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

[HappyTrainGuy]

Not to mention Gazza the people that go to School/TAFE/Griffith and work in the direct surrounding area.

[Gazza]

But Cam, why not keep both, and then passengers just change trains at Park Rd depending on which side of the river their final destination is on. Some pax might get a single seat journey, some might have to change.

I think having everyone shift onto the busway for South Bank and South Brisbane is a bit of a non solution, given that segment is already capacity constrained as it is!

[Cam]

But Cam, why not keep both, and then passengers just change trains at Park Rd depending on which side of the river their final destination is on. Some pax might get a single seat journey, some might have to change.

I think having everyone shift onto the busway for South Bank and South Brisbane is a bit of a non solution, given that segment is already capacity constrained as it is!

A shuttle train service between Park Road & Roma Street is an alternative to buses but the important point is that all southside services should use the proposed tunnel otherwise there will be a mass change at Park Road or wherever is possible in the yet to be released proposal.

Under CRR, the majority of passengers on services travelling via South Brisbane would have alighted at Yeerongpilly to take a service via the tunnel.

[nathandavid88]

But Cam, why not keep both, and then passengers just change trains at Park Rd depending on which side of the river their final destination is on. Some pax might get a single seat journey, some might have to change.

I think having everyone shift onto the busway for South Bank and South Brisbane is a bit of a non solution, given that segment is already capacity constrained as it is!

A shuttle train service between Park Road & Roma Street is an alternative to buses but the important point is that all southside services should use the proposed tunnel otherwise there will be a mass change at Park Road or wherever is possible in the yet to be released proposal.

Under CRR, the majority of passengers on services travelling via South Brisbane would have alighted at Yeerongpilly to take a service via the tunnel.

Instead though you'd be getting a mass change at Roma Street Station for anyone wanting to backtrack to South Brisbane/South Bank/Cleveland, or to continue north to Central or Fortitude Valley, or to switch to the Ipswich, Shorncliffe or Doomben lines. It would be chaos.

[#Metro]

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

The Merivale Bridge is a SUNK COST. That is to say that use it or don't use it, the money has already been paid to construct it and you can't get it back no matter what you do.

I agree with others that if you can get away with having all Southside trains go via the Campbells' Cross River Concoction, that would be preferable.

What to do with the Merivale Bridge then? Turn it into a giant pedestrian and cycleway stretching from PA Hospital through Southbank across the Brisbane River to Roma Street.

By the way, I have read the original Wilbur Smith Plan 1965 (Roads) and Wilbur Smith Plan 1970 (Public Transport) and the plan was to have the rail bridge go through Wooloongabba before exiting above the Brisbane River at Kangaroo Point Cliffs and then down into a tunnel in the botanical gardens continuing to Queen Street Station and Roma Street. One of the options in the plan was to make the Merivale Bridge redundant and for emergency use only. This was because South Brisbane/South Bank Stations would be stranded investments at the time and there was a rail yards stabling depot at the current site of the Exhibition Centre. The Cleveland line would feed into the 1970 rail link at Park Road.

The alternative is to use it for terminating Northside trains at Park Road.


I would like to see trains for southern lines (Beenleigh, GC and Cleveland) terminate underneath Roma Street. There may be no need to have more tunneling to bring them up to Ekka station, and this would also save cost.

[James]

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.

This has never been the plan, and never will be.

IMO, in order for the tunnel to be effective, it must go underground/above ground before Park Road. Otherwise it is going to keep those junction conflicts at Park Road which should be eliminated sooner rather than later.

I suggest between Fairfield and Dutton Park. Dutton Park is 800m from Park Rd station, it can be shut and people walk to PA Hospital busway station (or others). All Beenleigh trains proceed to use CRR (Campbell's edition), with Coasties (and possibly selected BL trains) using the Merivale along with the Cleveland Line trains. There will be underground stations at Park Road and Wooloongabba - pax can change at Park Road. Yes, it does remove a direct connection - but nothing that wasn't proposed under CRR 1.

People who want to go to South Bank from Ipswich have to change, no reason why BL pax can't do the same. Trains with CRR will also come more often, making interchange take less time.

[nathandavid88]

I would like to see trains for southern lines (Beenleigh, GC and Cleveland) terminate underneath Roma Street. There may be no need to have more tunneling to bring them up to Ekka station, and this would also save cost.

But to terminate them underneath Roma Street, wouldn't you have to excavate a huge, multi-platform terminus station under Roma Street? Wouldn't that be just as costly, if not more so, than creating an Ekka line connection?

[Gazza]

I would like to see trains for southern lines (Beenleigh, GC and Cleveland) terminate underneath Roma Street. There may be no need to have more tunneling to bring them up to Ekka station, and this would also save cost.

Would you save much tunneling? If it was a shallow level underground platform at Roma St it'd take only about 300m of tunneling to ramp up and surface next to the Countess St bus layover:
http://goo.gl/maps/vtUUL

Under the old CRR they had a much longer underground segment due to Roma St having deep level platforms.
Under a new CRR, you could probably use most of the ekka loop as is.

Under CRR, the majority of passengers on services travelling via South Brisbane would have alighted at Yeerongpilly to take a service via the tunnel.

Would they? What about those bound for Central and the Valley?

And even those heading to Roma St probably wouldn't bother changing trains, the time you'd waste changing wouldn't really offset the supposed inconvenience of losing the single seat journey.

[#Metro]

CRR = Campbell's River Rail 

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.

I can't agree with this. Often it is cheaper to do projects through public funding (if there IS public funds to be spent) than private sector HOWEVER interest rates are at historic lows (2.5%, something some European countries can only dream about) and we have AAA credit rating. Current QLD Treasury Bond rates are about 5%.

With low interest rates NOW is the time to spend money and borrow for large projects. Also good as the Mining Boom winds down from constructing mines to operating mines, there will be a lot of local cheaper labour to construct large public works projects like CRR.

[Old Northern Road]

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.

The highest concentration of employment is on the other side of the city around Eagle St. A station at Albert St would be far better as it's more central.

[Cam]

Under CRR, the majority of passengers on services travelling via South Brisbane would have alighted at Yeerongpilly to take a service via the tunnel.

Would they? What about those bound for Central and the Valley?

The majority of passengers who alight at Central walk south. The LNP proposal may contain a station more central than Central. We'll wait & see.

[nathandavid88]

At a guesstimate, I would say that the distance between the centre of the QSM (Queen & Albert intersection) and a new George Street station (around Mary St/Margaret St) would probably be about equal to the distance between Central Station and the QSM centre, with Roma Street to the QSM centre being slightly further away.

[SurfRail]

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

The Merivale Bridge is a SUNK COST. That is to say that use it or don't use it, the money has already been paid to construct it and you can't get it back no matter what you do.

I agree with others that if you can get away with having all Southside trains go via the Campbells' Cross River Concoction, that would be preferable.

What to do with the Merivale Bridge then? Turn it into a giant pedestrian and cycleway stretching from PA Hospital through Southbank across the Brisbane River to Roma Street.

By the way, I have read the original Wilbur Smith Plan 1965 (Roads) and Wilbur Smith Plan 1970 (Public Transport) and the plan was to have the rail bridge go through Wooloongabba before exiting above the Brisbane River at Kangaroo Point Cliffs and then down into a tunnel in the botanical gardens continuing to Queen Street Station and Roma Street. One of the options in the plan was to make the Merivale Bridge redundant and for emergency use only. This was because South Brisbane/South Bank Stations would be stranded investments at the time and there was a rail yards stabling depot at the current site of the Exhibition Centre. The Cleveland line would feed into the 1970 rail link at Park Road.

The alternative is to use it for terminating Northside trains at Park Road.


I would like to see trains for southern lines (Beenleigh, GC and Cleveland) terminate underneath Roma Street. There may be no need to have more tunneling to bring them up to Ekka station, and this would also save cost.

One of the advantages of a sunk cost item is you don't need to spend the money to create the capacity again.  Any talk of closing the Merivale Bridge is a bit nuts, particularly with the popularity of South Bank and South Brisbane and their proximity to events precincts and major employment centres in the area.

The one thing I do agree with what you have said here LD is that it might be possible to not have a connection to the Ekka.  Ideally services would be routed all the way to Strathpine via Trouts Rd.  The main stabling yard for this north-south sector would be at Clapham, so a Mayne connection to Roma Street "underground" would be redundant.  If Trouts Rd cannot be afforded, the interim step is to build trailing crossovers and tunnel stubs at Roma Street to give it a capacity similar to or better than Bondi Junction.  Possibly 4 platform faces.

[Stillwater]

That wily Campbell, is he thinking of an city loop, with southside trains whizzing through his revised CRR concoction, then, at Roma Street Station, heading either onto Ekka or on a loop around the city (via Eagle Street etc), before boomeranging back over the river to the southside once again?

Meanwhile, Mr Emerson obviously continues to work on his letter to the feds seeking more money for the old CRR Lite -- according to his latest statement on this matter.

[#Metro]

Well I hope that the planning is done carefully otherwise we run the risk of having a bus station here, a bus station there, train station over here, train station over there and a complete MESS of bus/train stations on every CBD street corner.

Buses need to be taken OFF city streets.

Who knows what they will come up with. One of the options in the Wilbur Smith Plan 1970 (Public Transport) was to have the train line turn sharply at Queen Street then continue to the Financial District and then terminate at around Fortitude Valley. So in theory a city loop may be possible that way.

I really hope the bus/train thing is done Toronto-style rather than just expand infrastructure but keep the modes separate.

[Stillwater]

Seven TV news tonight reported that Newman says he will release details 'by the end of the year'.  Robert Dow was interviewed.

[ozbob]

Seven TV news tonight reported that Newman says he will release details 'by the end of the year'.  Robert Dow was interviewed.

He sure was --> http://au.news.yahoo.com/video/national/watch/18868628/cross-river-rail-plan-to-be-revealed/



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

[Golliwog]

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

From an engineering point of view, my understanding is that George St is cheaper to tunnel under as it has better rock than Albert St which is muddier? That's what I've heard anyway. My understanding why CRR went with Albert St was you got a better catchment area by moving the station further away from the river. So again you have the constant tug of cost vs benefit.

In terms of making sure they get it 'right' my question would be about, for lack of a better term, future proofing it. While adding buses into the solution may help with that issue at the current point in time, ultimately I still believe that over longer distances and with larger station spacing that you would hopefully get on this project that rail makes more sense than as many buses as you can throw down the busway. Therefore, will the tunnel/s be built such that the bus section will be able to be potentially retro-fitted to carry trains?

[skippy]

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.

Please let's not suggest 9 car sets. This will only
- constain both the CCR lite grading and alignment (platforms need to be straight and 1 in 200 max grade) , adding hundreds of millions of $
- cost hundreds of millions to extend the 6 car platforms at existing stations
- give the economists an excuse to run the same lousy frequency

Going further, if there was the capacity I'd prefer 3 car sets at double the frequency.

[Gazza]

The old CRR was built for 9 car sets though right, with the view that GC trains would eventually be extended to that length.

[ozbob]

Future proofing is a given I would hope, but then again we are in Queensland .. 

Couriermail --> Brisbane underground proposal labelled a thought bubble by State Opposition

[ozbob]

Sent to all outlets:

11th September 2013

Brisbane Underground proposal - comment

Greetings,

The Brisbane Underground plan detailed by the Premier and the Minister for Transport is the way forward from here.

--> http://au.news.yahoo.com/video/national/watch/18868628/cross-river-rail-plan-to-be-revealed/

Earlier this year we suggested that a combined rail and bus tunnel might be the best option.

--> http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=9972.msg131193#msg131193

Both the bus system and the rail system need future capacity enhancements.

As single projects the Adelaide St bus tunnel/bridge and Cross River Rail are simply too expensive.  By considering a plan as outlined by the Premier significant cost savings can be achieved while delivering the capacity gains for the network.

It should be stressed though that the Brisbane Underground project needs to be constructed with a view to expansion in the future.  For example new rail stations be constructed in a space to allow nine car trains.  The bus tunnel segment be of such size to allow conversion to rail or light rail down the track.  Future proofing is essential.

Best wishes
Robert

Robert Dow
Administration
admin@backontrack.org
RAIL Back On Track http://backontrack.org

[#Metro]

Bus platform lengths and tunnel gradients must be long enough to allow for future conversion to metro as used in Vancouver Skytrain or similar. Busway conversion to rail would solve the high waste issues with lots of labour required to shift people around and would be cheap and easy to do as the ROW has already been acquired.

[ozbob]

Couriermail --> EDITORIAL: Newman grasps a nettle with his Brisbane River commuter tunnel plan

[nathandavid88]

By the way, I have read the original Wilbur Smith Plan 1965 (Roads) and Wilbur Smith Plan 1970 (Public Transport) and the plan was to have the rail bridge go through Wooloongabba before exiting above the Brisbane River at Kangaroo Point Cliffs and then down into a tunnel in the botanical gardens continuing to Queen Street Station and Roma Street. One of the options in the plan was to make the Merivale Bridge redundant and for emergency use only. This was because South Brisbane/South Bank Stations would be stranded investments at the time and there was a rail yards stabling depot at the current site of the Exhibition Centre. The Cleveland line would feed into the 1970 rail link at Park Road.

The more I read about this, the more it does sound very similar to the Wilbur Smith Plan reworked, so for reference here the proposed railway network images from a thread you started way back in 2010!  http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=3304.0




Click to enlarge.

[#Metro]

(Replace hoverboards with Segways)

My suspicion is that the section of rail from Queen Street to Fortitude Valley in the Wilbur Smith Plan (1970) will simply be replaced by busway...

The most scary and eerie thing about the Wilbur Smith Plan 1970 is that in the final pages was a hand drawing of a concept where buses would be placed in an underground station, like trains, and people could catch them in the same way. This was BEFORE any idea of busways had come to Australia. Scary stuff!!

[#Metro]

It would be a godsend if they could tack the Cleveland line on to it as well! That would mean heaps of capacity for Flagstone etc.

[bcasey]

From my perspective, working at QUT and catching a bus at the stop near the government buildings that will be demolished, I would welcome an integrated rail/bus station and tunnel where they are planning on putting it.

Because there is no rail stations currently on this side of the CBD, the narrow streets get very crowded with both buses and cars competing for space. Its not uncommon for this part of george street to get very congested, which delays the buses most of the time.

Particularly at Stop 108, where the 331, 332, 341, 344 and 384 starts their service of an afternoon, its quite common to see 3 or 4 buses arriving around the same time, due to bunching caused by traffic in this area, and the space for the stop can only barely fit 3 buses (2 comfortably, the 3rd one makes it very hard for traffic turning from Margaret Street into George street, almost impossible if its a bus turning). If a 4th bus comes along, they usually have to go around the stop, and pull up on the road next to the small car-pickup area out the front of the government buildings there. If one or more cars are still parked in the bus zone and haven't been taken away by the tow trucks that patrol the area, it vastly complicates things for the bus drivers and the surrounding traffic.

If the proposal made by Newman's government goes ahead, it would remove the buses from having to stop on the streets in this area, improving conditions for both public transport users and car users.

[BrizCommuter]

http://brizcommuter.blogspot.com.au/2013/09/brisbane-underground-half-baked-or.html
The BrizCommuter word on what we know about the "Brisbane Underground".

[Old Northern Road]

The one benefit to this proposal (apart from cost) is that it can be used by all Beenleigh and Gold Coast trains which not only means a faster trip but also removes the conflict with Cleveland trains at Park Rd. You might need to close down Dutton Park depending on where the tunnel starts.

If this project does involve a bus tunnel than I hope it is designed so it can be converted to light rail.

[Old Northern Road]

The one thing I do agree with what you have said here LD is that it might be possible to not have a connection to the Ekka.  Ideally services would be routed all the way to Strathpine via Trouts Rd.  The main stabling yard for this north-south sector would be at Clapham, so a Mayne connection to Roma Street "underground" would be redundant.  If Trouts Rd cannot be afforded, the interim step is to build trailing crossovers and tunnel stubs at Roma Street to give it a capacity similar to or better than Bondi Junction.  Possibly 4 platform faces.

I agree with this as when Trouts Rd is built you won't need to have Kippa-Ring trains run via Northgate just to serve the station at Exhibition. The only problem is that it might be a long time until Trouts Rd is built.

[ozbob]

Couriermail --> OPINION: Campbell Newman and Graham Quirk's plans for Brisbane's public transport system are useless without funding

[Stillwater]

Upon reflection, the combined bus-rail tunnel for Brisbane was the inevitable choice once Tony Abbott and the Coalition got into power in Canberra.

It didn't click with Mr Scott Emerson, the Queensland Transport Minister.  He revealed he was writing letters to Mr Abbott seeking additional contributions from the feds for CRR Lite, knowing full well that Mr Abbott had proclaimed that a federal Coalition government was not going to contribute a cent to urban rail projects.  Mr Newman had taken note.

In pursuit of offers above $715m from the feds, Mr Emerson negotiated the deal down to zero for Queensland, zero for CRR Lite, despite it being assessed as the highest priority infrastructure project in the land, and 'shovel ready'.

Having observed his boy-wonder transport minister's handling of the situation, Mr Newman took change and came up with the bus-rail option.  Why?  It put the feds back on the hook financially.  Obviously, the deal Mr Newman has in mind is a situation where a dual tunnel heads down George Street, allowing him to screw the private sector for funds as that part of the city is made over, but more importantly, he has it in his mind that the Queensland Government could scrape together the money needed for the RAIL component of the project while holding out hope that Mr Abbott will contribute to the BUS bit of the tunnel.  This would allow the feds to contribute without Mr Abbott breaking his commitment that he will not put Canberra money towards urban rail.

The big worry is that the bus-rail tunnel solution takes us back to square one.  It will require a business case and an EIS, public consultation etc.  Even working flat out, it will be two years before this project is 'shovel ready'.  By that time, we will be well and truly in the time zone when the existing rail bridge between South Brisbane and Roma Street will be at capacity.

[Derwan]

CRR Lite

No offence but I wish people wouldn't call it that.  That was the name the LNP came up with.  In reality it was CRR Stage 1.  The project was split into stages.  There wasn't a "lite" version.

Of course it's a moot point now as CRR is dead.

I don't think we'll get federal funding for the bus component.  I'm sure Abbott said something about urban transport being a state issue, not federal.  This would include both bus and rail.

[minbrisbane]

CRR Lite

No offence but I wish people wouldn't call it that.  That was the name the LNP came up with.  In reality it was CRR Stage 1.  The project was split into stages.  There wasn't a "lite" version.

Of course it's a moot point now as CRR is dead.

I don't think we'll get federal funding for the bus component.  I'm sure Abbott said something about urban transport being a state issue, not federal.  This would include both bus and rail.

I'm certain he only said urban rail.  But would fund urban roads... Buses run on roads, what an interesting thought.

[ozbob]

The Abbott Government has said it will fund certain roads only.

http://transportsydney.wordpress.com/2013/04/09/should-the-federal-government-fund-urban-transport/

In time I think that position will change.  For a very simple reason.  More roads alone is not going to solve anything.

As gridlock and congestion worsens,  ALP, Greens, PUP et al. simply say that they will proceed with Metro Melbourne, CRR, electrification of the rest of the Adelaide Network,  light rail extensions Gold Coast, and so forth .... game over ...

Abbott will do what is politically expedient rather than sound policy based thinking.  They all do.  Oz polyticks ... 

[ozbob]

^ Stillwater ..

In a couple of years they only way the masses will get around will be by ' thought experiment travel '.

Every morning, around 7am or whenever you would like to travel on your commute, close your eyes and imagine 9 car trains flying through new stations at the 'Gabba and Albert St. 

For the North Coasters their vision is one of a buffet equipped narrow gauge VLocity heading from Palmwoods at 160 km/h.  Time enough for a coffee and crumpets before the big smoke.  And they can also imagine working toilets ...

For those on the XPT arriving at 3.53am at Roma St, they can TET that it is really 10am or so ...

Sure to impress one and all.  TET  - thought experiment travel.  It will be the only quick way to travel   ...   

Whilst Queenslanders dwell on TET for their commute,  I will possibly be residing along a railway line that does have in reality VLocitys at 160 km/h, maybe not the crumpets though (might have to TET that bit    ).   SEQ is headlong into a transport collapse, and as you point out it will be a long time before there is any meaningful ' sod turning ', although it can be argued there is already a large number of sods in Brisbane.

[Stillwater]

 

[ozbob]

AFR --> Why rail beats gridlock, hands down

There has been much discussion recently about where investments in transport should be directed for the best outcomes.

I make the case that a leading role for rail – both freight and passenger – is crucial if we are to realise the best possible results socially, economically and environmentally.

The much publicised investment in roads by the incoming government is welcome, but without a corresponding substantial investment in rail networks, our national highways will be clogged with trucks and our cities could be heading towards gridlock, frustration and ugly urban sprawl.

Increased congestion will cost Australians an estimated $20 billion dollars a year by 2020 while also significantly affecting our lives in detrimental ways. Rail is essential to manage this congestion and increase productivity in our cities.

This is not to argue against well-targeted investment in specific road projects, but a disproportionate investment in roads can only add to overall increased congestion in the long run by entrenching motor vehicles as the dominant modal choice. International and local research shows the automobile distance driven per person is starting to level off and even decline, in contrast to dramatic increases in public transport patronage over the last decade ....

[STB]

Upon reflection, the combined bus-rail tunnel for Brisbane was the inevitable choice once Tony Abbott and the Coalition got into power in Canberra.

It didn't click with Mr Scott Emerson, the Queensland Transport Minister.  He revealed he was writing letters to Mr Abbott seeking additional contributions from the feds for CRR Lite, knowing full well that Mr Abbott had proclaimed that a federal Coalition government was not going to contribute a cent to urban rail projects.  Mr Newman had taken note.

In pursuit of offers above $715m from the feds, Mr Emerson negotiated the deal down to zero for Queensland, zero for CRR Lite, despite it being assessed as the highest priority infrastructure project in the land, and 'shovel ready'.

Having observed his boy-wonder transport minister's handling of the situation, Mr Newman took change and came up with the bus-rail option.  Why?  It put the feds back on the hook financially.  Obviously, the deal Mr Newman has in mind is a situation where a dual tunnel heads down George Street, allowing him to screw the private sector for funds as that part of the city is made over, but more importantly, he has it in his mind that the Queensland Government could scrape together the money needed for the RAIL component of the project while holding out hope that Mr Abbott will contribute to the BUS bit of the tunnel.  This would allow the feds to contribute without Mr Abbott breaking his commitment that he will not put Canberra money towards urban rail.

The big worry is that the bus-rail tunnel solution takes us back to square one.  It will require a business case and an EIS, public consultation etc.  Even working flat out, it will be two years before this project is 'shovel ready'.  By that time, we will be well and truly in the time zone when the existing rail bridge between South Brisbane and Roma Street will be at capacity.

Unless they change the fares or make driving more expensive, there will be no need for more PT across the river. Look at the numbers for last few years, its declining!

Difference between 2012 and 2008
Sth Bri-Pk Rd   -232 less people
DP-Yeerongpilly   -111 less people
Moorooka- BL   -959 less people
CL      -228 less people
      
GC      754 more people and about half of what was lost above.

There is some growth on the nth side, but on the south side and Ips not so. Only the new Richlands line saves the western line.

That's a short sighted view.  Imagine if Bradfield had that view down in Sydney 100+ years ago.  Sydney would be in total and utter gridlock!