North West Transport Corridor (Trouts Road Corridor)

[#Metro]

The CAMCOS study shows how modes were chosen.
Poor engineers at ARUP were confronted with 2 solutions which were more or less identical in terms of benefits...
http://www.arup.com.au/camcos/docs/final/ch2.pdf

[stephenk]

Also if a line on the Trouts Rd corridor was built to meet the Caboolture/Petrie Line, then extra tracks (particularly in the counter peak direction) would be required as far the terminus for the Trouts Rd services.  It would thus be most cost effective to terminate the Trouts Rd services at the station where the lines would meet. 

Are you talking about the Enoggera end or the Bald Hills end?

Bald Hills end should be a terminus. Enoggera end would be a grade-seperated junction onto the FG Line.

Would the FG line likely need triplication?
Some of those trains might not be passenger trains (assuming a Heavy rail option was chosen).

Why would you run freight on the line?
Triplication would only be necessary if expresses were to be run between Enoggera and Bowen Hills.

It wouldn't be effective unless there was stabling at Ferny Grove.

Not really. If the 3rd side of the triangle is built between Mayne and the FG Line, and there was a grade seperated junction at Enoggera, then trains can run reverse peak to FG and up the Trout Line without conflicting moves or capacity constraints. However, due to lack of space at Mayne, and availability of space along the Trout Line, then it would be sensible to build stabling on the Trout Line.

[somebody]

If the 3rd side of the triangle is built between Mayne and the FG Line, and there was a grade seperated junction at Enoggera, then trains can run reverse peak to FG and up the Trout Line without conflicting moves or capacity constraints. However, due to lack of space at Mayne, and availability of space along the Trout Line, then it would be sensible to build stabling on the Trout Line.

Good point.  That would be a good alternative.

[Arnz]

Although a potential between alignment Enogerra (the end of the Trouts Rd) and Normanby would be on the "trainspotters fantasy file alongside the Maglev Bus to Caboolture".  It would be a better route to re-route Nambour/Gympie and Sunshine Coast (CAMCOS) trains through Trouts Road.  

That is if the corridor was to be built 2 tracks from the start.  Track Crossovers would be placed near stations for the Nambour/Gympie and Sunshine Coast trains to overtake if a train breaks down/gets held up at a station.

TBH, the Trout Rd corridor (as well as the "trainspotter fantasy file" Normanby to Enogerra alignment), would free up existing North Coast Line for Kippa-Ring trains as well as 4tph to Caboolture.  Freight would continue to operate on the existing North Coast Line alignment.

[#Metro]

Just a note about the ARUP files, as it is a big document, Table 2.2.7 (Part A, February 2001, pages 2-5):

They put practical minimum headways (time between vehicles) per mode as:
Busway: a vehicle every 0.5 minutes
O-Bahn Busway: a vehicle every 0.3 minutes
Bus lanes: a vehicle every 0.5 minutes
Light rail: a vehicle every 0.5 minutes
Heavy rail: a vehicle every 2 minutes

For capacities, ARUP states (pax/hr/direction):
Busway: 14 400
O-Bahn Busway: 12 000 - 24 000
Bus Lanes: 7000
Light Rail, 2-car: 18 000 - 30 000
Heavy Rail, 3-car: 22,500 - 45 000

Prices for operations/constructions are there too but these would be off a bit as it is 2001 prices...

[stephenk]

Although a potential between alignment Enogerra (the end of the Trouts Rd) and Normanby would be on the "trainspotters fantasy file alongside the Maglev Bus to Caboolture".  It would be a better route to re-route Nambour/Gympie and Sunshine Coast (CAMCOS) trains through Trouts Road.  

That is if the corridor was to be built 2 tracks from the start.  Track Crossovers would be placed near stations for the Nambour/Gympie and Sunshine Coast trains to overtake if a train breaks down/gets held up at a station.

TBH, the Trout Rd corridor (as well as the "trainspotter fantasy file" Normanby to Enogerra alignment), would free up existing North Coast Line for Kippa-Ring trains as well as 4tph to Caboolture.  Freight would continue to operate on the existing North Coast Line alignment.

The problem with running North Coast services along the Trout Line would be that the line would have to be triplicated due to express services overtaking all stations. There would also be too much pressure on the FG Line between Enoggera and Bowen Hills and on the suburbans. Flyovers would be needs at Bald Hills as well.

As there should/will be 3 tracks along the Caboolture/Petrie Line for peak expresses to overtake all stations, then running Kippa-Ring services on the existing Caboolture/Petrie Line would be far more cost effective. 

[somebody]

They put practical minimum headways (time between vehicles) per mode as:
Busway: a vehicle every 0.5 minutes
O-Bahn Busway: a vehicle every 0.3 minutes
Bus lanes: a vehicle every 0.5 minutes

Where's our laughing emoticon!  
At the Cultural Centre it's more like 0.33 minutes.  
At Buranda it's more like 0.27 minutes.  
Captain Cook Bridge it's 0.38 mins without a bus lane.  
I'm not sure what the figure is for the Sydney Harbour Bridge's bus lane, but I'd expect more like 0.05 mins and perhaps less.  

And how would an O-Bahn out do a regular busway?  That's more troublesome at stations, although I think in Adelaide the guiding stops at stations.  

[Arnz]

The problem with running North Coast services along the Trout Line would be that the line would have to be triplicated due to express services overtaking all stations. There would also be too much pressure on the FG Line between Enoggera and Bowen Hills and on the suburbans. Flyovers would be needs at Bald Hills as well.

As there should/will be 3 tracks along the Caboolture/Petrie Line for peak expresses to overtake all stations, then running Kippa-Ring services on the existing Caboolture/Petrie Line would be far more cost effective.  

I wasn't talking about the Nambour/Gympie/Sunshine Coast (CAMCOS) trains taking the existing route between Bowen Hills and Enogerra.  

I was talking about those trains taking the "trainspotter fantasy file" alignment between Normanby and Enogerra, branching off the existing Exhibition Route.  As for the Trouts Rd Corridor, you just really need to make the tracks bi-directional with crossovers for the express trains to overtake the all-stoppers.

A good example is the Petrie-Caboolture alignment is bi-directional with crossovers north of Petrie and at Narangba.  The 5:13pm outbound Nambour train already runs on the down track between Narangba and Caboolture (overtaking a Caboolture all-stopper at Morayfield).

Edit: And another Trainspotter fantasy file, re the Normanby - Enoggera alignment.  Some potential for Airport - Sunshine Coast (CAMCOS) services via Brisbane City and Normanby/Trouts alignment. 

[#Metro]

And how would an O-Bahn out do a regular busway?  That's more troublesome at stations, although I think in Adelaide the guiding stops at stations.  

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vPhhbF0Ms7g&feature=fvw

This is for another thread, though I will say that Adelaide's O-Bahn is quite good. Its is extremely fast, faster than the SE Busway.
The driver takes their hands off the wheel and steps on the accelerator. It literally goes flying along the track at 100km/hr, so it might be viable for lengthier distances. Articulated buses can be used.

The track transitions to a normal busway before and at stations. So there is no problem here.
The downside is that you need a guidewheel attached to all the buses. Cars which enter the busway get their sumps ripped out by a sump buster, and the car has to be towed away...

[Jon Bryant]

Although a potential between alignment Enogerra (the end of the Trouts Rd) and Normanby would be on the "trainspotters fantasy file alongside the Maglev Bus to Caboolture"

Yer its just so much easier to let them build a freeway along the reserve and then celebrate that the planning was right and only 10% of trips are by Public Transport.  Unless we make significant changes (and thus redirecion of funding) to our transport planning then our region will decline, scoially, economically and environmentally.  Sure there is a lot to do but unless we start planning now it is not a bright future for this region.

[#Metro]

More O-Bahn http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3bBpWX-I7_s&feature=related

On the other hand, since this video was made, Adelaide got LRT and has now put forward a plan to order Tram-Trains for track sharing...

Now, back to the Trouts Line...

[somebody]

I've ridden the O-Bahn decades ago.

I would question how much value the guideway adds?  It's still 90km/h on the SEB.  Is it worth it for the extra 10km/h?

[Derwan]

Assuming you have stations along the Trouts Rd corridor (if it was heavy rail), you would need to run all-stoppers.  So you'd need all-stoppers between Bowen Hills and Bald Hills on both lines.  Perhaps one would go to Petrie and the other to Kippa-Ring.  This would result in the stations between Bald Hills and Petrie having additional services - so perhaps the Kippa-Ring services could run express through these stations.

Expresses (CAMCOS, Nambour, Caboolture) would probably be left to the current line where the additional capacity for expresses already exists.

[somebody]

The Clem 7 has shown in just 2 weeks that these tunnels need to become rail tunnels not road tunels

How do you figure?  Such a rail tunnel not stopping in the city wouldn't be a good idea.

[Jon Bryant]

He 77 does not stop in City so why not a rail line that does the same... Eventually.

[Arnz]

He 77 does not stop in City so why not a rail line that does the same... Eventually.

Too early to call, I'd wait and see if the Route 77 builds patronage over time. 

If the patronage doesnt increase (For example; Route 393 which has been running for the past 2 years - Teneriffe Ferry to Bowen Hills Station - which is every 15 minutes and it mainly carries air).  Then it is safe to say the 77 is a flop.

[somebody]

He 77 does not stop in City so why not a rail line that does the same... Eventually.

Because there is so little advantage in a rail service which expresses through the most popular stations.  Expressing through the less popular stations does have advantage for the people on the train.  I'm sure you could see that if you wanted to.

[#Metro]

He 77 does not stop in City so why not a rail line that does the same... Eventually.

This could work, but that would require Brisbane changing from the "starfish" urban model (where everything leads to the CBD or skirts around it) to a hub and spoke model where places like Toowong, Chermside etc are seriously developed into proper satellite cities with their own CBDs.

[O_128]

He 77 does not stop in City so why not a rail line that does the same... Eventually.

This could work, but that would require Brisbane changing from the "starfish" urban model (where everything leads to the CBD or skirts around it) to a hub and spoke model where places like Toowong, Chermside etc are seriously developed into proper satellite cities with their own CBDs.

I said why not convert one of the clem 7  tunnels to rail while it was being build only to be shot down saying it is enviable because it doesn't connect to the city, so where are all the motorist using the clem 7 now going

[Jon Bryant]

My point exactly.  The trips are there we just need to capture them.  To do this we need to restrict road capacity (look around for lightning strike  ) and car parking whilst increasing  public transport services and making the city bike and foot friendly.

[stephenk]

My point exactly.  The trips are there we just need to capture them.  To do this we need to restrict road capacity (look around for lightning strike  ) and car parking whilst increasing  public transport services and making the city bike and foot friendly.

Sorry, but a heavy rail passenger line that bypasses the CBD cannot be financially justified at a time when an urgently needed rail line passing through the CBD can barely get funding.

[stephenk]

And how would an O-Bahn out do a regular busway?  That's more troublesome at stations, although I think in Adelaide the guiding stops at stations.  

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vPhhbF0Ms7g&feature=fvw

This is for another thread, though I will say that Adelaide's O-Bahn is quite good. Its is extremely fast, faster than the SE Busway.
The driver takes their hands off the wheel and steps on the accelerator. It literally goes flying along the track at 100km/hr, so it might be viable for lengthier distances. Articulated buses can be used.

The track transitions to a normal busway before and at stations. So there is no problem here.
The downside is that you need a guidewheel attached to all the buses. Cars which enter the busway get their sumps ripped out by a sump buster, and the car has to be towed away...

Please explain how a guided busway has a better cost/benefit case than normal busway?

[Jon Bryant]

I never said it was a priority or should be ahead of the 2 CRR tunnels which I support whole heartly..and want digging to have started 2-3 years ago on both.  My point is that there are enough trips across this city/region, even at night and on weekends, to make public transport highly viable if not profitable.  The key is not to make unsubstatiated assumptions about how little public transport trips will grow.  Read most planning studies and there is an assumption that PT will be at max 18-20%.  Higher for the CBD but still not the majority of trips.  The report will then detail how the rest of the trips must be provided for by motor vehicle mainly the car. There is not even an assesment of PT in the area to determine if any additonal services as it is somebody else's problem.  We need to start setting public and acive transport targets and build the capacity to service those %.  Equally important is to only provide parking and road space for the remaining 25-30% of trips which will be mostly light commercial in nature.  This is how Vienna, Berlin and Vancouver have achived their high public and active transport levels.  It is infact the only way.

Yet this group lamemts the viability of services because the competition (free/toll roadspace and car parking spaces) is given the priority and designed to handle massive volumes in a peak hour or 2 period.  No service can truely compete aginst such competition and thus remains a social service.

My assertion is "if road space and car parking are restricted/reduced and PT services provided to serve our current movements then the services will either breakeven or make a profit".  Even if they make a loss the saving in health, environmental,  road "subsidies" and other tax burdens will make the overall system cost effective.

Arguing which service should have prioity and championing just one or two improvements whilst the fundamental planning/design principle has ensured that the service can only just survive in peak hour is not going to win the battlle against congestion, air pollution, pak oil, the costs of road trauma and so on.  

Probably off topic but we have to stop arguing over how best to service 12% of trips and start arguing about how to service 40-50% of trips.

[somebody]

Probably off topic but we have to stop arguing over how best to service 12% of trips and start arguing about how to service 40-50% of trips.

Jonno, that would be your opinion, not a fact.

However, to a large degree I agree with your points.  Look at the success of the BUZ routes, they've shown that by providing reliable frequency you can get good all day patronage.  I would love for the 15 minute daytime frequency to be extended to rail*, which has far higher fixed costs anyway and should get a much better benefit.

* At least to Manly, Ferny Grove, Petrie, Shorncliffe, the inner Beenleigh line and extended on the Ipswich line past Darra eventually.

[#Metro]

I agree with Jonno. A point needs to be made about capacity. You can't shift people to a service that has no space for extra people.
As it is, the public transport system is rather full already with 8% or whatever the mode share is. If 50% or 80% are going to use it, this will need massive expansion.

There is huge latent demand - as shown by BUZ introductions where patronage goes up anything between 100%-260% in just 3 months after introduction. There needs to be more connections in the networks.

Long distance connections - Kippa Ring, Trouts Road and possibly something like a Western Busway need to go in.
Translink needs to publish the financial and efficiency metrics and operating subsidies. We need to be able to benchmark against Perth, Sydney and Melbourne.

Brisbane's trams were once profitable with good service levels for their time. It is doubtful that a return to this would be possible with massive car subsidies in place...

Cars are effectively subsidised from manufacture to delivery. $1.3 Billion is going to the car industry for "Research". This has been going on for a while- often the name and objects of the program will change spots, but in essence it is a direct cash line. Why such an industry even requires any amount of public money to do anything with the amounts of profits it makes, for whatever the purposes, really is beyond me.

Then there is roads etc. Also effectively subsidised. Congestion and road use, also incompletely charged for. With all these subsidies to the car, to undo this effect, public transport has to be subsidised (despite a train carrying 1000 people being far more effective at moving people than a car with 1 person). So in the end, everything gets subsidised. How ridiculous.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/opinion/car-subsidies-blow-good-money-out-the-exhaust/2008/11/10/1226165475381.html

[#Metro]

Just do a search on Car Subsidies.
Almost every major country is subsidizing it. 

http://www.google.com.au/search?q=Car+subsidies

[somebody]

Where is this corridor anyway?  Are we thinking of a block west from Trouts Rd & Stafford Rd and then head north?  There still seems to be a few houses built on the corridor, or am I mistaken?

[longboi]

Where is this corridor anyway?  Are we thinking of a block west from Trouts Rd & Stafford Rd and then head north?  There still seems to be a few houses built on the corridor, or am I mistaken?

Yeah thats right. The section immediately north of Stafford Rd has maybe 20-30 houses but other than that the corridor is pretty much untouched right up to Carseldine/Bald Hills.

[somebody]

If that was done as heavy rail with a connection to the Ferny Grove line it would need to run along Shand St, knock over a few properties and connect at Alderley train station.  I suppose it's possible, but I can't see connection to Enoggera station.

[stephenk]

If that was done as heavy rail with a connection to the Ferny Grove line it would need to run along Shand St, knock over a few properties and connect at Alderley train station.  I suppose it's possible, but I can't see connection to Enoggera station.

The bit between Alderley and Stafford Rd would be the most problematic. It would need to be either be at grade with many property resumptions, elevated alignment sparking the NIMBYs, or in a pricey tunnel. A busway or LRT may (or may not be) better routed to Enoggera, but heavy rail would have to leave the FG Line alignment somewhere around Alderley.

[#Metro]

It would need to be either be at grade with many property resumptions, elevated alignment sparking the NIMBYs, or in a pricey tunnel.

Oh well, they can just cancel that mad mad mad Toowong to Everton Park tunnel thing, and re-assign the funds...

[#Metro]

Project 11: North West Transport Corridor (part of a future North South Motorway)
North West Motorway + North West bus lanes + North Western Veloway - Section 2
What is it?

This multi-modal project would utilise the North West Transport Corridor, a corridor preserved for transport purposes since the early 1980s. It runs from South Pine Road and Shand Street at Everton Park and continues north across Stafford Road joining Gympie Road at Carseldine.

A proposed North West Motorway would run along the preserved North West Transport Corridor connecting into the Stafford Road Tunnel (Project 8: Everton Park to Kedron) and Inner Orbital tunnel (Project 13: Toowong to Everton Park). It would form the northern section of a future North South Motorway, which would link the Ipswich Motorway at Darra to Gympie Arterial Road and the Bruce Highway.

http://www.transport.qld.gov.au/Home/Projects_and_initiatives/Projects/Western_brisbane_transport_network_investigation/Western_brisbane_transport_network_strategy_projects#project_11

This is straight out of the Wilbur Smith Plan 1960: North West Motorway, along the exact same alignment.

[somebody]

Before we even think about building something on this corridor, I think we need a more serious effort to build up PT patronage in the area.  I would suggest that some or all 345s could extend from Aspley Bus station could extend to cover the 350 stops east of Beckett Rd.  Then the 350 could run to Albany Village and possibly Brendale full time.  After 9pm when the 359 stops running, some of the 345s could then extend to Keong Rd and the 359 route from Old Northern Rd/Jinker Trk.

Maybe that wouldn't be going far enough, but a whole lot better than the present situation.

[colinw]

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/rail-to-recovery-new-line-for-brisbanes-north-20100831-149kg.html

Rail to recovery: new line for Brisbane's north

Tony Moore
August 31, 2010 - 10:37AM

A new rail line in Brisbane's north is a key component of a 20-year state government plan to encourage more commuters to use public transport.

Premier Anna Bligh today announced the 15-kilometre link from Alderley to Strathpine as part of a pledge to triple rail users by 2031.

The initiative also includes introducing high-speed trains between the Gold and Sunshine coasts and Brisbane.

It includes the extensions of rail lines to Maroochydore, Coolangatta and Springfield.

An 8km subway will be established from Toowong to West End, and then to Newstead or Bowen Hills, while the Gold Coast Rapid Transit project will be extended to Coolangatta.

While rail services are at the centre of the strategy, Transport Minister Rachel Nolan today said the government's Integrated Regional Transport Plan would also establish new bikeways, a 'ring road' around Brisbane and a heavy investment in freight services.

-------------------------------
LIST: key initiatives in SEQ transport plan
-------------------------------

The majority of rail extensions depend on the Cross River Rail Project, which was announced in July, securing federal government and private sector support.

The cross-river link, which will be completed in 2016, will provide a second rail crossing for the Brisbane River.

It will include an underground tunnel from Woolloongabba to the inner city.

The Alderley-Strathpine rail extension will service the same area that was earmarked for a road tunnel on 2008 that would connect Stafford Road with the Bruce Highway.

Premier Anna Bligh this morning said the government wanted trains and buses to arrive every 15 minutes making timetables redundant.

She said new high-frequency, high-reliability services would operate along core rail and bus routes between 6am and 9pm , seven days a week.

"In 2006, 15 per cent of south-east Queenslanders lived within 800 metres of a high-frequency public transport service, with a frequency of 15 minutes or better.

"In 2031, that number will double, and we want to double public transport patronage along with it – from seven to 14 per cent of transport trips taken in the region.

"If you knew there would be a train or bus at least every 15 minutes, you could take a relaxed approach with the confidence you would reach your destination on time."

Transport Minister Rachel Nolan said commuters from Redbank, Strathpine, LoganLea, Ferny Grove, Manly and the Brisbane Airport would be the first to benefit from new rail services.

[Golliwog]

All sounds good, but do they nave any plans on when these things are going to be delivered? The plan (Connecting SEQ 2031?) is supposed to be released today, so I look forward to giving it a read through.

[O_128]

Thank god the trouts road line will go ahead and not a stupid road, Also looks like they have taken other suggestions from this forum such as the express to manly and all stations to Cleveland, Even a suggestion I made a few months ago to run a gold coast station shuttle.

[Golliwog]

Also, from what the second Brisbane Times article seems to be saying (the list one) the only road based project in this plan is the orbital ring road, which is being built to take trucks off standard streets. I'm happy with that. Once you have dedicated freight routes IMO it's a lot easier to start putting in bus lanes as the only people who are being "inconvenienced" are car users which is kind of the point of bus lanes anyway.

[Dean Quick]

WOW-- FANTASTIC  !!!!!

[#Metro]

HELLO TROUTS ROAD!!!

Go Rail Back on Track!!!      
Credits to everyone and user somebody for their suggestions!
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/rail-to-recovery-new-line-for-brisbanes-north-20100831-149kg.html

[#Metro]

Hey look, there is an express link from Ipswich, stopping at Darra, Indooroopilly and Toowong as well.