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

[ozbob]

UBAT presently has more holes in it than Swiss Cheese  ...

It seems at present that a concept for a dual tunnel was formulated and now they are going about trying to fit the existing network to it, rather than looking objectively at the network needs and then planning UBAT to meet those needs.

I am going to wait until we can get more details before getting more alarmed than I already am ...

[STB]

However Transport Minister Scott Emerson said in 2021 a ''two-tiered'' stopping pattern would be used on the Beenleigh line, eliminating the problem.

NO!!! SPLITTING THE LINE INTO TWO MAKES IT MORE CONFUSING AND CUTS EFFECTIVE FREQUENCY IN HALF!!
It will also reduce the cost benefit ratio because half the trips DO NOT have the 10 min time saving.

The bus network will also be bifurcated (via S'Bank, via BUM, via C'Cook Bridge)

STOP!!

Not only that, you split the network into a case of Haves and Have Nots.  Like I mentioned previously, depending on what they want to do on a routing level, does this mean that some will have double transfers and others won't?  By the looks of things, it most certainly will, while complicating the network, and not allowing future growth with lack of track amplification and splitting the services.  For $5 billion, I've come to the conclusion that I'd rather save that $5 billion and move it towards the Cross River Rail project, in full.  At least with Cross River Rail, you were able to knock several issues in one go, and future proof it for the next 50 years with only some additional tracks required.  Meanwhile with the bus network, a simple modification of removing the 300 and 400 series routes off Cultural Centre would've done wonders as an initial step before ripping the network apart and starting again.  But yeah, Scott's way off the mark, there will still be double transfers, and that's just not clever planning.

Not much creativity or out of the box thinking with the Queensland Government, nor any guts for them to go ahead and do the hard yards and be creative to get the best possible outcome, which is very sad.

[ozbob]

There is a very serious flaw with the no frills UBAT.  There is no provision for extra rail capacity north and south of UBAT?  This was part of CRR, but chopped down for CRR Lite.  Is MBRL going to be shuttles?? lol

This is a frequency limiter ... 

The only benefit for rail will be some redundancy, and rail access into Gabba and George St.  As far as massive increases in train frequency, won't happen we are already nudging peak capacity from the north and in from Beenleigh.

And the failing direct service bus model becomes even more entrenched.   

Is this a nightmare?  Pinch me??

[STB]

There is a very serious flaw with the no frills UBAT.  There is no provision for extra rail capacity north and south of UBAT?  This was part of CRR, but chopped down for CRR Lite.  Is MBRL going to be shuttles?? lol

This is a frequency limiter ... 

The only benefit for rail will be some redundancy, and rail access into Gabba and George St.  As far as massive increases in train frequency, won't happen we are already nudging peak capacity from the north and in from Beenleigh.

And the failing direct service bus model becomes even more entrenched.   

Is this a nightmare?  Pinch me??

I do wonder if the LNP have realised that this is actually a bigger problem than first thought and goes way beyond just building a tunnel through the city.  Sure, it's a massive financial undertaking, but pays off big time if it is done right.  I'd hazard a guess, that they are doing this purely for political points, and are skipping over the minor details just say, we built a public transport tunnel through Brisbane and did it cheaper than the ALP!  Only that the service levels are going to be awful, routing will be complicated, transfers will be guesswork for the average passenger, and you'll still have clogged up conflicts on either side of the tunnel, northside in particular with the Mayne Yards and back end travel for trains (like freights) bypassing the city centre.

Nightmare indeed.

[Old Northern Road]

Are Gold Coast and outer Beenleigh trains going to stop at Fairfield? If not then the inner Beenleigh line passengers will have to backtrack to Altandi to get to Woollangabba.

[ozbob]

Are Gold Coast and outer Beenleigh trains going to stop at Fairfield? If not then the inner Beenleigh line passengers will have to backtrack to Altandi to get to Woollangabba.

Not publicly known yet.  And I don't think the authorities know themselves yet ... 

They can get a bus from Boggo Road to Woolloongabba I suppose ..

[Jonno]

This is like being in a nightmare that just never ends...meanwhile Europe, Sth/Nth Americas are making significant investment in active and public transport!

Madrid just released a plan to turn 60% of thier road space to transit, walking & cycling! 

Have we been left in the 20th Century by some rift in time!!!

[ozbob]

There was an interesting little yarn in the CM yesterday ..

--> Sea levels no longer included in State Government planning

Denial is manifest in many things ...  transport is just one ...

[Stillwater]

Mr Emerson and the LNP seem hell-bent on building a cross-river rail (and bus) solution where the purpose is not to provide efficient, integrated and network-strengthening transport capacity, but for it to be some sort of weird monument to cheapness.

The imperative to make a political statement a la 'we can do public transport at low cost and, therefore, better than the ALP' seems to be the overriding factor.  Practicality and common sense are being ignored.

Mr Emerson should park his politics.  Unfortunately for him, he has gone out on a limb from the outset and fixed a price for UBAT, even before the business case has established its cost and, presumably, without taking into account the effects of inflation.

It is not beyond the realms of possibility that further bits of this project will be chopped as times goes by to meet Mr Emerson's foolish 'fixed price' mentality.

If the LNP government is to involve the private sector in UBAT and if, as Mr Emerson has stated, the cost of an underground station at Park Road is too expensive, why not incorporate into the scope of the project an option to sell airspace in the rail corridor at Park Road for private developer, with proceeds going towards paying for an underground station there?

[James]

To put it in perspective - via South Bank trains will always be required IMO, as BUM won't be able to cope with Gold Coast, Beenleigh AND Flagstone.

But at this point in time, I don't see why we need trains going via South Bank. Bearing in mind Emerson's comment, I have zero faith in the project actually being done well. It disappoints me to say this (especially given I live in his electorate), but all this shows is that Emerson is a twit, and that for the good of the state I will have to vote him out next election. Non-inclusion of Park Road is negligent, the stupid bus portal locations (and bus component of the tunnel) are stupid, lack of track amplification is just dumb and this 'via South Bank trains' just tops it off.

If this continues, I have no choice but to personally oppose this project. Better to wait 5-10 years and build a superior product (e.g. CRR, either Heavy or Lite) than build something now and build a lemon now which encourages the firing of express buses everywhere.

Why do we have stupid people running our country? 'Federal government doesn't fund urban rail' Abbott, el cheapo Emerson and 'the bus network isn't broken' Quirk.

[paulg]

Yes, it appears they are determined to cut costs without regards for consequences.

I really can't see why resumptions would be required to include a Park Road interchange. I suspect they haven't looked carefully enough at it, they have their eyes on the cost savings.

[STB]

Just to put on the record in writing.  I personally oppose this project in its current form.  I have posted earlier reasons why, and I certainly don't want to see taxpaying dollars going towards a lemon that we are stuck with or will require further expensive work in the near future.

I'm planning on writing a letter to my local MP who I've dealt with on many occasions in the past on transport matters, detailing why, and provide some constructive feedback.

Also, I badly want to meet the project team.  The Project Director is a former co-worker of mine, who I wouldn't mind having some sharp constructive words with and finding out what the heck is going on.

[STB]

Yes, it appears they are determined to cut costs without regards for consequences.

I really can't see why resumptions would be required to include a Park Road interchange. I suspect they haven't looked carefully enough at it, they have their eyes on the cost savings.

I would love for them to take a little look at my plan and give some constructive feedback on it, as I certainly think it is doable in the current rail corridor with very little if any resumptions.

[ozbob]

Thanks STB, will take with me and all other comments in this thread as well.  I will ask them for a meeting/briefing for all members.  Too many uncertainties to make much sense of all at this time.

[ozbob]

Just thinking about the train service patterns.

What if all Beenleigh and Gold Coast go via UBAT?  Yeerongpilly reintroduced as a stop for express trains.  Yeerongpilly change station.

Doomben - Corinda via Central, South Brisbane and Tennyson does all the inner stations.

[ozbob]

A consistent service pattern is preferable I think to having some GC / Beenleigh going via UBAT some via South Brisbane. 

[aldonius]

^^^ So then Ferny Grove would pair with Cleveland?

Hmm, this could work. Wouldn't the Tennyson connection have some freight impacts though?

As for the 'some via UBAT, some via South Bris' - isn't this is just what we always expected would happen anyway? Inner BL all stops via Bridge to Doomben or Ferny, outer Beenleigh express via Tunnel to Caboolture or Redcliffe?

[ozbob]

Yes, I doubt if there is a enough train paths.  Just a silly idea .. lol

[ozbob]

Airtrain services could be a little bit mixed up as well.  Passengers may have to transfer with luggage as well.

[#Metro]

I'm interested in STBs idea and agree that Park Road should have a station.
Can the QLD organise a BBQ or are they just like Labor 

Park road would be great for mass TOD development (take note Jonno). May be able to get rid of the whole yucky 4th platform and fix it to boot.

There is great demand for units and apartments in that area. The demand comes from the PA Hospital (staff, patients that require an extended stay while getting medical treatment), The University of Queensland (student accomodation, staff, visiting academics) and anybody who generally wants to live in the inner city with good PT. The airspace is very valuable indeed. You could even have a small shopping Centre like Coles or Woolworths to anchor to that area, that would sweeten the deal for local residents a lot. The rail works depot could also be relocated as part of this development and turned into long term commercial apartment accomodation for patients staying in Brisbane for extended treatment. There already is a similar development by the Leukaemia Foundation nearby.

[#Metro]

Honestly, Emerson et al is making it up as he goes along, just with the bus review. There is a very reliable indicator to test whether a project will be successful or a catastrophe, and that is to simply ask "Is Brisbane City Council involved?". If the answer is yes, then there is a significantly heightened risk that it will turn sour, just like CityCycle, Clem 7, the Maroon Glider and the Bus network in general. These people appear to be immune to reality and don't like to hear things that might make them recongnise that they might be wrong.

My view is that ALL Beenleigh and Gold Coast trains must go up the BUM. If a flagstone line were added, this too should be considered for using the BUM unless the BUM is full, then Flagstone via South Bank for a consistent pattern.

How do I know Emerson is making this up as he goes along? Very easy. Suppose you are a passenger at Fairfield and want to go to UQ. You wait 15 minutes for the train, only to find that you can't interchange and go to UQ because it goes up the BUM. So you wait a further 15 minutes (= HALF AN HOUR) for "your" train where you can change to a bus at Park Road. You can already see that, and I fully suspect, Brisbane Transport must be planning the train routes/service patterns, because this style of thinking is so Bus. You have now wasted HALF AN HOUR of your time, and funnily enough, this is just as bad as the CURRENT situation. I thought the whole idea of a $5 BN infrastructure project was to assist better services not to keep them the same, no?!?!

Worse, consider that you are in the CBD. You want a Beenleigh train to Fairfield. You usually go to Central but now HALF the Beenleigh trains DON'T stop at Central. What happens is that the splitting of the train pattern will likely result in a (deep breath) 50% REDUCTION of service frequency at Central station so that the frequency is diluted and leaves everyone significantly WORSE OFF WIPING OUT THE ENTIRE 10 minute time "saving" that was the whole justification for the construction of the BUM.

It gets worse. The Toronto Transit Commission (TTC) once ran it's train services on a pattern called "interlining" where you would avoid transfer at key interchanges. The problem was that at one of the stations, trains for the same line could appear on EITHER the Top station or the station below. This was a catastrophe as passengers didn't know which station (top deck or bottom) the train would arrive on so they waited on the stairs in between both stations and then ran to the correct platform. This horror scenario will be set up at Roma Street where Beenleigh trains BOTH appear at Roma St (original) and Roma St (BUM). Passengers will have no idea which station the Beenleigh train will next pull up in and may take to running between stations to find out which one. This is even worse during non-peak hours as the frequency will be split - the Beenleigh train will appear at one station or the other station and, as a fact of physical reality (yes you can see just how far removed all these politicians are from the 'real' world) a passenger cannot be waiting in two places at once.

The whole bifurcation idea is MADNESS and must be stopped. This whole design by fiat and government by media release must stop or it will turn into a Sydney Style mess where all sorts of fanciful/fantasy things are proposed and then collapse.

[ezekial]

Just thinking about the train service patterns.

What if all Beenleigh and Gold Coast go via UBAT?  Yeerongpilly reintroduced as a stop for express trains.  Yeerongpilly change station.

Doomben - Corinda via Central, South Brisbane and Tennyson does all the inner stations.

Long time lurker, first time poster here... I had an idea similar to this, maybe mine is a bit naive but I wanted to test if it's feasible...

In the interest of consistency, I think it's only sensible that post-UBAT all GC and Beenleigh services should go via tunnel.
However, this results in a loss of service frequency for Park Road-South Bank-South Brisbane stations as there will only be the Cleveland line services running through these stations. 

Solution: This frequency loss could be replaced, or at least supplemented, by running all Springfield trains through south Brisbane and via the Tennyson line (but skipping Tennyson station).  This could be popular if it results in a time saving for Springfield passengers, and by this time new stock could plug the gap left between Milton-Darra from moving Springfield line.  Plus it retains one seat services Airport-GC which I think are important. 

Does this idea hold any water?

[ozbob]

Welcome ezekial!

I am rather fond of the Tennyson line.  It is a great connection between the southern and western lines.  The problem of running Springfield through Tennyson is that the frequency from Corinda in is halved, and will mean that Ipswich expresses would have to be made all stations to cover.  So for those reasons would not happen.

I agree that all Beenleigh / GC should go via UBAT.  So there needs to be a way to cover Fairfield <-> Central.  If there was a UBAT connection at Park / Boggo Road not the problem it is going to be.  Maybe the reference design work might convince the authorities to change their thinking.  We can only hope ...

[MaxHeadway]

yeah I know, life is tough

Then we need to work to make life less tougher where possible, like our forefathers did!

[ozbob]

...

How do I know Emerson is making this up as he goes along? Very easy. Suppose you are a passenger at Fairfield and want to go to UQ. You wait 15 minutes for the train, only to find that you can't interchange and go to UQ because it goes up the BUM. So you wait a further 15 minutes (= HALF AN HOUR) for "your" train where you can change to a bus at Park Road. You can already see that, and I fully suspect, Brisbane Transport must be planning the train routes/service patterns, because this style of thinking is so Bus. You have now wasted HALF AN HOUR of your time, and funnily enough, this is just as bad as the CURRENT situation. I thought the whole idea of a $5 BN infrastructure project was to assist better services not to keep them the same, no?!?!

Worse, consider that you are in the CBD. You want a Beenleigh train to Fairfield. You usually go to Central but now HALF the Beenleigh trains DON'T stop at Central. What happens is that the splitting of the train pattern will likely result in a (deep breath) 50% REDUCTION of service frequency at Central station so that the frequency is diluted and leaves everyone significantly WORSE OFF WIPING OUT THE ENTIRE 10 minute time "saving" that was the whole justification for the construction of the BUM.

It gets worse. The Toronto Transit Commission (TTC) once ran it's train services on a pattern called "interlining" where you would avoid transfer at key interchanges. The problem was that at one of the stations, trains for the same line could appear on EITHER the Top station or the station below. This was a catastrophe as passengers didn't know which station (top deck or bottom) the train would arrive on so they waited on the stairs in between both stations and then ran to the correct platform. This horror scenario will be set up at Roma Street where Beenleigh trains BOTH appear at Roma St (original) and Roma St (BUM). Passengers will have no idea which station the Beenleigh train will next pull up in and may take to running between stations to find out which one. This is even worse during non-peak hours as the frequency will be split - the Beenleigh train will appear at one station or the other station and, as a fact of physical reality (yes you can see just how far removed all these politicians are from the 'real' world) a passenger cannot be waiting in two places at once.

The whole bifurcation idea is MADNESS and must be stopped. This whole design by fiat and government by media release must stop or it will turn into a Sydney Style mess where all sorts of fanciful/fantasy things are proposed and then collapse.

The variation in patterns will be a nightmare and I think a major timetable problem for planning.  I expect 'their solution' will be GC expresses in the UBAT, Beenleigh trains surface.  Which means a considerable expenditure for not much real gain ...

This makes it straightforward in rollingstock planning as well.  NGR on the GC line ..

[ozbob]

So assuming GC trains will be the Airtrain services as well.  A proper luggage checkin could be set up at Roma St ..  which would be convenient for many. 

[minbrisbane]

So assuming GC trains will be the Airtrain services as well.  A proper luggage checkin could be set up at Roma St ..  which would be convenient for many.

That'd be fantastic.  The only issues are space at Roma Street for airline checkin and space in the train for the bags.  It's probably my favourite thing about HKG. 

[ozbob]

It will also be possible to run specials into Woolloongabba rail from Ipswich & Springfield (via Tennyson) and Caboolture for example.  This will be good for cricket, football and the like.

[SurfRail]

However Transport Minister Scott Emerson said in 2021 a ''two-tiered'' stopping pattern would be used on the Beenleigh line, eliminating the problem.

NO!!! SPLITTING THE LINE INTO TWO MAKES IT MORE CONFUSING AND CUTS EFFECTIVE FREQUENCY IN HALF!!
It will also reduce the cost benefit ratio because half the trips DO NOT have the 10 min time saving.

The bus network will also be bifurcated (via S'Bank, via BUM, via C'Cook Bridge)

STOP!!

Two tiered operation is the smartest practical thing they can do. While no one here knows what frequency the Minister is talking about if it was 15min from each location, I have no issue with that and makes perfect sense.

So if its 15min for each, no issue, please go ahead!

I think the issue Shane is more the idea of potentially doubling the number of stopping patterns, with some trains going via the tunnel and some not.  It is far from clear what they actually intend.

It does seem to be inner Beenleigh (say from Kuraby) via South Bank and everything south of there running express and via the tunnel.  Like I mentioned above, this is the lesser of 2 evils if there is to be no Park Road platforms, but they should still be built to prevent unnecessary transfer movements and doubling back in other parts of the inner city.

[BrizCommuter]

Just a question, how many people actually interchange between the Beenleigh/Gold Coast and Cleveland Lines?

Also, don't forgot to throw the Flagstone Line into the foam machine!

[paulg]

If there is no Park Road interchange, the biggest losers will be those on the Cleveland Line, since they will have no direct train connection to Wooloongabba/George St (forced onto buses at Park Road instead) and no direct change to Gold Coast trains (assuming GC/Beenleigh expresses run via UBAT and Kuraby trains run via South Brisbane). The other losers will be Kuraby pax wanting to get to Wooloongabba/George St (also forced onto buses at Park Road) and anyone trying to get from the GC/Beenleigh expresses to Park Road/South Bank/South Brisbane (must change trains somewhere along the line, presumably Altandi). However it ends up, it will be a mess.

[Gazza]

The other thing not really spoken about is pax from the GC heading to employment centers in South Bank & South Brisbane...You'll have a silly situation where pax are getting off at Wooloongabba and crowding buses for a couple of stops...Very inefficient compared to people changing trains at Park Rd and using standing room in carriages.

[ezekial]

The other thing not really spoken about is pax from the GC heading to employment centers in South Bank & South Brisbane...

This issue, along with the issue of GC pax headed for Boggo Road/UQ, is the best argument for a Park Road interchange.  At least it's the argument that is most capable of being communicated by TV news in order to convince the bulk of commuters of the need for Park Rd interchange. 

Think about the South Bank TOD, recent South Brisbane station refurb and plans for Kurilpa, these key trip generators all deserve simple connections for GC pax, enabled by a Park Rd interchange.  My point is this side of the story has more impact than the argument for a Park Road interchange "because it allows BL/GC pax to transfer to Cleveland services"

[The Reaper]

I might have missed something but is everyone assuming there will be northern services through the tunnel?

[BrizCommuter]

If there is no Park Road interchange, the biggest losers will be those on the Cleveland Line, since they will have no direct train connection to Wooloongabba/George St (forced onto buses at Park Road instead) and no direct change to Gold Coast trains (assuming GC/Beenleigh expresses run via UBAT and Kuraby trains run via South Brisbane). The other losers will be Kuraby pax wanting to get to Wooloongabba/George St (also forced onto buses at Park Road) and anyone trying to get from the GC/Beenleigh expresses to Park Road/South Bank/South Brisbane (must change trains somewhere along the line, presumably Altandi). However it ends up, it will be a mess.

Loosers?
Do Cleveland Line passengers currently have direct access to the Gabba and George St. No.
Do Kuraby passengers currently have direct access to the Gabba and George St. No.

Whilst the lack of interchange at Park Rd is a big concern, this thread is starting to get a bit hysterical and negative (and not just this post).

Other than an addition of a station at Park Rd (looking unlikely), then careful train service planning, and bus routing is the solution. This may even create new connectivity opportunities for other public transport users. It has been the plan since the ICRCS to run a three tier service (4tph each) on the Beenleigh/Gold Coast corridor. One of three tiers will run via South Brisbane. It is likely that one of these tiers will eventually run to Flagstone, although via Tennyson to Corinda is an unlikely but possible option.

Lets try to be constructive.

[paulg]

I am trying to be constructive by pointing out the many many benefits of a park road interchange. For the extra money (we at least need to know how much), it would be enormously  beneficial from both a simple connectivity perspective and also as a development catalyst for the boggo road precinct. To leave it out is very short sighted.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

[paulg]

UBAT is certainly a lot better than nothing. It's just frustrating when it could be made significantly better for (potentially) modest additional cost.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

[Stillwater]

There is no guarantee that UBAT will have connectivity to the North.  Planning shows a connection to the Exhibition Loop.  However, it would appear that Mr Emerson has been authorised to spend $5 billion only.

We should expect that the project will be cut back the extent to which it threatens to exceed $5 billion.

Look to the man and his past history.  He is driven to show that he is a better transport minister, more responsible that his Labor predecessor.  That will become his driving ambition, no matter how defective the project will become.

Somehow, although this has not been stated, it would seem that UBAT becomes the first stage of a Brisbane Underground loop.  In that scenario, the government is heading in a direction where there is an above-ground rail network (as at present) and an underground, where passengers will have to interchange at set-point stations by travelling up and down stairs/escalators.

So, the fear is that there may not be connectivity to the North as costs escalate inevitably and Mr Emerson will be forced into a spiral of cutbacks driven by his overriding desire to prove a political point; network efficiency and connectivity coming a distant second.

[Derwan]

Just thinking out loud.... is there any way that they can just sink the rails just after Fairfield, still following the existing track and tunnel it from there?  Not sure if that would increase the price that much, but I'm guessing it would allow a Park Road station to exist.

I have 2 issues/questions with this:

1. Where would they have the rather large area for construction of the tunnel portal?  (We've seen how big these areas can be with the road tunnels.)  Or would this remain the same and the tracks just be lowered into the "cutting" you mentioned in your subsequent post?

2.  If you are following the existing track (putting the tracks into a cutting), how would you achieve this while still running services?

[techblitz]

UBAT is certainly a lot better than nothing. It's just frustrating when it could be made significantly better for (potentially) modest additional cost.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

exactly...it may be a quick and cheap fix but at least its signed off and the ball is rolling....backtracking is nothing new in this city...it will just happen at a greater scale....higher frequency bus services should offset the transfer penalties. Looks like they have already locked in route 29.
They will not change their designs because passengers will be `inconvenienced'
Design,costs and decent enough integration into the bus network will supersede everything else......not a perfect job but better than nothing
If there are any overcrowding issues at the gabba...they will sort it out quickly. Its the one thing BT are first rate at.....implementing new services to decrease overcrowding.
With all the `inconvenience` statements.....Looks like ozbob will have his hands full at the meeting...