Concept Only Disclaimer
The following concept is for forum discussion and exploration purposes only.
It is not expected to be funded or built as a priority anytime soon. It is not BTQ policy.
In a different thread, a busway option was considered for improving PT to the Centenary Suburbs. Mode neutrality means the competing rail option will now be explored in this thread.
Centenary Rail
This (heavy) rail option concept takes the exisiting Springfield line and threads it through the Centenary suburbs before rejoining the Ipswich line at Indooroopilly.
Length: ~ 10 km (Priority A, mix of surface, tunnel and elevated) Time: Similar to existing or slightly faster by a few mins due to newer alignment with wider stop spacing. Stations: New stations at Indooroopilly, Fig Tree Pocket, Jindalee, Mt Ommaney Centre. Cost Estimate: 400 million/km x 10 km = ~ $4 bn (a very rough estimate).
Comments: Unlike the busway option where the Centenary bridge (road) could be used, a new rail only bridge over the Brisbane River will be required to carry the track and trains. Stricter engineering requirements than a busway due to trains requiring a less steep gradients and smoother curves. Trains could potentiall travel faster (speed limit bus 90 km, train 130-160 km/hr).
Weāve been over this before on RBOT that following the M5 would mean trains could not travel at the speeds youāre taking about. Cars are limited to 90kmh along much of the Western freeway north of the river, so trains would be the same. If itās tunneled could be a different story
IF the QT was to do a project of this scale, why not āgo for itā and put the line in a tunnel and then underground in via UQ and then on in through West End etc and across the city, via Albert St and down toward Fortitude Valley, New Farm, Newstead etc etc
Think as a group BTQ needs to move away from individual route ideas and set out a vision along the conceptual lines Jonno has. It wonāt be perfect but it will be based on strong concepts
Yes to having broader concepts, yes to less emphasis on random pie in the sky route ideas.
Iād rather focus on advocating for projects that are already in the public discourse. Ie if weāre talking about new infrastructure letās focus on things like Salisbury to Beaudesert, OOL extension, etc. Things that thereās actually a chance in happening.
Iām not really a big fan of a lot of Jonnos ideas so once again rather than focus on the random ideas of one guy, letās stick to stuff thatās realistic
So a concept of trunk BRT routes connecting across the city that are easy to understand and might actually give good HF coverage is not a good thing to do and too hard? Eek!
I donāt have a copy of his map, but from memory many of the routes were way too long, with no thought for driver relief breaks, little consideration of layover facilities at each end as well.
Many of the routes also seemed to ignore land use and passenger demand in favour of just running a big bus down a big road because thatās where the big road goes.
But more importantly, I donāt really care to critique an individual map, because its more of the same thing that this thread is originally about (Centenary Train), in that itās just some idea by some guy. I donāt care to speculate about inventing a new network when I feel that shouldnāt be our job
This is getting into the weeds but Iāve always been a pragmatist when it comes to dealing with government, and Iād rather BTQ focus on advocating for important, achievable nearer - term goals, that are already in the public eye or discourse, rather than proposing new networks and infrastructure that are pie in the sky, foam type stuff. It is my opinion that our messaging should be focused on that sort of grounded stuff, to help it gain legitimacy and momentum.
But anyway, I digress. These are just my opinions on policy and direction and probably better for another thread.
I assume BRT will need have long routes as this is the form of SEQ and driver changes will need to be like trains same as for the depots. Itās also how people are making trips.
Our main roads are how people move around by car so logic says this is how they will move by BRT? It is also where a lot of developments is or should be? It will take planning changes to reverse the inside-out planning of car-centric development!
Not endless BRTsā¦RAIL! BRTs have their place [and weāve certainly built a number in SEQ], but they are not the magical answer to everything, no matter how much QT might hope!
My thoughts are we have a lot of work to do, in achieving a generational shift, from an often short-sighted āroad based dietā in SEQ (incl BRTs) to a subway/heavy-rail based approach to transit, along key corridors, both existing and new.
In the late 1970ās QldRail revolutionised urban rail travel in Australia, by introducing the first true āstate of the artā electric based train units, sleek for the era, ariconād, based on 25Kv, offering passengers unrivalled travel comfortā¦the future looked brightā¦itās time to recapture that RAIL focused determine to deliver RAIL based transit opportunities.
Ask yourself this, both the Springfield extension to the Ipswich area and the advancement of the GC line to Coolangatta, are two pieces of letās be blunt ālow hanging infrastructure fruitāā¦but whereās the progress? Both have sat at āinterim completionā stagesā¦for yearsā¦decades!!! Itās not a good indicator, for genuine forward progress!
