East-West Subway

[SurfRail]

Ideas and aspirations are great but lets concentrate on fixing the current public transport mess rather than simply compound it with foam that distracts from the present problems that need resolution not distraction and band aids.

Sydney NWRL = official and widely supported foam.

I disagree that a Hills District railway is foam, but it certainly is in its current form without more CBD capacity.

It's not just about capacity through the CBD, i.e. Western Express or whatever the Libs are calling it.  I think it needs the second harbour crossing.

I should clarify that's what I meant.  The "city relief" plans are rubbish.

[somebody]

I should clarify that's what I meant.  The "city relief" plans are rubbish.

Well they are a "go".  A common aspect of all options according to Transport for NSW documents.

Why rubbish?  Because they don't cross the harbour in the first instance?

[SurfRail]

I should clarify that's what I meant.  The "city relief" plans are rubbish.

Well they are a "go".  A common aspect of all options according to Transport for NSW documents.

Why rubbish?  Because they don't cross the harbour in the first instance?

Bingo.  From what I understand, while it doesn't preclude cross-harbour links, it makes them rather less viable by taking up the best corridor.

[somebody]

I agree, if it is built in such a way that it can't be extended across the harbour later, that would be rubbish.  Hopefully, sense will eventually prevail.

[mufreight]

I agree, if it is built in such a way that it can't be extended across the harbour later, that would be rubbish.  Hopefully, sense will eventually prevail.

Have carefully perused a map of the Greater Brisbane area as this is a Queensland thread and am unable to locate any harbour which would require the construction of a line it for the proposed East West subway.
The harbour crossing which it would seem is being discussed would a appear to be the Sydney Harbour which is less than relevant to the topic of this thread.   

[SteelPan]

This is absolutely and totally untrue.....

Untrue hey, well please explain the article link below as just one example - Australian fund managers have been so keen and successful regards their investment in infrastructure, they are now among the most respected in the world when it comes to investment in infrastructure!

http://www.smh.com.au/business/california-fund-entrusts-500m-to-australian-manager-20120207-1r5bh.html

and you will of course note, as evidenced in the article, the enormous growth underway - that means the hundreds of billions of dollars - funds want to expose to infrastructure.

[Gazza]

I think the infrastructure that tends to get invested in (referred to in the article)
is non PT....Freight lines, power stations, toll roads etc.
In these, user fees cover the cost, making them attractive to investors.

PT infrastructure doesn't cover its costs ("directly" i mean...ie to the people investing) and the lines proposed for Australian cities don't have the same commercial potential as say Singapore or HK, so full cost recovery doesn't happen that way either.

[#Metro]

SteelPan, people only invest money into things that give them their money back PLUS a return.
Public transport runs at a LOSS. Building PT infrastructure is also loss making, unless we are going to build something like Air-train.

I'll tell you what might be worthwhile though, building track that would allow freight and coal to bypass the Brisbane CBD. That might be worthwhile to do.

[SteelPan]

I think the infrastructure that tends to get invested in (referred to in the article)
is non PT....Freight lines, power stations, toll roads etc.
In these, user fees cover the cost, making them attractive to investors.

PT infrastructure doesn't cover its costs ("directly" i mean...ie to the people investing) and the lines proposed for Australian cities don't have the same commercial potential as say Singapore or HK, so full cost recovery doesn't happen that way either.

Nothing to it - indeed, listen to Tim Fischers radio interview, link here on BOT - investors ARE certainly interested in all forms of infrastructure, including public transit.  Simply means the commuter fare and [maybe] a govt shadow fare are paid to the investor, standard business practice.

It simply means the govt avoids huge capital commitments - and here's the clincher - after the agreed investment period - ownership transfers to the govt!  

[SteelPan]

SteelPan, people only invest money into things that give them their money back PLUS a return.
Public transport runs at a LOSS. Building PT infrastructure is also loss making, unless we are going to build something like Air-train.

I'll tell you what might be worthwhile though, building track that would allow freight and coal to bypass the Brisbane CBD. That might be worthwhile to do.

The infrastructure investor is NOT investing in public transport - the infrastructure investor is investing IN the INFRASTRUCTURE.

Their return maybe gained in a number of ways, it may be an agreed flat fee, plus a usage based figure, for a defined period of time.

The structuring of the deal is entirely between the parties.

[#Metro]

Nothing to it - indeed, listen to Tim Fischers radio interview, link here on BOT - investors ARE certainly interested in all forms of infrastructure, including public transit.  Simply means the commuter fare and [maybe] a govt shadow fare are paid to the investor, standard business practice.

I'm confused. How is this any different or better than public finance where Queensland Treasury sells bonds to people, the people who buy them pay cash to the QLD Government and the government promises to pay back around 5% interest over 20-30 years?

Commercial investors borrow at much higher rates because they don't have the credit rating backing that millions of queenslanders combined do.

So why bother?

[Gazza]

Agreed.

When the govt builds it, they have to just pay back interest at market rates, over a period of x years.

When the private sector builds it, the private sector also has to pay for its borrowings, plus builds in a profit margin. The government has to pay for both with its usage fee/whatever.

The first option works out cheaper for taxpayers.

[SteelPan]

Agreed.

When the govt builds it, they have to just pay back interest at market rates, over a period of x years.

When the private sector builds it, the private sector also has to pay for its borrowings, plus builds in a profit margin. The government has to pay for both with its usage fee/whatever.

The first option works out cheaper for taxpayers.

Ahhh NO, when the govt builds 1) they have to have credit worthiness to raise the debt.  2) they build the infrastructure.  3) they attempt to make basic interest payments and MAY BE pay some debt back.  3) they run a usually loss making PT service.

So, now what happens???  in recent decades govts, who are in so deep, bail out, by selling to private sector infrastructure investors.

The alternate uses growing pension funds, that need to find a home, to invest in community and social infrastructure.  The govt need only expose itself to operational expenses (smart govts will minimise these, by contracting them to 3rd parties) - the govt is only up for meeting agreed infrastructure payments to the owner, for a defined period of time - no buildings full of white collar boffins, no maintenance expenses, just agreed regular inspections by govt appointed engineers and other appropriate experts, to ensure ongoing safe operations etc.

[Arnz]

Airtrain didn't start making a profit until they reduced their off-peak service to every 30 mins.  

Apparently the operating costs for the low number of passengers inbetween peaks at the time were too high (dont quote me on this one).  The premium prices didn't help for the average passenger either. :conf

[SurfRail]

SteelPan is actually talking some sense here.  Shadowing is probably going to be one of the only ways to encourage private firms to invest in major transport infrastructure in the future after the motorway flops here and in Sydney.  The Victorians seem to have learned from this and are working on better methods of involving the private sector.

IA funding pretty much requires private equity contributions as a given, which means the project has to make sense in order to attract the investment necessary to bring it to fruition (hence GCRT's private equity component).

[#Metro]

I don't understand how this is going to work, other than fringe things like retailing or TOD construction/value capture.
The BCR, when calculated from a commercial perspective is likely to be negative.

Put it another way - how are you going to profit from a rail tunnel? And why would you take on commercial risk and interest rates when government can do that much better (think about all the financial near-death experiences with Clem7, Brisconnections and so forth).

[SurfRail]

I don't understand how this is going to work, other than fringe things like retailing or TOD construction/value capture.
The BCR, when calculated from a commercial perspective is likely to be negative.

Put it another way - how are you going to profit from a rail tunnel? And why would you take on commercial risk and interest rates when government can do that much better (think about all the financial near-death experiences with Clem7, Brisconnections and so forth).

We'll be finding out shortly, considering the private stake in GCRT and several other projects in the pipeline.

[somebody]

I think it's fair to say that the Airtrain has a different level of sensitivity to frequency than other lines.  It's not like driving is a reasonable alternative.

[Gazza]

Depends on the direction. TUAG is important when leaving the airport, but not as important when going there.

[somebody]

Depends on the direction. TUAG is important when leaving the airport, but not as important when going there.

If you haven't made prior arrangements then it doesn't really matter heading away from the airport either, unless you are in enough of a hurry to get a cab.

[Gazza]

Disagree. When I have gotten off a  long haul flight, I just want to get home, not spend an extra 20-30 mins at the airport.
It can be a real tease too at Domestic, where you can see the airtrain departure time from the carousel. I've had my bag come out just after the train left.

[SteelPan]

Airtrain didn't start making a profit until they reduced their off-peak service to every 30 mins.  

Apparently the operating costs for the low number of passengers inbetween peaks at the time were too high (dont quote me on this one).  The premium prices didn't help for the average passenger either. :conf

Airtrain, like many other rail lines to airports, certainly took a good while to kick-in, indeed, it could be argued, it's still not operating at its best yet - its service levels are frequency low, as indeed are its operating hours - but then, to be fair, that same argument could easily be levelled at the wider state operated QR Citytrain service.

Also, infrastructure financing has moved on alot since the days of the Airtrain project been initated and much learnt.  Like everything else mankind does, with "failure" comes the knowledge for future success.

[SteelPan]

The potential appeal to infrastructure financiers in a project like a Brisbane Subway includes,

- a brand new mode of transit, we are NOT talking about "privatising" the QR Citytrain infrastructure.  However, there may (likely would) be selected "interchange" points, where the two networks would meet.
- opportunity to invest in the transit infrastructure and accompanying station developments.
- state govt client.
- growing city.

Remember, our initial consideration here, is the INFRASTRUCTURE, operation is another subject.  (Personally, it MAY be that state contracts this to a private operator too, but I stress, that's another subject).

But what's the appeal?
Today, national and global investment funds are drawn to "infrastructure" (physical and social), because it represents a stable and growing field of investment - indeed, funds know it may not always be the most spectacular investment, but yet it appeals.  

Why? Imagine you're a fund manager and you've got a couple of billion to invest!  Shares?  Yes, but, equity markets tend to be highly competitive and often have high PE ratio's.  Also, you might snap up a few million Coca-Cola,  Fairfax or Bluescope Steel shares - who knows where those types of investments will be 10yrs from now!!  Also, investment 101, says some risk must be spread, so you need to look beyond traditional equities and real estate.

Those three forementioned major business, might have made a mint or gone bust, either way, people are still riding the subway, travelling on the bridge, in the tunnel etc.  Yes, infrastructure can provide an unspectacular, but stable return to investors and pension/super funds like long-term investment horizons.  Also, a Brisbane subway would likely offer funds some real estate investment cross-over appeal.

Important points:
- State Govt Client.
- State Govt has final authority on fare increases or these are capped to published annual ABS CPI increase.  (covers state/infrastructure owner/operator)
- State Govt authorised no/short notice inspection rights on all infrastructure to ensure safety standards are maintained.  (same would apply to operator).
- after defined period, assets revert to State ownership.

[somebody]

Disagree. When I have gotten off a  long haul flight, I just want to get home, not spend an extra 20-30 mins at the airport.
It can be a real tease too at Domestic, where you can see the airtrain departure time from the carousel. I've had my bag come out just after the train left.

Not every flight is long haul, in fact the lion's share aren't.  I can believe that if you have just come from LA you may prefer to pay for a cab to your door than use PT.

[ozbob]

Disagree. When I have gotten off a  long haul flight, I just want to get home, not spend an extra 20-30 mins at the airport.
It can be a real tease too at Domestic, where you can see the airtrain departure time from the carousel. I've had my bag come out just after the train left.

Interesting tweet

=====================

Twitter

Daniel Bowen ‏ @danielbowen

Atlantic on @humantransit book. Frequency for motorists: "Imagine a gate at the end of your driveway that opens only once every 30 minutes."

[SteelPan]

- State Govt authorised no/short notice inspection rights on all infrastructure to ensure safety standards are maintained.  (same would apply to operator).

This really applies now to every mine, major industry, minor industry, place where food is sold, amusment park, office building, factory etc etc etc including the Rio Tinto Railway at Wepia.

Great - I simply included it in my post, so no-one would raise safety concerns etc...

[somebody]

Unless you have just come from NZ, NC, isn't most flights to Aussie Long haul?

Most flights are domestic.

[Arnz]

BNE intl has a morning bank of flights, then a bit quiet until the afternoon bank rush, then quiet again, and theres the redeye banks rush.

In other words the Intl flights has 3 banks, similar to other airline hubs in America or Europe.

[Gazza]

Plus if you get the overnight flight from Perth, which arrives after 5am, it pretty much reinforces my point about wanting to get home soon.

[somebody]

Plus if you get the overnight flight from Perth, which arrives after 5am, it pretty much reinforces my point about wanting to get home soon.

Enough to be prepared to pay for a cab?

The stats are against you, I'm afraid.  43.4% of station entries on the airport line are between 9am and 3pm based on the 2010 survey results.  Given that the line operated from 6am to 8pm (14 hours), 43.4% of station entries occur in the 42.8% of the operating hours, which contains 5 hours of 30 minute frequency.

I think that shows that the line is almost completely frequency insensitive.  That is in line with my use of it.  Only once have I ever said that 28 minutes was too long to wait.

[HappyTrainGuy]

Actually, yes simon. I know a couple who frequently do Brisbane-Perth for work who catch cabs home. I asked why once and despite living near a station the last thing she wanted to do was fart around with the mess of what is Brisbane public transport. She justs wants to get off the plane, quickly walk out of the airport and get a car straight to her house and not wait for a train, interchange and wait for another train then walk the 400 or so metres home. That being said depending on the time of day she'll catch a train to the airport.

[mufreight]

Plus if you get the overnight flight from Perth, which arrives after 5am, it pretty much reinforces my point about wanting to get home soon.

Enough to be prepared to pay for a cab?

The stats are against you, I'm afraid.  43.4% of station entries on the airport line are between 9am and 3pm based on the 2010 survey results.  Given that the line operated from 6am to 8pm (14 hours), 43.4% of station entries occur in the 42.8% of the operating hours, which contains 5 hours of 30 minute frequency.

I think that shows that the line is almost completely frequency insensitive.  That is in line with my use of it.  Only once have I ever said that 28 minutes was too long to wait.

Have to agree, I've caught the Airtrain a few times in that 43% period and the train capacity is WTF? Especially after International.

For the Gold Coast and maybe Loganlea and Beenleigh users, they will wait the 29min. For the inner suburban area especially during the middle of the day if you are stuffed from the flight a cab just sitting there waiting for a pax is very attractive especially if cost is not that much more. $10-15 extra sometimes is not worth arguing over when your Fooked.

regards
Shane

The last time I flew into the domestic rather than wait for the train caught a cab with three other passengers to Roma Street where I caught a train to Ipswich, had I waited for the train fron the Airport I would have waited there for 25 minutes and then another 28 minutes at Roma Street or Central for the Ipswich train, so I saved $6.oo and 45 minutes + and airtrain and BAC wonder why they have problems.

[somebody]

I think if everyone travelled with two other people then there wouldn't be traffic problems at the airport.

[#Metro]

It would make sense for Brisbane Airport to pay Airtrain to run more trains, but from Brisbane Airport's revenue point of view, they loose more money as they charge everyone for everything and being a monopoly they don't care what the traffic is like. Not like you will drive to Gold Coast to catch the Singapore/Dubai/USA flight.

Exactly. A private firm will not care about congestion on the wider network because that issue is beyond its organizational boundaries. Private commercial interests and governments have different financial perspectives, and this is one of the reasons why a BCR calculated for a private project might come out to be totally different to one calculated from a government perspective, despite being identical projects.

[somebody]

Well the state thought it would be a better idea to spend hundreds of millions on roads around the airport instead.  I hardly think they will suddenly change their mind, and I don't think the LNP would either.

[O_128]

Airport Link, wasn't a huge fan, but really it is needed longterm rather continue the jam along KS Drive. Not saying its needed as an access point to the airport from city as I doubt much of this traffic has this in mind, rather its traffic headed from inner west and south side to Nth and vice versa. The proof will be on how much it impacts on Airtrain and me thinks not alot. The toll (deserved) will help airtrain and at least makes the road mostly user pays.

I totally agree, its needed long term as was the clem 7, legacy way however :/