What would you miss?

[colinw]

Thanks HappyTrainGuy. "Railway Archaeology" is one of my interests, for some reason closed lines and old alignments hold a particular fascination. I blame my dad, early in my childhood we were on a picnic somewhere north of Toowoomba and dad pointed out an embankment nearby and told me that "when we moved to Toowoomba the trains to Crows Nest used to run there".  Dad could recall seeing trains on the Crows Nest & Haden lines, and even on the loop west of Toowoomba through Charlton (which closed in '59).  Just wish he'd taken photos.

Getting this discussion somewhat back on track, I note that the tracker surveys have now been released:

http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=7262.msg79103#msg79103

Looking at these, it is clearly possible to identify the under performing stations on the various lines.

The conclusions I draw are:

1. Beenleigh line: Holmview & Rocklea could go with little harm
2. Cleveland line: maybe Hemmant and Wynnum, but both are still moderately used.
3. Ipswich line: Gailes, Ebbw Vale, Bundamba & Riverview are the worst. Not sure if I'd close any on those numbers.
3. Shorncliffe line: Bindha, and only Bindha could go.
4. Caboolture line: only Sunshine & Virginia under-perform, but both probably should be retained.
5. Ferny Grove line: no standout under performers, don't change anything.
6. Doomben line: Ascot is the lowest patronage by far, then Hendra.  Clayfield & Doomben are reasonable.
7. Nambour line: a couple of very low patronage stations, but leave it alone as they are probably the only PT options.
8. Rosewood line: ditto, as for Nambour
9. Gold Coast line: Ormeau is under performing, but leave it as is.

Question: if Ascot were dropped from the Doomben Line, could the half hourly service be extended to Doomben?  I guess Ascot is difficult because it has the racecourse, and it would need to be retained for special events.

Regarding Sunshine Coast line, on those figures there is a clear case for duplication and service upgrades as far as Landsborough.

[HappyTrainGuy]

Sorry to go off topic slightly but you shouldn't mind

Ye old Beenleigh station in its glory > http://trove.nla.gov.au/picture/result?q=Beenleigh+Railway+Station http://trove.nla.gov.au/picture/result?q=Beenleigh+Railway+Station+1985
Over at Railpage there are a couple maps with the old alignment and Beenleigh railway station > http://www.railpage.com.au/f-t11348803-0-asc-s90.htm
An arial view. The old station is located on the far left of the image > http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8a/StateLibQld_1_150419_Aerial_view_of_Beenleigh%2C_1954.jpg

[petey3801]

In regards to Bundamba, it seems to be like Woodridge. Not overly busy during the peaks, but there is quite a bit of patronage in the off-peak (Woodridge is a fantastic example of this, not many peak boardings, but one of the busiest off-peak stations on the Beenleigh line by my observation).

[colinw]

Sorry to go off topic slightly but you shouldn't mind

Ye old Beenleigh station in its glory > http://trove.nla.gov.au/picture/result?q=Beenleigh+Railway+Station http://trove.nla.gov.au/picture/result?q=Beenleigh+Railway+Station+1985
Over at Railpage there are a couple maps with the old alignment and Beenleigh railway station > http://www.railpage.com.au/f-t11348803-0-asc-s90.htm
An arial view. The old station is located on the far left of the image > http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8a/StateLibQld_1_150419_Aerial_view_of_Beenleigh%2C_1954.jpg

HTG, thanks for that!  The 1954 aerial view of Beenleigh is particularly interesting.

Also, from those photos, it appears that electrification reached the old Beenleigh station (1984), only to have the station close a year later for its relocation.  A case of the left hand not knowing what the right hand was doing? (Repeated in 1988 - electrification reached Eagle Farm station just weeks before the domestic terminal relocated to its present location).

[colinw]

That 1954 aerial pic of Beenleigh was bothering me, it just looked "wrong". So I sent it to a friend of mine who grew up in Beenleigh.  He identified the problem immediately - it is flipped horizontally (probably a slide that has been scanned incorrectly).

Here's the corrected view:

[HappyTrainGuy]

Still looks the same on my phone. Having said that when I get home it would look totally different

[colinw]

Spot the difference.  





The one at the bottom is correct.

[#Metro]

No one has touched on the FG line yet. My pet peeve with the stations is Keperra-Grovely-Oxford Park being so close together. I would have thought you could have removed Oxford Park as Grovely is just around the corner (and you need that one as it is right on Dawson Pde, which would be excellent if they ran decent bus feeders up into the hills) but seeing as that has only recently been done up that would be unlikely, unless the LNP got in as they could spin it as "another Labor overspend". Keeping Grovely where it is is also needed to keep that sharp corner from being more annoying than it could be. Keperra is needed, but perhaps would be better if it was closer to FG, however that would then isolate the shops nearby, and if you went more than a few 100m, then the golf course cuts off access to the houses on the north side of the line.

All in all, not ideal, but pretty much stuck with it

Grovely has the school. Oxford park should probably go. Is 15 minute frequency possible on this line, perhaps with R.S. starters?

[petey3801]

No one has touched on the FG line yet. My pet peeve with the stations is Keperra-Grovely-Oxford Park being so close together. I would have thought you could have removed Oxford Park as Grovely is just around the corner (and you need that one as it is right on Dawson Pde, which would be excellent if they ran decent bus feeders up into the hills) but seeing as that has only recently been done up that would be unlikely, unless the LNP got in as they could spin it as "another Labor overspend". Keeping Grovely where it is is also needed to keep that sharp corner from being more annoying than it could be. Keperra is needed, but perhaps would be better if it was closer to FG, however that would then isolate the shops nearby, and if you went more than a few 100m, then the golf course cuts off access to the houses on the north side of the line.

All in all, not ideal, but pretty much stuck with it

Grovely has the school. Oxford park should probably go. Is 15 minute frequency possible on this line, perhaps with R.S. starters?

I can't see why not, really, especially once the duplication has been completed.. The hardest part would be getting through the City, but that shouldn't be too difficult with Roma Street starters/finishers (no need to dwell at Central on the way to Roma Street).

To get real metro frequencies in peak especially, a signalling upgrade wouldn't go astray...

[BrizCommuter]

Oxford park should probably go.

BrizCommuter doesn't like this trend of suggesting station closures just for the sake of it. Oxford Park has a high percentage of walk up traffic, which would be out of reach (more than 10-15mins) if it was closed. Parts of Oxford Park's catchment have no alternative public transport. It also has a car park, and closing a car park on the Ferny Grove Line would be extremely stupid.

Again, no one has suggested closing their local stations have they?

I can't see why not, really, especially once the duplication has been completed.. The hardest part would be getting through the City, but that shouldn't be too difficult with Roma Street starters/finishers (no need to dwell at Central on the way to Roma Street).

To get real metro frequencies in peak especially, a signalling upgrade wouldn't go astray...

Based around a 3 minute headway through the CBD, the Ferny Grove Line could operate an alternating 6/9 minute metro like frequency in the am peak. This would not require any signalling upgrades.

[somebody]

I'd be inclined to close Bindha and Gailes.  Rocklea I could contemplate, but if it is to be served by Salisbury/Coopers Plains terminators then I don't see much benefit.

Holmview?  Where's the upside?

Oxford Park I can see some upside.  Mitchelton and Grovelly are pretty close and the trains are busy thanks to Ferny Grove.  I think it's not happening though.

[petey3801]

I can't see why not, really, especially once the duplication has been completed.. The hardest part would be getting through the City, but that shouldn't be too difficult with Roma Street starters/finishers (no need to dwell at Central on the way to Roma Street).

To get real metro frequencies in peak especially, a signalling upgrade wouldn't go astray...

Based around a 3 minute headway through the CBD, the Ferny Grove Line could operate an alternating 6/9 minute metro like frequency in the am peak. This would not require any signalling upgrades.

I meant on the Ferny Grove line itself. The signals are quite widely spaced (one signal at each station till Mitchelton where there are a couple extras for turnbacks etc., then back to one per station till Keperra - Ferny Grove section) and only 3-aspect. A signal placed between stations and 4-aspect signalling would enable quite high frequencies down the track..

[BrizCommuter]

I can't see why not, really, especially once the duplication has been completed.. The hardest part would be getting through the City, but that shouldn't be too difficult with Roma Street starters/finishers (no need to dwell at Central on the way to Roma Street).

To get real metro frequencies in peak especially, a signalling upgrade wouldn't go astray...

Based around a 3 minute headway through the CBD, the Ferny Grove Line could operate an alternating 6/9 minute metro like frequency in the am peak. This would not require any signalling upgrades.

I meant on the Ferny Grove line itself. The signals are quite widely spaced (one signal at each station till Mitchelton where there are a couple extras for turnbacks etc., then back to one per station till Keperra - Ferny Grove section) and only 3-aspect. A signal placed between stations and 4-aspect signalling would enable quite high frequencies down the track..

The Ferny Grove Line can support approx. 3 min headways. It is unlikely to require better than approx. 6 min headways in the forthcoming timetable. So why bother improving the signalling?

[petey3801]

I can't see why not, really, especially once the duplication has been completed.. The hardest part would be getting through the City, but that shouldn't be too difficult with Roma Street starters/finishers (no need to dwell at Central on the way to Roma Street).

To get real metro frequencies in peak especially, a signalling upgrade wouldn't go astray...

Based around a 3 minute headway through the CBD, the Ferny Grove Line could operate an alternating 6/9 minute metro like frequency in the am peak. This would not require any signalling upgrades.

I meant on the Ferny Grove line itself. The signals are quite widely spaced (one signal at each station till Mitchelton where there are a couple extras for turnbacks etc., then back to one per station till Keperra - Ferny Grove section) and only 3-aspect. A signal placed between stations and 4-aspect signalling would enable quite high frequencies down the track..

The Ferny Grove Line can support approx. 3 min headways. It is unlikely to require better than approx. 6 min headways in the forthcoming timetable. So why bother improving the signalling?

Did I say it has to be done now?? No! I said it would be worthwhile later on down the track for high frequency.

3min headways would be really pushing the signalling on the ferny grove line as it is currently.

[Cam]

I posted this in another thread in response to another post regarding the suggested closing of Rocklea station:

I think that you would have to sell the idea to the community that currently use the station. What will they receive in return for the loss of their railway station? I have previously mentioned some of these ideas.

The following could help sell the idea to those that currently use Rocklea station:

1)   A new Salisbury station could be built between the current location & the Nyanda platform under Beaudesert Rd i.e. the new Salisbury station would be closer to Rocklea than its current location.
2)   A walkway/bikeway along the railway corridor to the existing Rocklea station could be built to reduce the time it takes to walk from those houses near Rocklea station.
3)   A pedestrian bridge could be built from Moorooka towards the southwest to Fairfield Rd & across to Cambridge St to provide better access to Moorooka station for those travelling to/from the Brisbane Markets & Sherwood Rd commercial area that currently use Rocklea station.
4)   A proper interchange could be built adjacent to the new Salisbury station for buses using Beaudesert Rd as well as cross town services.
5)   The new station would also become the interchange between the Flagstone, Beenleigh & Gold Coast lines.

I've been informed that the community is not happy about losing the railway crossing under Beaudesert Rd as part of CRR.

[#Metro]

6. Doomben line: Ascot is the lowest patronage by far, then Hendra.  Clayfield & Doomben are reasonable.

I'm looking at the station spacing and Eagle Junction and Clayfield are like 600 meters apart - cityglider stops are spaced further apart!

Clayfield is on a main road, but that said, I can't really see why you would transfer from there to a CBD bound bus (no point) and going north you could just transfer at Eagle Junction or a train to Toombul which has an entire interchange up there.

Removing Clayfield would speed up the Doomben services (good for the end point of Northshore Hamilton) bringing the total time difference between bus and train to around 15 minutes time saving in favour of train over the 305 bus.

If we had 15 minute frequency on that line that would be a major improvement.

[Arnz]

I personally think merging stations is something I may look at supporting, provided that alternative sites to replace the 2 targeted (underperforming) suburban stations is researched and thought out, along with development + the appropriate bus links with community consultation.  

But shutting down for the sake of it with no alternative or replacement (apart from the local bus out on the nearby street) I won't be supporting, and especially for the suburbs/towns which may have the rail as it's only link with little to no bus alternatives.

[BribieG]

Bindha really exists to service Golden Circle, I can imagine back in the 50s and 60s the crowds of happy workers flooding on and off trains. However nowadays I expect it's mainly casual workers who lob in and out in their Magnas and Pulsars.

On the Caboolture line - apart from a major upgrade to Dakabin which is a disgrace, There could be a case for moving Morayfield Station closer to Caboolture to service the Westfield directly and the new housing developments going in to the East of the track (currently just dairy cattle paddocks) and build a Morayfield II station further towards Burpengary to service the massive new commercial area up Morayfield Road where the new Masters store and other franchises have gone in, and the new estates in North Burpengary which are nowhere near the existing Burpengary station.

Wasn't there a proposal a few years ago to shift Morayfield? If you look at the way the fence line to the east bulges right out then back in again, it would suggest that QR have the land staked out as a possible option??

[Arnz]

Bindha really exists to service Golden Circle, I can imagine back in the 50s and 60s the crowds of happy workers flooding on and off trains. However nowadays I expect it's mainly casual workers who lob in and out in their Magnas and Pulsars.

On the Caboolture line - apart from a major upgrade to Dakabin which is a disgrace, There could be a case for moving Morayfield Station closer to Caboolture to service the Westfield directly and the new housing developments going in to the East of the track (currently just dairy cattle paddocks) and build a Morayfield II station further towards Burpengary to service the massive new commercial area up Morayfield Road where the new Masters store and other franchises have gone in, and the new estates in North Burpengary which are nowhere near the existing Burpengary station.

I'm aware Morayfield has a shopping centre, but since when did Morayfield have a Westfield? 

As for the Morayfield shift proposal, potential sites would be located near a swamp, unless if it was moved near the currently under construction overpass.

[BribieG]

Well I've been shopping there for the last 13 years or whatever and was always under the impression it was a Westfield. However on Googling, I note that you are correct - actually that makes me feel a lot happier shopping there, somehow 

[#Metro]

I've been thinking about this more.

Ferny Grove Line

* Oxford Park - remove station - replace with frequent feeder bus between Arana Hills K-mart and Mitchelton Rail & Shopping Centre. via Dawson Pde, Railway Parade, Scanlan Road. Leave the car park intact so that park and ride can be still used.

* Gaythorne - remove station - buses on Samford road may substitute. This station is 500 m from Ennoggera, the cityglider bus has wider stops!

* Wilston - remove station - replace with Stafford Shopping Centre BUZ 375 via Webster, Grange and Kedron Brook Roads then Northern Busway.

I would suggest this would save 6 - 8 minutes off a trip on the FG line, which would in turn attract more patronage from buses feeding rail at stations.

[#Metro]

32 km/hour average speed (30 minutes approx to Central from FG)
44 km/hour average speed (22 minutes approx to Central from FG)

I've assumed 2 minutes per station (acceleration/deceleration on approaches and dwell).

Of course boosting frequency to 15 minutes would shave up to another 15 minutes off travel times and boost patronage massively.

waiting time (30 min) + journey time (30 min) = one hour to get to FG, worst case. (Why bother! Car is faster!)

perceived time (30 x 1.5) + 30 min = 45 minutes. TOO LONG.

[somebody]

I'd be against moving the 375 away from Thistle St.  It is needed to provide coverage.  Most transport planners target most people having a bus stop within 400m.

[#Metro]

I'd be against moving the 375 away from Thistle St.  It is needed to provide coverage.  Most transport planners target most people having a bus stop within 400m.

Disagree. 375 has decent patronage and thus should be assigned Core Frequent Network Line Haul status, steam-ironed to travel along major roads and BUZzed. Some other route could perform the coverage function - it does not necessarily have to be the 375.

[somebody]

I'd be against moving the 375 away from Thistle St.  It is needed to provide coverage.  Most transport planners target most people having a bus stop within 400m.

Disagree. 375 has decent patronage and thus should be assigned Core Frequent Network Line Haul status, steam-ironed to travel along major roads and BUZzed. Some other route could perform the coverage function - it does not necessarily have to be the 375.

Not sure why Kedron Brook Rd would be faster than the current route?

If the train passes Wilston station it should serve it.

[p858snake]

Oxford park has (or used to have) pretty good patronage in the mornings doesn't it?

Gaythorn is directly opp the Army barracks, They should be pushing for more people use that (so locals aren't complaining about their driving skills and habits every second week in the newspapers)

[ozbob]

I can't see any stations on the FG being closed at all.  They are all used and will only get busier.

[#Metro]

This is all hypothetical anyhow.

The stations may well have people using them, but closing a station need not necessarily be done soley because patronage is low (otherwise we would close the Rosewood and Doomben Lines). There may be other valid reasons to take out a station (such as another one being within 500 m, e.g. Tennyson, and Gloucester Street).

I think most of that patronage can be substituted - that is to say that when the station goes- people will just use the next station down, provided that the alternatives are in place. The idea is to thin out stations that are too close together, and concentrate more passengers at fewer stations, to save time. This is not unlike a CityGlider or a BUZ service where stop spacing is wider, reflecting the high speed/high capacity line haul function of the route.

http://www.pta.wa.gov.au/NewsandMedia/TransperthPatronage/tabid/218/Default.aspx

Joondalup and Mandurah lines get twice the patronage of the older, more stops, services, despite the older ones being in areas where there is higher density/closer to the city (i.e. Fremantle line). In any event a trial can be conducted simply by altering the timetable such that the trains do not stop at those stations to model how people change their travel behaviour.

[BrizCommuter]

I can't see any stations on the FG being closed at all.  They are all used and will only get busier.

Glad to see someone is talking sense in this thread!

[Golliwog]

I'm with Briz and Ozbob re: station closures on the FG line. As someone who catches it all the way in from FG, yes some of the stations are a bit close but most stations are well used, particularly by walk up patronage. Gaythorne may be quite close to Enogerra, but the path under the Wardell St overpass has the look of a place you would get mugged. It all backs onto the industrial section of Pickering St so there's hardly anyone there past 5/6pm. Besides, over the last few years, I've watched most of the residential house that back onto the rail line near Gaythorne be knocked down and replaced with smallish appartment blocks (only two or three floors). I also don't think you could convince the pax who currently use Oxford Park to catch a feeder bus or walk to the next station. Most already walk a respectable distance, plus they only just refurbished the station.

[#Metro]

I think higher frequency is the way to save on time there- that saves up to 15 minutes compared to stations going, however that said, I am not convinced at all that people wouldn't catch a bus, particularly if it ran outside their house and was frequent. People walk decent distances to BUZ and busway stations, so I don't see why it would be any different.

[petey3801]

For longer runs, I can see positives in closing some low-used stations, however on a line as short as Ferny Grove (or Doomben or possibly even Shorncliffe [apart from Bindha]), I think the closer station spacing is OK (more of a Metro service), it's the frequency that really needs to be ramped up significantly. Lines such as Ferny Grove, Doomben and Shorncliffe should be minimum 10min frequency off-peak with minimum 5-min services during peak. This is foamer fantasy land stuff at the moment, because we simply don't have the inner city capacity to provide that many services at the moment.

4tph on the Ferny Grove line IMO is much, much better than closing stations on said line.

[p858snake]

I think most of that patronage can be substituted - that is to say that when the station goes- people will just use the next station down, provided that the alternatives are in place. The idea is to thin out stations that are too close together, and concentrate more passengers at fewer stations, to save time. This is not unlike a CityGlider or a BUZ service where stop spacing is wider, reflecting the high speed/high capacity line haul function of the route.

That depends, Most of the stations around those [The FG line] don't have much parking as is, So pushing more people in already packed parking will only have adverse effects most likely, and pushing them to use another mode to get their if they aren't driving (eg: Bus) will probably push people away as well since they would have to transfer services, Which I'm sure i'm not the only one that tries to avoid services where I have to transfer (unless it's trains) because the numerous issues that can arise from having to transfer.

[HappyTrainGuy]

Spot the difference.  





The one at the bottom is correct.

Finally remembered to have a look when I got onto a computer and I was correct. Same on the phone, totally when on a computer screen haha.

[#Metro]

That depends, Most of the stations around those [The FG line] don't have much parking as is, So pushing more people in already packed parking will only have adverse effects most likely, and pushing them to use another mode to get their if they aren't driving (eg: Bus) will probably push people away as well since they would have to transfer services, Which I'm sure i'm not the only one that tries to avoid services where I have to transfer (unless it's trains) because the numerous issues that can arise from having to transfer.

You'd keep the parking at former stations, but you'd just be catching the bus.
Provided that the buses are frequent enough, I don't see an issue. Save 8 minutes.

People are understandably hesitant to step outside the status quo. Same issues come up when removing MY bus stop.

But this comes down to physics and geometry (See Jarrett Walker's field guide to transit quarrels).

A service which has fewer stops spaced further apart runs faster.

Faster services are more competitive with competing roads.
Faster services are more attractive to catch feeder buses and drive to.

[#Metro]

Whereis places driving to Ferny Grove station, off peak at about 23 minutes.

Removal of three stations would make the current train speeds (30 minutes) almost identical to that of catching a car (22 minutes), which is VERY competitive.

Together with boosting frequency to 15 minutes would also do amazing things for cutting journey time.

15 minutes wait + 22 minute train journey = 37 minutes by train

The SE busway only has 9 stations up to and including Queen Street, while the Ferny Grove Line has almost double this (14), and both are a similar in terms of length and distance from city.

[Gazza]

Removal of three stations would make the current train speeds (30 minutes) almost identical to that of catching a car (22 minutes), which is VERY competitive.

8 minute saving by, in effect, skipping 3 stations?
How? Does each have a 2:40min dwell?
Ipswich trains need to skip 8 stations to save 8 mins, and this is on a line with a pretty straight express section.

[SurfRail]

About the only station I would consider getting rid of would be Gaythorne, and only if the line could be re-aligned to get rid of the awful curve.

[BrizCommuter]

About the only station I would consider getting rid of would be Gaythorne, and only if the line could be re-aligned to get rid of the awful curve.

Again, suggesting closing a station with good patronage, a sizeable car catchment (most of which is not served by buses), and a large car park is absolutely ridiculous.

[SurfRail]

About the only station I would consider getting rid of would be Gaythorne, and only if the line could be re-aligned to get rid of the awful curve.

Again, suggesting closing a station with good patronage, a sizeable car catchment (most of which is not served by buses), and a large car park is absolutely ridiculous.

You can fix the bus network, parking provision and the like.  As it is, Gaythorne is spitting distance from the GCL and the 390, which connect to 2 other FG line stations.

You cannot fix the fact that the station is not DDA compliant because it has 2 of the most bent platforms around, which would be extremely difficult to upgrade meaningfully.  As I said, I would only suggest something like this in the distant future if the track was going to be realigned to remove the pretty big kink that Gaythorne sits on.  Relocation is not going to be feasible given the proximity to Enoggera.

Yesterday I observed a guard having to step back about 5-6 metres from the train just to see down the length of the rear 3 cars...