Redcliffe Peninsula Line [was MBRL (Petrie to Kippa Ring)]

[#Metro]

Really? How do they manage to do that?

[mufreight]

I agree with the comments Somebody made. Perth can build train tracks AND run decent service on them, why can't Brisbane do that? Identical tracks, identical trains and I wouldn't be surprised if the labour costs were similar too.

^They make do without train guards though, so labour costs would be maybe 60% of ours?

Really? How do they manage to do that?

They build infrastructure that supports driver only operation, platforms that are at carriage floor height that enable all passengers  unasisted access to their trains being one part, advance planning is another, the provide their levels of frequency by running three car trains at twice the frequency operated here but with only the same labour costs for twice the services with the added advantadge of high frequency attracting higher numbers of commuters to the services.
      

[#Metro]

Ouch! That doesn't sound very inspiring
2x the services, same cost!

[somebody]

Melbourne does without guards in spite of the driver needing to assist wheelchair pax.

[#Metro]

I wonder if it would be better with the guard though. Having the driver get out, usher people in, get back in and then head off would add to dwell time. Are the Perth stations staffed?

[somebody]

I think they could have CCTV or something like that.

[ozbob]

Three levels of government officialy signed on to the Moreton Bay Rail Link project today. This fly through animation showed the latest 3D design of the rail line with stations and bridges represented.

[O_128]

can i ask why island platforms arent going to be used?

[Golliwog]

If you don't mind me asking, what difference would island platforms make?

[O_128]

If you don't mind me asking, what difference would island platforms make?

firstly it allows everything to be on one platform so you dont have to run across to the other platform, the other is that why not make all platforms similar, at least if building new stations make them island all other new stations bar omeau, and sunshine coast lines have been

[#Metro]

Aren't they cheaper to construct? And less walking, lower chance of people crossing the rail track illegally to get to the other side.

[ozbob]

Pros and cons --> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Island_platform

[Gazza]

I've thought about it, and I reckon it's because these new stations are being built on flat sites, so an island platform would require 3 lifts (one on each side, plus one in the middle to reach the platform) Whereas side platforms only need two lifts (one on each side), and you do get the benefit of not having to go up and over in one direction of your trip.
Since these stations will inevitably developed on both sides they will inevitably act as cross bridges for the surrounding community.
Another, smaller advantage is that the rail corridor can be narrower approaching the station, because the tracks don't need to diverge.

For stations located above or below grade, an island platform with a single lift is clearly the best solution.

[ozbob]

http://www.abc.net.au/news/video/2010/12/03/3084555.htm?site=newengland

Agreement reached over Redcliffe rail
Source:    7pm TV News QLD
Published:    Friday, December 3, 2010 7:09 AEST
Expires:    Thursday, March 3, 2011 7:09 AEST

The Redcliffe rail link north of Brisbane will go ahead after the Federal and State Governments signed a deal with the Moreton Bay Regional Council.

[ozbob]

Email upate:

3 Feb 2011

Current status

The project is pleased to announce that Brisbane's floods have caused no delays to the planning or implementation of the project.  As such, the project team is continuing the preliminary planning work that was started late last year. The community consultation period will also continue, finishing as scheduled on Friday 25 February 2011.

The project is currently at concept design and full details will be settled once detailed design is completed in late 2011 / early 2012. Traffic modelling will be undertaken as part of the detailed design process. Construction is still on schedule to begin in 2012 with train services operational by 2016.

Additional Public Displays

The project will be holding additional public displays in February 2011 at Peninsular Fair Shopping Centre and North Lakes Library should you wish to attend. The dates and times are as follows:

Peninsular fair, Kippa-Ring
Thursday 10 February 4.00pm–7.00pm
Saturday 12 February 10.00am–1.00pm

North Lakes Library
Thursday 17 February 5.30pm–8.00pm
Saturday 19 February 10.00am–1.00pm

3D animation

The project has commissioned a 3D animation representative of what the completed rail project might look like. The 3D animation can be downloaded for free from the project's website:  3D animation

Should you have any difficulties locating the 3D animation, please call the project 1800 number and a member of the team will assist you.

Maps

Additional maps can also be accessed via the project website.  Just follow the link below and navigate through Appendix B & C of the change report to access the maps:  Alignment Maps

Should you have any difficulties locating the maps, please call the project 1800 number and a member of the team will assist you.

http://www.tmr.qld.gov.au/moretonbayrail

[Golliwog]

Good news. Still, something I just noticed is that the video (downloadable from their website, or above in this thread on youtube) shows that the Kippa Ring station is across Anzac avenue and then some from Peninsula Fair shopping center. I don't know much about the shops, but one would assume they would be something of a community hub? I would have thought it would be worth extending the line just that little bit further to connect in with the center. It is only the draft plan though that they have animated there.

[#Metro]

That's what I thought too.
Why is it a busway goes through 300 homes + properties and businesses get demolished out of the way, but for a railway, all the homes are untouchable. The busway will even veer towards a hospital and deviate just so it can have a dedicated station right next to the building.

Extending the rail line and putting the station directly opposite, above or beneath the shops is something I would support.
Why to 99% of the job, when you can do 100%?

Will it have a bus/cycling interchange as well?

[colinw]

My own view is that the end of the line at Kippa-Ring should kick slightly south into the Grimley Street area here, so that the end of the track is pointing directly along Anzac Ave.

That preserves the opportunity to in future extend the line onto an airtrain style viaduct built in the median of Anzac Ave, allowing the railway to penetrate to the heart of Redcliffe.

Incidentally, a railway station site in the centre of Redcliffe was once before resumed by the State Government, in the 1890s or thereabouts.  That site is now occupied by Redcliffe State High at the corner of Oxley Ave & Klingner Rd.

[BrizCommuter]

The project is pleased to announce that Brisbane's floods have caused no delays to the planning or implementation of the project. 

Well apart the lack of CRR meaning that there will barely be any system capacity available for the extra patronage from MBRL.

[#Metro]

Maybe there is a programmed 'delay' to the project pencilled in and set to go off at some point in the future... 

[colinw]

The project is pleased to announce that Brisbane's floods have caused no delays to the planning or implementation of the project.  

Well apart the lack of CRR meaning that there will barely be any system capacity available for the extra patronage from MBRL.

How so if it is routed to Springfield via Central Platforms 5 & 6?

CRR won't do anything to alleviate congestion north of Albion or between Northgate and Petrie -  if anything it will actually add trains to those sections - so the question is whether there is capacity to cater for a Springfield / Kippa-Ring pairing of lines?

I thought the reason Kippa-Ring & Springfield could go ahead is because they are more or less unaffected by system congestion, which is primarily concentrated on the Merivale bridge routes and the pair of lines via the old tunnels between Roma St & Brunswick St.

[BrizCommuter]

The project is pleased to announce that Brisbane's floods have caused no delays to the planning or implementation of the project.  

Well apart the lack of CRR meaning that there will barely be any system capacity available for the extra patronage from MBRL.

How so if it is routed to Springfield via Central Platforms 5 & 6?

CRR won't do anything to alleviate congestion north of Albion or between Northgate and Petrie

Yes it will, Shorncliffe's will be increased in number, allowing Caboolture and Redcliffes to skip inner-city stations. Hence, some extra capacity as they will not have to serve 4 stations.

Unfortunately, the planned 18tph on the mains will still be insufficient, as it will be only 2-3tph more than 2011!

[Arnz]

Yes it will, Shorncliffe's will be increased in number, allowing Caboolture and Redcliffes to skip inner-city stations. Hence, some extra capacity as they will not have to serve 4 stations.

Unfortunately, the planned 18tph on the mains will still be insufficient, as it will be only 2-3tph more than 2011!

Actually no it won't under the sectorisation rule.  If anything, Kippa-Ring trains will only add to the mains, as the requirement is that all trains are to stop on the "mains" to pick up passengers otherwise it's a "waste" of train path and capacity.  After all "inner suburban commuters/passengers can't be left behind" after all.  

Kippa-Ring trains are likely to be all-stoppers to Petrie, whilst some Caboolture peak and Sunshine Coast trains are likely to take the express paths on the Northgate-Lawnton section of track.

Suburbans will still roughly be the same, even if Shorncliffe trains are increased by 2 per hour to add in with the Ferny Grove, Airport and the 1 train each to Gympie North and Doomben running on this sector.  

[BrizCommuter]

Yes it will, Shorncliffe's will be increased in number, allowing Caboolture and Redcliffes to skip inner-city stations. Hence, some extra capacity as they will not have to serve 4 stations.

Unfortunately, the planned 18tph on the mains will still be insufficient, as it will be only 2-3tph more than 2011!

Actually no it won't under the sectorisation rule.  If anything, Kippa-Ring trains will only add to the mains, as the requirement is that all trains are to stop on the "mains" to pick up passengers otherwise it's a "waste" of train path and capacity.  After all "inner suburban commuters/passengers can't be left behind" after all.  

Kippa-Ring trains are likely to be all-stoppers to Petrie, whilst some Caboolture peak and Sunshine Coast trains are likely to take the express paths on the Northgate-Lawnton section of track.

Suburbans will still roughly be the same, even if Shorncliffe trains are increased by 2 per hour to add in with the Ferny Grove, Airport and the 1 train each to Gympie North and Doomben running on this sector.  

If you had read the post, you would notice that the conversation was referring to post CRR, where the current plan (according to the reference design operations section) is for Caboolture, Sunshine Coast, and Redcliffe trains running express between Northgate and Eagle Junction, and Eagle Junction to Exhibition. This will free up some capacity on these lines without increasing the number of tph - around 3,000 passengers by 2009 figures.

However between mid-2011 and CRR opening, there are only around 2-3tph left available on the mains. If patronage rises between 2011 and MBRL's opening, there will be little spare capacity for the extra patronage coming from MBRL.

Even with CRR, the mains will be saturated by the early 2020s. This could be relieved by the Alderley to Strathpine corridor (which is likely to be Roma Street to Strathpine). But will we see this before 2031? I think not.

[somebody]

For stations located above or below grade, an island platform with a single lift is clearly the best solution.

Not necessarily if the station is underground.  Then you need to widen the tunnel in the approaches to allow the tracks to go around the station.  Of course, if there are two tunnels, this limitation doesn't apply.

There aren't very many stations which aren't at grade and are above ground.

Yes it will, Shorncliffe's will be increased in number, allowing Caboolture and Redcliffes to skip inner-city stations. Hence, some extra capacity as they will not have to serve 4 stations.

Thought you were against missing Albion/W/Nundah/T.

[BrizCommuter]

Yes it will, Shorncliffe's will be increased in number, allowing Caboolture and Redcliffes to skip inner-city stations. Hence, some extra capacity as they will not have to serve 4 stations.

Thought you were against missing Albion/W/Nundah/T.

Prior to CRR (or higher capacity signalling) I am against services on the mains missing Albion/W/Nundah/T, as there would not be enough services on the suburbans to provide a decent frequency to these stations.

Post CRR I have no problem with services on the mains services skipping these stations as long as there is a peak train at least every 10 mins on Shorncliffe duties which would service these stations (although I would expect that by 2020 a higher frequency than every 10 minutes would be required, more like every 7.5mins/8tph).

[somebody]

At least you are making some sense then.

That Doomben line is a pain in the rear end!  Effectively it blocks 4tph from being useful, unless you have a stagger in the timetable.

8tph Ferny Grove
4tph Airport

Only leaves 8tph for the Doomben & Shorncliffe lines, if you accept that the limit is 20tph.  I can't go along with accepting that.  It's been formally assessed as 23-25tph.

[colinw]

Opinion piece in The Australian: Infrastructure Australia has been all but derailed

Relevance to MBRL: this article attacks the Federal funding toward the Petre - Kippa-Ring line, along with funding for Epping - Parramatta in and Regional Rail Link in Melbourne.  Apparently the Australian's antipathy toward Federal investment in rail extends to urban public transport. 

THE Gillard government's confirmation that it will contribute $2.1 billion to building the Epping-Parramatta railway line in suburban Sydney will probably not help Labor in NSW, but it has delivered a fatal blow to the credibility of Infrastructure Australia.

Set up, with great fanfare, to "develop a strategic blueprint for our nation's infrastructure needs", the whole rationale of Infrastructure Australia was that it would be national, scientific and impartial. A body of experts would weigh the merits of competing infrastructure proposals from across the nation and pick those that would deliver the greatest benefit for the taxpayer dollar.

Yet, less than three years after its establishment, a combination of irrelevance and incompetence has Infrastructure Australia on the verge of joining the growing list of reforms Kevin Rudd failed to deliver.

By signing off on the commonwealth contribution to the construction of Epping-Parramatta, federal Infrastructure and Transport Minister Anthony Albanese has removed any pretext of national infrastructure funding decisions being taken on the basis of economic analysis.

When Julia Gillard made the original announcement about funding the project in the federal campaign, not only had Infrastructure Australia not recommended spending even one cent on this project, it had not even been considered a strong enough proposal to form part of the NSW government submission seeking federal largesse.

The best that Albanese could come up with, when queried as to why he was ignoring his own process, was the lame declaration that he had been discussing the proposal with chairman Rod Eddington for a "long period of time".

Last August, the obvious motivation for pursuing the project was an attempt by federal Labor to save Bennelong; now it is to save a couple of seats at next month's state poll. Just as it did not work then, it probably won't work now.

However, the commitment of the funds does present a potential conundrum for the next NSW government.

Barry O'Farrell may have a difficult job negotiating with the commonwealth to divert the funding to a more worthy project.

A similar issue has arisen in Victoria although, in this instance, Infrastructure Australia itself, not its political masters, needs to cop much of the blame for the problem the Baillieu government has inherited.

Based on Infrastructure Australia advice, the Rudd government committed $3.2bn, the largest chunk of its initial round of funding from the Building Australia Fund, to Melbourne's regional rail link. This project will see new track built from Werribee in the city's outer southwest to the edge of the CBD, thus removing regional rail services from crowded suburban tracks.

Victoria's new Liberal Transport Minister, Terry Mulder, recently revealed the true cost of the project was actually $880 million more than the previous Labor government, or Infrastructure Australia, had calculated. Somehow, the original costing had overlooked items, including a couple of rail overpasses, and underestimated the cost of signalling works by $400m.

At the same time that Mulder made these facts public, Albanese announced that he needed to defer $500m in expenditure on the project, mainly because of the need for post-flood re-prioritisation. This might sound reasonable if Albanese had not already clawed back $400m last November, well before the flood rationale was available.

In Victoria, Mulder has explained that his newly inherited bureaucrats were not at fault because they had been given insufficient time to cost the plan accurately, before the previous government went public with it.

While the Brumby government is rightly being held to account for this shemozzle, it also casts significant doubt on the ability of Infrastructure Australia to scrutinise state governments' plans rigorously before cheerfully doling out the commonwealth cash.

When this project was originally assessed against competitors, there were grumbles in other states that Victoria was always likely to have the inside running at Infrastructure Australia, as its $38bn transport plan was based on a report undertaken by Eddington before he became the chairman of Infrastructure Australia.

There also have been concerns expressed that the body was focusing too much on urban public transport, traditionally a state responsibility, and not enough on funding projects that were designed to boost the nation's export performance.

The fact Infrastructure Australia did not spot the holes in the Victorian plan certainly raises question about how rigorous its assessments were.

Maybe, like its Victorian counterparts, it was given insufficient time by its political masters to do a proper analysis.

And certainly, under Gillard's prime ministership, it is the politicians who have to take the lion's share of the responsibility for undermining Kevin Rudd's Infrastructure Australia.

As well as Epping-Parramatta, also in the federal election campaign, Labor pledged $742m to build a railway to the Brisbane bayside suburb of Redcliffe, a project neither recommended by Infrastructure Australia nor on the Queensland government's priority list.

In fact, even while Rudd was still prime minister, the government had begun ignoring Infrastructure Australia.

Last year, the Australian National Audit Office released a damning report on the allocation of infrastructure spending, pointing out that six rail, road and port infrastructure projects announced in the 2009-10 budget, as well as two rail projects funded in the 2010-11 budget, had not made Infrastructure Australia's short list of priority projects.

Four of the projects had been evaluated and found "not sufficiently developed to meet the criteria for recommendation as ready to proceed".

That capricious record, and the lack of transparency, creates serious problems for incoming state governments as they try to assess the real infrastructure priorities in their jurisdictions. They can only guess what type of projects may gain, or retain, commonwealth funding.

It is a long way from the promised "strategic blueprint", and can lead to only more questioning of whether it is worth the government persevering with Infrastructure Australia.

[#Metro]

Richard Allsop is a research fellow with the Institute of Public Affairs.

IPA is an extreme ideological think tank that is philosophically opposed to public transport if it does not make a profit.
While some of its arguments certainly need to be looked at on its own merits, you are never going to get smiles for PT from this group.

[colinw]

Already posted feedback along those lines.  The IPA has form in this area, and The Australian nearly always prints it.  I'm fairly sure that these idiots had the ear of one or more Howard Government ministers, given the complete lack of Federal funding for urban public transport during Howard's tenure.

The only public transport funding  announcement of any form that I can remember during the Howard years was the $65 million Centenary of Federation fund committment to the Borbidge Government's BrizTram project in 1997.  That money was of course lost when Beattie cancelled the project, and IIRC it was ultimately used on Bruce Highway widening in the North Lakes area*.

* = need to check this, might be wrong but I think the BrizTram money ended up going toward roads.  The Howard Government also pumped a bit of money into the Beaudesert Rail debacle.

[Stillwater]

There is merit in the argument that major infrastructure projects be fully costed and their benefit assessed for comparison against other, similar projects.  In another post in another thread, a full financial study of the Toowoomba Range bypass has proven that project  to be a dud (as proposed).  Of course, an amended proposal may be more cost-effective, and that is the beauty of the business case model – you can examine various 'what if' scenarios.

Oh how fortuitous it would be if the CRR business case was finished and sitting on the shelf if, say, the Victorian Regional Rail Link falls over and the reduced sum of money that the federal government has sitting there to fund it is in need of a new home.  Queensland perhaps?  There's an election coming up in this state next year.  And how many electorates benefit from the CRR?

[ozbob]

Email update from Moreton Bay Rail Link project staff

Community feedback on the Moreton Bay Rail Link project

Thank you to everyone who submitted feedback regarding the Moreton Bay Rail Link project. This feedback will be taken into account as part of the consultation process. All feedback collected during the formal community consultation process conducted between November 2010 and February 2011 will be compiled in a consultation report which will be made publicly available in mid-2011.

The Moreton Bay Rail Link is still at concept design and the final details of the project will not be known until detailed design is completed in late 2011/early 2012. Noise and traffic modelling will also be undertaken as part of the detailed design and all submissions from the community will be taken into consideration during this process.

The rail corridor was selected and purchased by the State Government approximately 30 years ago.  Details about the location of the rail corridor have been available from the state government to anyone undertaking relevant property searches in that period. The rail corridor itself has not moved during this time.  

We note that some residents and businesses have used Google Maps, independent websites or street directories as a source of information about the location of the rail corridor. Unfortunately, these sources are not controlled or regulated by the state government and as such, may not necessarily reflect accurate information.

It is anticipated that construction will begin in late 2012 and be completed in 2016.

The next formal community consultation period will be conducted in 2012 to give people the chance to provide feedback on the detailed design.

Should you have any questions in the interim, please contact the project team via the details below.

Kind regards,

Moreton Bay Rail Link

Email:            moretonbayrail@tmr.qld.gov.au 

Website:        www.tmr.qld.gov.au/moretonbayrail

Phone:          1800 096 821  Free call Australia wide. Higher rates apply from mobile phones and pay phones

Post:         Moreton Bay Rail Link
                Transport and Main Roads
                Reply Paid 2439
                Brisbane Qld 4001

[Jonno]

The next consultation is 2012?  Why so long?  Design should not take that long.  If this was a freeway it would be in construction later this year!!!

[mufreight]

The next consultation is 2012?  Why so long?  Design should not take that long.  If this was a freeway it would be in construction later this year!!!

If it was a freeway this Government would start construction then hold the "consultation" as a media event to announce what they were already doing, as a consequence of the consultation they "might" consider changing the colour of the sound barriers. (if Bunnings had a sale on cheap paint)

[Stillwater]

Remember all the bluster from the state government about this project being 'shovel ready' if only the money was available from the federal government?  Now the truth is exposed - it is at the CONCEPT stage.  Detailed design has not been done.  People should be very wary of state assertions that projects are 'ready to go'.  The state's concept of a project 'underway' includes the stages leading to actual construction, whereas the community's interpretation of that statement is that a shovel will break ground next week.  this is not so.

[#Metro]

The more I think about it, the more I think that the hold off has a lot to do with the state being broke.

[colinw]

I thought QR had already done detailed design work for Kippa-Ring years ago, although that may have been a single track design with loops at stations.

It is disappointing that there is a 1 year delay until constructon begins, but I guess there are other factors at play here (state budget, resource conflicts with the Richlands to Springfield and Mitchelton to Ferny Grove projects, availability of rollingstock on completion).

It is reasonable to assume that any media releases are window dressing and we are not getting the full story.  This is the way with all Government projects (and many private ones) these days, things are always spun to make them look better than they are.

[somebody]

I thought QR had already done detailed design work for Kippa-Ring years ago, although that may have been a single track design with loops at stations.

It is disappointing that there is a 1 year delay until constructon begins, but I guess there are other factors at play here (state budget, resource conflicts with the Richlands to Springfield and Mitchelton to Ferny Grove projects, availability of rollingstock on completion).

It is reasonable to assume that any media releases are window dressing and we are not getting the full story.  This is the way with all Government projects (and many private ones) these days, things are always spun to make them look better than they are.

Got to say, I think there will be some difficulty in getting the Kippa-Ring trains through the CBD without something being done.  An extension of the Petrie all stoppers seems to be the only viable plan if we aren't going to remove the Albion/W/Nundah/Toombul pax from the Caboolture line.  Not sure if there will be enough capacity by doing that.

[Stillwater]

Humm, construction starting in a year's time -- just when the next state election is planned.  It seems that this project is to become a political vote-getter once again!  Just how many elections is that now?

[mufreight]

Humm, construction starting in a year's time -- just when the next state election is planned.  It seems that this project is to become a political vote-getter once again!  Just how many elections is that now?

About 34 I would think