system to capacity. More trains, more often, all day long.
2. Build new rail lines, light rail & busways, not freeways.

What do we do in QLD? Sod all! Trains every half hour out of peak, focus on buses that struggle through the traffic with the cars.

It is time for the Government & Brisbane City Council to wake up to the failure of the last 40 years of transport planning.

To which some peanut has a go at me ...

Quote
@Col

Beating congestion by building ANYTHING.. EPIC FAIL!

You expect me to believe that freeing up a lane on a motorway by enlarging the motorway will simply encourage more drivers and more congestion.

Then you expect me to believe that freeing up the same lane on the same motorway by encouraging some of the existing drivers onto public transport will NOT have exactly the same effect?

What do you take me for??

Huh????  It appears that some people think that building public transport is bad, because it will induce road demand (by taking people off the road, no less!)

Starting to think we need to do something about the school system as well ... there are major comprehension problems out there!
« Last Edit: November 02, 2010, 10:35:18 AM by colinw »

Offline #Metro

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 19490
  • DON'T SIGN! DON'T RENEW!!
Re: Roads - articles and discussion
« Reply #8 on: November 02, 2010, 12:20:54 PM »
Quote
I really wonder what some people out there are smoking.  Huh?

It is the car fumes colin.

http://www.humantransit.org/2010/07/what-does-transit-do-about-traffic-congestion-1.html
This might clarify things up-- a must read for everyone on the forum IMHO
Quote

Now and then, someone mentions that a particular transit project did not reduce traffic congestion, as though that was evidence of failure.  In fact, the relationship between transit and congestion is indirect.  (In this post "congestion" means that volume/capacity ratio for motor vehicles on a roadway is high enough to substantially reduce average speeds.)   In most cases, it's unwise to claim congestion reduction as a likely result of your proposed transit project.

Road widening, however, is also not a very good way to relieve congestion, except in the short term.  In his 1992 book Stuck in Traffic Anthony Downs described the effect of widening an expressway in terms of a "triple convergence":

    In response, three types of convergence occur on the improved expressway: (1) many drivers who formerly used alternative routes during peak hours switch to the improved expressway (spatial convergence); (2) many drivers who formerly traveled just before or after the peak hours start traveling during those hours (time convergence); and (3) some commuters who used to take public transportation during peak hours now switch to driving, since it has become faster (modal convergence).
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.

colinw

  • Guest
Re: Roads - articles and discussion
« Reply #9 on: November 02, 2010, 01:45:04 PM »
Oh dear.  ::)

Ministerial Media Statement: Road network keeping up with demand -> click here

Quote
Minister for Main Roads
The Honourable Craig Wallace


Tuesday, November 02, 2010

Road network keeping up with demand


Peak travel times on South East Queensland’s road network stayed virtually the same from 2007 to 2009, according to the latest survey from the Department of Transport and Main Roads.

Main Roads Minister Craig Wallace said the department's annual travel time survey showed the region’s transport network was keeping up with increased demand from its growing population.

“We conduct annual surveys of peak period travel times on major routes in South East Queensland to monitor the network,” Mr Wallace said.

“Between 2007 and 2009, 89% of the surveyed network travel speeds improved or remained steady.

“And overall speed across all surveyed motorways and arterials for peak periods, both in and outbound, increased slightly from 39 to 40km/hr.

“While this is only a minor improvement, it’s important to remember these results come despite the associated works of a massive road building program in the region during the past few years, as well as a growing population.

“In that two-year period, South East Queensland’s population grew 5.6% from 2.9 million in 2007 to 3.06 million in 2009.

“Our survey method is comprehensive, accurate, and consistent with other states as standard practice for travel time monitoring.

“And it occurred during the biggest road construction boom in Queensland history.

“Given the amount of work going on last year on projects like the Ipswich Motorway upgrade, the Gateway Upgrade Project, and projects like Clem 7 and Airport Link, this is a promising result.

“But we’ll be keeping our focus on further improvements.”

Mr Wallace said while the State Government continued its huge program of works to help ease congestion and manage travel time reliability today, it was also planning the transport network of tomorrow.

“Recognising that roads need to cater for all users is a central element in planning and managing our future road network,” he said.

“Transport and Main Roads recently released the region’s draft 20-year transport plan for public comment, which aims to establish and reinforce a road hierarchy that ensures the right type of traffic moves on the right type of road.”

Mr Wallace said this hierarchy includes:
• motorways and highways to move large volumes of traffic over longer distances between communities
• multi-modal arterial roads to provide connections for all types of transport
• bypass or ‘ring-roads’ to remove through traffic from urban centres
• community boulevards to provide a high standard of visual appeal and local access within major activity and town centres.

Mr Wallace encouraged all South East Queenslanders to have their on the draft Connecting SEQ 2031 before comments close on 26 November 2010.

For more information visit www.connectingseq.qld.gov.au or phone 1800 038 178.

colinw

  • Guest
Re: Roads - articles and discussion
« Reply #10 on: November 02, 2010, 01:57:55 PM »
Remarkable, my "friend" on BT is now claiming that ...

Quote
@Col

"Beating congestion by building roads ...."

Umm, what do you mean by the phrase, "building roads" then?? Let me guess.. you meant.. building roads perhaps??

"Build new rail lines, light rail & busways, not freeways."

Oh. Now I see. You think that instead of building or enlarging freeways, we should be building or enlarging busways, light railways and heavy railways.

Because if we can take some of the cars off the existing freeways, it'll virtually create more space on the existing roads by freeing up existing space, which will reduce congestion. Which is preferable to creating more space on existing roads by expanding those roads, because creating more space on roads just leads to more cars, which leads to more congestion.

So creating more space on existing roads will simultaneously increase AND decrease congestion?? Nobody believes in magic Col.

How the heck does anyone get that out of what I wrote (below)?

Quote
Beating congestion by building roads .... EPIC FAIL!

The answer is obvious.

1. Run our existing rail system to capacity. More trains, more often, all day long.
2. Build new rail lines, light rail & busways, not freeways.

What do we do in QLD? Sod all! Trains every half hour out of peak, focus on buses that struggle through the traffic with the cars.

It is time for the Government & Brisbane City Council to wake up to the failure of the last 40 years of transport planning.

I'm starting to think I'm wasting my time trying to counter this kind of crap.  Reminds me of the kind of bollocks that goes on in politics, where you ignore what your opponent said and try to place words of your choosing in their mouth.

What we appear to have here is someone who wants us to believe that building public transport induces road demand!  Actually, a quick google reveals that this particular poster on BT seems to go ballistic any time someone mentions light rail.

Time to take a chill pill.  ;)
« Last Edit: November 02, 2010, 02:08:14 PM by colinw »

Online ozbob

  • Administrator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 78673
    • RAIL Back On Track
Re: Roads - articles and discussion
« Reply #11 on: November 02, 2010, 04:02:17 PM »
Light rail is coming Col.  I just posted something to that effect over yonder.  That should cheer them up.

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

colinw

  • Guest
Re: Roads - articles and discussion
« Reply #12 on: November 02, 2010, 04:14:42 PM »
That feedback "conversation" (if you can call it that) was doing my head in.  Had to take a chill pill & butt out.  ;D

I would very much love to get a light rail system up & running in Brisbane. I still clearly remember the jubilation many of us felt when BrizTram was announced back in the late '90s.  It has clearly stuck in my memory because it was announced the day before my wife & I boarded the Queenslander to travel to Cairns, so I ended up sitting in the very comfy club car of the Queenslander reading a Sunday Mail article titled "The Return of The Silver Bullet", and also a very pro light-rail editorial! (Inconceivable that today's Courier Mail or Sunday Mail would be so pro public transport).

I have never forgiven Beattie & Soorley for the grubby politicking that brought down the light rail project.  We should have been celebrating the 10th anniversary of the system soon.

Online ozbob

  • Administrator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 78673
    • RAIL Back On Track
Re: Roads - articles and discussion
« Reply #13 on: November 02, 2010, 04:33:03 PM »
The car crowd regularly have a crack at me for advocating bus priority.   Taking away precious road lanes is just too much for them. The fact that they will actually have a less congested environment if the public transport is a more attractive option generally escapes them  :bu :bo

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

STB

  • Guest
Re: Roads - articles and discussion
« Reply #14 on: November 02, 2010, 04:37:07 PM »
You just have to remember Colin that you'll never convince everyone that PT is the best answer, he probably thinks he's just as right as you are.  Everyone is different and has different ideas on how things should be run and developed.  Nothing wrong with that!

And anyway, there's better people to convince than random people who hide behind hidden names online, such as Rachel Nolan and Co.

colinw

  • Guest
Re: Roads - articles and discussion
« Reply #15 on: November 02, 2010, 04:42:50 PM »
You're right about that!  I don't even win that argument in my own family all the time! (e.g. it will be a cold day in hell before I coax my wife onto the Airtrain again)

I decided I was on a hiding to nothing pursuing that particular discussion.  I am just not accustomed to having my words twisted against me quite so adeptly. One thing is for sure, I will never have the makings of a politician.
« Last Edit: November 02, 2010, 04:54:32 PM by colinw »

STB

  • Guest
Re: Roads - articles and discussion
« Reply #16 on: November 02, 2010, 10:41:31 PM »
That reminds me of what a politician once said to me...never argue with an idiot because the idiot will knock you down to his level and beat you with experience.

In other words, the more you try and fight it the more likely you'll lose simply from him not wanting or wishing to understand your point of view.

Online ozbob

  • Administrator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 78673
    • RAIL Back On Track
Re: Roads - articles and discussion
« Reply #17 on: November 03, 2010, 04:45:59 AM »
From the Courier Mail click here!

Fourth tunnel could create long-awaited Brisbane inner ring road

Quote
Fourth tunnel could create long-awaited Brisbane inner ring road

    * Ursula Heger and Sarah Vogler
    * From: The Courier-Mail
    * November 03, 2010 12:26AM

THE fourth tunnel in Lord Mayor Campbell Newman's TransApex plan could create the long-awaited ring-road system for Brisbane's inner city, with plans to link it to another tunnel planned between Toowong and Everton Park.

Deputy Mayor Graham Quirk said yesterday the 6km East-West Link, which will join the Pacific Motorway at Buranda and Toowong, may be linked to the State Government's proposed toll road between Toowong to Everton Park to improve traffic flows for the project.

Brisbane City Council will undertake a $1.4 million study for the East-West Link project over the next two years to review traffic demand for the tunnel - the final of the four tunnels proposed in the TransApex projects.

Cr Quirk said council would investigate a connection to the Toowong to Everton Park tunnel, known as the inner-west orbital link, which is undergoing a feasibility study as well as options to build the link separately.

''The inner-west orbital link combined with the East-West Link will provide a strong demand flow, but we want to look at them individually, and when this detailed work is done, it will have a couple of scenarios available,'' he said.

''But it is very early days and there has to be some research done.''

He said if the two projects were completed close to each other, it would improve the traffic flows using the East-West Link toll road.

''But as with the example of the Clem7 and Airport Link, when Airport Link comes on board that will increase the likely flow of traffic through Clem7,'' he said.

''So that's why we are looking at it as a stand-alone project and then what happens when you connect it to a further project.''

But inner-west orbital tunnel is not expected to be completed until 2031, despite being given a ''priority project'' tag by the State Government, while the East-West Link project was originally set to be built after 2026.
Half baked projects, have long term consequences ...
  Bob's Blog

Online ozbob

  • Administrator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 78673
    • RAIL Back On Track
Re: Roads - articles and discussion
« Reply #18 on: November 03, 2010, 06:52:12 AM »
From the Brisbanetimes click here!

East West Link v Kingsford Smith Drive: The great infrastructure stand-off

Quote
East West Link v Kingsford Smith Drive: The great infrastructure stand-off
Tony Moore
November 3, 2010 - 6:20AM

With construction on the Northern Link tunnel set to start before Christmas, the next two big council infrastructure projects are waiting in the wings.

The two projects are the last of Lord Mayor Campbell Newman's TransApex tunnels: East West Link between Toowong and Woolloongabba, and the widening of Kingsford Smith Drive.

Cr Newman said new options for Kingsford Smith Drive, including a proposed busway, will be unveiled before Christmas.

Options already made public include a tunnel, revealed by brisbanetimes.com.au in February, and a widening of the roadway over the river.

"There's tunnels, there's building out over the river, there's options to put bus lanes and bike lanes, a variety of options which we will release some time soon," Cr Newman said.

"We have done a lot of work. We have got about 15 options and within each option there is maybe three to five sub options."

Cr Newman said Brisbane City Council felt pressured by the residential development at the Hamilton Northshore development, which is set to house between 10,000 and 15,000 residents.

"There needs to be good public transport. That is why we are putting the CityCat in at Hamilton, but there needs to be more than that," he said.

A busway would need to go to the Hamilton Northshore development, Cr Newman said.

Meanwhile, the East West Link tunnel was earmaked for 2021, still more than a decade away, because widening Kingsford Smith Drive was more pressing.

Travel time statistics released by the state government yesterday showed traffic was slowing on Kingsford Smith Drive.

It shows the average travel time increased by 20 per cent from 45km/h in 2008 to just 36km/h in 2009.

"East West Link was always going to be 2021, but this [Kingsford Smith Drive] has reared its head as a big issue," Cr Newman said.

Council has set aside $1.4 million over the next two years to explore whether proceeding with the six-kilometre East West Link was feasible.

A pre-feasibility business case would be ready in around 18 months, Cr Newman said.

He said this work would re-examine traffic volumes on the project and explore whether there was merit in linking up East West Link with the state government's revamped "Route 20" project, an unfunded and contentious western bypass.

Council's transport consultant Andrew Brown - who is a trustee of Campbell Newman's Forward Brisbane Leadership - was contracted in late September to begin the study.

Labor's infrastructure spokesman Kim Flesser questioned infrastructure chairman Graham Quirk over East West Link and said Labor doubted the city could afford the project.

"I suggested it would cost about the same as Northern Link and he said 'no it would be a lot more than that because it has to go under the Brisbane River'," he said.

"The question that we will continue to ask is that the Queensland Treasury Corporation has made it clear that the council has already reached the limit of its credit card.

"How is council going to pay for this tunnel and, if you look at the other toll tunnels, you will see the traffic volumes are actually starting to decrease."
Half baked projects, have long term consequences ...
  Bob's Blog

Offline Derwan

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2542
  • Now a bus person
    • Andrew's Place
Re: Roads - articles and discussion
« Reply #19 on: November 03, 2010, 07:31:33 AM »
It's not a "ring road" if you have to go that close to the city!
Website   |   Facebook   |  Twitter

Offline #Metro

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 19490
  • DON'T SIGN! DON'T RENEW!!
Re: Roads - articles and discussion
« Reply #20 on: November 03, 2010, 07:59:55 AM »
They are not building ring roads. There is a lot of focus on "this road bypasses the CBD", which of course is true, but when you look at the network on its own, the whole idea is to connect the inner suburbs with a series of tunnels to form an inner/internal city distribution road system.

A bypass or ring road in my view would be something like the Gateway & Logan Motorway
It stays away from the CBD absolutely and the suburbs too. These tunnels etc are being built to allow someone in Paddington to go to South Bank by Car, or someone living in Buranda to go to Wooloowin etc etc.
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: 19490
  • DON'T SIGN! DON'T RENEW!!
Re: Roads - articles and discussion
« Reply #21 on: November 03, 2010, 08:09:11 AM »
I looked up the timetable for route 305 and the Doomben line.
Although the Doomben line is a bit indirect, the train takes 19 minutes and a bus about 25 minutes to get to the city (from Doomben)

A railway station should be built at NorthShore Hamilton.
The construction of a station and regular rail services will induce TOD around the area and accelerate the development there.

The rail extension option would be short, so might be competitive with the bus option.
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: 19490
  • DON'T SIGN! DON'T RENEW!!
Re: Roads - articles and discussion
« Reply #22 on: November 03, 2010, 08:10:41 AM »
During construction there is likely to be much disruption, so putting more Doomben trains on might be one solution.
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: 19490
  • DON'T SIGN! DON'T RENEW!!
Re: Roads - articles and discussion
« Reply #23 on: November 03, 2010, 08:29:08 AM »
It just doesn't end... it is like Wilbur Smith all over again. Have we learned nothing?

Fourth tunnel could create long-awaited Brisbane inner ring road

Quote
THE fourth tunnel in Lord Mayor Campbell Newman's TransApex plan could create the long-awaited ring-road system for Brisbane's inner city, with plans to link it to another tunnel planned between Toowong and Everton Park.

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/fourth-tunnel-could-create-long-awaited-brisbane-inner-ring-road/story-e6freoof-1225946986462

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: 19490
  • DON'T SIGN! DON'T RENEW!!
Re: Roads - articles and discussion
« Reply #24 on: November 03, 2010, 08:30:37 AM »
I am just waiting for another tunnel going from Wooloongabba to Bulimba and then north to Toombul and another one going from Toombul to Carseldine to "relieve" gympie road.

 :-r
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 Golliwog

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4988
Re: Roads - articles and discussion
« Reply #25 on: November 03, 2010, 08:51:28 AM »
The interesting this about the tunnel they've marked from Toowong to Everton Park/Hills is that thats a State Gov. tunnel but I have NFI where they have pulled that design from seeing as all that currently exists for that tunnel is an arrow on a map saying "tunnel from here to here"

I do understand where they are coming from with this plan. Currently far too many cars travel through the CBD and this would rectify that... except for the tolls. I think that in a way these tunnels are needed, but they should certainly not be focusing on these tunnels alone.
There is no silver bullet… but there is silver buckshot.
Never argue with an idiot. They'll drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

Offline Jonno

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1942
Re: Roads - articles and discussion
« Reply #26 on: November 03, 2010, 03:04:29 PM »
But here is the Catch 22.  The tunnels can only be built by Council as a toll road (private sector will never invest in toll tunnels again after Clem 7) but non-toll roads can not have their capacity reduced or that is funneling.  So we are left with some traffic going via tunnels and the current roads "which go through the CBD" still full because they are free.  So these tunnels will never address the "through CBD" issue, nor reduce congestion and bankrupt the Council.  Not a good option at all and unable to fix the issues they are claimed to be able to do.

Offline Golliwog

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4988
Re: Roads - articles and discussion
« Reply #27 on: November 03, 2010, 03:29:45 PM »
Council should toughen up. IIRC its something like 50% of CBD workers already use PT to there, thus it is more than fair that they be given some form of priority, especially given that buses are more effecient than cars. Rail is of course more so efficient, but I doubt we're going to get rail put down Coro drive of Milton Rd any time soon. What needs to be done to get people to use the tunnel is to make the "free" (they still have to pay rego, and everything else) route less attractive to those who are just using it to pass through to the other side.
There is no silver bullet… but there is silver buckshot.
Never argue with an idiot. They'll drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

somebody

  • Guest
Re: Roads - articles and discussion
« Reply #28 on: November 03, 2010, 03:41:11 PM »
I'm inclined to think Jonno is right here.  Not sure of any toll road which has been successful for a private operator without government funding, tolling an existing road and/or funneling.  Sydney:
M2 - govt kicked in some funds
LCT - belly up
CCT - belly up, or soon to be.
Eastern Distributor - not sure about that one, actually.
M4 - tolled existing road and had funneling
M5 - govt contributed

CityLink in Melbourne also involved tolling existing roads and funneling.

Council should toughen up.
Yes, but the problem is that they promised not to.

Offline Golliwog

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4988
Re: Roads - articles and discussion
« Reply #29 on: November 03, 2010, 03:43:02 PM »
Council should toughen up.
Yes, but the problem is that they promised not to.
Because all that matters is being popular, not doing what needs to be done to make Brisbane a better place...
There is no silver bullet… but there is silver buckshot.
Never argue with an idiot. They'll drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

Offline Jonno

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1942
Re: Roads - articles and discussion
« Reply #30 on: November 03, 2010, 06:36:20 PM »
Council should toughen up. IIRC its something like 50% of CBD workers already use PT to there, thus it is more than fair that they be given some form of priority, especially given that buses are more effecient than cars. Rail is of course more so efficient, but I doubt we're going to get rail put down Coro drive of Milton Rd any time soon. What needs to be done to get people to use the tunnel is to make the "free" (they still have to pay rego, and everything else) route less attractive to those who are just using it to pass through to the other side.

But Councils/governments can not make them free or they go bankrupt.  So it is a complete No Win situation.  What I can't understand is why the Lord Mayor continues to flog the deadest of dead horses.  Is he that stubborn or does his believe so strongly in the incorrect 1960 traffic engineering he was taught at Uni?  He clearly believes that every car ad which shows an uncongested road is the reality of every day life not the congested mess he sees through his chauffeur driven limo's window!!!!

Online mufreight

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2988
Re: Roads - articles and discussion
« Reply #31 on: November 03, 2010, 07:08:08 PM »
I beg to differ on the concept that these expensive roadwork's have to be provided and that they should be tolled and operated by private operators.
Governments at both State and Local level are elected to provide services and infrastructure and it is their responsibility to provide them, that is why we pay rates and taxes.
With any infrastructure that is built that is beyond the available finances of the responsible Government authority, there is a valid argument for a toll but any such tolls should be reasonable and only exist for a fixed term until the infrastructure is paid for as was the case with the old Indooroopilly Toll bridge.
This Government and council should remember their obligations and that motorists are not a bottomless cash cow to fund their incompetent management of infrastructure of provide an endless revenue stream for some private enterprise.  ROAD USERS VOTE
The provision of adequate reliable affordable public transport will remove the need of many to use private transport and save many lives, millions in infrastructure costs and many millions more in the medical costs and trauma for those involved in accidents as a consequence of a road system that is like public transport considerably less than fit for purposes.
 :pr   :lo   :bu   :tr   :bi

somebody

  • Guest
Re: Roads - articles and discussion
« Reply #32 on: November 03, 2010, 09:26:22 PM »
A counter example of the toll being removed would be the Sydney Harbour Bridge.

I don't think anyone on here would have much argument with most of what you wrote though.

Offline Golliwog

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4988
Re: Roads - articles and discussion
« Reply #33 on: November 03, 2010, 09:27:35 PM »
Jonno, I wasn't suggesting they make the tunnels free to use. What I meant was that they make the current free roads (so in the case of Northern Link, Milton Rd and Coro Drive) have PT priority which yes the car addicted will complain about as tunnel funneling. But my theory with anything political is that if there's no one complaining then they're not doing it right. The road network is for all vehicles not just the private car so once you expand the capacity some of that needs to be reserved for public transport.

mufreight, its all well and good to say "give them public transport" but if you're just going to sit in traffic next to the other cars, whats the point? By providing these tunnels (with the toll, but I agree this should be for a fixed period, not as a revenue source) they are giving those that insist on using cars their option while also giving PT the opportunity to reclaim the surface roads that provide the best access to trip origins and destinations. Yes running express buses through the northern link has its places, but it doesn't provide any benefit for those trying to get to anywhere other than the CBD, or starting their trip further in than Toowong.

There is no silver bullet… but there is silver buckshot.
Never argue with an idiot. They'll drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

Offline Jonno

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1942
Re: Roads - articles and discussion
« Reply #34 on: November 03, 2010, 10:29:51 PM »
Sorry. Mis-read on the iPhone.  Still don't think the tunnels benefit anyone except the construction companies provided they are not investers.  I am all for removing the road space for PT without the tunnels.  The roads space is there to convert. It just needs a smart debate and rationale discussion.

Offline #Metro

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 19490
  • DON'T SIGN! DON'T RENEW!!
Re: Roads - articles and discussion
« Reply #35 on: November 03, 2010, 11:21:47 PM »
Hmm. I always have mixed feelings about these things.

Motorways have their place:

* As bypasses
* As roads that connect distant towns or cities together
* As special purpose roads (i.e. port of brisbane motorway, road into Brisbane airport)

Something like the Gateway Motorway is a true bypass and allows city to city connection with your car.
The Logan Motorways and Pacific Motorways post 8 Mile Plains would fall into this category.

Tunnel projects- I can see a tunnel from the Ipswich Motorway at Granard Road to connect to the Gateway, allowing the re-claiming of Ipswich Road for PT and slower "avenue/boulevard". Of course gains should be "locked in" by slowing traffic once the alterations have been made, otherwise the benefits will be lost again.

The Western Freeway could dive into a tunnel and connect with the Gateway Motorway at Eagle farm, with no surface connections except at the terminal ends. Unfortunately the current approach is to dump the traffic into the ICB which- surprise surprise- dumps into Kingsford Smith Drive to get to the Gateway. No surprises why Kingsford Smith is busy then- the primary answer isn't the "need" for accommodating the expected 10 000-15 000 residents at NorthShore hamilton- IMHO that seems like a co-incidence. A rail track or a busway could easily handle that load in one hour. So it must be some other reason.

From maps is is not hard to see what is happening. KSD allowed surface connections so that now not only is through traffic from the ICB using it, but also local commuting traffic too. The result is congestion, high speed traffic that is anti-pedestrian and which is now the self-perpetuating reason why now that section too must be upgraded.

The traffic streaming from the ICB cuts the urban fabric and allows through, commuting traffic and inner suburban traffic to mix. No surprises here. If traffic is to connect to the gateway, best done via a dedicated connection that is solely for traffic doing that. No access to surface streets.

On these grounds, I might have to re-think my view of the tunnel under KSD!  :o

IMHO as a matter of principle, freeways and motorways should be kept out of the urban fabric as much as practical.
If they absolutely have to go through the fabric, they should go underground and IMHO should not have surface connections except at the terminal ends.

IMHO TransApex fails the bypass test because it really is just an inner city underground traffic distribution system.
Sure it bypasses the CBD, but really you want to bypass the CITY which is much more than just the CBD.
TransApex it is designed such that you can go from inner city suburb to inner city suburb via car.
Something like that competes with PT IMHO and isn't the best way to increase capacity for suburban trips IMHO.
« Last Edit: November 03, 2010, 11:52:24 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.

Offline #Metro

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 19490
  • DON'T SIGN! DON'T RENEW!!
Re: Roads - articles and discussion
« Reply #36 on: November 03, 2010, 11:46:32 PM »
I want to illustrate my point more clearly:

Compare Vancouver:

http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=Vancouver&sll=-27.451466,153.072853&sspn=0.064284,0.148659&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Vancouver,+Greater+Vancouver+Regional+District,+British+Columbia,+Canada&ll=49.236431,-123.10215&spn=0.094599,0.428123&t=h&z=12

With LA:
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=Los+Angeles,+CA,+USA&sll=49.236431,-123.10215&sspn=0.094599,0.428123&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Los+Angeles,+California&ll=34.070294,-118.22216&spn=0.120013,0.428123&t=h&z=12

LA has the "ring" around the CBD (Like Brisbane!!!)
Vancouver does not. Where you would find LA freeways cutting into the urban fabric, you find main avenues and skytrain lines in Vancouver.
There is a highway, but see how it deviates well away from the CBD. The others stop when they get to the CBD.

In Brisbane, we are going the LA way- put the CBD into the centre of a virtual roundabout. IMHO this is not the right way to go.
In Vancouver, the highway skirts the city instead. That might be the better application.
« Last Edit: November 03, 2010, 11:56:56 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.

Online ozbob

  • Administrator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 78673
    • RAIL Back On Track
Re: Roads - articles and discussion
« Reply #37 on: November 06, 2010, 05:26:24 AM »
From the Courier Mail click here!

Billion-dollar plans to ease traffic woes at Kingsford Smith Drive

Quote
Billion-dollar plans to ease traffic woes at Kingsford Smith Drive

    * by Ursula Heger
    * From: The Courier-Mail
    * November 06, 2010 12:00AM

THESE are the multimillion-dollar options to fix one of Brisbane's worst congestion bottlenecks, destined to become a peak-hour car park within a decade.

The Courier-Mail can reveal the five shortlisted options (see below) to upgrade Kingsford Smith Drive being considered by Brisbane City Council, including a $3.2 billion double-decker tunnel built into the river, and a $1.35 billion Riverside Expressway-style proposal.

All but one of the options will add more lanes to a 2km traffic bottleneck between Newstead and Hamilton, where the width of the road is restricted by cliffs.

The proposals will be put out to public consultation, with the final design chosen by April next year.

But a start date for construction on the upgrade has not been fixed, with some of the options dependent on federal or state funding.

Lord Mayor Campbell Newman said council had no option but to upgrade the road, which was already overloaded with almost 5000 vehicles an hour in peak times.

"There is no do-nothing option here, it is a very congested road, the traffic is going to build because of Hamilton Northshore, the Australia Trade Coast and the airport and we have to sort it out. It is still really early days," he said.

"All the roads in Brisbane are busy one way in the morning, and busy the other way in the afternoon. This is one of the few roads that has incredible traffic in both directions."

A recent State Government travel time survey showed Kingsford Smith Drive had the largest drop in morning peak-hour speeds for motorists, with congestion forcing drivers to travel at an average of just 36km/h.

Cr Newman said his preferred option, a $850 million proposal which would involve a retaining wall built into the river with a road surface laid on top, was the best value for money.

But he conceded not all the upgrade options would prove popular with local residents, saying he expected opposition over several busway-style overpasses planned to stop unnecessary interruptions to traffic flow.

"This community really does have a record about having concerns over any work that is being done around here," he said.

"There are a lot of legal actions about blocking of views. I'm sure that it will be very controversial."

The two most expensive options, which would see either a double-decker tunnel or a $2.43 billion side-by-side option would need to charge a toll.

No homes will be resumed under any of the options, but commercial and industrial properties will be required along Kingsford Smith Drive.

Cr Newman said he would seek some funding from the Urban Land Development Authority, which was responsible for the Northshore Hamilton development.

Earlier this year, Infrastructure Australia rejected a $640 million bid for the Kingsford Smith Drive upgrade, but Cr Newman said council would bid again for the infrastructure cash pool.

He said the project would need to be built within the next decade.

THE OPTIONS

OPTION 1: Retaining structure

$850 million

Retaining wall built into the river to increase lanes between Toorak Rd and Riverview Terrace from four to six, including a high-occupancy lane

Pedestrian/cycle path

Replace pedestrian crossings with overpasses

OPTION 2: Do minimum

$255 million

No change between Toorak Rd and Riverview Terrace

Widening of road in front of Hamilton Harbour development

Replace pedestrian crossings with overpasses

No pedestrian and cycle separation

Roadway widened by two lanes between Riverview Terrace and Alison St

OPTION 3: Viaduct structure

$1.35 billion

Viaduct structure similar to Riverside Expressway between Toorak Rd and Riverview Terrace increase road from four to six lanes including a shared pedestrian and cycle path

Replace pedestrian crossings with overpasses

Upgrade to Nudgee Rd intersection

OPTION 4: Double-decker tunnel

$3.2 billion

Double-decker tunnel built into the Brisbane River adding another four lanes, tunnels will be 20m deep

Pedestrian and cycle path on top of tunnel

Possible toll for motorists

Removed pedestrian crossings and create overpasses near Crescent St and Cooksley St

OPTION 5: Side-by-side tunnels

$2.43 billion

Side-by-side tunnels built 10m into the Brisbane River adding four extra lanes

Pedestrian and cycle path built on top of tunnel

Possible toll for motorists

Replace pedestrian crossings with overpasses
Half baked projects, have long term consequences ...
  Bob's Blog

Online ozbob

  • Administrator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 78673
    • RAIL Back On Track
Re: Roads - articles and discussion
« Reply #38 on: November 06, 2010, 05:29:25 AM »
Media release 6 November 2010

SEQ:  Zero time left to can congestion

RAIL Back On Track (http://backontrack.org) a web based community support group for rail and public transport and an advocate for public transport commuters has noted that the recent congestion statistics for South East Queensland released by the Department of Transport and Main Roads shows that the multi-billion dollar road investments have had little impact on congestion levels (1).

Robert Dow, Spokesman for RAIL Back On Track said:

"The improvement in traffic speeds of a solitary kilometre per hour is reason to question if the return on investment from the massive motorway and tunnel construction over the last 10 to 20 years is actually a success.  We are now seeing right in our own backyard what researchers and many Governments around the world have recognised for almost two decades.  Building more road space can and never will reduce congestion."

"If 20 years ago we had followed the lead of cities such as Vancouver, Vienna, Berlin or Copenhagen our city would have a truly "world-class" public and active transport network rather than the mess we have today.  RAIL Back On Track predicts that unless a complete about face in transport policy is adopted, South East Queensland is headed towards a very unsustainable future. As was highlighted in the forum initiated by the Minister for Transport and jointly hosted by the Brisbane Institute and the Australian Conservation Foundation held in Brisbane yesterday we have zero time left to act (2)."

"RAIL Back On Track calls on all levels of Government to take off their 'road coloured glasses' and accept that the only solution to our traffic woes is to:

1. halt the construction of any new motorway or tunnel road capacity immediately and immediately invest in a true sustainable transport future, and

2. establish meaningful sustainable transport mode targets in the Connecting SEQ 2031 plan for people and freight of a target at least 60-70% for all trips made by rail freight and public/active transport."

References:

1. Southeast Queensland motorists stuck at 40km/h in peak hour on clogged major roads - www.couriermail.com.au/lifestyle/motoring/southeast-queensland-motorists-stuck-at-40kmh-in-peak-hour-on-clogged-major-roads/story-e6frer6x-1225946372830

2. Queensland’s sustainable transport future http://statements.cabinet.qld.gov.au/MMS/StatementDisplaySingle.aspx?id=72447

Contact:

Robert Dow
Administration
admin@backontrack.org
Half baked projects, have long term consequences ...
  Bob's Blog

Offline #Metro

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 19490
  • DON'T SIGN! DON'T RENEW!!
Re: Roads - articles and discussion
« Reply #39 on: November 06, 2010, 06:32:07 AM »
More billions. Every tunnel project = about the cost of 1 GC LRT project.
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