LNP Statement: Building Queensland: Planning major projects properly

[ozbob]

http://candoqld.com.au/policies/building-queensland-planning-major-projects-properly.html

LNP Statement

Building Queensland: Planning major projects properly

Traffic congestion and safety continue to plague commuters due to the large number of level rail crossings across Queensland. Worse still, Labor fails to plan properly when it announces major projects like Moreton Bay Rail without addressing the major capacity and safety impacts that some level crossings will create for both rail commuters and the road traffic networks.

Between the future impacts of Moreton Bay Rail and recent timetable changes, already busy level crossings at Telegraph Road in Bracken Ridge and Robinson Road in Geebung will be unworkable and unsafe during peak hour.

The Moreton Bay Rail project is incomplete without addressing these level crossings and the CanDo LNP Team will fix this problem in conjunction with the Brisbane City Council.

According to the Department of Transport and Main Roads, there are 1,602 level rail crossings in Queensland.  All Labor has done is:

    Run a failed taxpayer funded advertising campaign aimed at reducing/eliminating motorists' tendency to "run" the boom gates or race over the crossing to beat a passing train;  and
    Start an uncompleted maintenance program to replace or install boom gates at all level crossings in Queensland.

As Lord Mayor of Brisbane, Campbell Newman ensured business cases were prepared for these  crossings; and, while they are State responsibilities, he committed to funding 50 per cent of the work.

If elected an LNP State Government will commit to the other 50 per cent.

The CanDo LNP team will plan for the future not live for the media cycle, and fixing these two crossings to ensure the Moreton Bay Rail project works better is just one demonstration of our commitment.

LNP Policy Commitment:

The LNP is committed to:

    Planning major projects properly; and
    Identifying rail crossings requiring upgraded arrangements for traffic flow while improving rail traffic.

To date, the LNP has committed to:

    In its first term of government, build a flyover each at:
        - Telegraph Road, Bracken Ridge and
        - Robinson Road, Geebung;   and
    Work with the Brisbane City Council to build these flyovers.

[Stillwater]

The press release heading says "Planning Major Projects Properly", yet the text says nothing about how the LNP will plan major projects properly.  How, then, would the LNP plan CRR properly, or CAMCOS on the Sunshine Coast, or a series of minor rail projects aimed at improving network efficiency?  I suppose it is easy to plan projects properly when all you have committed to is just two rail overpasses.

[BrizCommuter]

Whilst these bridges are indeed required, BrizCommuter doubts that MBRL will actually add many trains during the busiest am peak hour. The mains are now at 18tph during the busiest am peak hour, with just 2 free track slots, most probably still required to be kept spare as delay recovery time. MBRL will however require a couple of extra counter peak services. So maybe just 2 extra peak period services/hour will run through these level crossings in 2016?

[somebody]

Whilst these bridges are indeed required, BrizCommuter doubts that MBRL will actually add many trains during the busiest am peak hour. The mains are now at 18tph during the busiest am peak hour, with just 2 free track slots, most probably still required to be kept spare as delay recovery time. MBRL will however require a couple of extra counter peak services. So maybe just 2 extra peak period services/hour will run through these level crossings in 2016?

Counter peak services are required as empties anyway.  The Caboolture+Petrie stabling isn't exactly huge, and numerous empties are required in the peak timetable between Petrie and Mayne.  A few less north of Petrie.

[Golliwog]

Seeing as a large part of the project is through scrub, would it take much to put in some stabling near Kippa Ring? There would of course be issues with habitat protection and all that jazz, but those are not insurmountable.

[SurfRail]

Seeing as a large part of the project is through scrub, would it take much to put in some stabling near Kippa Ring? There would of course be issues with habitat protection and all that jazz, but those are not insurmountable.

Already part of the reference design actually.  Room for several 6 car sets in the yard (can't remember exactly how many), so some counter-peak movements would still be required.

[somebody]

Seeing as a large part of the project is through scrub, would it take much to put in some stabling near Kippa Ring? There would of course be issues with habitat protection and all that jazz, but those are not insurmountable.

Already part of the reference design actually.  Room for several 6 car sets in the yard (can't remember exactly how many), so some counter-peak movements would still be required.

Is there a reason why the stabling can't be made large enough?  I'd doubt that many, if any, empties would reach Kippa Ring in time to do a subsequent peak run after doing an earlier peak run.

[SurfRail]

Is there a reason why the stabling can't be made large enough?  I'd doubt that many, if any, empties would reach Kippa Ring in time to do a subsequent peak run after doing an earlier peak run.

Ramsar wetlands and other environmental factors I presume will reduce the maximum permissible footprint. 

As it is, the yard is intended to be in between the 2 tracks rather than off-set like most others on the network.

[Golliwog]

I would think between the tracks would actually be better from an operations point of view. No conflicting moves when accessing/leaving the yard where as off to the side yards would have a conflicting move on one of those moves.

[somebody]

I would think between the tracks would actually be better from an operations point of view. No conflicting moves when accessing/leaving the yard where as off to the side yards would have a conflicting move on one of those moves.

Which would be the reason for it to be done this way.  Although I hope there aren't speed restricting curves to get around the stabling!

I expect it will involve trains needing to end to end rather than be all side by side as in Robina.  Which may have issues in the case that a train breaks down.  Perhaps there will need to be access at both ends?

[Golliwog]

Or a combo of both. But yeah, the wider you have it either the slower the approach or the more bush you disturb.