North West Transport Corridor (Trouts Road Corridor)

[Derwan]

Wow!!  I just assumed our suggestions for the Trouts Rd corridor would fall on deaf ears.

I think we can claim this as a win for "Rail: Back on Track".  Thanks to Bob, Tramtrain an everyone else who supported the idea!

As O_128 mentioned, some of the other ideas discussed here have also been included.  We're making a difference!

Hmmm... what's with the dotted lines from Doomben?  Where's that going?

Edit:  I see Flagstone is also included and, in the longer term, Beaudesert.  These were other ideas heavily supported by Rail: Back on Track.

[colinw]

There are some very good ideas proposed in that plan / article.  Specifically :-

1.  Confirmation of Springfield - Ripley - Ipswich loop line.  #1 of the 3 satellite cities gets rail.
2.  Flagstone line via interstate corridor.  #2 of the 3 satellite cities gets rail. Caveat - must be done in such a way as to preserve freight capacity.
3.  Trouts Road corridor.  A 2nd corridor to the Sunshine Coast and rail into a relatively poorly served area.  A very good thing.
4.  Confirmation of Maroochydore.  But PLEASE build it as a dual track line from the outset, and don't forget about Nambour.  Mandurah shows the way.
5.  Confirmation of the Gold Coast line to Coolangatta plus the full coastal light rail vision.
6.  Confirmation that a corridor WILL be preserved beyond Doomben to Hamilton North Shore.  A short & logical extension.
7.  Stopping patterns, & multi-tier services (e.g. to Manly, Loganlea).  Very good.

A few minor nits, specifically

- Still nothing for Yarrabilba.  I'm not sure if the existing Bethania to Logan Village corridor is of much use, or whether this would be worth "greenfielding". I'd like to see something in the area, Waterford and surrounds are developing fast (Woodlands is another Forest Lake style Delfin development).  A line from Yarrabilba/Logan Village feeding to Beenleigh, with an interchange opportunity at Bethania and limited peak hours direct service to Brisbane would be good.
- Would have liked to see Caboolture to Wamuran preserved as a corridor to serve the increasing urbanisation of Caboolture west.
- Looks like Corinda to Yeerongpilly remains relatively under utilised.
- Still looks like the 2nd CRR / metro tunnel comes off at Toowong & not further west, where it could be used to route via UQ & form the basis for a line to Kenmore.
- Cleveland line remains horribly indirect.
- Ipswich line capacity is going to be contingent on extra tracks Darra to Ipswich via Redbank, or building the "Southern Rail Freight Corridor" from Rosewood to Kagaru (which will itself make freight / pax segregation on Salisbury to Flagstone critical).
- By 2031 I would hope to have an inter-urban service (possibly DMUs) to Laidley & Gatton. (I actually believe electrifying beyond Ipswich was a mistake, and a new generation of DMUs ala NSW "Hunter" cars should have been built to replace the 2000 class RMs).
- Something will eventually have to be done about the relatively slow alignments between Beenleigh & the Fairfield CRR portals.  Even with track amplification, there are some horrendous curves & permanent speed restrictions through Kingston - Woodridge and around Altandi to Banoon.

But the above shouldn't be taken as detracting from what looks like a very good 20 year vision for the system.  I hope to see the political & planning will to see this through.

cheers,
Colin

[Stillwater]

The transport plan now says the Maroochydore Line is part of the '2031 plan'.  Trouble is, when this line was first announced, it was to be built from Beerway to Caloundra by 2015 and to Maroochydore by 2020.  In repackaging the announcement, and including a new line in Brisbane's north, the timetable for the Maroochydore line's completion has been pushed out; just like the timing of the Sunshine Coast University Hospital at Kawana.  If the cake starts to go stale, slap on some new icing.

[paulg]

Presumably another tunnel from the CRR at Spring Hill to Alderley would be required if the Trouts Road corridor is to be used. Otherwise the Ferny Grove line from Bowen Hills to Alderley would need to be triplicated or quadded?

- Something will eventually have to be done about the relatively slow alignments between Beenleigh & the Fairfield CRR portals.  Even with track amplification, there are some horrendous curves & permanent speed restrictions through Kingston - Woodridge and around Altandi to Banoon.

The suggestion that tilting technology may be used (see this topic: http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=4335.0) is probably a response to this issue.

Cheers, Paul

[#Metro]

We really need to see the plan in detail.
There is a nice picture, but where is the document and the details?


response? suggestions ---> http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=4337.0

[Derwan]

The poll on Brisbane Times is interesting.  It clearly indicates that people want better rail services - more than a ring road.  Buses are below the ring road!!

[Sunbus610]

Hmmm... what's with the dotted lines from Doomben?  Where's that going?

I was thinking of a possible extension into the Portside retail/cinema/residential precinct?? Maybe by usilising the existing goods line easement which branches off after Doomben station and then crosses Kingsford Smith Drive near Eagle Farm??

[#Metro]

I think Brisbane City Council is already buying up land in this area for the double deck tunnel. The railway siding near Remora road IIRC is part of that and will be removed IIRC.

[somebody]

The poll on Brisbane Times is interesting.  It clearly indicates that people want better rail services - more than a ring road.  Buses are below the ring road!!

To be fair it asks something like "which of these initiatives are the most important?" when it is planning to do stuff all about buses.

[ozbob]

G'day!

I attended the Briefing at Parliament on this project this morning.  Unable to comment until now.

I was asked a question about the Trout Road corridor this morning so I was very encouraged and delighted to finally see the plan.  There will be a web site soon (if not already), and there should be copy of the plan for delegates at the forum on Saturday too.  Presently homeward bound on EMU 44 (in the quiet car) ...had a quick chat with the Premier and Minister at the briefing.  The 'rail revolution' is underway.  A plan is a start.  Work to be done.
More to come.

[ozbob]

Media release --> http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=3664.msg24217#msg24217

Media Release 4 April 2010

SEQ:  North West Corridor - congestion buster

RAIL Back On Track (http://backontrack.org) a web based community support group for rail and public transport and an advocate for public transport commuters has suggested the preserved Trouts road corridor is well suited for heavy rail.

Robert Dow, Spokesman for RAIL Back On Track said:

"The recent growth management summit highlighted the need for Queensland to move to a more connected and convenient public transport system. This means moving more people out of congested roads and tunnels and onto more frequent buses, ferries, and in particular, trains."

"The announcements by the Queensland Government about the Cross River Rail link and the promised still to be delivered 83 400 new seats on trains every week are welcome. Many people in Brisbane can't take advantage of these initiatives though simply because they have no rail service within easy reach of their suburb. Train frequency is also often poor. In particular, residents of the North Western suburbs often find themselves in cars or buses stuck in congestion on Kelvin Grove and Enoggera Roads."

"Rail Back on Track wishes to highlight the preserved Trouts road corridor for a potential new rail line and feeder bus network directly linking the Ferny Grove line at Enoggera to the Caboolture/Sunshine Coast line at Bald Hills. Residents of suburbs such as Everton Park, Stafford Heights, Mc Dowall, Chermside West, Aspley, Bridgeman Downs, Eatons Hill, Albany Creek, Carseldine stand to benefit from such a service (1)."

"Although it has been proposed that this corridor be used for a North Western Freeway potentially connecting to a tunnel, such a solution is straight out of the 1960s Wilbur Smith Plan and would likely involve some form of tunnel tolling (2). We need to move away from such 1960s planning to a more people and TOD-oriented transport network that can facilitate urban decentralisation and mass transit for everyone."

"Its time to get rail back on track!"

Snapshot of a future North Western line:

* Reliable, high-capacity, rapid public transport link connecting the north-western suburbs through to the central business district. Direct links to the Cabooluture, Sunshine Coast and and Ferny Grove lines would be present at either end of the line

* Complement the Ferny Grove rail line by providing additional public transport capacity in the inner north-western suburbs

* Collect passengers from bus services in the northern suburbs onto trains, and bypass all road traffic and congestion on Enoggera and Kelvin Grove Roads. A dedicated rail link means higher speeds and more capacity than a buses in a bus lane while still allowing access to street stops using feeder buses.

* Reduce car travel demand on Kelvin Grove Road and Enoggera Road, as well as provide easy connections to any other part of Brisbane via the rail network and the proposed Cross River Rail tunnels.

* Complements the proposed veloway by allowing bicycles to use the train, something that cannot be done with the bus.

* Allow safe access for all with a disability compliant, CCTV monitored, safe and high-capacity facility to accomodate future growth in demand

* Support the construction of TODs and urban renewal at locations along the length of the line;  For example the disused warehouse facility on the corner of Stafford & South Pine Roads may be suitable for a TOD development.

References

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

2.  http://www.mainroads.qld.gov.au/~/media/files/business-and-industry/technical-publications/queensland-roads-technical-journal/march-2009/hobmar0903qldroads.pdf

Contact:

Robert Dow
Administration
admin@backontrack.org

[longboi]

Amazing news  Running the new corridor via Alderley will also see added benefits for the FG line and interesting to note urban services planned specifically for the GC and SC 

I would suggest, however, they they investigate building the subway all the way to Hamilton with provisions for an extension to Bulimba. Considering BCC's concerns about traffic on KSD, this would go some way to at least curbing private car use in the area.

[#Metro]

Looks like the unlikeliest of characters have no choice but to jump on board too.
Thanks for their support!

Brisbane City Council and the RACQ last night both firmly backed the State Government plan for a new rail line from Strathpine to Alderley.

The new "north-west line" running from Strathpine to Alderley was a feature of yesterday's new 20-year-plan for transport planning for South East Queensland.

Until recently it had been viewed only as a road tunnel project, under the State Government's Western Brisbane Transport Network Investigation.

[...]

Lord Mayor Campbell Newman said he was very frustrated not to have seen the Connecting Queensland 2031 document before it was released yesterday.

"But having said that, I am right behind this and I really am ready to support it," Cr Newman said.

"But what people want to know is: 'what is going on, what are you going to do?'," he said.

He urged the State Government to move quickly on the proposed rail project.

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/racq-council-back-new-rail-line-20100831-14fih.html

[#Metro]

Mr Fites said a new funding model for transport infrastructure projects was urgently needed after the lower than expected traffic figures for the Clem7 toll tunnel, rather than public private partnerships.

I think that is the end of the motorway. There just isn't the money or value for money there.
I can't see how the state government wants to pay everyone's toll for them for the myriad of roads that will go everywhere.

[colinw]

This on top of Rivercity Motorway's $1.67 billion write down may well trigger the seismic shift in transport thinking that we need.

We certainly cannot continue with the failed policies of the last 50 years.

[somebody]

I know some of you are probably waiting for me to say this, but if Trouts Rd is going through, that is a prime opportunity to connect it to the Cleveland line.

[colinw]

I think I'm starting to come around to your (and TT's) view on this ...

I like - no LOVE - the Trouts Road corridor idea, except for the bit of it what has trains hanging a left at Alderley & travelling via Newmarket, Wilston, Windsor & Bowen Hills.  That may be fine in initial stages, but ultimately I think a line should continue from Alderley to the CBD via Kelvin Grove, and this underground continuation would logically be extended to the Cleveland line.

cheers,
Colin

[#Metro]

 

I'm sure they will have consultations for each project.
They need to break the plan up into logical stages.

[Golliwog]

From the Richlands to Springfield Central - Stage 2 thread:

TR and KR have similar setups but there will be big price differences. KP is in a reserved corridor and goes through wetlands/non developed areas to cut down on costs with only a couple bridges and property resumptions needed. TR has big costs when it gets to Carseldine/Bald Hills with the flood plains there (regularly floods and can isolate Strathpine, Bray Park and Lawnton), possible land resumptions around potential overpass sites, lots of landscaping works (not the flattest of corridors eg around Hamilton Road), flood mitigation works eg Hamilton Road/Trouts Road is located at the bottom of 3 steep hills on either side with a creek up the middle/in the corridor, houses need to be resumed, flood prevention from Kedron Brook and so forth. Quite a big difference compared to KP despite similar space from a reserved corridor.

Don't forget a potential change in setup of Alderley Station for the split to TR. The tendency these days is to not build new LX so I expect a flyover from Alderley station over Raymont Rd and then Shand St once you get to Grinstead park. Might have an embankment until you bridge Kedron Brook. Hopefully (if) the government does sell off the Everton Park State High School (the fields that the bikeway runs along on the northside of Kedron Brook are at the back of the school and it's directly adjacent to the Trouts Rd corridor at Stafford Rd) they are smart enough to keep the part that would be needed as part of this corridor. Otherwise add a bit to buy back the land as well.

Once you cross Stafford Rd though, I don't see it being much too bad really. Yes you have a bit of earthworks, etc but site access is relatively easy though if you want to use the same construction practices as FG/Springfield then you might have to wait a while to run a rail/sleeper/ballast train as the two most difficult parts are obviosuly the bridges, etc required at the Alderley and Strathpine ends.

Depends on how it is done.  I think the best way would be to have no connection between the FG line and the NWTC whatsoever and just have 2 underground platforms to effect an interchange.  Least surface impact, cheaper, and the flexibility you buy with connecting the 2 if something goes wrong is probably nowhere near cost-effective for what it would take to implement.

A fair point, though where would you head underground in the NWTC? If you do it before Stafford Rd you have to go back north a bit to get low enough to pass under the Kedron Brook, and if you cross it on a bridge you then have to tunnel somewhere in a minor flood plain or take houses anyway (that's my understanding of the geography of the area anyway). How sure are you about it being cheaper to tunnel?

My thinking would be viaduct with columns in the traffic island in the middle of South Pine Rd: until Raymont Rd, there's a nature strip on the western side that you can shift the road to if you need a wider median for the columns, North of Raymont you'd need to take some land which would be unpopular (there was a bit of an argument about shifting the church's belltower there when they removed the horrible old 5-way round-about there).

I'm also thinking of potential yard movements and Mayne I think is still closer than Clapham, though if they do get any kind of decent yard with Kippa Ring then that's probably no big deal.

[SurfRail]

A fair point, though where would you head underground in the NWTC? If you do it before Stafford Rd you have to go back north a bit to get low enough to pass under the Kedron Brook, and if you cross it on a bridge you then have to tunnel somewhere in a minor flood plain or take houses anyway (that's my understanding of the geography of the area anyway). How sure are you about it being cheaper to tunnel?

My thinking would be viaduct with columns in the traffic island in the middle of South Pine Rd: until Raymont Rd, there's a nature strip on the western side that you can shift the road to if you need a wider median for the columns, North of Raymont you'd need to take some land which would be unpopular (there was a bit of an argument about shifting the church's belltower there when they removed the horrible old 5-way round-about there).

I'm also thinking of potential yard movements and Mayne I think is still closer than Clapham, though if they do get any kind of decent yard with Kippa Ring then that's probably no big deal.

Irrespective of how the NWTC is done I would prefer there to be no connection with the FG tracks at all - it just increases the likelihood of things mucking up. 

Given the local environment I would have though a tunnel is more or less mandatory.  Where it pops out north of Stafford Rd is just an engineering question, one I'm not that equipped to answer, but it wouldn't have to be a deep tunnel. 

The NWTC connection from CRR is meant to be at the Victoria Park land bridge so it needs to curve back around to head up to Alderley, which I suppose means no station at QUT KG (no biggie seeing the busway is still there) - http://www.tmr.qld.gov.au/~/media/Projects/C/CRRail/EIS/vol2/1GA/Pdfcrreisgeneralarrangement19.pdf.  I'd maybe look at putting a station in Herston somewhere near Butterfield St (maybe even near Ballymore).

Yard shouldn't be a factor.  We should be moving towards one main yard/maintenance centre per operating sector as much as possible, so Clapham would be the CRR sector's together with subsidiary yards at Caboolture, Kippa-Ring, Beenleigh and Robina.  The future sector 1 maintenance centre would be Wulkuraka (I think this should be a stabling location as well), with stabling at Ipswich and Redbank, while sector 2 would be basically be maintenance and stabling at Mayne and stabling at Manly - probably some spillover from Sector 1 into Mayne although you might also look at Banyo.

[HappyTrainGuy]

IMHO there's no need for an expensive flyover at Strathpine. Its what...60 for freights at Bald Hills powering up to 80 and then to 100kph. Petrie is where the money really needs to be spent to enable a proper use of the network and corridor. Have a flyover for the northbound Kippa Ring line and the freight trains can easily run onto the subs and all the way to Bald Hills without causing any conflicts (providing NWTC junction to Petrie is a quad). The only conflicts would be northbound freight but as I said they would fly through the junction and because of the middle road passenger services can be run on that while a freighter travels at a reduced speed prior to merging from the subs onto the future NWTC mains. More than likely CAB/KP trains would run via NTWC during peak hour only with Petrie/Strathpine trains handling Bald Hills-City via Northgate. Off peak Kippa Ring would run via Northgate with Caboolture/Sunshine Coast services using NWTC.

[Golliwog]

SR, it is indeed mostly up to engineering and geotechnics/hydraulics. I'd still want to see a comparison of the costs/benefits each way. I can see your point about not connecting onto the FG lin, though even if you just ran on the surface from Alderley until the park/pool area where there's more room to sink a tunnel.

RE: the pull off from CRR, I'd prefer if they shifted it closer to Roma St. If you peeled off around where the leftermost cross tunnel passage on map 18 you should be able to roughly follow Kelvin Grove Rd. At the split the eastern track heading to the NWTC would move between the two CRR tunnels and then go under the other CRR tunnel.

http://www.tmr.qld.gov.au/~/media/Projects/C/CRRail/EIS/vol2/1GA/Pdfcrreisgeneralarrangement18.pdf

[SurfRail]

^ Agree about the NWTC connection.  I was surprised to discover that it was so far along towards Ekka.

Best route in my view would be to nearly mirror K-G Road with a station at the Kelvin Grove Urban Village, but a station in the Herston area would be good too if the route needs to do what it appears is being planned.

[Stillwater]

I wonder what's the latest on North-West Transport Corridor along Trouts Road, especially now that CRR has been abandoned, as has CRR Lite; in favour of the dual rail/bus tunnel down George Street.  CRR was going to feed into NWTC to give what Anna Bligh said would be a 'one-hour' passenger rail service to the Sunshine Coast (presumably Landsborough).  How would NWTC work without GC trains feeding in from CRR?  I suppose we will have to wait until the Newman solution to the nation's most important infrastructure project is released.  It used to be a 'shovel ready' project, but now is years off.

[SurfRail]

I wonder what's the latest on North-West Transport Corridor along Trouts Road, especially now that CRR has been abandoned, as has CRR Lite; in favour of the dual rail/bus tunnel down George Street.  CRR was going to feed into NWTC to give what Anna Bligh said would be a 'one-hour' passenger rail service to the Sunshine Coast (presumably Landsborough).  How would NWTC work without GC trains feeding in from CRR?  I suppose we will have to wait until the Newman solution to the nation's most important infrastructure project is released.  It used to be a 'shovel ready' project, but now is years off.

From what I saw of the initial work on the NWTC, either the original version of CRR or Newman's version would both likely work with it.  The NWTC connection was meant to be at the Victoria Park land bridge (roughly) so it would need either CRR or "Brisbane Underground" to work, but those 2 projects do not need the NWTC (even if they would work better with it).

[pandmaster]

I was in the area the other day so I thought I would check out some of the corridor. Unfortunately I could not get more pictures as a bird swooped me! A warning for anyone else planning to check it out. All the pictures were taken from near the Northwest Plaza at Everton Park.

http://imgur.com/a/iP23y#0

[pandmaster]

As for my thoughts on the NWTC, it has got to be rail when almost the entire corridor is clear and connections to the existing line are available at both ends. The area is prime for rail as there are no motorways in the area, making rail much more appealing. Ideally a tunnel would be built to the city to keep the capacity for FG trains. I think it would be a good idea to just continue BaT/CRR (rail only) out there instead of linking it with the Exhibition Line, even if the corridor was not used for a while. The tunnel would not even needed to be fitted out past Roma Street (save for a set of points between each track) until then, as BaT as present will not serve trains to/from the Northside for some time. Sunshine Coast/Caboolture trains could use it and free up capacity through Central as well as avoid upgrades to the junction with the Exhibition Line at BH which are need for the rail tunnel to serve the Northside in reasonable numbers. All in the long term anyway and unlikely to happen in the current environment, as BaT as is is struggling for funding.

[riccardo]

Hi everyone, just posted to Surfrail on a other forum my question about what trouts rd is about. I haven't ridden the north coast line for a couple years and am Melbourne based, but from recollection north of Northgate there is plenty of room in th easement for a fourth track. I had simply i imagined you would put the fourth track down, use one pair for freight and long distance passenger, the other for local stopping trains to kipparing and Shorncliffe.

I lost track of the debate and woke up to find a different corridor through Stafford heights, one that has a strange interaction with the Ferny grove line about half way along, with no particular benefit from that.

A corridor that seemed like a classic busway corridor but people are talking rail.

So I remain to be enlightened to the need.

I think QR needs to get out of the business of building passenger lines that can't handle 140km/h from the word go, unless they are under the CBD.

What are therefore the arguments in favour?



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[ozbob]

Welcome Riccardo!

Trouts Road corridor was going to be mainly for the express services on the Sunshine Coast line (140 km/h services), with a few limited all stations. from what I recall.  I think it is all rather moot at this point.  Without any real capacity north of Brisbane now that CRR is canned, BaT being very much half baked, we will probably have to wait for the next political generation to work its way through the cycles of plans, glossy brochures, more plans, more brochures until a point is reached where something is actually done.

It will end up being a road is my guess.

[ozbob]

Some interesting reading > http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=4336.0



> http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=3629.0

[#Metro]

A corridor that seemed like a classic busway corridor but people are talking rail.

So I remain to be enlightened to the need.

I think QR needs to get out of the business of building passenger lines that can't handle 140km/h from the word go, unless they are under the CBD.

What are therefore the arguments in favour?

The Toronto/Perth Model.

Busways cost as much as rail per kilometre. This is confirmed by the Eastern Busway ($465 million for 1km, more than metro rail) and further confirmed by Kippa Ring and Sunshine Coast transport studies which shows that the costs are essentially the same for busway vs rail.

Buses carry 65 - 85 people per vehicle. A train carries 1000. You need a lot of buses and drivers and bus access within the CBD (i.e. parking and layover) is constrained. Moreover, it would be highly likely huge volumes of buses would be sent to the CBD, along with a bazillion rocket patterns. This is one of the reasons why it is so hard to have a simple network on Brisbane's southside - you cannot achieve bus-bus transfer efficiently because in peak hour you would have a full feeder bus terminate at a busway station and then the entire bus would transfer to another bus - which would then be full. So you are forced to run and pay for all the buses to run to the CBD.

The idea that bus-rail transfer 'won't work in Australia' has been destroyed because, Perth took the Toronto model and adapted it - the result is the highly successful and rapid Mandurah/Joondalup lines. Even more powerful evidence accumulates with Gold Coast Light Rail being fed by buses and operating on a feeder/transfer model.

A rail network will permit a very simple bus network design, with buses flowing east-west across the northern suburbs. This simplicity will be destroyed if you have buses - you will end up with a mess like Sunnybank or Centenary Suburbs bus networks. Simplicity will maximise patronage as buses can be used in both directions and you don't have to wait for 'your' bus and the same service can run all day, not just in peak. If stations are distanced well like in Perth, there will be no need for express bus operation because speeds will be very high already.

If a connection to the northern lines is made, then there could be benefits for Sunshine Coast commuters which a busway would not achieve. However, I think planners should also consider the possibility of bending the line north west to Albany Creek as a new line.

[newbris]

As for my thoughts on the NWTC, it has got to be rail when almost the entire corridor is clear and connections to the existing line are available at both ends. The area is prime for rail as there are no motorways in the area, ...

I think the planned motorway is the future M5 tunnel running north from Toowong which would join with this corridoor.

[aldonius]

There's plenty of space in the TR corridor for both modes if done correctly.

There won't be any real need for a motorway along the corridor until and unless there's that M5 tunnel from Toowong anyway - nowhere to go.

[Old Northern Road]

There's plenty of space in the TR corridor for both modes if done correctly.

There won't be any real need for a motorway along the corridor until and unless there's that M5 tunnel from Toowong anyway - nowhere to go.

They could build a tunnel from Everton Park to Kedron instead. It's only half the distance.

[aldonius]

Are you positing the Stafford Rd tunnel as an outright replacement for TR connecting to the 'western bypass' tunnel, or as sufficient demand to enable TR?
I disagree with both. If we use Stafford Rd as a screen line:

• trips heading from southwest of Toowong to northeast of Stafford Rd will soon have Legacy Way - ICB - M7, while trips heading to northwest of Stafford Rd don't need it or a tunnel underneath it
• trips heading from north of Carseldine to southeast of Stafford Rd have Gympie Rd (as the hypotenuse, too), while trips heading to southwest of Stafford Rd again don't need it or a parallel tunnel.

If the 'western bypass' tunnel has a bunch of entrances and exits at the bottom of the major hills, then there are trips that would find a use for Stafford Rd. But if there's nothing in or out from Toowong to EP, then nothing making that trip needs a Stafford Rd tunnel.

[HappyTrainGuy]

Busway along Trouts Road.... 

It has to be rail full stop. The whole northside is prime for proper interchanges but because of whatever reason it's still the sh%thole it was back in the early 90's. Because of the lack of proper bus routes in the form of direct to city corridors (Chermside-RBHW, Kelvin Grove Road, Sandgate Road etc), random high frequencies of routes that bleeds money like crazy (340 for example but that also stems from the issue above of the Gympie Road-City corridor) or routes duplicating the hell out of each other/stealing patronage from each other (369/375/379, 330/331/332/333/335/340/341/370/375/379) or local feeder routes (feeding locals into major hubs like busway stations, railway stations and bus interchanges). Try going east-west across anywhere across the northside. It's just crazy. The 369 might be good but there are massive black holes about getting to access to it. Depending on the time of day it can run very early (by up to 4 minutes) and that wrecks the current interchange options). Heck look at the options of getting a bus to chermside if you happen to live 1.5-2km from it. Remember the current 330 can have its entire peak hour capacity loaded onto a couple of trains. Trains of which run more frequently during peak hour than the buz frequency does (7min vs 10min).

The 369 had a departure time of 12.24 or something. Even though I waited around for any possible late running, caught another bus to Windsor, got on a train to Bowen Hills, transfered to another train to Toombul, made my way up the stairs to the ped walkway only to see the bus to DFO was waiting at the Zebra Crossing to turn onto Sandgate Road, still walked across the road to the interchange, sat down on the chair for about 5 minutes before finally the next 369 bus had I have stayed at Kedron and waited for arrived. I knew I should have just waited at Chermside rather than make such an obvious quick connection.

12:10 PM    'Chermside (Gympie Road)' Gympie Road (37/38)    12:18 PM    Kedron Brook Station Platform 1
12:42 PM    Kedron Brook Station Platform 1    12:48 PM    'Windsor Rail' Stop 13 Lutwyche Road
12:50 PM    Windsor    01:13 PM    Toombul

[Arnz]

Many Sydneysiders of that other forum would've been rabbiting on about a 'Maglev Busway' and how it'll take '18 minutes' from Trouts Road to Caboolture, like the NWRL passing through WPH

[Arnz]

Saying that, my personal preference is that Trouts Road is 4 tracks from the get go, with the 2 tracks for all-stoppers (Caboolture?) and 2 dedicated tracks for freight/Sunshine Coast/Nambour/Gympie expresses.  Thus leaving Kippa-Ring and Strathpine locals on the existing corridor via Zillmere.

[Gazza]

Riccardo I reckon it would only be marginally more to do a Greenfield line along Trouts then to muck around doing a quad...for the most part youd do a quad along the eastern side of the Cabo line, but its still messy in areas and every station would need a rebuild.
in effect it is a bit like repeating the sins of upgrading the beenleigh line rather than doing extra GC trackage via the M1


Why not do it as rail, earthworks packaged with a motorway along there too, and keep it fast with say 5  stations at the main east west roads, with east west buses funneling pax in.
-Beams Rd
-Albany Creek Road
-Hamilton Rd
-Rode Rd
-Stafford Rd

[SurfRail]

The number of stations is open to debate, but the main thing is to keep it fast.  120kph running at minimum, preferably higher if you decide to go with fewer stops.  There definitely can't be a repeat of Kippa-Ring with some stations being barely 1km apart.