Suburbs 2 City Bus Tunnel Proposal

[#Metro]

And if you want to have an inquisition, bring in McConkin Rankin, Jarrett Walker and Luke Franzmann.
http://www.humantransit.org/2009/05/brisbane-a-short-tour-of-the-south-east-busway.html

Out of curiosity, any reason why this couldn't/shouldn't have been done with rail?

Posted by: grvsmth | 05/10/2009 at 20:25

Grvsmith: You bet there's a reason why this is busway instead of rail. Two
really big ones.

1. Cost. To build this line as light rail, you'd have had to build every
bit of the busway's infrastructure, plus lay rails and overhead wire. You'd
have also had to build a rail operating base directly on the line, whereas
the busway's buses can run from any operating base nearby.

2. Flexibility. Buses can run along part of the busway, then branch off to
serve other destinations. For more on that, and its limitations, see this
post:

http://www.humantransit.org/2009/05/brisbane-busway-note-.html

Cheers, Jarrett

[colinw]

If you apply that logic everywhere, we'd never build rail at all! 

[O_128]

Tram Train you keep missing the point "at the time" is not good enough. Why is this only an issue in Queensland? Why can everywhere else design infrastructure that lasts.

[mufreight]

Having read this thread entirely there have been a number of points raised unfortunately too many are that far from reality that they border on fantasy.
The key point that it appears most chose to ignore is this, the CRR will provide a new route through the CBD providing a high capacity service to three stations in areas not currently served by rail removing perhaps a third of the current bus loading from the existing bus system in a sustainable and economical manner.
That Mr Quirk currently comes out with his proposal wanting someone else to pay for it at the same time as the aspiring Premier tunnels Newman is attempting to justify an absolute lack of public transport policy and the construction of an isolated Metro system of tunnels that in comparison with CRR has a limited effectiveness over a restricted area and fails to address the failures to provide the infrastructure essential for not only the Brisbane CBD but entire South East of Queensland.
Time for reality to be faced and the foaming BS to cease, it is indeed fortunate that the foam contingent do not formulate public transport policy.  Heads out of the sand and a visit to the optropimist to correct this epidemic of vested interest myoptic tunnel vision.
    :bi  

If the infrastructure exists the frequency and capacity can be improved and no two lane busway in the world has ever attained even a third of the potential capacity two track railway

[#Metro]

Tram Train you keep missing the point "at the time" is not good enough. Why is this only an issue in Queensland? Why can everywhere else design infrastructure that lasts.

Well I don't agree because then we'd just throw our hands up in the air and build maglev everywhere "because one day we might need it".

Curiously, it's only the busway that seems to have such ASTRONOMICAL patronage of 150 000 trips per day. All the lines on the current QR rail network absolutely struggle to achieve anywhere near this. Even the Mandurah line which is being paraded around like some firebrand only gets one third of the patronage of the SE busway. Yes really, i'll even reference it. Its around 60 000 per day. Pfft.

My point stands. That is UNPRECEDENTED patronage for ANY system in Australia and to forecast that ahead in time is to expect that the people had a crystal ball.
Trying to paint the SE busway as some kind of failure that could have been predicted beforehand is like saying some concert at a packed out 100 000 seat stadium is a failure because there weren't enough seats... the busway is just too good it has become a victim of its own success.

http://www.parliament.wa.gov.au/parliament/pquest.nsf/3b051e205914713c4825718e00186cc2/04f20987e8f9decf4825770e002f821c?OpenDocument

It would be a mistake however, knowing that it is approaching capacity, to stick with buses IMHO.

[somebody]

Why don't we get questions like that asked in Parliament here?  I've seen similar in NSW.

mu, if you are saying that getting operational logic is rather fanciful in Brisbane, I would say that there is every sign you are correct.

[Gazza]

IMHO busways were the right choice

There seems to be a mix-up by a few, between 'right choice' (politically) at the time versus 'right choice' (Full stop).

If they had done a public consultation at the time comparing Busway, Light Rail and Heavy Rail, would have you been "Yup, they nailed it " ?

Peak hour under an SEB heavy rail model:
-8 Tph in from GC/SE corridor.
-8 Tph in from Beenleigh
-8 Tph in from Cleveland

24 Tph, a train every 2.5 minutes, which is well within the limits of signalling technology.

Problem, Merivale Bridge?

That could last a few years, and CRR would have just been bought forward.

Well I don't agree because then we'd just throw our hands up in the air and build maglev everywhere "because one day we might need it".

Now you are just exaggerating to win an argument (As usual).

Even the Mandurah line which is being paraded around like some firebrand only gets one third of the patronage of the SE busway. Yes really, i'll even reference it. Its around 60 000 per day. Pfft.

Yes, and I'd imagine the running costs, per pax, are much lower, especially in peak.

Why rail was not a good idea then

* Would have run at 2tph (yes really, Kippa Ring, Richlands almost all lines on the netowork are run at low frequency)
* It would have connected to Beenleigh, Cleveland or the current network, and then be handicapped at 2tph due to network
constraints/coal/freight/blah blah
* Connect to crapola system, causing all sorts of conflicts
* Big vehicle but Low frequency
* required a new merivale bridge, 20 000 pax/hour dumped into Roma Street is just not going to happen convention centre in the way
plus more conflicts or tunnel required
* freight run on rail network
* going via Roma street is also indirect

But the point is, 'at the time', why couldn't these improvements be made. We can build a new tunnel in 2020, but the technology to build an 8km tunnel didn't exist in 2000 did it?
Oh wait, it did, Sydney built the 10km airport link tunnel for $762 Million.
We couldn't do this because.....?

People need to stop being apoligists for the mindset back then. When will everyone realise Australia is the odd one out when it comes to poor transport planning, and the rest of the world has been doing it properly for years.

The Victoria line in London was built in 1968, had automatic train operation from the start, they made the effort to build cross platform interchanges with existing stations from the start, and is only just having capacity issues now, at the ripe old age of 42...And they've been able to address that get an extra 20% capacity by just replacing the original rolling stock  and upgrading the ATO.
In fact, the trains are running just fine, the real problem they are having to address is the ticket halls being too small, rather than any bottlenecks in the ROW.

THAT is an infrastructure project that was designed to last.

Why were they able to do that 40 years ago, without computer etc, but we cant?

[HappyTrainGuy]

The only reason the busway carries an astronomical figure is because every damn bus route in Brisbane and beyond feeds into a busway to get to the city instead pumping in money to increase rail frequency, establishing the railway as the PT backbone, making all railway stations interchange points/creating local hubs and provide feeder routes (Such as the 336/337 Chermside Community bus) that link all these areas together. Edens Landing/Holmview is just begging to be a major interchange point. Just realign to Bethina to remove the curves along with merging the two stations together and whipping up a road bridge linking into Loganholme.

It would be very interesting to see how many routes especially BT routes that don't feed into the city.

[somebody]

Problem, Merivale Bridge?

That could last a few years, and CRR would have just been bought forward.

If the SEB was to be heavy rail it should have included CRR from the first, and also fed into the Gold Coast line.

It would be very interesting to see how many routes especially BT routes that don't feed into the city.

Not many.  Especially if you don't count SWT routes.

[Mr X]

I think it's ridiculous we have to build an inner city busway. While in the past I might have supported it, considering it now it just seems like a damn stupid solution. Cut the number of air parcels going through the CC and things will improve big time!

[Arnz]

Problem, Merivale Bridge?

That could last a few years, and CRR would have just been bought forward.

If the SEB was to be heavy rail it should have included CRR from the first, and also fed into the Gold Coast line.

It would be very interesting to see how many routes especially BT routes that don't feed into the city.

Not many.  Especially if you don't count SWT routes.

And HTM routes operated on behalf of BT (310, 311-314 and 326/327).  HTM operates a few 310 services, whilst they operate the majority of the other routes.

[BrizCommuter]

BrizCommuter's word on BCC's latest pie in the sky idea.
http://brizcommuter.blogspot.com/2011/12/suburbs-2-brisbane.html

[#Metro]

THAT is an infrastructure project that was designed to last.
Why were they able to do that 40 years ago, without computer etc, but we cant?

I think it is very unfair view indeed. The busway patronage is extremely high, its even equal to or higher than any of the rail lines on the QR network. How are the planners supposed to know that they would be dealing with 150 000 trips per day in LOW DENSITY (we are not talking London here!). Perhaps it would be fine if it did have a proper bus tunnel connection at Southbank to go under the CBD, but that wasn't required then.

It's all fine and dandy to sit bank and say "oh they failed" at the time the busway opened, all sorts of stories were flying around about how the busway might be an abysmal failure, no one will catch it, oh it is sooo expensive.

Perth Mandurah line gets ONE THIRD of what that busway gets. Had that busway been built as heavy rail, not only would it be more expensive but it would also connect to a much compromised network and thus far lower capacity. I caught it home tonight, the busway has sharp curves and a dip going to mater hill, were we going to put a QR train into that? Really? Were we going to put an entirely separate rail line run parallel to the beenleigh line, and then under it, under the Cleveland line out to 8 Mile Plains? Really? Any planner would have connected the line to the Beenleigh line to go over merivale bridge. We KNOW that line can't handle an extra 20 000 pphd added to it in peak hour.

No planner in their right mind in 1997 would suggest a subway to start with going out to Eight Mile Plains. Should the line to Yarabilla now be totally and completely isolated from the rest of the QR network? Should Kippa-Ring be a subway seperated from the QR system? What about richlands? Should that get its own underground line parallel but seperate to the Ipswich line? Should that be metro too just in case the forecast is off by an order of magnitude more people catch it?

Perhaps it might be time to request the planning documents from 1997 to see the rationale.

It is all very well and easy to make these pronouncements 10 years after the fact they were built and with the luxury of hindsight. And I think personally such views are utterly shameful - we should be proud that infrastructure has induced such huge above-all-expectations demand that it requires such upgrading.

The rail system will get its own upgrades in due time. But the areas which do not have access to rail and use the busway ALSO need to get a decent upgrading.

[Gazza]

How are the planners supposed to know that they would be dealing with 150 000 trips per day in LOW DENSITY

No planner in their right mind in 1997 would suggest a subway to start with going out to Eight Mile Plains. Should the line to Yarabilla now be totally and completely isolated from the rest of the QR network? Should Kippa-Ring be a subway seperated from the QR system? What about richlands? Should that get its own underground line parallel but seperate to the Ipswich line? Should that be metro too just in case the forecast is off by an order of magnitude more people catch it?

You're exagerating to win an argument again.
I never said a subway to 8MP in 2001. I said heavy rail. Heavy rail would not  been seen as an outlandish solution in Australian in 2001.
In 2001, they were building 9km Sydney's Airport Link.
In 2001, we got Airtrain right here in Brisbane. Airtrain is half as long as the Busway.
5 years prior they were opening the GC line.
Tell me again why heavy rail was unreasonable suggestion, we were doing rail projects at the time? Why not one more.

Perth Mandurah line gets ONE THIRD of what that busway gets.

Yeah, but Mandurah spends ages going through coastal scrub.

It is all very well and easy to make these pronouncements 10 years after the fact they were built and with the luxury of hindsight. And I think personally such views are utterly shameful - we should be proud that infrastructure has induced such huge above-all-expectations demand that it requires such upgrading.

So, Im real proud that the single track GC line exceeded expectations, such that duplication has cost more than the original construction cost.

And I think personally such views are utterly shameful

Why? We F*** it up all the time in Australia. Why should I view this any more favourably than all the other failures?

I caught it home tonight, the busway has sharp curves and a dip going to mater hill, were we going to put a QR train into that?

You would have done it by running alongside the Pacific Mwy to Buranda, going on an Airtrain style viaduct to come in at Park Rd. Mater Hill would have been skipped. Quad to South Brisbane (Or another solution)
Why were planners in 2001 not able to think long term. I'ts not just about the SE corridor. GC trains still had a crappy alignment back then anyway.

[#Metro]

You're exagerating to win an argument again.
I never said a subway to 8MP in 2001. I said heavy rail. Heavy rail would not  been seen as an outlandish solution in Australian in 2001.
In 2001, they were building 9km Sydney's Airport Link.
In 2001, we got Airtrain right here in Brisbane. Airtrain is half as long as the Busway.
5 years prior they were opening the GC line.
Tell me again why heavy rail was unreasonable suggestion, we were doing rail projects at the time? Why not one more.

You tell me what the frequency would have been and tell me where and how it would have connected to the existing system and I'll give you my answer. ALL of those rail lines branched off the existing rail network.

[#Metro]

Yeah, but Mandurah spends ages going through coastal scrub.

And all the other lines on the network? None of them have come close to the busway.
None of Brisbane's rail lines come close to the busway.

So, Im real proud that the single track GC line exceeded expectations, such that duplication has cost more than the original construction cost

Good for you!

Why? We F*** it up all the time in Australia. Why should I view this any more favourably than all the other failures?

A busway that carries 70% of what the entire rail system carries is hardly a F*ck up by ANY measure. Hell, I'm not even arguing that it stay busway, I'm arguing for it to be converted!

You would have done it by running alongside the Pacific Mwy to Buranda, going on an Airtrain style viaduct to come in at Park Rd. Mater Hill would have been skipped. Quad to South Brisbane (Or another solution)
Why were planners in 2001 not able to think long term. I'ts not just about the SE corridor. GC trains still had a crappy alignment back then anyway.

I'm not the person to ask for this. Quad to South Brisbane? And then bottleneck over the bridge and interaction with freight et al once at Roma Street? Would that have handled 20 000 pphd? I doubt it. Anything that requires connection to the existing QR train network would have resulted in mediocrity - we only need look at the Ferny Grove line, which is of a similar length to the SE Busway to see what we would have got. A rubbish low frequency service that is handicapped by the wider network, incapable of carrying 20 000 pphd in peak.

[Gazza]

^TT I already said. The GC/8MP , Cleveland, and Beenleigh (Old) lines would have each had 8 TPH in peak, for 24 TPH across the Merivale, which is entirely possible with current signalling technology.
Off peak, it would have been 12 TPH (Well probably 10 tph because Cleveland still isn't duplicated) , which would have been a piece of cake compared to now since the Beenleigh line wouldn't be juggling GC trains.

In the early years, yes growth along the coridoor would have been lower, BUT, once CRR had been built in that alternative universe, in the later years the 8MP/GC line would have overtaken what the busway is currently doing, and we'd have only needed one capacity boost (CRR) rather than the two we need now (CRR + Busway Upgrade)

[#Metro]

^TT I already said. The GC/8MP , Cleveland, and Beenleigh (Old) lines would have each had 8 TPH in peak, for 24 TPH across the Merivale, which is entirely possible with current signalling technology.
Off peak, it would have been 12 TPH (Well probably 10 tph because Cleveland still isn't duplicated) , which would have been a piece of cake compared to now since the Beenleigh line wouldn't be juggling GC trains.

8 TPH x 1000 pax on train = 8000 pphd, or 40% of what the busway carries in peak hour. Your solution would not have capacity as heavy rail using the merivale bridge. It would have to be isolated from the wider QR network. Who builds isolated QR train lines???

The merivale bridge now carries something like 24 tph in peak anyway. It is already saturated without carrying any of the busway load- and this is why "lets run buses to the beenleigh line train station" would also fail without CRR.

You could bring CRR forward, but that would explode the cost to 8 billion PLUS the cost of the new line construction- effectively pricing it out of existence (10 billion or so). Why bother when you could get a busway for 2 billion and carry the same capacity?

I'm not convinced because you have to carry today's current saturated load on the merivale bridge during peak hour from the GC/Cleveland/Beenleigh line PLUS all the trains on this hypothetical connection- easily requiring 48 tph.

EVEN IF you duplicated the Merivale bridge it TOO would be at capacity NOW.

20 000 / 1000 pax on train = 20 trains from busway plus 24 tph already existing today in peak = 44 tph, maxing out capacity...

[colinw]

People, this is all becoming a touch pointless & circular don't you think?

The South East Transit project was not built as rail, so there's little point postulating about what may or may not have been.

Equally, the busway has a snowball's chance in hell of being metro or light rail converted, so wishing for that rather than a practical solution (by which I don't mean this damn stupid bus tunnel idea) is equally pointless.

The focus needs to be on developing rail and making sure CRR does get up, otherwise the public transport system in Brisbane is well & truly screwed.  Quirk's bus tunnel may stave off the inevitable for a while, but without CRR and a rail revolution we are in deep trouble.

I still think the SE busway or anything else that falls over within 10 or 15 years is crap planning. Hopefully we won't continue to make the same mistakes (and by that I don't mean avoiding the problem by suppressing demand with 2tph services to places like Springfield).

[Gazza]

It would have to be isolated from the wider QR network. Who builds isolated QR train lines???

What do you mean by isolating it?
What was the busway carring in 2001. It was below 8000 pph wasn't it?

[colinw]

Incidentally, this PDF file (from the busway extension study) is interesting:

http://www.tmr.qld.gov.au/~/media/0bc453ca-d54e-4f02-8c14-03475c6625fe/pdf_sebx_cds_v1_s18_traffic_and_transport.pdf

I refer specifically to tables 18-1 and 18-2 on page 183 (reproduced here);

Morning peak:


Afternoon peak:


Weekday average:


These figures indicate that a heck of a lot of the patronage measured for the busway is actually coming from feeder routes, not the busway stations themselves. Some of the stations are doing no better than minor rail stations, so the big figures reported must be coming from routes like the 150 BUZ that run onto the busway.

[#Metro]

I still think the SE busway or anything else that falls over within 10 or 15 years is crap planning. Hopefully we won't continue to make the same mistakes (and by that I don't mean avoiding the problem by suppressing demand with 2tph services to places like Springfield).

The irony would be that had we built it as rail, we wouldn't have 'this' problem- The frequency would be sh*te (witness Ferny Grove, Shorncliffe lines that's what we would have got- even Mandurah and Joondalup and even Kippa Ring, Airport and Richlands extension all fall into that basket) such that the demand would suppressed and thus be well within capacity of suburban heavy rail and we could all pat ourselves on the back and tell ourselves how great it is that our rail line isn't over capacity at 60 000 trips in a day.

Anybody who builds something that induces unprecedented 150 000 trips a day in an urban context like Australia, of which none of its cities have metros, deserves a medal.

Cross River Rail and the Busway upgrade are separate projects serving different areas. There may be some scope at Wooloongabba to drop busway pax into CRR but that said forcing transfer that close to the city might raise some eyebrows.

A bus tunnel would increase busway capacity on that section because you would go from Class C and Class B to Class A and be able to get buses off Adelaide street. Yes this would not do much about crowding at Mater Hill- this is a valid point - and this is why I think metro options are worth looking at. On the other hand I wonder what would happen if all door boarding were introduced, would it be so bad? If we got rid of the small fry routes like 172?

[#Metro]

These figures indicate that a heck of a lot of the patronage measured for the busway is actually coming from feeder routes, not the busway stations themselves. Some of the stations are doing no better than minor rail stations, so the big figures reported must be coming from routes like the 150 BUZ that run onto the busway.

This is correct Colin. I think 70% or so of the patronage comes from off-busway boardings.

[colinw]

A bus tunnel would increase busway capacity on that section because you would go from Class C and Class B to Class A and be able to get buses off Adelaide street. Yes this would not do much about crowding at Mater Hill- this is a valid point - and this is why I think metro options are worth looking at. On the other hand I wonder what would happen if all door boarding were introduced, would it be so bad? If we got rid of the small fry routes like 172?

I think a lot more can be squeezed out of the busway by making it more "rail like", a rubber tyred version of what Ottawa is trying to do.  I.e. high capacity "core" routes at very high frequency, and turf a lot of the minor routes off the thing or make them terminate at the nearest busway station.

My own local bus, the 554, terminates at Garden City interchange and does just fine.  It would be ludicrous for it to continue on the busway when you can hop off at Eight Mile Plains and be on a 169, 111 (or even an 88) within seconds or minutes.  Many other secondary routes that DO run through to the city could be chucked off the busway.

It doesn't have to be turned into light rail or metro to have a service pattern like one (only tighter headway, because buses can do that).

[colinw]

These figures indicate that a heck of a lot of the patronage measured for the busway is actually coming from feeder routes, not the busway stations themselves. Some of the stations are doing no better than minor rail stations, so the big figures reported must be coming from routes like the 150 BUZ that run onto the busway.

This is correct Colin. I think 70% or so of the patronage comes from off-busway boardings.

Thought it was the case, but this is the first document I've seen which breaks out the busway station patronage figures so clearly. Thought it might be of interest.

[Gazza]

Makes you wonder, if the Busway was dramatically exceeding expectations, I wonder how long they originally expected it to 'last' before an upgraded was needed.

Must have built it thinking PT patronage would be forever crap.

Problem, induced demand? 

[Gazza]

http://www.couriermail.com.au/ipad/critics-dig-in-over-bcc-bus-tunnel-plan/story-fn6ck45n-1226215553315

A PLAN to run Brisbane City Council buses under the CBD has been slammed by Queensland's Transport Minister as "just dreams".

The Courier-Mail yesterday revealed Lord Mayor Graham Quirk's proposal for a Suburbs 2 City buslink featuring a bus-only bridge connecting two underground tunnels between South Brisbane and Fortitude Valley.

He estimated the project would cost $2.5 billion and would require state and federal funding to build, but Transport Minister Annastacia Palaszczuk almost immediately ruled out any state contribution.

"I say to the Lord Mayor today, he must be dreaming," Ms Palaszczuk said.

She said Cr Quirk instead needed to get behind the Cross River Rail project, which required funding of about $8 billion.

"We have a plan for the growth in public transport over the next 10 years and the answer is Cross River Rail," she said.

"It's going to provide a solution for not just Brisbane, but the entire southeast of Queensland: the Lord Mayor's solution is just for buses coming in from the southeast."

Opposition transport spokesman Scott Emerson said the LNP was keen to see what came out of council's $2 million feasibility study.

"If the Government's policy was to improve public transport, they would wait and see what the outcome of the feasibility study was, rather than ruling it out," Mr Emerson said.

He said it remained doubtful the State Government would get the money needed to build Cross River Rail, despite going ahead with preliminary works.

Council opposition leader Shayne Sutton accused the Lord Mayor of doing "too little too late" for Brisbane's public transport network and labelled buslink as "another hollow promise".

The plan was not even supported by commuter advocacy group Back on Track, which described the underground busway as "a kneejerk reaction to the bus capacity crisis".

"Cross River Rail is the real driver for transformation of public transport system," spokesman Robert Dow said.

x10000000

[Arnz]

A bus tunnel would increase busway capacity on that section because you would go from Class C and Class B to Class A and be able to get buses off Adelaide street. Yes this would not do much about crowding at Mater Hill- this is a valid point - and this is why I think metro options are worth looking at. On the other hand I wonder what would happen if all door boarding were introduced, would it be so bad? If we got rid of the small fry routes like 172?

I think a lot more can be squeezed out of the busway by making it more "rail like", a rubber tyred version of what Ottawa is trying to do.  I.e. high capacity "core" routes at very high frequency, and turf a lot of the minor routes off the thing or make them terminate at the nearest busway station.

My own local bus, the 554, terminates at Garden City interchange and does just fine.  It would be ludicrous for it to continue on the busway when you can hop off at Eight Mile Plains and be on a 169, 111 (or even an 88) within seconds or minutes.  Many other secondary routes that DO run through to the city could be chucked off the busway.

It doesn't have to be turned into light rail or metro to have a service pattern like one (only tighter headway, because buses can do that).

+1

Cutting all the routes that carry air to terminate at the nearest Busway station or Major Interchange to reduce the buses through the CCB is a more sensible proposal than the Cross River Busway.  Ordering more Artics and Tags for the trunk routes (primarily for the Southern depots, or Bowen Hills as mainly only those drivers from those depots are trained to drive them) would help too.

[Golliwog]

http://www.couriermail.com.au/ipad/critics-dig-in-over-bcc-bus-tunnel-plan/story-fn6ck45n-1226215553315

A PLAN to run Brisbane City Council buses under the CBD has been slammed by Queensland's Transport Minister as "just dreams".

The Courier-Mail yesterday revealed Lord Mayor Graham Quirk's proposal for a Suburbs 2 City buslink featuring a bus-only bridge connecting two underground tunnels between South Brisbane and Fortitude Valley.

He estimated the project would cost $2.5 billion and would require state and federal funding to build, but Transport Minister Annastacia Palaszczuk almost immediately ruled out any state contribution.

"I say to the Lord Mayor today, he must be dreaming," Ms Palaszczuk said.

She said Cr Quirk instead needed to get behind the Cross River Rail project, which required funding of about $8 billion.

"We have a plan for the growth in public transport over the next 10 years and the answer is Cross River Rail," she said.

"It's going to provide a solution for not just Brisbane, but the entire southeast of Queensland: the Lord Mayor's solution is just for buses coming in from the southeast."

Opposition transport spokesman Scott Emerson said the LNP was keen to see what came out of council's $2 million feasibility study.

"If the Government's policy was to improve public transport, they would wait and see what the outcome of the feasibility study was, rather than ruling it out," Mr Emerson said.

He said it remained doubtful the State Government would get the money needed to build Cross River Rail, despite going ahead with preliminary works.

Council opposition leader Shayne Sutton accused the Lord Mayor of doing "too little too late" for Brisbane's public transport network and labelled buslink as "another hollow promise".

The plan was not even supported by commuter advocacy group Back on Track, which described the underground busway as "a kneejerk reaction to the bus capacity crisis".

"Cross River Rail is the real driver for transformation of public transport system," spokesman Robert Dow said.

x10000000

It's the LNP's response there that worries me. I could well imagine Mr Newman taking this $2.5B project as his no frills replacement for CRR, and with the changes to how the busway goes past South Bank station, he could possibly put in that 4th platform at South Bank like he has previously suggested, and voila he's "doing something" to fix the problem now rather than whenever CRR will get funding.

I'm not saying we shouldn't do something for bus priority in this section of the busway, and in the CBD, but to me this tunnel and bridge screams of gold plating.

[colinw]

Indeed.  It is not so much the proposal itself, as the damage Newman and his buddy Quirk can cause with it.

I greatly fear that the LNP are positioning this thing to be built INSTEAD OF CRR, in which case rail in SEQ is well and truly screwed.

[somebody]

Incidentally, this PDF file (from the busway extension study) is interesting:

Those figures are quite interesting.  They show that even the Cultural Centre is less busy than Oxley in peak direction movements.  I imagine that the off peak is busier at the Cultural Centre, of course.

People, this is all becoming a touch pointless & circular don't you think?

I agree.  I don't know why we are still having this conversation.

[#Metro]

Indeed.  It is not so much the proposal itself, as the damage Newman and his buddy Quirk can cause with it.

I greatly fear that the LNP are positioning this thing to be built INSTEAD OF CRR, in which case rail in SEQ is well and truly screwed.

Killing off this proposal WON'T guarantee CRR funding because it is likely that both would go off to the ATM that is IA for funding.

[ozbob]

To be honest, changes to Victoria bridge, CCBS, bus lanes and signals is all that is needed, and needed now.

They are just too weak to drive the cars away.

[somebody]

To be honest, changes to Victoria bridge, CCBS, bus lanes and signals is all that is needed, and needed now.

They are just too weak to drive the cars away.

Even that is beyond what is needed.  Establish a stop for westbound 19x + CityGlider in the general traffic lane, send O/B 4xx via Grey St until Peel St and re-jig the traffic lights is likely enough.

Weak is right.

[Golliwog]

Indeed.  It is not so much the proposal itself, as the damage Newman and his buddy Quirk can cause with it.

I greatly fear that the LNP are positioning this thing to be built INSTEAD OF CRR, in which case rail in SEQ is well and truly screwed.

Killing off this proposal WON'T guarantee CRR funding because it is likely that both would go off to the ATM that is IA for funding.

Never said it would, but if the LNP don't put CRR forward, then it won't be considered in the first place.

[colinw]

Quite right, the two proposals should not be competing against each other, and something needs to be done for both modes.

Alas the lame-brains of the LNP DO see them as competing, and have explicitly said so.  Quirk and Newman seem to think they can cancel CRR, sling a couple of billion at this, cram an extra 4TPH through Merivale, and "Bob's Your Uncle, its fixed!"!!!!

[somebody]

something needs to be done for both modes.

I think mostly just logical operations would do wonders for bus.  The suggestion of putting Melbourne St bound on the left side of South Bank bound is something I had never considered before and a really good idea.

[Golliwog]

something needs to be done for both modes.

I think mostly just logical operations would do wonders for bus.  The suggestion of putting Melbourne St bound on the left side of South Bank bound is something I had never considered before and a really good idea.

I never quite understood why they did that at Dutton Park, as I would have thought the turning radius from the right hand lane would have been ok. In use, it is sometimes annoying there, as you can't have straight through and turning movements at the same time (the left lanes does have both those marked, but drivers don't seem to use straight through from the left lane). But it would be ideal for the Melbourne St portal as even now you can't have the two movements occur together.

[somebody]

^ Presume you mean ex-UQ Lakes.  I don't understand that one either, but so few runs make that right hand turn that it isn't a big deal either way.

[Golliwog]

^ Presume you mean ex-UQ Lakes.  I don't understand that one either, but so few runs make that right hand turn that it isn't a big deal either way.

Yeah, ex-UQ. Though if they did start running more buses that way, it could be solved by getting the drivers of the through routes to go through in the left lane when it has the green.