NEWSFLASH: CRR DELAY ANNOUNCED!!!

[#Metro]

I think there is a dire need for measures that prevent cost blowouts here.
I feel that a "reference set" of similar projects both built (e.g. Perth, ECRL in Sydney) and planned (e.g. Auckland) need to be studied so that costs do not blow to such a proportion that it becomes impossible to fund.
Unlike other incremental upgrades, you can't have half a CRR tunnel. You must have the whole thing for it to work.

The sooner CRR rings up TransPerth and maybe the people ColinW was talking about (where was it Barcelona or Spain?) the better.
There just is no room for something like Melbourne-style Myki cost blowouts or Regional Rail price tag blowouts.
A reference case of similar projects must be developed and mitigation steps taken before this happens.

[colinw]

The sooner CRR rings up TransPerth and maybe the people ColinW was talking about (where was it Barcelona or Spain?) the better.

Madrid.  Do some research on the growth of the Madrid Metro (Metro de Madrid) - one of the fastest growing Metro systems in the world.

Here's a good starting point:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madrid_Metro

[Stillwater]

Yep, you do test drilling so you know the nature of the rock you are going to have to go through.  That way, you don't plan for 'soft' rock and then find that it is super-hard, requiring additional drilling bits and mote time etc, 'cos that adds to costs.  You double check the survey work so you don't encounter a sewer, or the basement or foundations of a building as you build the tunnel.  You look at different techniques and reinforcing measures, and whether there are other services, such as an electricity cable that can be put in the tunnel cavity, so that means discussions with Energex etc.  You leave nothing to chance, assume nothing and check everything.  That's the preconstruction phase of 'construction'.

[somebody]

The perfect road storm approaches. Delay the CRR so more people have to drive. No CRR so inner city high density development is delayed.  Urban sprawl is ramped up to cater for population growth leading to even more people on the road.  The delay of the CRR will sit up beside the removal of Trams, Clem 7 and Airport Link as one of the most politically stupid decisions ever made.  I hope you enjoy toxic air because that is what future holds!

I say that cancellation wouldn't be as bad as what Sydney has done over the last decade and a bit.  Worst aspect, IMO, was when there was a private contractor (Leightons IIRC, might have been a consortium headed by them) wanted to build a toll tunnel from Parramatta to the CBD, I believe non stop between Parramatta and a new station west of Town Hall, a distance of about 20km at a top speed of 130km/h with a surcharge of $2.50 each way IIRC.  I think it then might have gone to Wynyard 1 & 2.  I think the reason why the Carr govt said no to this, as they were alleged to have done is that it would make CityRail look quite bad.  In every way, this plan should have been implemented IMO.

Part of me wonders if this delay is putting Brisbane back to where Sydney was around the turn of the century.

I predict that the decision to delay CRR will end up costing Queensland more than the entire flood crisis did.

Good point.

you can't have half a CRR tunnel.

Half of it being useless didn't prevent a government project where I work from being done in stages.

And Can Only Build Roads Campbell.  He has set this city back 30 years.

It's easy to blame Campbell Newman, but from my observations he is really only a reflection of what the people want.  Although getting rid of the bus/transit lane on Coro was pretty unforgivable.

Yep, you do test drilling so you know the nature of the rock you are going to have to go through.  That way, you don't plan for 'soft' rock and then find that it is super-hard, requiring additional drilling bits and mote time etc, 'cos that adds to costs.  You double check the survey work so you don't encounter a sewer, or the basement or foundations of a building as you build the tunnel.  You look at different techniques and reinforcing measures, and whether there are other services, such as an electricity cable that can be put in the tunnel cavity, so that means discussions with Energex etc.  You leave nothing to chance, assume nothing and check everything.  That's the preconstruction phase of 'construction'.

So "shovel ready" is something of a misnomer then.

[#Metro]

Yep, you do test drilling so you know the nature of the rock you are going to have to go through.  That way, you don't plan for 'soft' rock and then find that it is super-hard, requiring additional drilling bits and mote time etc, 'cos that adds to costs.  You double check the survey work so you don't encounter a sewer, or the basement or foundations of a building as you build the tunnel.  You look at different techniques and reinforcing measures, and whether there are other services, such as an electricity cable that can be put in the tunnel cavity, so that means discussions with Energex etc.  You leave nothing to chance, assume nothing and check everything.  That's the preconstruction phase of 'construction'.

Yes I hope so. They will have an extra 2 years to check everything again.

[mufreight]

There is no reason why actual physical construction could not commence in the Gabba region tomorrow were the WILL to do it there, the geotechnical surveys were all done for the Clem 7, the route has been decided so the excavation of the station chamber could start as could the tunneling both towards Albert Street and Park Road, were these works to start now they would enable the Gabba redevelopment to start also which would be of considerable ecenomic advantage at this time, carried out on a small scale this would provide employment and as the experienced workers became avaliable from the road tunnels presently under construction the scale of work could be stepped up.

[Stillwater]

Have the engineering drawings been finalised?  Has the split of public/private costs been decided, resumptions finalised, services such as telstra etc been relocated prior to drilling and construction beginning? Have developers permission to build exactly what?  Has a traffic management plan been prepared?  EIS, development application?  If the argument being put is that there is nothing to start the 'pre-construction' component of 'construction', that may be true, but you can't start actual drilling because you will need to square away every last detail of the entire tunnel project before drilling a bit of it.  And know that you had the money to proceed.  The pre-construction component of the budget can be contained and should contribute to the business case study.

[ozbob]

From the Brisbanetimes click here!

Cross-river rail 'vital' for development

Cross-river rail 'vital' for development
Marissa Calligeros
February 12, 2011

Brisbane's leading developers say the state has dropped the ball on vital infrastructure projects, costing the city crucial investor confidence in the property market.

While Lord Mayor Campbell Newman and Prime Minister Julia Gillard continued to exchange jibes over how Brisbane's flood recovery would be funded, developers met in Brisbane yesterday to discuss the property market outlook.

Chief to the recovery and the restoration of confidence in the Brisbane market, according to the development industry, is a commitment from the federal and state governments to big-ticket infrastructure projects - namely the cross-river rail link.

The $7.7 billion project, which was to include a new underground railway station on Albert Street was due to begin construction in 2013, but the start date was pushed back to at least 2015 following the floods.

This means it may not be finished until 2020.

However, some developers remain concerned the project may never secure funding from the key body responsible for setting the nation's infrastructure agenda, Infrastructure Australia.

They fear the federal and state governments have failed to see the connection between long-term investment in public infrastructure, investor confidence and the diaster recovery.

Property analyst Michael Matusik told the room of developers yesterday "function over form" ('function' being key infrastructure) was needed, in order to entice interstate migrants and investors alike, back to Queensland.

"The cross-river rail needs to happen and it needs to happen now. We need key infrastructure and key development first - that's function," he said.

"I would think that the flood and rebuild is an excuse, an argument, for what we need."

Mr Matusik said the disaster rebuilding effort would provide a temporary boost to the state's building and construction industry, but focus should not be on shovel-ready projects alone.

He said the floating Riverwalk should not be rebuilt without a commitment to vital infrastructure projects, including the cross-river rail.

"It needs to be committed to and [it needs to be] communicated and shouted that we're not changing that program," Mr Matusik said.

Leighton Properties state manager Andrew Borger supported the motion.

"[Cross-river rail] does need to be committed to. It's important that the money is put aside now to be spent in a number of years time," he said.

"We can't afford to have that project not happen. In 2016, when we can't afford to put another single train on the track we can't avoid the issue. It must be committed to now for future years expenditure."

Brisbane's property market has not fared well following the global financial crisis, but Melbourne's market has boomed.

In the past five years five per cent of the population - nearly 400,000 people - have fled interstate, where housing is considered more affordable and job opportunities are a plenty, Mr Matusik said.

Queensland lost 11,600 construction jobs last year and the value of private sector building approvals fell from $18 billion in 2007 to $11 billion in 2009 - the lowest figure since 2003.

Mr Matusik said investor confidence had "evaporated" and with it the interstate migration necessary for the recovery of the property market.

"Confidence is missing," he said.

Delfin Lend Lease general marketing manager Stuart Leo said the cross-river rail link would go a long way to restoring confidence in the economy and in turn the property market.

"Queensland is a product and we need to reinvent it," he said.

Melbourne salvaged its "brand" after fastening development approval processes, opening the door for greenfield projects.

"Part of the key to [Brisbane's] re-invention is the cross-river rail link. It could be the shot in the arm Queensland needs," Mr Leo said.

"Queensland doesn't sell itself as well as it used to. The pride and promotion and one-upmanship can be revisited."

Mr Leo went so far as to suggest Premier Anna Bligh go door to door spreading the word to businesses interstate that Queensland was open for business.

Mr Matusik said the Urban Land Development Authority went part of the way speeding the approval process, but was more a "band-aid solution" to a greater problem, whereby developments were stalled by unreasonable appeal systems.

"Part of the solution to that involves approving what I call the 'low hanging fruit'; it's nonsense that there's a lot of development applications out there not being approved," he said.

"Let's approve and move on."

[Jonno]

m.smh.com.au/nsw/state-election-2011/greens-condemn-rail-tunnel-costs-20110306-1bjna.html

Greens condemn rail tunnel costs
Jacob Saulwick March 07, 2011
THE cost of building rail tunnels in NSW is more than four times that in Europe, prompting calls for a parliamentary inquiry into the way the state government budgets for public transport.
NSW Treasury's method of predicting rail costs was fundamentally flawed by including big allowances for risk, according to the Greens transport spokeswoman, Cate Faehrmann.
She told a forum in northern Sydney last night she feared the huge price tag attached to rail projects was a ploy to make public transport less attractive to governments than motorway building. When Parliament resumes after the election, she will move for an inquiry by the Legislative Council, where the Greens might have the balance of power.
''Why is it that rail projects cost so much more in NSW than elsewhere in Australia and overseas?'' she said. ''Something doesn't smell right about these costings.'' She said commuters and the economy were suffering.
The concerns are based on the steep rise in the predicted cost of rail lines in Sydney. When the north-west rail link was proposed in 1998, running seven kilometres from Epping to Castle Hill, the estimated cost was $360 million. The proposed line has since been extended to 22 kilometres but the projected cost, $7.5 billion, is more than 20 times the original.
In 1998, the entire cost of a rail link from Parramatta to Chatswood was put at $1.4 billion. The Carr government delivered only half the project, from Chatswood to Epping. The most recent estimate to complete the link, from Epping to Parramatta, has been put at $2.6 billion.
At a parliamentary committee hearing in September, the director-general of Transport NSW, Les Wielinga, said the $2.6 billion estimate was for only the civil infrastructure, design and construction of the line. It did not include stabling, rolling stock or property acquisition.
He said a project such as the Epping to Parramatta line would typically be costed with about 30 per cent contingency built in. But the contingency would almost always be used.
EcoTransit, an advocacy group that organised the forum at which Ms Faehrmann spoke, has argued that transport projects in NSW are overpriced. It compares the Gotthard Base Tunnel, which runs for 57 kilometres under the Swiss Alps and was costed at $90 million a kilometre of track, even though it involved tunnelling through granite, with the projected cost of the north-west rail link, which is $366 million a kilometre.
In a letter to the Commonwealth Grants Commission in 2009, the Treasurer, Eric Roozendaal, said tunnelling through Sydney sandstone cost $400 million a kilometre. EcoTransit cites the 72-kilometre Mandurah line in Western Australia, built for $1.2 billion or $17 million a kilometre. The south-west rail link in Sydney is costed at $106 million a kilometre.
Ms Faehrmann said an inquiry was needed to scrutinise rail contracts. ''Closed hearings will allow commercial-in-confidence information to be examined,'' she said. ''Scrutiny must be applied and the inflated costings brought to account.''

Maybe time to see if the cost can be revised down significantly.  $90M per km vs $390?  Time to investigate!

[Stillwater]

The 'risk buffer', for want of a better word, built into tunnel cost estimates is high due to the fact that you are planning works and seeking tenders for a project that passes through unknown territory (i.e. underground).  Without having an intimate knowledge of the geology through which the tunnel passes.  What happens if you strike hard rock -- harder than estimated originally, thus slowing down the drilling process and incurring additional costs?  What happens if you strike an underground river?  A few years ago, a traffic tunnel in Sydney took out the foundations of a block of flats that slowing began sinking into the hole that opened up.  With roads, you can walk the route, see the mountains in the way and estimate exactly how much earth you have to remove, and how much of that can be placed in the valleys through which the road will pass.  The science is easier.  That said, Sydney tunnels can be beautiful things to behold because they most likely will pass through that beautiful sandstone, on which most of Sydney is built.

[ozbob]

Another excellent view point from Chris Hale ..

From the Courier Mail 14th March 2011 pages 26-27

Crucial employment obligations

[#Metro]

Wow, they have no idea.
"Let's use bus" er, just a problem:

BRISBANE will need another six King George Square bus stations within 16 years to cope with booming population growth unless funding for the city's second cross-river rail tunnel is found, the project chief has warned.

Cross-River Rail Project director Luke Franzmann told a Business Development Association lunch yesterday the southeast's rail network would reach capacity within six years unless the vital second cross river link was built.

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/features/push-for-rail-tunnel-funding/story-fn4z2520-1225834056511

[Golliwog]

Of course, it was right under a whinge piece by Mike O'Connor complaining about the Bruce Highway being continually closed due to flooding.

[Stillwater]

This says it all, really: "Brisbane no longer has room to move when it comes to vital urban mass-transit infrastructure." - Chris Hale

D-Day 2016.  We are no longer talking about someone not getting a seat on a train, forcing them to stand, or a passenger having to endure two full buses passing by before they can hop on a third.  We are talking about the capping of jobs, the stiffling of jobs growth (with direct consequences for the economy).

At Flagstone and at Palmwoods and Caloundra South on the Sunshine Coast, we are planning modern-day slums with no, or inadequate public transport; with all the inherent social consequences that brings.

What's the plan? "All will be right by 2031".  We are due for another of these so-called "plans" and the likelihood is that it will shift everything out a further five years and be called "Connecting SEQ 2036".  What's needed is a Connecting SEQ 2012, Connecting SEQ 2013, Connecting SEQ 2014, and so on.

Maybe it is time to decentralise government departments - put them closer to their customer base.  Agriculture/Primary Industries to Toowoomba.  Department of Mines to Rockhampton, etc.  Move people from the CBD if we can't provide adequate public transport for them.

Has it really come to this?

[somebody]

Wow, they have no idea.
"Let's use bus" er, just a problem:

BRISBANE will need another six King George Square bus stations within 16 years to cope with booming population growth unless funding for the city's second cross-river rail tunnel is found, the project chief has warned.

Cross-River Rail Project director Luke Franzmann told a Business Development Association lunch yesterday the southeast's rail network would reach capacity within six years unless the vital second cross river link was built.

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/features/push-for-rail-tunnel-funding/story-fn4z2520-1225834056511

Yes, it's a laughable suggestion to use bus. Only places I see much potential for that is the Cleveland line and the Ferny Grove line.

Temporal spreading (i.e. peak service for a longer period) may help a little though. With the Gold Coast line, even with a 10 space Robina stabling, that doesn't allow for the temporal spreading to extend very long.  Only another 90 minutes.  Re-vamping the seating on the IMUs would likely help.

[ozbob]

From the Brisbanetimes click here!

'Scrap cross-river rail': Lord Mayor

'Scrap cross-river rail': Lord Mayor
Daniel Hurst
March 18, 2011 - 4:48PM

Brisbane's stalled $8 billion cross river rail project should be scrapped and replaced with a Barcelona or Paris-style metro system, Lord Mayor Campbell Newman has demanded.

The state government in January delayed its cross-river rail plans, which would involve construction of a new 18-kilometre north-south railway line, 9.8 kilometres of which would be in a tunnel.

New underground stations were planned at Boggo Road, Woolloongabba, Albert Street and Roma Street, while new surface stations were slated for the Exhibition site and Yeerongpilly.

Cr Newman, who last year strongly backed the project, told a Property Council forum today the plans should be abandoned in favour of a separate inner-city metro system.

"I'd like to actually see this cross river rail project completely stopped right now," he said.

Cr Newman said the existing project was designed to provide more capacity to run trains from the Gold Coast through to the Sunshine Coast and tackle a bottleneck at the Brisbane River.

"A different way of looking at this is to say to QR, settle down, we're going to have it run two semi-separate systems," he said.

"Instead of putting $8 billion into cross river rail we could for between $3 and $4 billion total, get 40 kilometres of inner-city subway in Brisbane, with probably at least 25 to 30 stations, using the technology that was put forward in Barcelona.

"We can have that to service the CBD and the high growth areas of the inner six or seven kilometres of Brisbane, the high growth urban renewal areas."

Like in Paris or Barcelona, people would be able to transfer from conventional train stations to underground stations closer to the CBD, Cr Newman said.

"I think that gives us a better outcome for the connectivity of the inner-city Brisbane, linking metro to the existing busways ... and scrapping cross-river rail."

However, Cr Newman's idea won little support from his Liberal National Party colleague, John-Paul Langbroek, who was a member of the same panel.

"No, it absolutely should not be scrapped, because we need it, because otherwise our rail network is going to grind to a halt," he said.

Mr Langbroek, who has previously labelled cross-river rail as one of the state's most important infrastructure projects, said he was always happy to talk to Cr Newman about the rail issue.

He said there were some problems with the cross-river rail project in light of the January floods.

Mr Langbroek said areas proposed for it to go underground at Yeerongpilly, and the site of the Albert Street Station, were flooded. Those sites would now need to be rethought, he said.

Earlier, Premier Anna Bligh told the Property Council audience that cross-river rail was the only planned infrastructure project to have been delayed in the wake of the floods.

She said the project had not yet been funded in the budget, but this would have been the first year that money needed to be set aside.

In January, Treasurer Andrew Fraser said work on the rail project would be pushed back from 2013 to at least 2015, with the project now not due for completion until 2020 at the earliest.

"Frankly, we are just not in a position to do it," Ms Bligh said today, adding this could change in 18 months' time.

"It's not a very long delay and one we believe is manageable."

In July last year, Cr Newman strongly backed cross-river rail.

At the time he told brisbanetimes.com.au it was the most important transport infrastructure project aside from his two remaining TransApex projects – the Northern Link and East-West Link tunnels.

"If we don't get the inner-city rail project done, it affects the ability to run rail services right across the region," Cr Newman told brisbanetimes.com.au in July.

"The bottleneck of the Brisbane River prevents better rail services down at Beenleigh and north to Caboolture because you can't get the trains through."

In October, Cr Newman rejected claims he did not support cross river rail as "dishonest".

However, he called for a review of the project cost and scope amid fears over its "astronomical" price-tag, and hit out at the planned resumption of character houses in Yeerongpilly.

Comment has been sought from the state government.

[ozbob]

CRR is needed for to provide the capacity on the wider network, not principally as a inner city commute service.  I think Brisbane is far more likely to have light rail type systems to augment the existing transport systems than a true metro.  Light rail will be a combination of surface, cut and cover and elevation.  A metro system will cost a lot more than CRR I am afraid.  But don't let that fact get in the way of a Friday kite ... lol

[#Metro]

Like in Paris or Barcelona, people would be able to transfer from conventional train stations to underground stations closer to the CBD, Cr Newman said.

OMG. Does anyone actually do planning these days?
LET'S COPY PARIS SYNDROME!!!   AARRGH!!!

We already have Paris bikes and they don't work.
We already have the Eiffel Tower in Milton (I kid you not- walk down Park Road)
We already have copied that very unoriginal rotating "wheel of Brisbane" thing at South Bank.

Copy Copy Copy...

Perhaps Newman has not heard of the wildly successful RER???

[BrizCommuter]

This shows that Campbell Newman has no idea about public transport!

[ozbob]

RER --> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RER

[#Metro]

Maybe he should convert his car tunnels!
Oh no, can't do that, its already been spent on Car Rapid Transit.

[Gazza]

Instead of putting $8 billion into cross river rail we could for between $3 and $4 billion total, get 40 kilometres of inner-city subway in Brisbane, with probably at least 25 to 30 stations, using the technology that was put forward in Barcelona.

So how much have your road tunnels cost so far Campbell?

[longboi]

OMG. Does anyone actually do planning these days?
LET'S COPY PARIS SYNDROME!!!   AARRGH!!!

I hear the symptoms are a lot like 'Let's copy Perth syndrome' 

[#Metro]

Actually Perth runs the same trains as Brisbane.

What's not to like at frequent train services? Why doesn't QR want to run more frequent trains?
I have to say, I didn't like waiting 30 minutes today for my QR train service which I will also add was straight after peak hour at 6pm and the frequency died back to 30 minutes. I don't think this has so much to do with QR but TransLink and also the Queensland Government who simply just don't want to fund proper train services.

I hear the symptoms are a lot like 'Let's copy Perth syndrome'

I'd rather copy Perth than Paris anyday Nikko!
I can't speak french! :-)

[Gazza]

I'd rather copy Perth than Paris anyday Nikko!

Why the dislike of Paris? Paris has better PT than Perth, their amazing rail network aside, They have some pretty good ideas when it comes to running buses.
And their bike hire scheme is better implemented than ours...you don't need helmets, and you can use it on the spot with a credit card.

Actually Perth runs the same trains as Brisbane.

What's that got to do with anything? A train is a train, it goes along tracks.
It's like saying "X city uses the same buses as Brisbane"....Doesn't prove or disprove anything.

Now, onto the main point of my post.....If 40km of metro is $4 Billion, then why is 8km of CRR costing twice that? A metro train and a narrow gauge train wouldn't have that much difference in terms of tunnel diameter, and the actual systems like track and power supply shouldn't vary much either....Why is it costiing 10 times as much per kilometer.
Sometimes I feel some of the design intentions with CRR are pushing the price up too much...The desire to have natural light penetrating down to the platforms is a 'nice' idea, but it costs a hellavua lot in terms of earthworks etc.
How much could CRR be done for if it were built cheap as chips...By all means, have it capable of accomodating 9 car trains, but dump every other frill.

The Spaniards take a very efficient approach to building metros....They do it in a single bore 10.9m wide , and stack the tracks above each other...Stations can actually fit entirely within this bore, so they can use the same construction method throughout: http://www.engineersireland.ie/media/engineersireland/community/whitepapers/International%20Best%20Practice%20in%20Metro%20Related%20Tunnel%20Projects.pdf

http://img860.imageshack.us/i/barcelona.jpg/


Their stations are nice and simple...Not much more than a painted concrete box:
http://www.urbanrail.net/eu/mad/linea12.htm

A good article on the Spanish methodology:
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0BQQ/is_5_43/ai_102286983/?tag=content;col1
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0BQQ/is_5_43/ai_102286983/?tag=content;col1

[ozbob]

From the Brisbanetimes click here!

Newman's metro plan blasted as 'nonsense'

Newman's metro plan blasted as 'nonsense'
Daniel Hurst
March 19, 2011

Public transport lobbyists have blasted Lord Mayor Campbell Newman's call to scrap Brisbane's $8 billion cross-river rail project and replace it with a European-style metro system.

And the state government last night attacked the "nonsense" proposal, saying it would not address fundamental problems with capacity on the inner-city rail network.

The state government in January delayed its cross-river rail plans, which would involve construction of a new 18-kilometre north-south railway line, 9.8 kilometres of which would be in a tunnel.

New underground stations were planned at Boggo Road, Woolloongabba, Albert Street and Roma Street, while new surface stations were slated for the Exhibition site and Yeerongpilly.

Cr Newman, who last year strongly backed the project, yesterday told a Property Council forum he would like to see the "cross river rail project completely stopped right now" in favour of a separate inner-city metro system.

"A different way of looking at this is to say to QR, settle down, we're going to have it run two semi-separate systems," he said.

"Instead of putting $8 billion into cross river rail we could for between $3 and $4 billion total, get 40 kilometres of inner-city subway in Brisbane, with probably at least 25 to 30 stations, using the technology that was put forward in Barcelona.

"We can have that to service the CBD and the high growth areas of the inner six or seven kilometres of Brisbane, the high growth urban renewal areas."

Rail Back on Track spokesman Robert Dow said Cr Newman seemed to be forgetting that the cross-river rail project was actually designed to increase capacity on the rest of the rail network.

It would tackle existing "major bottlenecks" at the Merivale Bridge and allow for an increase in train capacity through the CBD, he said.

Mr Dow said the project was crucial, given rail extensions planned to Springfield and from Petrie to Kippa Ring and the need for increased services across the network.

"Cross river rail must proceed, it's urgently needed," he said.

"Cross-river rail is not designed to primarily give an inner-city commute; cross-river rail is designed to give greater capacity across the rail network."

Mr Dow said whereas cross-river rail would be compatible with the existing rail network, a metro would involve "expensive duplication" at a much higher cost than Cr Newman predicted.

"A metro is a different type of rail system. It's independent, it's high frequency, it's an isolated system in that it's not connected with the heavy rail network," Mr Dow said.

"You have to have a completely different system of rolling stock [trains], maintenance, the support for the network.

Transport Minister Annastacia Palaszczuk said last night a second river crossing, not a metro, would have to be the next big step in the region's public transport network.

"Newman's call would not address the fundamental issue of capacity on the inner city rail network," she told brisbanetimes.com.au in a statement.

"It simply will not cater for growth over the next 10 years."

"The idea that you're going to get 40 kilometres of subway and 30 stations for $4 billion is a nonsense."

Ms Palaszczuk seized on Opposition Leader John-Paul Langbroek's comments that cross-river rail must not be scrapped, saying they were evidence of divisions within the Liberal National Party.

A spokesman for Cr Newman last night said the Lord Mayor supported a cross-river rail project, but not in the form proposed by the Queensland Government.

In January, Treasurer Andrew Fraser said work on the project would be pushed back from 2013 to at least 2015, with the project now not due for completion until 2020 at the earliest.

The delay, blamed on the budgetary impact of the floods, was condemned by public transport advocates including Mr Dow.

"Cross river rail is essential and in fact delaying cross-river rail is going to cost Brisbane dearly, in terms of congestion; it's going to make it very difficult for the rail system to cope," Mr Dow said.

[ozbob]

Courier Mail --> Brisbane Lord Mayor Campbell Newman wants cross-river rail project dumped for a subway system

[BrizCommuter]

Sorry, forgot to link to yesterdays blog entry.
http://brizcommuter.blogspot.com/2011/03/can-do-clueless.html

http://img860.imageshack.us/i/barcelona.jpg/

Ah yes, the Barcelona Line 9/10 that came in overbudget, 5 years late (due to construction issues), and with an oversized tunnel (not really suitable for medium depth tunnels such as CRR). Not a good idea for cut price Brisbane.

[#Metro]

Now, onto the main point of my post.....If 40km of metro is $4 Billion, then why is 8km of CRR costing twice that? A metro train and a narrow gauge train wouldn't have that much difference in terms of tunnel diameter, and the actual systems like track and power supply shouldn't vary much either....Why is it costiing 10 times as much per kilometer.
Sometimes I feel some of the design intentions with CRR are pushing the price up too much...The desire to have natural light penetrating down to the platforms is a 'nice' idea, but it costs a hellavua lot in terms of earthworks etc.
How much could CRR be done for if it were built cheap as chips...By all means, have it capable of accomodating 9 car trains, but dump every other frill.

It is probably costing more because the tunnel must be constructed at 2% maximum gradient, whereas a metro you can have a steeper and therefore shorter and therefore cheaper tunnel.

[ozbob]

The ball park figure for subway/metro 40 Km of tunnels etc. and up to 25/30 stations at $4 billion is way out ..

I just took part in an interview on 4BC Weekend Mornings where I explained the true intent of CRR and the role a subway/metro has.  The subway/metro is flagged in Connecting SEQ 2031.

CRR is going ahead in terms of the feasibility study/EIS and will be ready should funding become available sooner than expected at the moment.

[somebody]

It is probably costing more because the tunnel must be constructed at 2% maximum gradient,

I've never seen a reasonable reason for this!  This is a shallower gradient than what exists in NSW on the Main North, Main South, Main West in both directions for the former and latter.  The Main South only has 1:40s facing down trains, but given that's the direction that freight travels except MEL-BNE, it's still an issue.

No way do we need to make the CRR suitable for freight!!!  We need the surface route for dangerous goods, if nothing else.

EDIT: Also, the southern approach to the harbour bridge has 1:30 gradients.  2% grades is a completely unreasonable requirement that gold plates the project with no actual benefit derived.  So there!

[Stillwater]

These figures get chucked out there with very little factual evidence to support them.  So I don't know why people throw themselves into a fury to argue one way or the other.  

The fact that a Spanish worker on the minumum wage in that country earns half that of his Australian navvie counterpart I suspect has something to do with comparitive costs.  We are back to comparing Valencia oranges with Stanthorpe apples.

True costs (in an Australian context) are established through the business case process, which is ongoing for CRR and will be finalised towards the end of the year.

[Gazza]

The ball park figure for subway/metro 40 Km of tunnels etc. and up to 25/30 stations at $4 billion is way out ..

It's not really....
MetroSur in Madrid is 40.5 Km long, 28 stations, and 1.55 million EUR in 2003, which worked out to 2.75 Billion AUD back then. Perhaps this is what Campbell was looking at?

If we move to Scandanavia, the Cityringen line in Copenhagen is a little over 4 Billion AUD equivalent...Theirs is only 15.5km long and with 17 stations.

I think the Danish example is probably more realistic (Particularly for labour costs), but it proves that a purpose built metro can bemuch less per kilometre than trying to expand legacy networks, since you can build entirley for purpose, and contractors are able to propose what they want rather than having to satisfy existing technical requirements etc.

Of course, CRR needs to be done before anything else, and simply upgrading the heavy rail network to be more like a metro too.

....But I wonder about things like the Trouts rd corridor...Could that be done as a metro from Roma St? No tunnels under rivers to worry about etc. Could be a good test case.

[BrizCommuter]

These figures get chucked out there with very little factual evidence to support them.  So I don't know why people throw themselves into a fury to argue one way or the other.  

The fact that a Spanish worker on the minumum wage in that country earns half that of his Australian navvie counterpart I suspect has something to do with comparitive costs.  We are back to comparing Valencia oranges with Stanthorpe apples.

True costs (in an Australian context) are established through the business case process, which is ongoing for CRR and will be finalised towards the end of the year.

Indeed. The cost of extending some Madrid Metro lines were 1/10th the cost per km of extending the Jubilee Line in London.

[colinw]

Different regulatory standards apply as well. The (rail industry) company I work for is UK based, but with a major subsidiary in Madrid. The Spanish projects typically come in a lot faster & cheaper, both due to lower cost of employment and less "red tape". The UK in particular is horrendously expensive, both due to an overvalued currency and due to the costs of complying with the regulatory framework imposed by Her Majesty's Rail Inspectorate.

If we were to try to replicate Metro Sur here, we would have to use cheap imported labour, probably ban unions, throw the OH&S rulebook out the window, and give up 50 years of hard fought gains for worker's rights.

[ozbob]

No way would a subway/metro be built in Brisbane for $4 Billion ...

I think one of the factors for the high cost of the Jubilee extension was coping with the building structures and so forth already in place. Be a similar situation in Brisbane too, and one of the reasons for the costs of CRR proposal and the route chosen.  A true metro would be nice, but struggle to see how it will be achieved.  No Oz capital will have a true metro IMHO ever, underground extensions to the existing heavy rail network, yes.  I still think light rail systems will be much more likely in Brisbane.  

This is more of a guide ..  x 5 = $25 billion

The $5.4 billion CBD Metro was to consist of an approximately 7 kilometre line, connecting Rozelle to Central, with stations at Rozelle, Pyrmont, Barangaroo-Wynyard, Martin Place, Town Hall Square and Central.

[Gazza]

I notice in Spain they have a tendency to build really big expansions in one hit, which gets the price per kilomater down....It's probably a similar effect to how the Mandurah line was able to come in at such a low cost per kilometre compared to other projects in Australia, by doing it as a mega project, and dividing it up into smaller packages of works. Labour costs would indeed play a role too.

The fact that a Spanish worker on the minumum wage in that country earns half that of his Australian navvie counterpart I suspect has something to do with comparitive costs.

So even if we double the cost of the expansions overall to account to this (but preserve their other efficient methods in design and construction) we could still be getting say 20km worth of metro for $4 bil rather than 40km...Which is still excellent.

Secondly, construction costs seem quite volatile, and I think the high figure quoted for CRR is inflated.
I'ts a bit like how the Springfield line has managed to come in $177 Million cheaper, whilst adding a station that didn't exist previously.
That's not a small figure, thats 1/3 of the budget, so initial cost estimates must have had some major errors.
Imagine if 1/3 was knocked off CRR...That's a couple of billion out of nowhere.

No Oz capital will have a true metro IMHO ever, extensions to the existing heavy rail network, yes.  I still think light rail systems will be much more likely in Brisbane.

The third point I want to make, but Brisbane is more or less building Metros at the moment, just with buses rather than trains, and the cost per kilometer as we have seen on these expansions is huge. I honestly do reckon if they did them as metros in the first place it would more or less come out at a similar price...The costs of track and a 3rd rail and signalling would be higher than roadway, but this would be offset by the narrower tunnels, smaller stations (no need for passing lanes) and removal of ventilation systems.

I think one of the factors for the high cost of the Jubilee extension was coping with the building structures and so forth already in place. Be a similar situation in Brisbane too,

Wouldn't this be the case anywhere you build a metro though? Since the point of building an underground railway is to serve built up areas where no above ground corridor is available.

No way would a subway/metro be built in Brisbane for $4 Billion ...

Depends on how much you want really....I doubt we'd get a huge 40km system, but we'd get something decent.

Anway, lets put Spain aside, and look at other recent projects overseas, where costs are more comparable to Australia. Prices have been converted to AUD.

U55, Berlin, 2009, $252 Mil/Km

Cityringen, Copenhagen, 20XX, $261 Mil/Km

Fukutoshin Line, Tokyo, 2008, $348 Mil/Km

[Gazza]

I think the Fukutoshin Line is probably a very good comparison for what CRR should be costing...Its narrow gauge, has some deep level stations (35m, which compares to the 32m deep Albert St), and the platforms are long to accomodate 200m long 10 car trains (Again, comparable to the 9 car trains CRR will be built for)...And of course, labour is going to be very expensive, and property impacts high in the middle of Tokyo.

So the 8 Bil for CCR should technically be getting us 22km of line, all underground. We're only getting 18km, and only half of that is in a tunnel, and some of it is just recycling an existing alignment.

[Stillwater]

Who can state a valid source where the $4 billion figure for a Brisbane 'Spanish-style' metro has been properly costed?  Anyone?  It is a figure without validity.  So why are people so dogmatic about it and use it as the basis for a premise as though it were fact?  It is not.

Equally, the $8.5 billion figure for CRR is highly suspect and remains so until a buiness case has been completed and published.

To say somehow that Brisbane commuters would get more for $4 billion for a 'Spanish style' metro and, on that basis, the $8.5 billion CRR project is overcosted is a complete furphy.

The $4 billion figure was plucked from the air by Campbell Newman.  His council has to bear the baseload of cost for bus operations within the BCC border. It is no secret that he wants to offload those bus services to the state and the state, equally, resists.

Newman wants to completely overturn the basis of CRR for a metro (details?) that will stem the costs his council will incur to provide bus services as Brisbane's population grows.  Buses = council pays.  Metro = state government pays.

CRR has some significant 'metro style' advantages, as well as serve the wider SEQ regional transport needs.  It remains the chosen and preferred project, the specifications of which could be changed to meet various scenarios and budgets.

See the Newman Metro proposal for what it is -- a bit of a burr under the saddle of the Bligh government, a pitch for state government to take over greater responsibility for Brisbane mass transit.  It also distinguishes Mr Newman from John-Paul Langbroek (who supports CRR) in the internal power struggle in the LNP, where forces are manoeuvring for Mr Newman to enter state parliament.

Folks, the $4 billion and $8.5 billion figures are rubbish.  Comparisons are fruitless.

[ozbob]

CRR looks fine to me today.  There is a lot more than just the tunnel and right of way.  

e.g. just for this section http://www.crossriverrail.qld.gov.au/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=104&Itemid=161

Victoria Park to Bowen Hills

Key features of the reference design proposed between Victoria Park and Breakfast Creek, Bowen Hills include:

   * tunnel portal and dive structure at the northern end of Victoria Park, allowing the tunnel to connect to the Exhibition line
   * three kilometres of new surface tracks from the tunnel portal through to Mayne Rail Yard
   * new Exhibition Station, servicing the RNA precinct, Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital health service precinct and the urban development area all year round
   * elevated structure adjacent to the Inner City Bypass and the Mayne Rail Yard
   * reconstruction of O'Connell Terrace, Bowen Hills
   * construction sites located in Victoria Park and the RNA.

The figures you are comparing are years old, what worries me is each month of delay is adding many millions.  I am starting to doubt if anything will ever get built at this rate.

The Sydney Metro was fully costed and had gone to the tender stage.  That is a better Oz benchmark ..