Connecting SEQ 2031 - The rail revolution ...

[ozbob]

From the Sunday Mail 23rd October 2011 page 43

Railway revamp - Ambitious plan unveiled



=============

Expect there will be more news later today ...

[ozbob]

http://www.connectingseq.qld.gov.au/

Not yet updated ...

[O_128]

Every year we see the same article, Why bother

[ozbob]

Now available --> http://www.connectingseq.qld.gov.au/


(File seems not to be downloading properly at the moment ...)

[SurfRail]

File does appear to be faulty - very keen to see what if anything has changed from the draft once they have fixed it up.

I still think the 14% patronage target is very lame duck.  They should be aiming for the same proportionate increase everywhere as the Gold Coast (4-5% to 14-15%, or around 3 times as much), except perhaps Brisbane which could get away with less.

[ozbob]

Yes,  feedback we gave was to aim for > 30% public transport, active transport > 20%, cars < 50% ...

I note from the link --> http://www.connectingseq.qld.gov.au/About/Targets.aspx  they appeared to have ignored us and stuck with the original mediocre targets ...  who knows there might be a qualifier in the final document ....

[ozbob]

The link to the document on http://www.connectingseq.qld.gov.au/  keeps changing so I guess they are on to it ...

I remember same sort of thing happening with some TransLink PDFs, they look fine from the internal government net, but when they go public not downloadable, assume permission thingo ...

[somebody]

Urban Link only until 9pm?  9pm is the Metrobus standard, and it is very unclear if that formula is successful.  BUZ can do it until after 11pm, and it is clear that formula is successful.  Why not emulate BUZ for trains? 

[SurfRail]

Urban Link only until 9pm?  9pm is the Metrobus standard, and it is very unclear if that formula is successful.  BUZ can do it until after 11pm, and it is clear that formula is successful.  Why not emulate BUZ for trains? 

The State's own standard for HFP bus services appears to be 9pm cutoff for high-frequency.

[Stillwater]

Is 'rail revolution' the new buzz phrase that replaces 'world class'?  Let's hope the final document addresses the year-on-year funding and actions required in 2012, 2013 etc to achieve the revolutionary objectives in 2031, otherwise it becomes yet another well-intentioned, yet meaningless, document.  The timing and release (supported by the marketing dollars available within the government and Translink budgets) is a helpful boost to a government in the electoral doldrums.  What will be the counter document from the LNP, as the alternative government?  It would have to be a bit more comprehensive than the discussion paper that's in the public arena currently. 

[somebody]

I haven't read it yet, as I can't download it, but It's hard to take this document and the whole idea of the "Rail Revolution" seriously after the govt baulking at implementing 15 minute frequency to Strathpine, Petrie or Caboolture.

Strathpine would only be achievable by blocking the middle road AIUI.

[Stillwater]

Yes, the 15-minute frequency is important and could be achieved with some tweaking of existing infrastructure augmented by 'low-hanging fruit', such as Lawnton-Petrie upgrade.  The real worry is continuation of the delusion that the big ticket items remain unfunded.  Wording on the website reads that Connecting SEQ 2031 is a '$125 billion transport blueprint for the region'.  It is nothing of the sort unless the government reveals the means whereby that money is to be raised/obtained.  And it can't just be that the money will come from the federal government, because that is a bit like the government saying it hopes the grand transport plans will be funded from proceeds obtained from the tooth fairy.  At best, Connecting SEQ 2031 is a $125 billion transport blueprint, for which only about $20 billion can be sourced from existing revenue-raising measures.  The question the government should be asked is: 'where is the remaining $100 billion or so coming from?'  It's 2011.  Can people see any circumstances where the state government would spend more than $1 billion a year for the next 20 years on major transport infrastructure?  What's likely is that Connecting SEQ 2031 becomes an election document for the next 12 months only, at which time the government reprints the document to achieve the same objectives, but by 2035, then 2040.  Connecting SEQ 2031 should be seen as not much more than a kiddie's Christmas present wish list.  Congestion taxes and other fiscal measures (an extra levy on petrol dedicated to public transport) must form part of the planning, otherwise its credibility will always be in doubt.

[AnonymouslyBad]

File does appear to be faulty - very keen to see what if anything has changed from the draft once they have fixed it up.

I still think the 14% patronage target is very lame duck.  They should be aiming for the same proportionate increase everywhere as the Gold Coast (4-5% to 14-15%, or around 3 times as much), except perhaps Brisbane which could get away with less.

Have they actually said 14% for Brisbane? (Hard to tell when the document isn't working!) I'd be hoping we get up there in the next few years as it is.

If 14% is the target for the SEQ average, essentially a doubling across the board, then that would actually be pretty remarkable compared to the past.

[somebody]

Yes, the 15-minute frequency is important and could be achieved with some tweaking of existing infrastructure augmented by 'low-hanging fruit', such as Lawnton-Petrie upgrade. 

Sigh.

Lawnton-Petrie triple required for 15 minute frequency?  Don't be daft.  I am sure you know that is not true.

[colinw]

"The file is damaged and could not be repaired".  Says it all really.

Really keen to read the latest incarnation of this, to see what magic fairy dust is going to be sprinkled over the next 20 years.

Not that it means anything, because this plan will be in the shredder about 3 seconds after Newman becomes premier.

Regarding service frequency, I have visited several places overseas that manage to run quarter hourly or better services on far less infrastructure that Brisbane has. Maybe we're special and can't do it here?

[mufreight]

Yes, the 15-minute frequency is important and could be achieved with some tweaking of existing infrastructure augmented by 'low-hanging fruit', such as Lawnton-Petrie upgrade. 

Sigh.

Lawnton-Petrie triple required for 15 minute frequency?  Don't be daft.  I am sure you know that is not true.

Actualy Petrie Lawnton needs to be tripple now if the timetable is to operate reliably and allow for the operation of other services beyond Petrie.  For the Moreton Bay Rail Link to operate it will beyond question require the third track Petrie Lawnton and that without any provision of further rail services be they freight or passenger on the NCL.
The logical and most cost effective solution is to build the new bridge accross the North Pine River and build the third and fourth tracks between Petrie and Lawnton now.

[dwb]

The question the government should be asked is: 'where is the remaining $100 billion or so coming from?' 

Of course, but I feel this argument needs to come from the community.

I am getting a progression bar using http://www.connectingseq.qld.gov.au/Libraries/Publications_split/Connecting_SEQ2031.pdf link to download the document, the other one on the front page (not under Publications with _2) didn't load.

[dwb]

Not that it means anything, because this plan will be in the shredder about 3 seconds after Newman becomes premier.

What says more?!

[somebody]

Yes, the 15-minute frequency is important and could be achieved with some tweaking of existing infrastructure augmented by 'low-hanging fruit', such as Lawnton-Petrie upgrade. 

Sigh.

Lawnton-Petrie triple required for 15 minute frequency?  Don't be daft.  I am sure you know that is not true.

Actualy Petrie Lawnton needs to be tripple now if the timetable is to operate reliably and allow for the operation of other services beyond Petrie.  For the Moreton Bay Rail Link to operate it will beyond question require the third track Petrie Lawnton and that without any provision of further rail services be they freight or passenger on the NCL.
The logical and most cost effective solution is to build the new bridge accross the North Pine River and build the third and fourth tracks between Petrie and Lawnton now.

Double sigh.

What you are saying is that the current levels of peak reliability are unacceptable for the Caboolture line.  I challenge you to support that.

It is not beyond question that we need a Lawnton-Petrie triple for the MBRL.  I've questioned it before and don't think I've gotten much of an answer.  The Lawnton-Petrie triple pre-CRR is a laughable proposition IMO.

Besides, the proposition I was responding to referred to off peak.

These posts show exactly what has been holding QR back.  Every time someone wants to improve services there is some infrastructure demand which is clearly not required to achieve such an upgrade in many cases.

Regarding service frequency, I have visited several places overseas that manage to run quarter hourly or better services on far less infrastructure that Brisbane has. Maybe we're special and can't do it here?

In Sydney, Sutherland station sees a 15 minute frequency to/from Cronulla with a double track between Hurstville and Sutherland (Cronulla trains run via Hurstville), additionally, there is half hourly trains to Waterfall, interurbans and freight.

It was similar St Marys-Penrith on the pre-2004 timetable.

Epping-Hornsby is similar as well since the ECRL.

I'm less familiar with Melbourne's system but I think it is similar, just with less freight on the BG.

"Special" is right.

[dwb]

The PDF consistently seems to "fail to load" in the browser (Chrome on Mac OS X), but if you right click and save as to your hard drive, the document then opens, at least it does for me via Preview (if not Adobe Acrobat Professional) and Safari seems to load the document (http://connectingseq.qld.gov.au/Libraries/Publications_split/Connecting_SEQ2031.pdf).

I'll try to upload a copy to scribd.com.

[somebody]

The PDF consistently seems to "fail to load" in the browser (Chrome on Mac OS X), but if you right click and save as to your hard drive, the document then opens, at least it does for me via Preview (if not Adobe Acrobat Professional) and Safari seems to load the document (http://connectingseq.qld.gov.au/Libraries/Publications_split/Connecting_SEQ2031.pdf).

I'll try to upload a copy to scribd.com.

I think you are looking at the draft document.

[dwb]

I'll try to upload a copy to scribd.com.

The document is available for all at http://www.scribd.com/doc/69924596/Connecting-SEQ2031

[ozbob]

Thanks Dwb   

[dwb]

I think you are looking at the draft document.

Nope, it's got Annastacia's signature in the front and "draft" is nowhere to be seen.

Their little promo video that took forever to load will be on youtube soon, link coming (might take an hour or so to encode etc).

[dwb]

Thanks Dwb   

My pleasure Bob

[O_128]

Why bother, Unless there is a guarantee of 1billion funding every year for the next 20 years then nothing will eventuate.  the first way to claw the money would be to fire the person that rehashes this document every year.

[ozbob]

Transport and Multicultural Affairs
The Honourable Annastacia Palaszczuk
23/10/2011

20-year transport vision unveiled for south-east Queensland

The Queensland Government's Connecting SEQ 2031 transport plan unveils a sustainable transport vision for the next 20 years.

Transport Minister Annastacia Palaszczuk and Main Roads Minister Craig Wallace released the Connecting SEQ 2031: An Integrated Regional Transport Plan for South East Queensland today.

"The release of the final integrated transport plan today is great news, letting people know about our plans and giving a clear direction for future transport projects," Ms Palaszczuk said.

"This is a 20-year blueprint to further develop South East Queensland's busy transport system to ensure we meet the needs of this rapidly growing community.

"The population of South-East Queensland is expected to nearly double from 2.7 million people in 2006 to 4.24 million in 2031; a population the size of Sydney but spread over an area about three times the size.

"To meet challenges such as population growth, climate change and traffic in the region, we need to change the way people move.

"The plan highlights many vital projects like Cross River Rail which will provide essential capacity for the rail network, potentially doubling the number of train services to the city as well as increasing services across the entire network.

"Cross River Rail will be a revolution to public transport in Brisbane with new inner city stations which will also reenergise the CBD.

Connecting SEQ 2031 is further evidence of the critical role Cross River Rail will play in Brisbane's transport future.

"This is part of a service revolution with UrbanLink delivering a high frequency service in Brisbane seven days a week.

"We added about 200,000 weekly seats in June with stage one of the train timetable overhaul with TransLink and Queensland Rail working on stage two now. In August, we rolled out more than 103,000 weekly seats to the network with the opening of the $466 million Eastern Busway extension.

"In the last two years, we have added 600,000 new weekly seats on public transport, invested in new bikeways, and built shared pedestrian pathways."

Connecting SEQ 2031 will guide all levels of government in prioritising investment in public transport, roads, active transport and freight, delivering the maximum benefit across the whole transport system.

Mr Wallace said the $1.9 billion Dinmore to Goodna Ipswich Motorway project was the perfect example of the kind of project covered by the plan.

"This project will widen 8 kilometres of the Ipswich Motorway from four to six lanes, including major interchanges, shared bike pedestrian paths, and new road and pedestrian bridges," Mr Wallace said.

"With project expected to be finished by the end of next year, we are already delivering for the south-east.

"We've got a plan and a vision and we're proud to share it with the people of Queensland.

"We're building roads to keep people connected and to make sure our goods are able to get where they need to go.

"This plan provides a vision for economic and social growth of our state."

Other projects include:

·the first section of a Brisbane subway connecting Toowong to Newstead/Bowen Hills and supporting major growth in the inner city

·Gold Coast light rail

·Northern Busway

·Expansion of the Springfield to Richlands Rail corridor

·Port of Brisbane Motorway upgrade

·Bruce Highway upgrade - Caloundra Road to Curra

·Pacific Motorway upgrade - Nerang to Tugan

·Connected and managed motorways to complete the motorway network and improve overall performance.

The timing for these projects will be outlined in future years through the Queensland Government's Queensland Infrastructure Plan (QIP), which was released for consultation in July and provides a clear outline of short-term infrastructure projects, as well as forward planning for longer-term infrastructure priorities.

For more information or to download a copy of Connecting SEQ 2031, visit the project website at www.connectingseq.qld.gov.au


- ENDS -

[dwb]

Why bother, Unless there is a guarantee of 1billion funding every year for the next 20 years then nothing will eventuate.  the first way to claw the money would be to fire the person that rehashes this document every year.

Shoot the messenger good work.

Those same messengers were trying their hardest to start the discussion on congestion charging to part fund the plan, until LNP heard it and ran circles round Labor in Parliament about them wanting to introduce "a great big tax on families already struggling with cost of living increases".

I still strongly believe you need a goal before you can figure out how to get there... surely you figured out you wanted to go to uni, for a whole bunch of reasons before you knew how you were going to make it work... and then you probably only made it work by getting funds from higher levels (HECS anyone). So quit your whinging, the planners are delivering the vision for the network this forum wants - a return to a heavy focus on rail and yet still not happy.

Well planning and politics is about empowerment and discussion as it is about anything, and at least the goal part of the future has been laid out. Figuring out how to get there is obviously important and is the next big step, but we need the goal first.

Bob, do you think a press release focussing on the funding elements might be a good idea - positively acknowledging that congestion charging will have to be a part of the future rather than simply saying what the LNP will, that the document is an unfunded wish list?!

[ozbob]

Yes,  put together some thoughts and post elsewhere.  See what the LNP say and do as well.

A plan is a start, better than no plan by a long shot.  It is very rail centric by necessity, the pax loads will be significant.

[SurfRail]

I'm a bit more sanguine about this than some other state's plans.  We had no busways or BUZ routes when 1997 IRTP came out.

The big failing of IRTP was not so much infrastructure, but a failure to reach its patronage goals, which suggests the answer (as we have known all along) is to invest more in services than in concrete where you can.

[somebody]

Why bother, Unless there is a guarantee of 1billion funding every year for the next 20 years then nothing will eventuate.  the first way to claw the money would be to fire the person that rehashes this document every year.

Shoot the messenger good work.

Those same messengers were trying their hardest to start the discussion on congestion charging to part fund the plan, until LNP heard it and ran circles round Labor in Parliament about them wanting to introduce "a great big tax on families already struggling with cost of living increases".

I still strongly believe you need a goal before you can figure out how to get there... surely you figured out you wanted to go to uni, for a whole bunch of reasons before you knew how you were going to make it work... and then you probably only made it work by getting funds from higher levels (HECS anyone). So quit your whinging, the planners are delivering the vision for the network this forum wants - a return to a heavy focus on rail and yet still not happy.

Well planning and politics is about empowerment and discussion as it is about anything, and at least the goal part of the future has been laid out. Figuring out how to get there is obviously important and is the next big step, but we need the goal first.

Bob, do you think a press release focussing on the funding elements might be a good idea - positively acknowledging that congestion charging will have to be a part of the future rather than simply saying what the LNP will, that the document is an unfunded wish list?!

The problem with the plan is that they have shown their interest in implementing it with the 6/6/2011 IPS-CAB timetable, which is none.

See what the LNP say and do as well.

A plan is a start, better than no plan by a long shot.  It is very rail centric by necessity, the pax loads will be significant.

Yep, agree with that.  But I don't think we are much different to Sydney here.  There was an article recently with a title something like "Welcome to Sydney, where the plans arrive frequently, but the trains don't".

I'm a bit more sanguine about this than some other state's plans.  We had no busways or BUZ routes when 1997 IRTP came out.

The big failing of IRTP was not so much infrastructure, but a failure to reach its patronage goals, which suggests the answer (as we have known all along) is to invest more in services than in concrete where you can.

Who is "we"?

The infrastructure foaming on this site is incessant.

[Stillwater]

SUNSHINE COAST AND CONNECTING SEQ 2031

The section of the report dealing with the Sunshine Coast contains some interesting observations and comments that don't match with current government thinking or the text shows subtle changes in intention.

For the first time, the government has announced that CoastConnect will operate not just from Maroochydore and Nambour to Brisbane but from Gympie North to Brisbane: "CoastLink rail services will operate from Gympie North and Maroochydore."  Does this entail duplication and track upgrades not just to Nambour, but a further distance to Gympie North.  Cost?  Timeline?  Presumably by 2031, but this would be counter to current thinking.

Also for the first time, Maroochydore is identified as the terminus for CoastConnect rail, whereas previous thinking was that the railway line would extend to the Sunshine Coast Airport.  Vague mentions were made of extending it to Noosa, but these have disappeared.  The words used are:  "Maroochydore will be the main interchange point between intra-regional and suburban public transport services onthe Sunshine Coast. It will contain a high standard, multi-modal interchange used as an eventual terminus for the rail line, CoastConnect  bus corridor and other suburban bus routes."

There are some fascinating double-talk in relation to major new developments, such as Caloundra South.  On the one hand the government acknowledges the rapid growth projection for the Sunshine Coast by saying: "Population on the Sunshine Coast is forecast to increase by over 68% from295 000 in 2006 to 497 000 in 2031. Most of the growth will be accommodated in new development areas."

Then comes the motherhood clause:   "There is an important opportunity to achieve a more sustainable form of new urban development by ensuring new communities are designed around public transport and active transport."

At Caloundra South, while the design may be there, the actual infrastructure won't be.  The Connecting SEQ 2031 document states: "Interim bus measures will be provided on the Sunshine Coast to ensure appropriate public transport access to Caloundra South in advance of the rail line being developed. These interim bus measures will support the long-term vision for rail to the Sunshine Coast. In the longer term, UrbanLink rail services could also operate on the new rail line between Maroochydore and Beerwah."

Clearly, buses serving Caloundra South to Caloundra envisage a long, long, interim period.

But the most telling words in the Connecting SEQ 2031 document for Sunshine Coast travellers are these:
"Growth on the Sunshine Coast will mean a 71% increase in daily trips from 1.03million in 2006 to 1.76 million in 2031.The 2031 transport targets aim to reduce the share of trips made by private car from86.3% to 72%.  Meeting the targets would still see daily private car trips made by Sunshine Coast residents increase by 42% from 890 000 in2006 to 1.26 million in 2031."

While effecting a six percent decrease in the percentage of trips made by car, the actual number of car trips made will increase.  In other words, more will be expected of the existing, inadequate Sunshine Coast transport network in the years to come.

It will be interesting to see the LNP's Sunshine Coast regional transport plan in the light of these disclosures in the Connecting SEQ 2031 document.

[O_128]

Why bother, Unless there is a guarantee of 1billion funding every year for the next 20 years then nothing will eventuate.  the first way to claw the money would be to fire the person that rehashes this document every year.

Shoot the messenger good work.

Those same messengers were trying their hardest to start the discussion on congestion charging to part fund the plan, until LNP heard it and ran circles round Labor in Parliament about them wanting to introduce "a great big tax on families already struggling with cost of living increases".

I still strongly believe you need a goal before you can figure out how to get there... surely you figured out you wanted to go to uni, for a whole bunch of reasons before you knew how you were going to make it work... and then you probably only made it work by getting funds from higher levels (HECS anyone). So quit your whinging, the planners are delivering the vision for the network this forum wants - a return to a heavy focus on rail and yet still not happy.

Well planning and politics is about empowerment and discussion as it is about anything, and at least the goal part of the future has been laid out. Figuring out how to get there is obviously important and is the next big step, but we need the goal first.

Bob, do you think a press release focussing on the funding elements might be a good idea - positively acknowledging that congestion charging will have to be a part of the future rather than simply saying what the LNP will, that the document is an unfunded wish list?!

I get that but use the 2009-2031 and stick to it, set funding goals and things will get done, this plan is virtually identical to last year but other the projects underway or confirmed for this year have started. Its all well and good to tell me about an amazing subway and High frequeny trains but until I see a guarantee of $$$ being put into PT per year then its all rubbish.

If plans are going to be written then start getting trouts road, Light rail stage 2, CAMCOS etc going. 21 years isn't long when the big bits of infrastructure take 6+ years from concept to delivery.

On a side note perhaps the federal gov should strike a deal going dollar for dollar with PT investment in Queensland.

And finally 15 min off peak isn't going to cut it in 2031, I would be looking more towards every 10 mins.

[Gazza]

For the first time, the government has announced that CoastConnect will operate not just from Maroochydore and Nambour to Brisbane but from Gympie North to Brisbane: "CoastLink rail services will operate from Gympie North and Maroochydore."  Does this entail duplication and track upgrades not just to Nambour, but a further distance to Gympie North.  Cost?  Timeline?

What I'd interpret that as is.

-GYN Services will operate under 'Coastlink' (3rd) Tier rather than Expresslink or Urbanlink.
-GYN Services will most likely use those proposed tilting sets that were mooted for Coastlink (Id imagine the ICEs would need replacing before 2031 anyway)

[Stillwater]

Good insight, Gazza.  Thanks.  Interesting, because it means Gympie North to Brisbane would be just over 2 hours (in 2031, or thereabouts), so may make rail travel more attractive for the northern outer zones.

[colinw]

That is going to require some serious deviations to fix the alignment north of Nambour (I'm taking realignment & duplication to Nambour as a given).

The thing that bothers me about this plan is that it appears to require an investment of something like $100 billion over 20 years, or a continuous $5 billion per year for the next 20 years.  There has NEVER been that level of sustained investment in public transport infrastructure in this or any other State of Australia, so what exactly makes us think that is suddenly going to happen here?

We really need to focus more on optimal outcomes from infrastructure we already have, while admitting that some expensive projects like CRR are required to take public transport to the next level.  I agree with Simon's comment above about "infrastructure foaming" (and am often guilty of it myself - big splashy rail projects are just so attractive).

[#Metro]

The thing that bothers me about this plan is that it appears to require an investment of something like $100 billion over 20 years, or a continuous $5 billion per year for the next 20 years.  There has NEVER been that level of sustained investment in public transport infrastructure in this or any other State of Australia, so what exactly makes us think that is suddenly going to happen here?

It's NOT going to happen!

They will find reasons to stall. Won't matter anyway, next government comes in all that reports etc will be tossed into the shredder.

[Fares_Fair]

This is my initial summary and may be subject to change upon reading the entire document.

Not much joy for the Sunshine Coast in this new non-draft glossy brochure.
Yes, it is a planning document and yes there should be plans, but there is no money set aside to achieve the stated goals.

Nambour rail duplication still on the backburner to 2031 despite our record growth.
Massive new developments at Caloundra South and Palmview that equal Springfield in size and population to be serviced with buses as a long-term interim measure.

Springfield gets the dual rail track for a mere 22,000 current residents, to 87,000 by 2030. (source Greater Springfield website)
The fact that the seat of Bundamba where it is situated is red team, has nothing to do with the incongruous discrepancy in resource allocation.

Appears that the rail link from Maroochydore to Beerwah to occur before duplication to Nambour.
No time frame mentioned for it in the document.

Cynically, the difference between Springfield and the Sunshine Coast is the colour of the political seats the rail line serves but that's typical politics in Queensland
(or anywhere else for that matter).
Need, unfortunately, is not the precursor for action.
What makes it galling is the advantages duplication to the north coast line would bring to the economy by freight savings and pavement savings alone, and still they cannot stand to provide acceptable levels of rail service to us.

Regards,
Fares_Fair.

[Gazza]

Appears that the rail link from Maroochydore to Beerwah to occur before duplication to Nambour.

What's wrong with that?

[Stillwater]

Nonetheless, it is the government's plan, but maybe not a plan of action.  If it were such, the government should explain where the $5 billion for next financial year will come from and how it will be applied.  If that $5 billion won't be spent in 2012-13, then it becomes $10 billion to be spent in 2013-14 to keep the plan on target to achieve what the government has set out to achieve by 2031.  I am sure the government won't spend $5 billion on new PT infrastructure in 2012-13, but it's action won't be to spend $10 billion the following financial year in order to keep the plan on schedule; merely extend the plan completion to 2032, then 2033 etc.  It is not a plan whereby the government will adhere to its (self-imposed) deadline discipline.