The empty trains will have to run on that corridor anyway from Boggo Road to Clapham Yard, so capacity will still be used up whether they are revenue services or not. My best bet is to have all trains stop all stations from Boggo Road to Yeerongpilly in the counter-peak to squeeze as much capacity as possible on that tri-track; express running will only reduce the capacity for the all-stops Beenleigh train in the counter-peak direction.
2 Likes
Iâm starting to think that rebuilding Dutton Park wasnât a good idea.
3 Likes
Good point.
It really grinds my gears that they didnât do anything to address the capacity bottleneck on the Beenleigh/GC line from Boggo Road to Kuraby. Building CRR with the tunnel to Yeerongpilly like the original plans would have gone a very long way to address this, and I donât think with all the things theyâve been doing it would have cost a prohibitively larger amount more.
1 Like
Itâs just a shame that Roma Street itself is pretty hostile to active transport and pedestrians by design.
3 Likes
I originally put in a submission for a full length segregated bikeway from Upper Roma Street along Roma Street to Ann Street and Turbot street. They could have widened the foot path and included floating bus stops to accommodate segregated active travel paths.
They should have also included that shared path bridge over Roma Street to the magistrate courts as well.
3 Likes
Looking back over the General Arrangement plans, it doesnât look like the DG track will be able to be used at all by CRR services between the Tunnel and Yeronga.
As far as I can see, there are no switches anywhere along the line connecting the DG to the Subs from the tunnel portal right through to between Yeronga and Yeerongpilly. All trains still on the DG after Yeerongpilly need to have used/be using the Merivale Bridge, while all CRR trains will be on the subs exclusively between Yeronga and the tunnel portal.
EDIT: This conversation should probably be moved over into the CRR thread.
There have been a lot of crossovers built between Fairfield and Dutton Park in the last 12-18 months and I believe you can get to any track from the most Easterly track (platform 1 Dutton Park) to any other track. Iâve noticed they are 50kph crossovers too.
1 Like
New crossovers were installed immediately south of Dutton Park in 2024 to facilitate movements across to the DG line.
Note: North (to Dutton Park) is to the right in this image.
4 Likes
Yairs, the question is around Dutton Park itself - there is no connection from the DG line to the tunnel portal north of the platforms given the geometry involved.
I didnât favour Dutton Park being rebuilt when they were considering just deleting that station all together. Too late now and they will need to spend heaps if they need to do any track amplification around that area in the future.
2 Likes
Yeah, I was responding to Nathan (who for what is worth was right, the general arrangement drawings have no crossovers and do not reflect the constructed track alignments or even the Dutton Park station layout).
To your point, I totally agree. As the line approaches capacity, I would have to expect that all trains stop at Dutton Park given they have to go through the platforms anyway just to maintain the consistent headway.
Iâm even more interested to know how far the ATO will apply, because it seems like a very busy corridor down to Clapham.
1 Like
Ok, Iâm thankful to see this has been included, and think I have worked out why this didnât show in the General Arrangement plans - the crossovers were added in Change Application 8, but that version of the plan wasnât copied across to the âCurrent General Arrangement and Property Impact Drawingsâ section of the Coordinator-Generalâs CRR page.
Plan from the Current General Arrangement Section:
Plan as listed under the Change 8 Application section:
1 Like
I was always in favour of rebuilding Dutton Park due to the proximity to many houses and health facilities. I was however wanting a 3 platform arrangement but for whatever reason this did not eventuate which will lead to issues into the future.
It was silly for them not to include a crossover from the Westerly track into the tunnel portal, as essentially this Western track only goes to South Brisbane area or the Port of Brisbane from Dutton Park.
That could be used during track closures in the CRR tunnels for general track work to divert Beenleigh/Gold Coast services via South Brisbane/Merrivale
Absolutely. We still need this track to connect to South Brisbane and the port, but it also should have connected to the tunnel.
This actually was part of the plan going by the Change 8 plans, when there were dedicated Up and Down Portals:
However, this was removed when it was rationalised down to a single tunnel portal in Change 9. Trying to get the DG into CRR with this layout I think simply proved too difficult (a tight turn after Annerley Road combined with crossing the Sub connection to the aboveground lines).
Could a crossover be added even though it has been built?
Iâm no expert but like I said above, I think the turn may be too tight, and it would need to crossing the via Merivale sub line, which wouldnât be desirable.
I would say that is why they positioned the DG to Sub crossover south of Dutton Park.
2 Likes
I do agree that it probably should have been closed back when that was on the cards, or at least rebuilt with bypass tracks (although that would have involved rebuilding the Annerly Rd bridge, which would have been extremely disruptive and expensive). Crazy to me that the current CRR design was approved with this obvious capacity constraint!
1 Like
Itâs mind blowing right? Iâm no expert but I think nearly anybody could tell the obvious issues there.
1 Like