BaT - Bus and Train project (was UBAT, was no CRR)

[Derwan]

"We are currently reworking Cross River Rail. We are turning it into a project that delivers lots more bang for less buck, that solves not just the rail issues but hopefully bus issues."

I wonder how long they've been working on that! 

[Stillwater]

Condition of casino license:  Private sector builds a railway station in the basement.

[Derwan]

Perhaps it will be the Cleveland solution with added bus bridge?

[James]

I have three big issues with this.

1. The SE Busway does not need expanding. A bus tunnel is not required, period. Rail needs expanding. Chuck a rail line down Mains Road and suddenly there is quite a lot more spare capacity down the busway.

2. Any route along the alignment Gazza suggests is grossly inferior. (Not taking a stab at Gazza, rather what is probably proposed by the state government). A few things:
a) What is the rail line going to do between Fairfield (probably the last opportunity the rail line has to dive without encountering other structures or land issues) and CCB, assuming CRR takes Beenleigh/Gold Coast trains?
b) Do we really want something as unsightly as a rail line running beside the Captain Cook Bridge? And further to that, is there room to fit in two tracks between CCB and where the station would go underground?
c) Flood resistance - how resistant is this site going to be in case we have another flood like 2011, or worse?
d) Expansion - Has there been any consideration in this plan for the future addition of tracks/platforms?
e) Wooloongabba station - Where does this fit into the equation?

Duplicating the Merivale is also a non-option. It still leaves the key choke point of Central - Bowen Hills, not to mention the number of tracks requiredd South Brisbane to Park Road would need to increase (Park Road station, if you modified the way the platforms work, could work without modifications if you fixed up P4).

3. Why are we quarter-baking CRR? Originally it and its associated capacity improvements were going to be the key which would open the door to massive rail infrastructure improvements across SEQ. Then Emerson came along and decided to make it just the tunnel, allowing the Cleveland Line to have capacity pumped up in a big way but still ignoring the Beenleigh/GC/Flagstone capacity issues south of Salisbury, half-baking the thing. Now we are quarter-baking it.

As is evident, I am quite critical of this idea, and do not see how it is going to get off the ground without an elevated railway in the inner suburbs (which will be an eyesore) or repossessing land, which in the city will cost hundreds of millions of dollars. I see the urgent need for Cross River Rail, but we need real solutions. I would support up to 10tph terminating at South Brisbane over this.

[newbris]

So here's my first stab at how you could do it.

The red dotted rectangle are buildings earmarked for demolition anyway. The yellow box is a 240m long station (9 cars), 26m wide. This is big enough for a 9 car train on the top level, and a busway station over twice the length of Cultural Centre on the lower level.

On approach the line runs over the river and above gardens point rd into the station, and after leaving the station it curves to get under George St, where it runs underground for 1.5km and surfaces next to the bus layovers space near countess st.
I guess the benefits of building the station there are that it puts it in the middle of where the action is planned to be in the CBD in the future and the construction cost would be lower...If the private sector was going to be flattening that area anyway, then that gives you a nice easy spot to put your station in, and then just build your building on top....Lots of value capture.
The location is also a tad closer for QUT students than albert st station.


http://i.imgur.com/3kVq51o.jpg

Isn't the currently under construction 1 William St going to get in the way or have I misread your mockup ?

[Gazza]

a) What is the rail line going to do between Fairfield (probably the last opportunity the rail line has to dive without encountering other structures or land issues) and CCB, assuming CRR takes Beenleigh/Gold Coast trains?

I think the reason you had to go underground at Fairfield was to get under the river, which meant a runup that long.
If you were bridging the river then the tunnels at either end would only have to be below street level, much like the tunnel through the Perth CBD.

My thoughts are that you could go underground just after dutton park, at what is currently a QR works depot:
http://goo.gl/maps/FpOsA

b) Do we really want something as unsightly as a rail line running beside the Captain Cook Bridge? And further to that, is there room to fit in two tracks between CCB and where the station would go underground?

For a while (Back before Newman even got in) I've thought it would have been better to emerge from the cliffs at KP have a bridge at gardens point  and get underground somewhere around there rather than a massive tunnel the whole length.
One thing I feel strongly about is that Australia should get over it's immaturity when it comes to elevated railways.  Doing everything underground will send us broke and takes money away from being able to do more extensive networks.

These are good examples of nice looking rail bridges:

e) Wooloongabba station - Where does this fit into the equation?

My thoughts is get the Go Print site knocked down  ASAP (Since its been shut anway) and do a simple cut and cover station there. Build over it at a later date, much like what happened with Perth underground.

Isn't the currently under construction 1 William St going to get in the way or have I misread your mockup ?

Have they started that yet? I figured they may well change the plans...

[#Metro]

I am willing to entertain alternatives like Gazza has up. I do wonder what the effect of the building piles that hold up the 1 William Street tower are going to have. I suspect that if this option is chosen, the line will be under William/George Streets to avoid these piles (surface buildings are being demolished apparently).

Just please NO Cleveland solution. I like the first photo Gazza has up with the rail line in a mesh tube. Elevated lines can be OK provided they are designed well. After all, we have elevated roads, why be scared of elevated trains? It's just the same viaduct with tracks in it.

[dancingmongoose]

The issue with elevated tracks is that trucks carrying large loads may not always fit under them, which creates unneccessary hassles. Although there should not be many, if any, trucks with that sort of load going through the cbd.

[newbris]

Have they started that yet? I figured they may well change the plans...

Busy digging the hole so yes full steam ahead. Would have thought it would be a major thing to re-design at this stage but I guess the guy with the keys could do it.

[ozbob]

Couriermail --> Campbell Newman reveals plan for underground rail and bus network to ease traffic woes

A MULTIBILLION-dollar tunnel will be carved beneath Brisbane's CBD in a bid to battle congestion.

Dubbed the Brisbane Underground, the rail and bus network is in the final stages of planning by the Newman Government as a cut-price alternative to the now defunct Cross River Rail.

The tunnel will join the south side of the river with George Street and include underground stations in the city.

It is understood the project will be paid for by the State Government and the private sector. Premier Campbell Newman said the Brisbane Underground proposal would cost "billions" of dollars less than Cross River Rail, which had an initial price tag of $8 billion.

Mr Newman said construction would begin "within the next few years" .

Cross River Rail had an initial price tag of $8 billion but the new tunnel is now expected to cost less than half that amount.

The rail and bus corridor has shifted from Albert Street to George Street which is likely to save money because it is more suitable for tunnelling.

Buses are also now expected to be included in the project in a bid to boost capacity and services.

"We are currently reworking Cross River Rail. We are turning it into a project that delivers lots more bang for less buck, that solves not just the rail issues but hopefully bus issues," Mr Newman said ...

[STB]

I'm interested on hearing what this is.   I did a bit of back reading on the CRR and George St was mooted at one point to be a possible tunnel point for the CRR.  Have they borrowed elements of the now dead CRR? And decided, what the hell, kill two birds with one stone?

[Derwan]

I'm interested on hearing what this is.   I did a bit of back reading on the CRR and George St was mooted at one point to be a possible tunnel point for the CRR.  Have they borrowed elements of the now dead CRR? And decided, what the hell, kill two birds with one stone?

Campbell will do anything to put his stamp on projects rather than accept what was proposed under Labor.  This move doesn't surprise me.

Don't be surprised if this project costs a lot more than CRR - but because it'll have bus as well as train, Campbell will call it "cost efficient" and "cheaper in the end" (blah blah blah).

That doesn't mean it's not a better idea.  I'll reserve that judgement until I see the plans.  However I DO think it's a bit late to be going back to the drawing board.

[Stillwater]

Essentially, this is a brand new project that will require a business case, re-evaluation by a revamped Infrastructure Australia and also an EIS.  An engineering study would be required to assess whether all the buildings down George Street would / would not fall into the tunnel.  All of that would take at least 2 years, even if the bureaucracy worked at a sprint.  Is the building at 1 William Street and a new Casino going to be put on hold while these assessments are made, or will they go ahead and we will then have to re-dig, re-bore, or whatever, their foundations to retrofit a tunnel of some sort?

[ozbob]

Brisbanetimes  --> Is 'Cleveland solution' set to resurface?

[STB]

Heh, that reminds me, a little while back I had a meeting with my local state MP (LNP), and he did mention that the LNP was seriously looking at the Cleveland solution as a 'solution' to the Cross River Rail.  I would not be surprised if this was back on the table.

[ozbob]

It is crazy, grossly undercosted.

However the  in me would be delighted with light rail units running on bridges in the Brisbane River ... 

I hope this time they manage to avoid the vents for the road tunnels and factor in the existing bridges ... lol

[ozbob]

However, if you read the Premiers comments they are looking at a combined bus and rail solution.

My blog comment at BT

Is 'Cleveland solution' set to resurface? Hope not ... crazy.

What the Premier has outlined is a combined bus and rail solution. We need to enable both the bus and rail network for system capacity increases. The Adelaide St bus tunnel/bridge and CRR independently are simply not going to get funding assistance. A compromise that can be afforded is needed.

Read more: http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/is-cleveland-solution-set-to-resurface-20130909-2tgdo.html

[STB]

Just because they say 'rail' doesn't mean necessarily 'heavy rail'.   

[ozbob]

Just because they say 'rail' doesn't mean necessarily 'heavy rail'.   

LOL  BCC really hate light rail with a passion.  Might be poetic justice ... 

May as well light rail Shorncliffe, Doomben, FG of course.  Heavy rail corridor northern western southern lines only.

[ozbob]

Twitter

Robert Dow ‏@Robert_Dow 9m

@scottemersonmp Media firestorm of speculation unleashed re CRR etc., can we expect a statement to clarify please? Thanks .. #qldpol

[Derwan]

However, if you read the Premiers comments they are looking at a combined bus and rail solution.

Not quite.  He said it "solves not just the rail issues but hopefully bus issues".  The "solution" might be to get people off of both heavy rail and bus at hubs outside of the city and then onto the high-frequency light rail line being constructed for the final leg of their journey.

[O_128]

This will be interesting. Potentially cheaper to go under george street due to the redevelopment there.

[nathandavid88]

Essentially, this is a brand new project that will require a business case, re-evaluation by a revamped Infrastructure Australia and also an EIS.  An engineering study would be required to assess whether all the buildings down George Street would / would not fall into the tunnel.  All of that would take at least 2 years, even if the bureaucracy worked at a sprint.  Is the building at 1 William Street and a new Casino going to be put on hold while these assessments are made, or will they go ahead and we will then have to re-dig, re-bore, or whatever, their foundations to retrofit a tunnel of some sort?

1 William Street won't be put on hold, as it is the lynch pin needed for the redevelopment of the Government Precinct and because it is currently well advanced with basement excavation approaching completion with sources saying that the base and pad for the crane has been put in place. The new Casino project however can't and won't commence until 1 William Street is completed (can't knock down the Executive Building without somewhere to put the public service after all) and that completion date is set at the end of 2016 according to the Treasury page for the project. This gives the State Govt a little over two years to get its plan worked out. And if this project is not going to receive federal funding, will it still have to be submitted to Infrastructure Australia?

[johnnigh]

Oh dear, all this TMR/Emerson/Newman threshing around to find a 'cheap' solution. And all the BoT speculation about it...

I guess all that can be said is 'bizarre'.

Now we're speculating on heavy rail, light rail, bus. Have we forgotten hover craft and teleporting? Free high speed Segues on dedicated Segue-ways? How much more messy can public transport be made in Brisbane?

The short term financial problem is now dictating Brisbane's long term future. Why can we not step back and consider that long term?

Politicians may be worst at this, but bureaucrats may not be too far behind the financiers. And don't forget, a financier with a NPV using a 15% rate of discount can't see beyond about 7 years. And that isn't even long enough for a Gen Y adult, let alone her children.

[ozbob]

Informed sources have confirmed it does involve heavy rail with the north south connection, George St alignment which is actually a bit easier to do technically with a bus segment with the rail tunnel for part of it.

The ' Cleveland solution ' is not what is planned at all.

[Derwan]

Informed sources have confirmed it does involve heavy rail with the north south connection, George St alignment which is actually a bit easier to do technically with a bus segment with the rail tunnel for part of it.

The ' Cleveland solution ' is not what is planned at all.

That's a relief!

Without the actual release of at least some details, the speculation will continue to run rife!  It may have been better for Newman to hold off until he had something to show/tell us!

[ozbob]

Opposition respond to governments cross river plan

10 September 2013 , 8:17 AM by Matthew Macklin

It's being spruiked as the affordable alternative to Cross River Rail.

The state government is devising a new plan which it has confirmed will involve underground bus and rail.

Spencer spoke with Annastasia Palaszczuk about the opposition's plan.

--> here!

[aldonius]

The question as always is: does it have sufficient capacity to accommodate any sort of future expansion to Browns Plains and further south?

[Stillwater]

Mr Scott Emerson's most recent comment on all of this is that he continues to press the federal Coalition for funding for CRR.  All the latest running is being done by our engineer Premier, Mr Newman.

Does this mean Mr Emerson, the transport minister, has been sidelined or that the Premier has stepped in after seeing that his minister is floundering with the politics without moving on to devising a practical solution for Brisbane's inner-city transport woes?

[ozbob]

^ certainly mixed messages, needs clarification for sure ...

[nathandavid88]

Actually, the latest comments from Mr Emerson were regarding the increase is Fed road funding, and that more state funding can be diverted to other projects like CRR as a result.

Mr Emerson said that changed the traditional funding arrangements between state and federal governments over federal highway funding.

"With a federal Coalition in place with its commitments for them to pay for 80 per cent of federal roads, we have more money to spend on other projects like Cross River Rail."

Read more: http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/coalition-puts-cross-river-rail-back-on-the-table-emerson-20130909-2tf30.html#ixzz2eRZlEDYk

I think he knew, he just didn't want to upstage Newman by letting the cat out of the bag prematurely.

[red dragin]

If it involves a tunnel, you best not announce it before CanDig does or you'll be in trouble  <-kinda resembles a TBM 

[nathandavid88]

Informed sources have confirmed it does involve heavy rail with the north south connection, George St alignment which is actually a bit easier to do technically with a bus segment with the rail tunnel for part of it.

The ' Cleveland solution ' is not what is planned at all.

Spot on Ozbob! The Brisbane Times has had a chat to Emerson's spokesman:

The Newman government has rejected suggestions it will resurrect the $2.5 billion Cleveland solution, instead saying it is considering an underground rail and bus tunnel under George Street.

A spokesman for Transport Minister Scott Emerson confirmed on Monday that under a proposal it was considering a tunnel would run under George Street's parliamentary precinct.

This comes despite Mr Emerson backing the Cleveland solution in June 2012.

Since then until Monday afternoon, the Queensland Government's policy was to proceed with a $4.45 billion scaled-back version of Cross River Rail.

Labor's Cross River Rail project ran the underground rail under Albert Street.

It is unclear how much cheaper the LNP plan would be, or what tunnel's alignment would be, Mr Emerson's spokesman said.

He said there were no firm details of the new concept, or where the stations would be built.


Read more: http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/lnp-rethinks-river-crossing-plans-20130910-2th3n.html#ixzz2eRuKuAwf

[SurfRail]

I'd like to suggest we do little more than call for clarification at this point.  CRR is clearly not going to happen, continuing to argue for its resurrection would in my view be a strategic mistake.

What we do need to keep doing is emphasise the looming problem.  Our real interest is in the problem of core network capacity being solved.  Rather than being position-oriented (ie CRR, being one project, is the only way to fix the problem), we should be open to alternatives.  Obviously they should be sensible alternatives - the first thing many of us no doubt thought was "not the bloody Cleveland Solution" again.

The other thing is that circumstances have changed.  There will be a higher concentration of employment on George/William Sts than before due to the new tower.  Albert St was also chosen because it made more sense for a deep tunnel alignment.  What we are likely to get now will not be a tunnel diving at Yeerongpilly.

[Gazza]

Agreed, so long as it is heavy rail, can run 9 car sets, and has stations at the Gabba and somewhere at the southern end of the CBD then the way the rest of it is done doesn't really change too much.

[nathandavid88]

+1 from me as well. If the Newman Government can come up with a half decent plan that helps solve the river crossing/inner city capacity issues, we should support it. Bonus points for any benefit to the bus system they can build in.

[#Metro]

The Rail Station could be named NORTHBANK STATION to contrast it with SOUTHBANK STATION and hopefully will be an excellent point and catalyst for future Northbank development.

[Cam]

How about running 4 tracks through the proposed tunnel so that all Beenleigh, Cleveland & Gold Coast services can use it? South Brisbane & South Bank can be serviced by bus along the busway via an interchange at the Goprint site adjacent to the Woolloongabba Busway Station. 

[Gazza]

How about running 4 tracks through the proposed tunnel so that all Beenleigh, Cleveland & Gold Coast services can use it? South Brisbane & South Bank can be serviced by bus along the busway via an interchange at the Goprint site adjacent to the Woolloongabba Busway Station. 

But what's the gain in doing that? You'd be mothballing the Merivale Bridge for no good reason.

[Cam]

I'm guessing 80-90% of passengers from the southside would prefer the more direct route to the city & likely better city station locations. The time saving for CRR was about 10 minutes. The LNP's proposal would likely save several minutes on the train & several minutes in walking to/from stations - all depends on the station locations.