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

[Cam]

paulg, the Park Road interchange is equally important to passengers on Beenleigh Line services using UBAT.

[paulg]

paulg, the Park Road interchange is equally important to passengers on Beenleigh Line services using UBAT.

Yes, agreed. For many reasons, it's vital!

[Stillwater]

Exchange with the UBAT team so typical of state government agencies -- they will talk at you about what they have already decided what to do and constantly refer someone to the process that they go through, a sort of Claytons process.  They have no intention of interacting with people  alter, change or modify their planning.  It takes political intervention to steer them to a different course.

[Golliwog]

Exchange with the UBAT team so typical of state government agencies -- they will talk at you about what they have already decided what to do and constantly refer someone to the process that they go through, a sort of Claytons process.  They have no intention of interacting with people  alter, change or modify their planning.  It takes political intervention to steer them to a different course.

You're assuming there that UBAT is what the public servants want/decided on. They're doing their job of informing you of what the existing plan is and telling you when the plan is for consultation in the future. They can hardly come out and say "I agree with you that not having an interchange station at Park Rd is silly and should be rectified." when that is the governments announced plan.

[Stillwater]

Equally, Public Servants can use the process to throw up outcomes that they may, privately, be telling their political masters are desirable.  It is the Public Servants way of saying 'I told you so' to a Minister, without saying  'I told you so.'

Pressure on a minister results in minister going to the Public Servants and saying 'I am copping all these letters, emails and petitions.  I didn't think it was going to be this bad.  Please make the pain go away.'

[BrizCommuter]

Hi all,
Here is an exchange I had with the UBAT team on Facebook.

> paulg:
> Could you please clarify whether the new line includes an interchange at Park Road station? This is important to allow passengers on Gold Coast trains to transfer to UQ bus services and to
> Cleveland Line trains.

> Underground Bus and Train Project - Brisbane:
> Hi Paul,
> Sorry for the delay in our response, we do appreciate your comments.
> At this stage, the proposed stations will be at Wooloongabba, Roma Street and George Street. That being said, starting next year the Underground Bus and Train project will undertake a
> number of a key activities including developing a reference design, preparing an environmental impact statement, and consulting with key stakeholders and the community.
> Community consultation will play a key role in the developing both the reference design and the environmental impact statement. We'll advertise consultation events and opportunities on both
> the project's website at www.tmr.qld.gov.au/ubat and also here on the Facebook page. If you would also like to be added to our email list, please send your details to ubat@tmr.qld.gov.au and
> we'll make sure you're kept informed regarding feedback opportunities in the future.

That sounds like a NO.

[Stillwater]

It is a bureaucrats way of saying 'no'.  -- We have a process in place where you can bash your head against a brick wall and wail your objections and, after careful consideration, the answer will be no. ..... but we have given you a full process for your views to be submitted.

[ozbob]

Couriermail --> Brisbane underground bus and train tunnel to boost values in adjacent suburbs

[ozbob]

Deputy Premier, Minister for State Development, Infrastructure and Planning
The Honourable Jeff Seeney

Have your say on Brisbane underground

The community will be able to have its say on the Newman Government's innovative Underground Bus and Train project from Monday.

Brisbane has shown keen interest since the innovative public transport connection was announced on Sunday, with 25,000 people viewing the transport tunnel fly thru online.

Deputy Premier and State Development, Infrastructure and Planning Minister Jeff Seeney said Queensland Coordinator-General Barry Broe had declared the $5 billion project to be a coordinated project requiring an environmental impact statement.

"This exciting, world-class public transport project demonstrated that the Newman Government is fulfilling its election promise to deliver better infrastructure," Mr Seeney said.

"Queenslanders will have access to one of the most innovative public transport connections in the world through the Underground Bus and Train project and it will be delivered by our government at a saving of $3 billion compared to Labor's fanciful cross river rail proposal.

"The government is also progressing other transport priorities ignored by Labor, including the Bruce Highway and the Toowoomba Second Range Crossing.

"I welcome the Coordinator-General's release of the draft terms of reference for an EIS, with consultation occurring on this project from November 25 to 20 December 2013."

Coordinator-General Barry Broe said the draft terms of reference would look at a range of key impacts as part of the environmental investigations of the 5.4 kilometre, 15-metre diameter transport tunnel. It would also look at potential underground stations and platforms at Woolloongabba, Roma Street and Queen's Wharf, the new Government precinct located in George Street.

Mr Broe will coordinate a whole-of-government response to the project's assessment.

The EIS does not include any above-ground development above stations, or demolition of the existing buildings in the Government precinct, which will be determined by a separate process.

"The proponent, the Department of Transport and Main Roads, will have to address any impacts to private residences and land owners, including potential noise and dust impacts, as well as any interruptions to existing bus and rail services during the construction phase," Mr Broe said.

"Other issues to be addressed include impacts to public transport users, the removal and disposal of spoil, the operating hours for the construction team and groundwater impacts."

To view the draft terms of reference for the EIS and find out how to make a submission, visit www.dsdip.qld.gov.au/underground   

[ozbob]

Twitter

Robert Dow ‏@Robert_Dow

@UBATBrisbane consultation opens today, --> http://www.dsdip.qld.gov.au/assessments-and-approvals/underground-bus-and-train-project.html ... ... #qldpol #auspol #springst #nswpol #wapol #sapol #taspol

[ozbob]

Concerns so far:

1.  Station excavation areas should be big enough for 9 car trains ..

2.  Park Road

3.  Bus section should be electric bus (bi-artic capable)/light rail capable as might be needed down the track ..

Any others?

[SurfRail]

Look at whether platforms can be provided for the top level at other locations even with no companion rail station (eg top of the QSM).

Identify in advance what kind of services will be operated and optimise the infraetructure towards that instead of doing it arse about.

NWTC connection?

[James]

My concerns:

1. Bus portal on the southern end for UBAT - raise the issue of bus congestion due to (bus) junction conflicts north of Buranda between the UQ part of the Eastern Busway and SE Busway.

2. INB connection prior to RBWH should be looked at

3. Legacy Way connection - Make sure it is there and is a 'clear exit' for the buses (i.e. one where buses jump off Legacy Way and into UBAT without stuffing around)

Of course I'd prefer a different alignment bus-wise, but that probably won't be up for negotiation in consultation...

[paulg]

I'd like to get a better understanding of the implications of moving the rail tunnel portal from Yeerongpilly to Dutton Park.

Effectively, they have reduced the future capacity of Yeerongpilly-Park Road from 5 tracks to 3. Even 'CRR Light' which the LNP previously supported had the portal at Yeerongpilly.

Does anyone here have a good feeling for the capacity implications of having only 3 tracks available in this section, for passenger as well as freight trains? I understand the LNP is now proposing a freight tunnel (eventually) to take the freight trains off this section of track. Hard to see that one happening any time soon.

It is important to recognise the direct costs of rolling the bus capacity improvement into the UBAT project. I think 'CRR Light' was supposedly also $5 billion, same as UBAT? So the trade-off appears to be extra bus capacity at the expense of rail capacity in the Yeerongpilly-Park Road section. I'm sure Fairfield and Yeronga residents will be less than happy about any proposals for surface widening of the rail corridor in this section.

Cheers, Paul

[curator49]

I am very concerned about the UBAT proposal with the closure of Dutton Park station and the stated intent of not having a connection at Park Road.

It would appear to me that there will be insufficient room at Dutton Park for the two tracks to go into the UBAT tunnel and still leave room for two suburban tracks on the old route through Park Road etc. I assume (?) there is an intention for the old route to be still available but, if so, what services will use UBAT and what services will go via South Brisbane.

The proposed pedestrian bridge fom Park Road to the PA Hospital would appear to have issues with getting around the flyover for the dual gauge track to Fisherman Island and will be of no benefit to anyone coming in on the Beenleigh Line if there is no interchange at Park Road.

Will the upper deck be strong enough to support a future Metro or light rail. If it is planned for buses only it may not have the ability to support the weight of track infrastructure and rail vehicles.

CRR Lite seemed to me to be a good way to go whether it ultimately followed George Street or Albert Street. Is this a case of our Australian democracy failing again where one political party changes to an opposite approach to a problem that a previous party had been advocating just because it was their political "opponents" who first proposed it.

CRR Lite or Heavy was "shovel ready" according to the national infrastructure people and some money had been offered from the Feds but "No" the present government has been bloody-minded all the way along the process (when they were in opposition and now in govermnment). The previous government had spent millions on test drilling for the proposed route (including under the Brisbane River) as well as numerous public consultations, engineering reports, epa reports, every report you can think of, then proposed designs, redesigns and so on. Now this government has to do all of it or at least much of it all over again. I do not think UBAT will provide any significant benefits in the longer term planning for the future.

When will our state and federal governments and oppositions ever come out of "kiddie land" and agree on a project of state or national significance and support infrastructure for the good of Australia not their own mean small-minded agendas because "they didn't think of it first". That is not to say that sometimes improvements cannot be made/suggested by one side or the other.

[ozbob]

Please take the time everyone to make a submission.

Comments close at 5 pm on Friday 20 December 2013.

http://www.dsdip.qld.gov.au/assessments-and-approvals/underground-bus-and-train-project.html

[STB]

1.  Have a Park Road station underground to allow transfers.

2. Make sure that track conflicts are dealt with at either end of the tunnel, and do track amplification works as necessary to prevent that from happening.

3. Make provision for a future Spring Hill station near the intersection of Fortescue St and Gregory Tce.

4.  Make provision for Exhibition station to be opened full time, and possibly used as a terminus for trains that go via the tunnel to terminate before heading into the yards, which acts as an alternative to Bowen Hills station on the current infrastructure.

5.  Look at renaming 'Park Road/Boggo Road' station to 'Dutton Park' station, and renaming 'Exhibition' station to either 'Victoria Park' or 'Herston' station.

6.  Ensure that there is provision that the bus tunnel can be converted to a light rail or heavy rail tunnel in the future if needed.

7.  Look at tying in UBAT with the future Trouts Road rail line, so they can be connected when the time comes.

[Gazza]

I think its fine calling it Exhibition. ..In all likelihood RCH Herston will take the herston name when the new Childrens Hospital opens.

As for the footbridge, youd put it as an extension of the PA hospital cycleway, connecting to where the Southeast corner of the ecosciences precinct is

[nathandavid88]

If they were to change the name of the Exhibition Station, I imagine it would be changed to "Brisbane Showgrounds", inline with the RNA's renaming of the precinct. Herston wouldn't work because it isn't actually in Herston for one thing Bowen Bridge Road is the divider – west is Herston, east is Bowen Hills, and could cause confusion with the RCH Herston stop. As for Park Road/Boggo Road, I'd be more inclined to name the lot Boggo Road, as the area is called the Boggo Road Urban Village, so the name works.

[paulg]

This presentation will cover both UBAT and the Port of Brisbane rail tunnel:

http://www.engineersaustralia.org.au/events/queenslands-infrastructure-future-neil-scales-director-general-transport-and-main-roads-and-r

I'll be attending.

Cheers, Paul

[SurfRail]

I am very concerned about the UBAT proposal with the closure of Dutton Park station and the stated intent of not having a connection at Park Road.

It would appear to me that there will be insufficient room at Dutton Park for the two tracks to go into the UBAT tunnel and still leave room for two suburban tracks on the old route through Park Road etc. I assume (?) there is an intention for the old route to be still available but, if so, what services will use UBAT and what services will go via South Brisbane.

The proposed pedestrian bridge fom Park Road to the PA Hospital would appear to have issues with getting around the flyover for the dual gauge track to Fisherman Island and will be of no benefit to anyone coming in on the Beenleigh Line if there is no interchange at Park Road.

Will the upper deck be strong enough to support a future Metro or light rail. If it is planned for buses only it may not have the ability to support the weight of track infrastructure and rail vehicles.

CRR Lite seemed to me to be a good way to go whether it ultimately followed George Street or Albert Street. Is this a case of our Australian democracy failing again where one political party changes to an opposite approach to a problem that a previous party had been advocating just because it was their political "opponents" who first proposed it.

CRR Lite or Heavy was "shovel ready" according to the national infrastructure people and some money had been offered from the Feds but "No" the present government has been bloody-minded all the way along the process (when they were in opposition and now in govermnment). The previous government had spent millions on test drilling for the proposed route (including under the Brisbane River) as well as numerous public consultations, engineering reports, epa reports, every report you can think of, then proposed designs, redesigns and so on. Now this government has to do all of it or at least much of it all over again. I do not think UBAT will provide any significant benefits in the longer term planning for the future.

When will our state and federal governments and oppositions ever come out of "kiddie land" and agree on a project of state or national significance and support infrastructure for the good of Australia not their own mean small-minded agendas because "they didn't think of it first". That is not to say that sometimes improvements cannot be made/suggested by one side or the other.

Weight wise I think the upper deck will be strong enough as the buses axle load is in two points (for standard bus) but while a train is heavier per axle, the rails spread the weight. However it would be nice to know if it is. However unless the deck is built with concrete made for easy removal and bolting of rails, it will NEVER happen. To build a track bed on something like that not made for easy conversion will cost a fortune and cause absolute havoc for over a year.

My understanding of the project is that there will be 2 tracks for dive, 2 tracks to continue to the city and DG to Fishermens. A freight tunnel, not this quarter of a century. The four suburban tracks then can continue south and provide high level of capacity for BL/KY/GC and future Green Bank services. I could not see the project doing anything else.

The problem with the "shovel ready" CRR is quite simple. Who was going to pay for it? Answer, not the feds ALP or feds LNP and not the state either ALP or LNP, so the term "shovel ready" doesn't mean much if you are not "finace ready". Much better to blow "millions", than blowing "billions".

What the state has done as far as I can work out is use as much as possible of the CRR and convert it to a project for which they can find a way to finace and kill two birds with one stone. Anna extended the CRR further south than originally proposed to save on local disruption, LNP don't seem to have a problem with this, or was Anna's issue more her local electroate? While the final tunnel may not be the end game, which nothing ever is, so long as its easily upgradable, its not the end of the world. I work in Dubai, a city you can literally watch grow faster than grass at a rate that makes Australia look snails pace and my employer is no different, but they still avoid wasting money and will change plans if its the wrong decision.

CRR/UBAT what ever is not a project of national significance. Its a project for Brisbane, just like the new Sydney Metro is for Sydney (and not funded by the feds) or electrification is for Adelaide etc etc. Once built, most vistors to Brisbane won't even know its there.

It would appear the critical part of the project that maybe missing is the Park Rd interchange.

The issue for me is that this actually costs about the same as CRR now the bore is big enough for 2 x 2 way tunnels.  About $2-3bn of the cost of the project is confected to suit BCC and is utterly unnecessary - the sort of thing that should be fixed by amending the bus network and getting people onto trains, not making it grow endlessly until it consumes the CBD.  We're talking about less than a billion dollars' difference between the 2.

There's also no evidence whatsoever that additional tracks will be provided anywhere south of Dutton Park itself, or north of Exhibition.  If so, great.  If not, then the cost will be even greater than CRR, which included these bits.

The local resumption / disruption angle doesn't work in the LNP's favour either, and in fact militates AGAINST the conclusion additional tracks will be built.  The LNP have made a great song and dance out of the fact no resumptions are needed other than crown land and Dutton Park station, ie less than what the ALP wanted to resume from the commercial sites around Yeerongpilly.   I cannot see how a fourth track is going in between Dutton Park and Yeerongpilly without resumptions outside the rail corridor, especially in tight spots like around Fairfield. There would almost certainly be losses to station parking even if the other impacts can be mitigated.

[Stillwater]

^^ All very good points.  Mr Emerson is on dangerous ground touting how the LNP is 'more frugal' than the ALP in the provision of cross-river transport links.  A business case and EIS have yet to be done.  These will establish a cost range.  It is only at the final design stage that a true cost-estimate can be established and this may be much closer to the original CRR proposal price tag.  The government should be condemned if UBAT does not have the ability to link, eventually, with the Trouts Road rail corridor.  Look at the compromise already at Park Road.  What other connectivity benefits have been foregone in this latest plan?

[ozbob]

I nearly cried today, looking at the Eastern Busway at Stones Corner  ....  the bus frequency on the adjacent roads seemed better at times.  MGLD was almost empty ...  part of it is terrible network design, part of it is fares ...

Don't cry for me Queensland ... 

Time to just let the process proceed.  Please put in your comments formally all.  That might help, well I hope it does.  I am fast reaching the point that it is simply just too difficult and hopeless with both LNP and Labor. 

Maybe living next to the 2'6", with a better train frequency than north of Nambour might be the go .. and least steam runs most days ...

[STB]

I nearly cried today, looking at the Eastern Busway at Stones Corner  ....  the bus frequency on the adjacent roads seemed better at times.  MGLD was almost empty ...  part of it is terrible network design, part of it is fares ...

Don't cry for me Queensland ... 

Time to just let the process proceed.  Please put in your comments formally all.  That might help, well I hope it does.  I am fast reaching the point that it is simply just too difficult and hopeless with both LNP and Labor. 

Maybe living next to the 2'6", with a better train frequency than north of Nambour might be the go .. and least steam runs most days ...

This is what happens when you let Politicians who are only keen on keeping their jobs design the network.  Even TransLink themselves have said that they would like the politics taken out of network planning, and just to let them do the job that they were put together for. 

At the moment, it is all just simply romantic thinking, but the reality is that TransLink has their hands tied, same with TMR, at the whim of Politicians who are only looking to skimp on cost and put out half baked projects in the hope that it'll keep them in power (and in turn, keep giving them an income), but are not trained in public transport planning and design.  I remember working at TransLink, and our hands were tied so much, yet we were coming up with these amazing plans that just were not going to happen due to politics.

UBAT I think is a half baked project, missing key elements that would allow it to actually practically work for the decades to come.  The only real win for me is if they put in a Park Road station.  I have been told though by higher ups that the LNP is actually anti-consultation, and I worry that the consultation is simply window dressing, before they just simply say, no, we are not going to fund these suggestions, too expensive, we'll implement our plan as is.

Queensland is a sad state.  I can't wait till I move south in the year/s to come!

The conservatives in particular have got a habit, both state and federally of cutting out well designed plans, another example is the NBN project, which is cheaper in the short term, but more expensive in the long run, as the copper won't be replaced with fibre.  And unfortunately the general public are  ignorant enough to buy up what they spout out, without realizing that they are being shortchanged.  People vote on their feelings and what they've been fed marketing wise, rather than on the facts and what will benefit them in the long run.

Just as a side note, I think the party system is broken, and the way politics and Politicians work needs to be redone from scratch, which I hope that Generation Y and Z will be able to do in the years to come, as from what I've seen, those generations are the most innovative and open minded (for the most part) compared to the Baby Boomers, and to a smaller extent, Gen X, but that's a topic for another day and another thread.

[techblitz]

I nearly cried today, looking at the Eastern Busway at Stones Corner  ....  the bus frequency on the adjacent roads seemed better at times.  MGLD was almost empty ...  part of it is terrible network design, part of it is fares ...

Don't cry for me Queensland ... 

Time to just let the process proceed.  Please put in your comments formally all.  That might help, well I hope it does.  I am fast reaching the point that it is simply just too difficult and hopeless with both LNP and Labor. 

Maybe living next to the 2'6", with a better train frequency than north of Nambour might be the go .. and least steam runs most days ...

Good points ozbob...theres only so much you can do.....More formal letters/pictures by james/ld/Htg sent to local councellors complaining of too many taxi style rocket services should give you some weight.
Also,an actual presence (via petitions) out in the suburbs which lack HF services would be a +.
Time for other members to step up formally. Some other members do thier arguing in writing to the higher uppers. More needed to step up like this as well....
I think you have done a great deal in highlighting the bus review issues in the media/social to the best that you have to work with...

[Golliwog]

RE: the connection Legacy Way to UBAT:
http://translink.com.au/about-translink/reporting-and-publications/media-releases/details/981

...
"It will also ease congestion along Coronation Drive and Milton Road and will ensure Legacy Way is a vital part of south east Queensland&'s public transport network.

Mr Emerson said inbound buses would use the connection between the Inner City Bypass, Gilchrist Avenue and the Northern Busway, onto the new underground busway.

In the outbound direction, buses would come from the underground and use a new west-facing on-ramp to the Inner City Bypass and then onto Legacy Way.
....

[James]

Issue with the inner suburban buses is that much of the southern side is devoid of a rail network. Look at previous argument on CL line that running the buses to the current route involves a resonable distance in wrong direction. If $10-15B was available we could build a new subway to the southern side and fill the large populated gap between BL and CL lines.

I think the way Newman wants to fund it is saying this part is for BCC and they will fund their bit, thus leaving the rail component significantly cheaper than CRR lite.

I think we would all be very surprised there won't be space for four tracks post the tunnel on south side. I recall someone saying once that they thought four tracks through Eagle Junction was considered impossible until they actually did it.

I guess the best approach for now is to raise the issues and ensure that its forwarded to powers at be rather than pick apart a plan thats still in conceptual design.

Regards
Shane

The fact that the triangle between Carindale and about Mansfield is devoid of a rail network means nothing. Spend a few billion on straightening the Cleveland Line, then feederise everything north of Carindale, aside from maybe a BUZ or two. So from that area, you have two BUZes + 200 BUZ (bye bye 222) + 175 BUZ + 185 BUZ + Chatsworth Road BUZ + some other buz = 7 BUZ routes, and there is no need for further bus routes. Double that number to account for other infrequent buses and the odd other BUZ route (Ipswich/Beaudesert Road BUZ, coverage routes), and you won't have busway congestion any more.

The BIG DIFFERENCE in congestion along the busway is the 130/140/150 series buses. If you removed those BUZes (and simply assumed all their users stayed home), you would not have any case for a second bus river crossing.

This is why I do not support a subway, metro, or BUM for Brisbane. Once you start feeding pax to a Mains Rd railway line (or simply Altandi/Fruitgrove) with trains operating at decent frequency and to proper interchanges, 130/140/150 series buses can ALL be terminated at Garden City or Griffith Uni. Pax for busway destinations (mostly Buranda/Greenslopes/HPW, which require a change to access currently anyway) can change at these busway stations, else, they should all go to the RAILWAY LINE.

If we remove our heads from our BUM and look at mass-feederising the 130/140/150 to rail (which will end up saving far more resources than expensive metro conversion), we quickly will realise there is no need for a BUM. Our railway lines are not failing because they are bad, they are failing because BCC has never supported the feeding of buses to trains. Never.

[Gazza]

Surfrail, Re the corridor south of Dutton Park I think quadding is entirely possible without resumptions.

Granted, it's not as good as 5 tracks with the original CRR, but then again if the feds want to send freight via the gateway then let them.

Basically.

South of Dutton Park you'd run on the western side http://goo.gl/maps/SBRSw
Presumably you'd have a full set of crossovers and Bi-Di signalling on this stretch anyway to allow trains to switch sectors in the event of trackwork, disruptions etc.

Just prior to Fairfield you'd then begin using the eastern side http://goo.gl/maps/2XMPi
There is that one odd house on Midway street that might be the one victim of the project.

New Retaining wall needed here: http://goo.gl/maps/dpXbE

Plain sailing http://goo.gl/maps/cKtXP

Seeya later Yeronga P&R http://goo.gl/maps/wiCWF

To get under Cardross St, excavate the current shotcrete slope stabilisation, do a vertical slurry wall on the eastern side, and excavate out to the left of the bridge pylon, and pass through:
http://goo.gl/maps/dAFXA

Yeerongpilly...Already sufficient tracks through, relay degraded siding tracks and electrify:
http://goo.gl/maps/QCg2A

Moorooka. Allow for 4th track as part of Clapham stabling
http://goo.gl/maps/k2XfP

Rocklea & Salisbury, no real issues
http://goo.gl/maps/IXwL1

[HappyTrainGuy]

Our railway lines are not failing because they are bad, they are failing because BCC has never supported the feeding of buses to trains. Never.

Another reason why I keep saying that there wouldn't be high returns if the Caboolture line had a 15 minute frequency tomorrow (MBRL would sustain and have the big return for patronage and worthy of a higher frequency as their bus network is supportive of the rail network even though its not actually built yet. Something which the Caboolture line just doesn't have or currently lacks - frequency and span of hours. Remember the Strathpine-Petrie-Warner has hourly peak hour buses. The two Narangba and Burpengary loop feeders cut out at 6.30 and it was only recently that the 7pm request services were made full time. The 327 arrives at Geebung the exact same time both the outbound and inbound services arrive so anyone transferring will miss the connection regardless). Sure it would be more convenient and get a small patronage boost in some areas but overall it really needs a bus network to really back it up to drive the patronage. There's only so much you can squeeze out of the walk up patronage and alot of the areas surrounding the stations on the Caboolture line past Virginia are the big deterrents to actually catching the train at night (street lighting, access paths etc which are the responsibilities of local councils and out of the hands of QR). You just have to be at a couple of the stations to see how everyone bails from the train and goes directly to the park and ride.

The reason I liked the Translink Review for the northside was that so many routes utilized these railway stations instead of the current scenic tour bypassing the stations going to the city.

@Gazza. One thing to be careful of when looking/relying on arial maps for planning ie google earth some things can become distorted when it comes to available space. I'm not too familiar with the southside but some areas are kinda tight.

[Gazza]

Please take the time everyone to make a submission.

Comments close at 5 pm on Friday 20 December 2013.

http://www.dsdip.qld.gov.au/assessments-and-approvals/underground-bus-and-train-project.html

I'm slightly confused. Is that submission really making sure that the EIS covers everything of interest, but it's not for actual project specifics yet, right?

[ozbob]

Yes, Terms of Reference doc needs to be read, and comments on that.  It is not specific detail yet as I understand it.

However I think that by thinking through some of the specific issues it might help inform any points on the TOR that might need comment.

[SurfRail]

Surfrail, Re the corridor south of Dutton Park I think quadding is entirely possible without resumptions.

Granted, it's not as good as 5 tracks with the original CRR, but then again if the feds want to send freight via the gateway then let them.

Basically.

South of Dutton Park you'd run on the western side http://goo.gl/maps/SBRSw
Presumably you'd have a full set of crossovers and Bi-Di signalling on this stretch anyway to allow trains to switch sectors in the event of trackwork, disruptions etc.

Just prior to Fairfield you'd then begin using the eastern side http://goo.gl/maps/2XMPi
There is that one odd house on Midway street that might be the one victim of the project.

New Retaining wall needed here: http://goo.gl/maps/dpXbE

Plain sailing http://goo.gl/maps/cKtXP

Seeya later Yeronga P&R http://goo.gl/maps/wiCWF

To get under Cardross St, excavate the current shotcrete slope stabilisation, do a vertical slurry wall on the eastern side, and excavate out to the left of the bridge pylon, and pass through:
http://goo.gl/maps/dAFXA

Yeerongpilly...Already sufficient tracks through, relay degraded siding tracks and electrify:
http://goo.gl/maps/QCg2A

Moorooka. Allow for 4th track as part of Clapham stabling
http://goo.gl/maps/k2XfP

Rocklea & Salisbury, no real issues
http://goo.gl/maps/IXwL1

It can be done - just needs to be factored into the cost of the project, which it probably isn't.

You would need to have a think about what happens at Fairfield and Yeronga.  My preference would be to try and slew the tracks at Fairfield to straighten the corridor as much as possible, and put island platforms in at both stations with the outermost tracks being the express/freight lines.

[paulg]

Here is my submission to the CG:



Submit here:
http://www.dsdip.qld.gov.au/assessments-and-approvals/underground-bus-and-train-project.html

[SurfRail]

My preference would be to try and slew the tracks at Fairfield to straighten the corridor as much as possible, and put island platforms in at both stations with the outermost tracks being the express/freight lines

If you can nominate an express and local line at this point, you only need one island platform in the middle, keeps the cost and width of the corridore right down.

Absolutely agree Shane.  You wonder how much of the budget for Salisbury to Kuraby could have gone into a fourth track if they didn't pay for upgrading or adding third platforms at all those stations, which now of course go completely unused.  Partial fourth track Kuraby to Runcorn maybe with four platforms at Kuraby and longer term plans to get rid of the Sunnybank kink.

[James]

The CL line needs some improvement and I made a post about 6 weeks ago of an option leaving maybe Manly a stub but thats another story. There is no where in hell you would blow $1,000,000,000 - $2,000,000,000 of tax payers money to do something to this line and/or the alignment of the BL line untill you can improve the river crossing capacity significantly. Because you would spend the limited funds, changes the buses and then find you have over crowded trains and whinging riders and taxpayers and no money left over to do the CRR for a 5-10 years to come. The Qld budget can only afford about $500-600mpa longterm on suburban rail capital infrastructure projects. The CRR/equivalent will chew up about 8-10 years worth capital leaving very little for anything else during this time frame.

While I agree buses need to run to stations with 15min timetables or better and something Sydney has doen well. There are limits on this. The bus capacity to the city in the tunnel is the right outcome and its about time Australia starting doing larger co-joined projects like this because frankly we are F_in hopeless at it compared to many other countries in both private and public sector.

As for a Metro to the Carindale area, another story but another poster mentioned a while back for a tunnel from western lines to Queen St station proposal. I would actually make this come from West End and points further west as part of Inner Western Metro. From the east side of the city, the line would then spilt in two again, one towards BH/Springhill, the other curve around SE through the Newstead area, under the river and down right through the guts of the gap between BL and CL lines and middle density surburbia. This would be a project for post 2030, after the CRR, after the Green Bank line, after the Quad on BL line and after doing soemthing with CL line.

Then we need to start thinking outside the box. Just sticking a BUM under the CBD is a non-solution, and once we build a proper rail network on the southside, will be a stranded investment.

The amount of money saved by feederising the 130/140/150 series buses is HUGE (around 15 in-service route km). HUGE HUGE HUGE! (And I'll slip this in here: converting the SE Busway to metro would save 11km and be pricier than straightening the railway line.) When you consider that there is probably 100bph coming from these areas (not joking) in core peak, you could save 1500km of in-service km just in one hour. In just that one hour, you save 7500km (in-service) per hour - and you can probably double that to 15000km to account for dead running. To put it in context, the 444 uses ~27500km of in-service running. In other words, by terminating 130/140/150 series buses at railway stations for two hours in peak, you can fund the 444 BUZ to run for a whole week. Imagine the savings by doing this full time.

Bus is an inferior mode at this point in time. Sure, it may suit some parts of Brisbane (e.g. the inner North West, a railway line to The Gap isn't feasible), but for the most part, it is far more effective to simply feed rail. Yes, Campbell's BUM must come first, but in that same breath, once you have the BUM, get a bit more money together and you can improve the rail network and feed bus passengers to rail. Now with 100bph removed from the SE Busway, the BUM has now been vacated of buses and is essentially empty and serves no purpose.

Maybe we can cut BCC's budget by $200 million every year so we can fund projects like modifying the Cleveland and Beenleigh lines in order to make them more suited to fast rail transit.

[Gazza]

I don't think its a stranded investment, provided the upper deck is convertible...If we do stuff like build new underground lines then that gives you a way of feeding into the CBD.
It doesn't even need to follow the same technical standard as the lower deck....By all means, use the lower deck for Trouts Rd, Camcos and Flagstone trains, but then keep the upper deck for driverless, with no mixing of traffics.

[ozbob]

The Member for South Brisbane is spearheading a campaign to save Dutton Park rail station.  Was talked about on 612 ABC Brisbane radio this morning breakfast show.  Transport Minister was interviewed.

[ozbob]

The Member for South Brisbane is spearheading a campaign to save Dutton Park rail station.  Was talked about on 612 ABC Brisbane radio this morning breakfast show.  Transport Minister was interviewed.

612 ABC Brisbane --> Campaign to save Dutton Park station

A campaign has started to save Dutton Park station. The state government intends to resume the land as part of its plans for an underground rail and bus tunnel.

State MP for South Brisbane, Jackie Trad, is trying to organise support to keep the station open. Scott Emerson is the Transport Minister:

[James]

I think in reality it would never be converted, why? Bus technology will not go away, it may diminish in portion, but as some bus routes get railed, other evolve and frequency increases on existing. No city in the world is bus free and those still with a high proportion of trams compared to buses are more based of historic infrastructure that survive the tram hating period of 40's to 70's rather than what would be built greenfield. Ie what would happen to Brisbane if LR was rolled out.

A Metro will also probably exit and enter the city via a different route more suitable to where it going to/from. Going via this route means you already miss better catchments and double up with the rail system. The cost of a Metro will be huge and river crossing a minor component.

^ this. The way the portals are positioned with the BUM, conversion to metro will be quite difficult (both on south and north sides).

This is partially why I support having portals which come off the SE Busway north of the junction to UQ - so if we really wanted to (that is, urban form dictated this to be in the city's best interests), we could have two metros going Loganholme - Zillmere and Capalaba - Indro via UQ.

Of course this is total and absolute foam, but we need to be thinking foam given we are designing infrastructure that should be future proof.

The Member for South Brisbane is spearheading a campaign to save Dutton Park rail station.  Was talked about on 612 ABC Brisbane radio this morning breakfast show.  Transport Minister was interviewed.

Oh dear lord goodness. 'NEWMAN GOVERNMENT CUTS CUTS CUTS SHAME SHAME SHAME'

Well if the state's finances weren't in so much of a f***ing mess, your government hadn't been so bad and Beattie had removed his head from his BUM back in 2006 when such capacity problems were first noted, CRR could already be under construction and completed shortly. Dutton Park should be closed regardless of whether BUM goes ahead of not. It is on the edge of Park Road's catchment area, and is one of the most poorly patronised Beenleigh line stations.

[#Metro]

Oh dear lord goodness. 'NEWMAN GOVERNMENT CUTS CUTS CUTS SHAME SHAME SHAME'

OMG, somebody stop these lunatics from destroying PT even more with their good intentions but bad results! Aren't they content with destroying the connected bus network proposals? Is that not enough? How much poo do we have to put up with just so politicians (Milton Dick, Jackie Trad) can get their face in the newspaper?

There must be a reason for this. I reckon she is going to try to replace Annastacia P. as leader of the opposition and this is why she's searching for hi-visibility public crusades to rally at.