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

[SurfRail]

I don't like the notion of adding more tracks north of Albion.  They will just become a stranded investment if Trouts Road is being seriously pursued.

With Trouts Road, the only service which will need to compete with freight between Strathpine and Mayne will be the local service running via Geebung, which would only require 15 minute off-peak headways and would probably be an express between Northgate and the city (most likely Ekka and CRR).  No conflicts whatsoever with Shorncliffe, Airport or Doomben, which would be self-contained.

[somebody]

I don't like the notion of adding more tracks north of Albion.  They will just become a stranded investment if Trouts Road is being seriously pursued.

That too.

[mufreight]

I don't like the notion of adding more tracks north of Albion.  They will just become a stranded investment if Trouts Road is being seriously pursued.

That too.

I note that you said IF Trouts Road is persued, the provision of the fifth track as a bi-directional line for trains operating on the line to or from points to the north of Toombul, such a line would have an essential life of at least 20 to 25 years before Trouts Road was if it ever is constructed and provides a means for trains to avoid the bunch up at the choke point between Albion and Eagle Junction with express services overunning all stations services as presently occours.
As for the big conflict problem that you raise the only possible conflict would be possibly in the morning peak where ontbound counter peak services could conflict with city bound express services crossing onto the express bypass line.
There is no itention to route airport line services over this line other than in an emergency situation and to enable such a move would require the instalation of additional crossovers which are not proposed at this time to add to the redundency factor.
There would be no platforms over this length of line so that services operated over it would by-pass Eagle Junction to Albion and then either proceed onto the exhibition line or through Bowen Hills
Services such as the Tilts, the Sunlander and northern freight services would use this fifth track which would effectively get them out of the path of commuter passenger services.

[ozbob]

From the Couriermail Quest click here!

Wayne Swan finds $20 million for Moreton Bay Rail Link in Federal Budget 2012

Wayne Swan finds $20 million for Moreton Bay Rail Link in Federal Budget 2012

    by: Staff writers, Redcliffe & Bayside Herald
    From: Quest Newspapers
    May 09, 2012 10:39AM

The Federal Government allocated $20 million to the Moreton Bay Rail Link in last night's Federal Budget for continuing construction work on the project which is due to be finished in 2016.

Federal Member for Petrie Yvette D'Ath said the government had brought forward $135 million in funding in the previous budget.

It has committed a total of $742 million to the project and Ms D'Ath said a tender had been awarded to start roadworks at Mango Hill's Kinsellas Rd shortly.

A second tender should be awarded in late July for the design and construction of the Dohles Rocks Rd realignment, the construction of a new bridge between School Rd and Russell St, and a new bridge along Goodfellows Rd which will also be realigned so it connects with Dohles Rocks Rd at Russell St.

Design and construction of this part of the project should take 18 months.

The rail link is a three-way partnership between the Federal Government ($742 million), the State Government ($300 million) and Moreton Bay Regional Council ($105 million).

[wbj]

The question now is whether Campbell Newman will come up with the state's share to have it completed in 2016.

[ozbob]

From  http://www.commissionofaudit.qld.gov.au/reports/interim-report-risks-government-commercial-businesses.pdf

Page 168

10.4.2.3. Moreton Bay Rail Link project
During the 2010 Federal election, funding was announced for the Moreton Bay Rail
Link Project. The cost of $1.1 billion was to be funded by the Federal Government
($742 million), Moreton Bay Regional Council (Council) ($120 million) with the
balance funded by the Queensland Government through a contribution of land
($120 million) and cash ($300 million). The business case was approved in
December 2011, with an indicative cost of $1.2 billion, with the increase being
attributed to additional risk and contingency escalations.
The Australian Government and Council contributions are capped at $742 million and
$120 million respectively, meaning that the State will have to bear the risk of any cost
overruns. Furthermore, no provision has been made for:
. connection of the rail spur to the existing network line, requiring grade separation,
which would cost an additional $300 million, or
. the estimated annual operating cost of $50 million per annum (beyond the
forward estimates period).
While the Australian Government has approved funding for this infrastructure project,
its contribution will be subject to assessment by the Commonwealth Grants
Commission and will result in a reduction of Queensland's share of GST funding. As
such, in overall terms, there is a risk that a major portion of the Australian
Government's share will in fact be met by the State.

[ozbob]

Politically biased.  Designed to mislead.

[mufreight]

Obviously Mr Newman and his company of faceless non elected men intend to attempt to use the fudged figures from his considerably less than independent politicaly inspired dog and pony show audit of the states finances as an out not to proceed with the construction of the MBRL.
As for the chances of the additional tracks between Petrie and Lawnton and any realignment or duplications between Beerburrum and Nambour to enhance the capacity of the NCL for both freight and passenger services they will have a snowball in hell's chances.      

[somebody]

$300 million for grade separation?  Sounds overpriced.

[somebody]

The line will be built, but I doubt it will have grade seperation connection and the 3rd track/bridge won't be built at this time. Reading the report on Qld's finaces in todays CM, potentially I wouldn't bet against the branch line being partially reduced to single track.

I would say that is the most reasonable option.  Although it may be much harder to grade separate at Petrie later.

It's also going to be politically challenging to reduce frequency Dakabin and beyond, which would mean that only all stopping trains can reach Kippa-Ring.

[SurfRail]

I don't think it would end up with single track.  They have learned that mistake. 

I am entirely suspicious about the arrangements at Petrie and Lawnton though.

[HappyTrainGuy]

$300 million for grade separation?  Sounds overpriced.

Very missleading. From what I've heard grade seperation is part of the Lawnton to Petrie project (Which I'm guessing is where the 300 million figure came from). Extra platforms at Petrie, DDA upgrades at Petrie, new stations, car parking, stabling, power sub stations, signaling, overheads, ballast, grass, trees, new/upgraded roads, overpasses... basically everything else done at Petrie and between to Kippa Ring is part of the MBRL project.

[Mr X]

So they took the $300m cost of the Lawnton - Petrie upgrade and tried to claim it is a 'black hole' in the MBRL funding? Dodgy business right there.

[HappyTrainGuy]

I say they have been very very clever in their wording.

connection of the rail spur to the existing network line, requiring grade separation, which would cost an additional $300 million

[Stillwater]

Maybe it is laying the groundwork to dust off the begging bowl in readiness for asking Canberra for an extra $300 million.  Not beyond possibility for the state to engineer the project so it stops just short of the mainline, the government publicity machine then going into overdrive about the 'line to nowhere' or 'Albanese and Gillard's folly' of a railway line.

[somebody]

Maybe it is laying the groundwork to dust off the begging bowl in readiness for asking Canberra for an extra $300 million.  Not beyond possibility for the state to engineer the project so it stops just short of the mainline, the government publicity machine then going into overdrive about the 'line to nowhere' or 'Albanese and Gillard's folly' of a railway line.

Extremely sleazy, but completely plausible.

[Arnz]

If they get rid of the "separate" flyover crossing into the MBRL and do a half-baked job on the MBRL (wouldn't surprise me if part of it is single track), it would be a lazy job with conflicts to southbound trains.

[somebody]

If they get rid of the "separate" flyover crossing into the MBRL and do a half-baked job on the MBRL (wouldn't surprise me if part of it is single track), it would be a lazy job with conflicts to southbound trains.

How severe is this problem?  I imagine it will be 10 trains/hr crossing 4.  BrizC mentioned a grade sep he is aware of overseas for 8 crossing 8.  The latter is worse IMO.

<dons flameproof suit>

[HappyTrainGuy]

If they get rid of the "separate" flyover crossing into the MBRL and do a half-baked job on the MBRL (wouldn't surprise me if part of it is single track), it would be a lazy job with conflicts to southbound trains.

How severe is this problem?  I imagine it will be 10 trains/hr crossing 4.  BrizC mentioned a grade sep he is aware of overseas for 8 crossing 8.  The latter is worse IMO.

<dons flameproof suit>

A flat junction wouldn't be that much of an issue depending how they go about it with funding for infrastructure from what I've heard.

[colinw]

Has the LNP articulated any policy about the MBRL, either during the election campaign or since?

I don't recall seeing anything.

If you go back to the previous State Elections, LNP was campaigning for MBRL, to the point that they produced giant mock-up Kippa-Ring tickets during one campaign.

To renege on the project now, after years of campaigning for it, would be fairly typical QLD politics 'though.  You have to remember that projects like this are primarily political footballs to be dangled before the voters, not serious attempts to address the infrastructure needs of one of the largest urban areas in the country without a rail link.

I am quietly hopeful that MBRL will still proceed, although with some cost cutting measures. I think we can probably do without a grade separated junction, and wouldn't mind seeing one or two of the excess stations culled (Kinsella's Road for one).

[O_128]

Im surprised the project hasn't started yet. I thought it was shovel ready at the 2010 election

[colinw]

IMHO "Shovel Ready" is the new "World Class".

There's still a heck of a lot of design & procurement to be done before this line can proceed, although I believe some of the early works (road over rail bridges in a couple of places) are ready to start.

[ozbob]

Report on 612 ABC Brisbane Radio (Steve Austin) in response to a listeners query about MBRL.    LNP supports MBRL, funds already allocated.

[colinw]

Ah, found it:

http://www.tmr.qld.gov.au/Projects/Featured-projects/Moreton-Bay-Rail-Link.aspx

Project update:

• First construction contract for the Moreton Bay Rail Link has been awarded to McIlwain Civil, to build a road-over-rail bridge in Mango Hill.
• Construction is expected to begin on site in July 2012. Subscribe to our e-newsletter for all the latest project news.

IMHO, cancellation of MBRL at this late stage would rapidly lose LNP a swag of seats in the Moreton Bay shire. Screw up public transport too badly and Newman could yet be a single term premier.

I expect this project to proceed but with some changes to scope. I'd say grade separation & Lawnton - Petrie triple are out, and maybe 1 or 2 stations might go. Hopefully it won't get downgraded to single track, which would be a false economy.

[HappyTrainGuy]

MBRL won't be scrapped. Nothing to worry about.

[colinw]

The stations are all side platforms except Kippa-Ring which is an island (probably similar to Cleveland).

[Gazza]

Problem with removing stations is then the add-on station tends to be side-by-side which unless the topography supports this has inbuilt high running costs. Islands I feel a better, although I agree the track geometry and land requirements is better with side by side, but on an all stopping branch line is not a big deal as trains are slowing towards the station anyway.

The TL design manual (And I) Disagree with you.
On flat land, side platforms are better because it requires two lifts, rather than 3, and takes less land.
http://translink.com.au/about-translink/what-we-do/public-transport-planning/public-transport-infrastructure-manual
See page 59

[ozbob]

Another option is subway and ramps as for the new fully DDA compliant Cardinia Road station in Victoria --> http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=8466.msg100264#msg100264

Automatically assuming lifts are needed just adds costs and ongoing maintenance issues.  Lifts fail.

[somebody]

Do the disabled have a preference for lifts in spite of this?  Ramps can be a hazard too.  Someone is probably going to mention the standard!

[ozbob]

Do the disabled have a preference for lifts in spite of this?  Ramps can be a hazard too.  Someone is probably going to mention the standard!

Views differ.  Many prefer to avoid lifts because of the issues with them.  Ramps done properly are fine.

[Fares_Fair]

Ramps are never out of order or suffer mechanical issues .. but just take up a bit more land.

[ozbob]

Ramps are never out of order or suffer mechanical issues .. but just take up a bit more land.

Indeed, it is a sensitive issue down south ...

E.g. --> Train passengers let down by lifts at $93m station

[colinw]

Those examples from Laverton & Footscray seem a bit extreme.  Kuraby station was re-built with just lifts & stairs, and I don't believe I have ever seen the lifts out of order.

For that matter, Eight Mile Plains busway station only has lifts & stairs for the city bound platform. Never seen it out of order either.

[Fares_Fair]

On the Sunshine Coast line, just last week I received a report that the lifts at Elimbah were stuck with the doors open.
It had been that way for a week, I was told.
The person concerned was going to report it direct to QR.

Mechanical / electrical devices will always have potential for problems.
Guaranteed none for a ramp.

[ozbob]

They do seem to have a bad run down south.  The point is though we don't automatically need lifts.  Some of the stations on MBRL might be better suited to ramps.

Some one was stuck in the lift at Beerburrum for an extended period.  Both Beerburrum and Elimbah could have been done ala Cardinia road ...  would have saved heaps.  Isolated stations might be better off with ramps due to the time it takes for support.

Ed: just saw you post re Elimbah FF.  Massive over kill the lifts.  Some locations will need lifts but not all.

[somebody]

Someone probably should have mentioned these issues to the people who built Pennant Hills platform #1.  Already had a ramp, but they added a lift, with a third level to climb about 6 steps so that the lift down to #2 could be accessed.  So the 3-level lift could have been trimmed entirely with (1) a short ramp up to the overpass and optionally (2) a ramp angling down to the existing ramp (rather than going up a slight incline to reach the ramp from the ticket office).

[Fares_Fair]

They do seem to have a bad run down south.  The point is though we don't automatically need lifts.  Some of the stations on MBRL might be better suited to ramps.

Some one was stuck in the lift at Beerburrum for an extended period.  Both Beerburrum and Elimbah could have been done ala Cardinia road ...  would have saved heaps.  Isolated stations might be better off with ramps due to the time it takes for support.

Ed: just saw you post re Elimbah FF.  Massive over kill the lifts.  Some locations will need lifts but not all.

Indeed, it's one lift per person at Elimbah... 

[Gazza]

Automatically assuming lifts are needed just adds costs and ongoing maintenance issues.  Lifts fail.

What about the MRT in Singapore, or Skytrain in Vancouver.

In these systems stations run in tunnels downtown, but on elevated viaducts outside those areas, so ramps are totally out of the question due to the heights/depths involved. You go there and there are lifts getting people up, or taking them down.

It works there (with higher passenger volumes I might add, especially in Singapore!)
So it can work here.

Many prefer to avoid lifts because of the issues with them.

How would they do that in Brisbane? If you are going to the CBD stations, you have no choice but to use lifts (Except for South Bank i guess? It has the old ramps still)

[ozbob]

Gazza all we are highlighting is that in some situations ramps will do ...  obviously there are many locations that will need lifts.

Elimbah and Beerburrum could have been easily built with just ramps and subway.  Cardinia Road is an excellent example of smart planning.

[Gazza]

Gazza all we are highlighting is that in some situations ramps will do ...  obviously there are many locations that will need lifts.

Elimbah and Beerburrum could have been easily built with just ramps and subway.  Cardinia Road is an excellent example of smart planning.

Cardina Rd the line is on an embankment right, so it only requires one set of ramps?
And it's reasonably greenfield so they could take up a fair bit of land to do the ramping around it.

Lifts break down....the trains themselves break down too!