http://www.nsbt-eis.com/assets/nsbtwave.jpg
The official site for the North South Bypass tunnel impact study (complete with logo) has been launched.

North South Bypass Tunnel EIS (http://www.nsbt-eis.com/)

Official Logo:
http://www.brisbane.qld.gov.au/bccwr/2010/accessible/images/nsbt_banner.jpg

Where it will go:
http://www.brisbane.qld.gov.au/bccwr/maps/bypass_tu.gif

jt

I'd rather they built some rail tunnels and gave the city a few more train lines.

For people that don't know the proposal well, not all of the red lines will be tunnels, the smaller ones just show connecting roads.

This looks like a massive project.

The target audience for this is drivers who are on the SE Freeway (and have already some reason why they didn't use PT), and at the moment, travel either straight through the valley, or down to hale street and through the ICB.

The riverside expressway / hale st+corro drive intersection + the cbd roads would get a little bit of a break when this goes though. Though lets face it with a toll no one will use it outside of peak. It's also going to do more to help people moving off hale st onto coro drive / the express way, than the reverse, due to the overpass in the other direction. So I'd imagine that there will be quite a few people that only use it in one direction.

I just keep wishing they'd do something like open up the RNA rail line for regular service, since it's there already, and the ICB though that area has created quite a development hotspot. It's also a shame when you see steps backwards like the removal of the buslanes outside the RBWH Hospital. :(

Oh well, I think by the time this is eventually finished it will be so badly needed that people will just put up with paying the tolls, at least in peak. It would be good if they could reduce the rate / not toll in off peak though.

I just keep wishing they'd do something like open up the RNA rail line for regular service, since it's there already, and the ICB though that area has created quite a development hotspot. It's also a shame when you see steps backwards like the removal of the buslanes outside the RBWH Hospital. :(



You can kiss the Inner loop services good bye. The Busway is here to stay, yet the former Borbidge Opposition wanted to open this up, complete with a Hospital train station. Over the long term the INB will be improved with stops at the 5 ways etc.

Without the rest of TransApex and a connection between this North-South Tunnel and the Gympie Arterial Road, it's not going to do a hell of a lot. It's basicly just splitting a freeway in two and then joining them back up and ending them both at almost the same place.

Without the rest of TransApex and a connection between this North-South Tunnel and the Gympie Arterial Road, it's not going to do a hell of a lot. It's basicly just splitting a freeway in two and then joining them back up and ending them both at almost the same place. you obviously dont know the area, for starters the expressay and hale st are not freeways

Both of which get severly clogged up at certain times and certain events. The expressway is 70km/h and Hale st is 60km/h? and both are old and pretty pathetically designed. There are actually two sets of lights on this route depending which way you are heading.

The north south tunnel may ultimately forn a bottleneck on the north side then again its not like there all heading in the one direction anyway so it will filter out like it is now. Anyway i think you need a better understandind of the area to get what its all about.

btw, the exhibition line will not be opening any time soon, why would a state govt organisation run two forms of transport in direct competition with each other for the same fares. The busway acts as a feeder while the rail line would be more about the local area.

Well, I think that there will be a problem unless they do some sort of connection to either the Gateway or to Gympie Arterial Road. Lutwyche Road is terrible as it is. This isn't going to help.

I've looked at a possible route for a tunnel in the northern suburbs. Just make it to the creek at the top of that map and the rest of the way to the Gympie Arterial Road can be upgraded to freeway standard.

Don't forget under the old Labor plan the North~South tunnel was to be extended in two stages. This was to link Stafford Road to the East~West Aterial, and connect to the existing planned tunnel.

While I am 110% behind any tunnel option, I think again the Northern suburbs have missed out.

Funnelling traffic on to the Gateway MWY does not solve the problem. There is a need for a Northern option to link the ICB to the Caboolture MWY (Bruce HWY)

Without the rest of TransApex and a connection between this North-South Tunnel and the Gympie Arterial Road, it's not going to do a hell of a lot. It's basicly just splitting a freeway in two and then joining them back up and ending them both at almost the same place.

If you've ever been down Hale St in the evening or across the Riverside Expressway in the morning you probably wouldn't say that. Overall it's not going to make more people able to jump in their cars, but people won't be waiting at the traffic lights in Hale St with traffic backed up to the ICB. It's a shocker there of an evening. This will also help the riverside expressway and inner city streets cut alot of through traffic heading to that area.

What I'm saying is that it will just concentrate more of the traffic around Bowen Hills.

Tunnel setback to push up tolls
August 13, 2004

THE toll for a tunnel under Brisbane looks set to rise from $2 to $3.50 after Lord Mayor Campbell Newman failed to gain Federal Government financial support for his plan.

In the lead-up to the March council election Cr Newman had promised tolls of $2 a vehicle for a network of five proposed tunnels criss-crossing the city.

But yesterday he failed at his second attempt to convince senior Government figures in Canberra to provide $400 million over 15 years to subsidise the tunnels.

Despite meetings with Treasurer Peter Costello, Deputy Prime Minister John Anderson, Assistant Treasurer Mal Brough and Roads Minister Jim Lloyd he received not even a hint of a promise of funds.

While the tunnels are not wholly dependent on federal funding, Cr Newman emerged from his meetings conceding that the toll on the tunnel linking Woolloongabba and Bowen Hills could be $3.50.

"Even if we don't have any federal government funding for the north-south tunnel we can still make this tunnel happen as this one can still be delivered as a PPP (public private partnership)," Cr Newman said.

"I believe that a toll of around $3.50, which is what was set by the Labor Party, is what we need if this is going to be a PPP. I'm accepting of that at this stage."

Cr Newman had told the Ministers that the proposed TransApex tunnels provided vital regional road links in southeast Queensland and deserved funds from the Government's AusLink program.

He likened his quest to get the north-south tunnel completed as soon as feasible to the race to the moon.

"(US President John) Kennedy set a national goal to get on the moon by 1970," he said. "By the time he set the goal in 1962 or 1963 it was an audacious goal. Why can't we have audacious goals?"

He highlighted the potential for heavy traffic to flow from Ipswich along the Western Freeway and then by a tunnel to the Inner City bypass and by a second tunnel to Brisbane Airport, Gympie Rd, and the Gateway Arterial Rd, then north.

But Mr Brough, Mr Lloyd and Mr Anderson were more concerned that the State Government cough up funds for TransApex.

"This (plan) would normally be picked up by state governments using GST revenue and road funding grants," Mr Brough said.

Mr Anderson said the Federal Government had increased road construction by 71 per cent through AusLink but Queensland had not increased its budget at all.

A blunt Mr Lloyd said that "at this stage the funds for AusLink have been expended". Deputy Lord Mayor David Hinchliffe said at no stage before the election had Cr Newman told voters that the $2 toll was dependent on federal funding.

"The people of Brisbane made a decision in the election based on a very firm commitment of a $2 toll for five tunnels. It seems we were misled," he said.

"Not only that, the cost of the (north-south) tunnel is not just $1.2 billion, up from $1 billion originally, it's on its way to $1.5 billion.

"We're talking a 75 per cent increase in the cost of the toll and a likely 50 per cent increase in the cost of the first tunnel."

Cr Newman conceded he had "a lot of hard selling to go" and was planning a formal submission to the Government after feasibility work was completed in January.



The Courier-Mail

I think the question is who is going to pay $3.50 for this? It's going to be empty outside peak hours, and most people will still go around it even in peak.

Would like to see a bus route from Bowen Hills to Woolloongabba at least out of it.

Stay tuned for a Jimmy James Crazy Solution to all this nonsense

I'd rather pay 3.50 than go through Hale Street in bad traffic.

I'd rather see some decent planning from the BCC. This is pathetic, TransApex is a waste of money.

TransApex is needed, but so is alot of other requirements. A ring road, better public transport.

The council should not be running the Tunnels, leave that to companies like Transurban, who build it and risk the monies doing so - not rate payers.

More to the point, who would pay a $3.50 toll plus $3/L for fuel by the time it opens?

Also, why would Transurban fund a project like this? They are a company that tries to rent-seek off government money and a bit of their own, but collect all the revenue for themselves. They'd inflate the cost of the project, cost to taxpayers would remain about the same (albeit a smaller percentage of a larger project cost), but to add insult to injury, taxpayers would not collect the toll revenue.

I am sure people said the same about the Sydney Harbour, Westgate and Gateway bridges when they all opened.

People will pay for convenience.

$3/L for fuel by the time it opens?


lol, do you believe everything you hear?

I've been following the peak oil situation for a few years now. $3/L in 3 years is very plausible. There's just not enough slack in global supply capacity (steady, falling in many parts of the world) to match growing demand, short of a major recession or depression in the next 2-3 years.

I am sure people said the same about the Sydney Harbour, Westgate and Gateway bridges when they all opened.

People will pay for convenience.

except that the Harbour Bridge toll was increased to meet the Tunnel toll; and the next harbour/river crossing is at an incovenient Gladesville. If the Tunnel cost more than the Bridge, you can bet people would avoid it if possible.

So, it will probably depend on the exit structure for the Brisbane tunnel, but for city-bound traffic (as distinct from through traffic), they may want to avoid it...

Portal Options have been released!

North
Option 1 (http://www.nsbt-eis.com/assets/downloads/Northern%20Connection%20-%20Option%201.pdf)
Option 2 (http://www.nsbt-eis.com/assets/downloads/Northern%20Connection%20-%20Option%202.pdf)

(Note: The inner city bypass is not actually displayed in these maps, but you can follow the path from the designs of the proposed on ramps)

South
Option 1 (http://www.nsbt-eis.com/assets/downloads/Southern%20Connection%20-%20Option%201.pdf)
Option 2 (http://www.nsbt-eis.com/assets/downloads/Southern%20Connection%20-%20Option%202.pdf)

Kangaroo Point Connection
Option 1 (http://www.nsbt-eis.com/assets/downloads/Shafston%20Connection%20-%20Option%201.pdf)
Option 2 (http://www.nsbt-eis.com/assets/downloads/Shafston%20Connection%20-%20Option%202.pdf)

__________________

To be honest I am suprised by some of these proposals,

North
Straight forward plan, I can see alot of complaints about Option 2, Nimbys will say the council are freeway-ising (if there is such a word) Lutwyche Road.
(For non Brisbane Forumers Lutwyche Road is the major northern road from the CBD.

I am pleased that the original idea of the NST (north south tunnel) joining the ICB (Inner city bypass) via traffic lights has been scrapped.

South
I am dissapointed. Heading south on the NST it appears you only have 1 lane of traffic to merge on to the M3. Northbound traffic merges into 1 lane before the 1 lane from Ipswich road joins the then 2 lane tunnel.

Kangaroo Point
Good stuff.


For more info displays are currently in the Brisbane Library in the Administration Centre.

Very interesting.

North - Looks a bit messy, and I have to say I would prefer it to join Gympie Road at the intersection with Stafford Road. I just have a feeling either of these options are going to turn into a bottleneck on Gympie Road and too much more traffic on Newmarket Rd.

South - Not too bad, but getting images of South Dowling St. Its a pity there are no plans to put another tunnel under Ipswich Road to meet up with Ipswich Mwy on the other side of Moorooka.

Kangaroo Point - both OK I think

Very unsure about the northern intersections, I would prefer if this was just an entry exit point for a tunnel that extends further north. And its pointless to worry about it linking with Gateway as it is still quicker to take Gympie Road.

I'm not sure how well it will work in peak hour traffic. Northbound the traffic will be entering into a section of Lutwyche road that already is not much better than walking pace. I suppose its a couple extra lanes of space to park cars as they try to escape the city.

Under TransApex I am not sure it this includes the former administrations plans to build a tunnel from the NST/ICB to Stafford road, and another tunnel from Stafford Road/Gympie road to the East~West Aterial/Sandgate Road.

I agree with GMAC, Ipswich Road should be fixed up. Shops along this around Annerley are dead due to the volume of traffic. Even a Nundah style tunnel along here would be beneficial.

I wonder what the interchange at the Pacific Mwy will look like? Knowing QLD Transport they'll have a bloody set of lights there!

I wonder what the interchange at the Pacific Mwy will look like? Knowing QLD Transport they'll have a bloody set of lights there!


It is actually not that bad, 1 lane though... NOT smart thinking.

Check out my post above for links to the design options.

Just off topic for a moment, and on to a future proposed tunnel. I am starting to get worried about Campbells comments yesterday regarding the tunnel that is suppose to go from Hale St to South Bris. While I have never thought that this was long enough, I am even more concerned that Campbell wants to make it a bridge now. I realise that it will apparently save $300Million, but surely there are enough bridges in that corner of the river. Im unsure if Campbell is going to be able to deliver on much of what won him his election campaign.

Im unsure if Campbell is going to be able to deliver on much of what won him his election campaign.

There was never any question that he was promising stuff he couldn't deliver. If I thought there was even the possibility that he could I would have voted for it. But I don't like people who lie to steal power.

The same is happening to Gold Coast Mayor, Ron Clarke. He proposed a tunnel under Surfers, but it's just never going to happen.

With the North portal, I think the first option is better.
South Portal: 6 of one, half a dozen of the other
Kangaroo Point: same again.

those onramps to the tunnel at kangaroo point are going to be bloody steep i would imagine.... considering its perched ontop of a hill/cliff to begin with and the tunnel would be below river level at that point...

I wouldn't worry. People will bitch that they will be required to pay then use it regardless..........So whats new?

Well... newman certainly wont be re-elected will he:

http://www.thecouriermail.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5936,11055449%255E3102,00.html


Newman tunnel funding king-hit
Chris Griffith, City Hall reporter
13oct04
THE funding plan for Brisbane's proposed North South Bypass tunnel has been canned in the same industry publication that inspired Lord Mayor Campbell Newman's controversial vision for the city.



The magazine King's Counsel, produced by property consultants King & Co, this month cited projects in NSW and Victoria that ended up financial basket cases under the same BOOT (building-own-operate-transfer) arrangements to be adopted for the $1.3 billion tunnel from Bowen Hills to Woolloongabba.

Cr Newman revealed on Monday that following feasibility discussions with the State Government, Civic Cabinet had approved the tunnel's business case – a comprehensive economic analysis of the way the project would proceed.

But instead of opting for a straightforward public-private partnership, the business case has nominated a BOOT arrangement which would see a private consortium responsible for raising much of the project's funds, researching the project, building it and operating it.









Under the BOOT model, the tunnel would revert to public ownership in 30 to 35 years' time.

Council transport chairman Graham Quirk said the tunnel would be the first major project built using the BOOT model in Queensland.

Cr Quirk said consortiums bidding to build it would do their own costing, traffic and revenue projections.

However in an article in King's Counsel, road infrastructure expert John Goldberg, from the University of Sydney, said projects built using the BOOT model could blow out to more than double their original cost. He cited the M2 Motorway in Sydney and CityLink project in Melbourne as examples.

"In 1999, the M2 Motorway was revalued at over twice its original capital cost, and in 2002 CityLink was revalued to over three times original capital cost," Dr Goldberg said.

The schemes also had proven to be publicly unaccountable.

"BOOT schemes lack transparency, not only in respect of the financial arrangements but also how the government has acted in facilitating the schemes," Dr Goldberg wrote.

But he said governments opted for the BOOT model in the belief the private consortium bore all the financial risk for the project, there was no debt on government books, and government credit ratings were unsullied.

He said the complex legal situation meant it may be possible governments could have to pick up the tab for enormous losses in years to come.

He said consortiums which financed such projects had in past cases advanced unrealistic road usage, toll and profit figures to attract high-interest investors – only to face financial turmoil later.

One answer was for these consortiums to hike up tolls.

Dr Goldberg said the M2 and CityLink would not be financially sustainable without the Federal Government's Infrastructure Borrowings Tax Offset Scheme.

I wish that dickhead would realise investment into BT, extensions to Citytrain and IMPROVEMENTS to existing roads will fix the trasport situation up. The last thing we need is more by-passes to lead people every which-way

a subway would be good.

Maybe Inner city and UQ/St.Lucia subway would work well. But I think more work should be put into rail line extensions and new lines in areas that need it (Central North, Redcliffe etc.). An investment into light rail and a better maintained bus fleet.


. . .or this


http://www.railpage.com.au/modules.php?set_albumName=album53&id=Brisbane_Metro&op=modload&name=gallery&file=index&include=view_photo.php

:D

The need the samford line back. stupid of them to have removed it.

And a line to chermside is DEFINITLY needed.

And i dont see why they dont have a circular line running around the edges.

You guys need to keep in consideration that BCC does not control CityTrain. CityTrain is part of QueenslandRail. Of course, QR is controlled by the State government.

But I do agree that a subway line to UQ would be a good idea. Maybe, they could have the line from Roma St-Central to split and go underground, south down to Gardens Point under Albert St. A couple of stations inbetween and one in the Botanical Gardans that could also service the QUT campus, then under the river to the Gabba, and then west across to cross under the existing line at the Park Road station. Then across the river near where the Green Bridge is proposed. Then join up with the existing line near the Taringa station.

yeah train tunnels would of been better, but o well :p

I still think the tunnels connecting the Western Fwy to the ICB and the Gateway should be built. I think they're probably the most needed of the 5 tunnels. I also think there should be a northern tunnel from the ICB to around Kedron Brook, and the Gympie Road should be upgraded to Freeway standard.

I am shocked at the lack of vision by this regional plan.

Say for example:

I live in Caboolture/Pine Rivers and live too far away from a Train station, so I drive in to work. How do I get to the city? There is no plan for any Northen Free/Toll way.

Shame Shame Shame!

Nope. SEQ sucks!

I don't have time enough to read all this time, but how long will this tunnel be?

If you miss the news during the week you can alway count on Roy & HG to bring you up to date. This story featured on The Memphis Trousers Half Hour on Friday, along with other important issues such as sewage blowback.

Naked protesters cycle into strife
By Katrina Witham
16may05

A PACK of nude cyclists rode through Brisbane's city centre yesterday to protest the Brisbane City Council's proposed north-south bypass tunnel.

But the group's ride was cut short when police arrested four people for wilful exposure.

A spokesman for the protest group Communities Against the Tunnel said it was only the beginning of a long campaign to get ratepayers debating the tunnel's benefits.

"These tunnel plans are actually going to increase the amount of traffic in the city in the long term," a protester who gave his name only as Alex said. "We just think the tunnel is a really silly idea and we would like to encourage the residents of Brisbane to think what they could do with $7 billion."

He said Brisbane should follow Paris and London's lead in trying to eliminate cars in the city centre.

Full article>http://www.thecouriermail.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5936,15301856%255E421,00.html

If they mean the money would be better spent on PT then I agree with them although I'm not sure if I'd be willing to nude up to further the cause. :D

I don't have time enough to read all this time, but how long will this tunnel be?



Probably 2009

I don't have time enough to read all this time, but how long will this tunnel be?


5.7km or something close to that. not quite sure.

Go to www.nsbt-eis.com for all the Environmental Impact Statement information. I've been studying and analysing the EIS for months now for a major assessment report due tuesday this week. My report is a review of the EIS process and the results looking at the sufficiency of information and suggesting further areas of study. The report is focusses on impacts for the southern portal at Wooloongabba.

More soil testing is occuring today in the Gabba area in Jurgen Street.

1. Three consortia vie for Brisbane’s $1.3b North-South Bypass Tunnel

Three consortia featuring local and international companies are to compete for the contract to finance and construct Brisbane City Council’s $1.3 billion North-South Bypass tunnel - likely the largest project undertaken by an Australian local government.
The competing consortia are:
- RiverCity Motorway consortium, comprising: Leighton Contractors; Baulderstone Hornibrook; Bilfinger Berger Concessions; ABN AMRO (supported by Maunsell, Parsons Brinckerhoff, Golders and EDAW Gillespies.

- BrisConnections: a largely Brisbane-based consortium that includes Macquarie Bank; Thiess; John Holland; Hochtief (consortium to be chaired by former Queensland Governor Major-General Peter Arnison).
- Brisbane Express Motorway – an international consortium comprising Bouygues; Egis; and McConnell Dowell.

Expressions of interest for the project closed on May 18. Brisbane’s Lord Mayor, Campbell Newman, says his council will seek to invite by the end of June a shortlist of consortia to tender for the project.

I am totally opposed to this project on a number of grounds:
1. The money involved is huge amount to pour into a road and could buy some brilliant PT projects in the area. We need to make it easier to catch public transport not easier to drive. Car owners in Brisbane are continually rewarded for selfish behaviour (i can hear the howls of protests from some of you forumers already - he he). Catch a bus/train and chill out! Or drive to a train stn/bus stop. Or better still, get proactive and lobby council/govt for better PT in your area.
2. I wouldn't want to live near any of the air stacks. NIMBYism has its roots in some valid arguements about why should people in one area have to put up with a decrease in quality of life for others who want to drive faster.
3. Traffice chaos and communities torn apart/disrupted at the portals (eg. Bowen Hills/Albion and Woolloongabba. I lived in the Gabba once and the traffic was terrible. A 4 lane tunnel ain't gunna fix it!
4. More roads are NOT the way to create a vibrant and liveable city.
5. The only people to benefit from this project in the long run will be the engineering and construction companies (using PT-using taxpayers money of course!). Funnily enough - Campbell Newman happens to be an engineer by profession. What a coincidence! The traffic will be just as congested in a decade's time - and the price of petrol will only go up.

The words "SHORT" and "SIGHTED" come to mind.
I await your fiery replies (or words of encouragement).

I agree with some of the comments (above). I think that it is a state problem which the state should be dealing with. (Ie Citylink in Melbourne)

Public Transport does need to be majorly improved. Hopefully such projects as a city train loop and Busway expansions (what about the west??) will also improve things.

.....

If I could be premier for a day I would also scrap the GST Fuel rebate. The 8.35cpl, equal to around $500m per year should go towards public transport options and other traffic improvements.

Yeah I agree. Brisbane should invest in some innovative public transport instead like light rail inner city trams. Or why not an inner city mono rail. Queensland is supposed to be the smart start so it should start acting like one and think outside the square.

:blahblah: :blahblah: :blahblah: :blahblah: :blahblah: :blahblah: :blahblah: :blahblah: :blahblah: :blahblah: :blahblah: :blahblah: :blahblah: :blahblah: :blahblah: :blahblah:

i want the tunnel and im damn well gonna get it. hahahahahahahahaha

and by the way, i catch a bus to and from work EVERY DAY!

Geez, they are duplicating railways, planning new busways, building more rail crossings and buying more citycats. what more do you want.

everyone is dreaming of this magical land where everyone catches PT and the air is clean and the wildlife interact with ppl. there are even faries driving the buses. WAKE UP!

^ What more do we want?

It's a backward trend in Oz when it comes to urban transport. While in Europe & Asia there are many PT initiatives being introduced, more light rail lines and new mass transit options. Which is all the way to go. In Oz, we are still living in the 60s and embracing the car as the only means of transport. Its quite pathetic really...

I am quite happy to catch public transport (and often do). I also agree that some new PT initiatives should take place. Brisbane's heavy rail network desperately needs to be expanded to rapidly-growing areas and light inner-city transport would prove very beneficial.

BUT reality is going to rear its ugly head right here. Neglecting road infrastructure in favour of huge new PT schemes is, in my mind, just as idiotic. The reason for this is that instead of people being all queued up in their cars during peak hour, they will be crowded into all kinds of barely-efficient public transport (it may run on-time but that isn't all there is to 'efficient running', don't forget) and be just as miserable. I'm no urban planner by any stretch of the imagination, but countering stupidity with idiocy isn't going to get us anywhere.

Agreed that the govt is spending quite alot of money on PT in Brisbane - buts its small bikkies compared to how big the problem is (and how much they're spending on roads!).
For too long in brisbane buses have been ruling the roost and competing directly with the train lines. Rail or light rail is the only way to move masses of people efficiently and therefore should be the major trunks routes of PT. Buses fill in the gaps and supplement train services.
I don't know what it costs to build a subway (or extended underground SR services), but I reckon a good start could be made with the the money being spent on the NSBT.
The Green Bridge to me seems to be a waste of money when the buses have to turn around at UQ - where's the onwards destos? Been better to have improved cross river ferry services or a ped/cycling bridge only, with a plan to build an UG rail loop connecting park Rd/dutton park with toowong or i'pilly. Not having massive trip generators like UQ on a train line is crazy.

with the tunnel there is going to be a hefty toll. this toll back and forwards each day will be more than getting PT. The tunnel will open up the congested road corridor to make way for Bus Lanes. On Gympie Rd, i know thats a priority for when the tunnel opens. It is a bypass remember, to take ppl who dont want to drive through the CBD to the other side of the river.

With our population growing as it is, you cant afford to let this grow. A considerate proportion of the budgets are directed towards PT which goes to show it is not been ignored.

We have to have a system where buses go directly into the city in Brisbane. The rail system is already overcrowded so feeder services are not practical or viable. That being said, trains move more people longer distances faster than buses can. On average a train will get you 60km within an hour while buses will only get you 30-35km within an hour.

17...to answer your question, a Subway is a cheaper or almost equal price to a road tunnel. They are alot narrower and thus requiring less boring. I tihnk we need to adress the REAL problem though which is in fact, inner city traffic. It sounds weird, but alot of the inner city dwellers have no choice other than use a car because even tohugh they're supposed to be close to everything, when they need to travel theres no fast public transport option there.

Projects need to be implemented for the future to avoid any chaos in 25-30 years time. A fast subway system for the inner city would not only diminish the neccessity for cars, but also encourage higher growth and newcomers to choose city over suburbs.

Suburbs should be connected to secondary CBD's by bus. Secondary CBD's (Chermside, for example) have access to fast, reliable transport (or will if the busway is ever completed). Suburbanites should have buses to connect them to these secondary CBD's, then continue their journey, if need be on rapid transit. Having buses from these outer areas to the city is a joke, it takes upwards of an hour jsut to travel from Eatons Hill to the city by bus because of all the damn traffic. Why spend it with weird strangers on an overcrowded bus when you can have the comfort of your own car? thats the main problem that needs to be attacked in terms of suburban transport.

developments should be encouraged to be close to transport. Discounts, anything just so people will build their dream home at most 2.5km away from a decent mode of transport. Large developments (e.g. North Lakes) should be subjected to a transport study to make sure there are viable options and room for expansion in the future (for example, a busway or rail line).

Although, as marty k said, you can't ignore the need for road infrastructure because one people get into their car routine, they won't stop. But if Brisbane plans for the future, out next generations hopefully won't see the need to pollute the earth for their own comfort.

:blahblah: :blahblah: :blahblah: :blahblah: :blahblah: :blahblah: :blahblah: :blahblah: :blahblah: :blahblah: :blahblah: :blahblah: :blahblah: :blahblah: :blahblah: :blahblah:

i want the tunnel and im damn well gonna get it. hahahahahahahahaha

and by the way, i catch a bus to and from work EVERY DAY!

But only about 25% of your trips are to work or work related (or so claims the Household Travel Survey from the Transport Data Centre). What about everything else? :bleh:

As for a reply to a post a tad more recent:
It is inefficient for all the buses to do City-Outer Suburb runs.
1) It's a waste resources to run an empty bus from the City for 30-50 min back to the suburbs. It's also a waste of a bus that could be used for other outer suburban runs.
2) Not everyone wants to go to the City. One of PT's failings is the fact that it focuses ONLY on CBD-bound travel.
3) Nikko is also correct in that the average speed of buses are just slow. In 1991, it was calculated that the average speed of buses in Brisbane was 28kmh. Car was 50kmh, Train was 44kmh. Now in 2005, I'm sure car speeds have decreased to below 1991 train speeds and bus speeds have fallen too, while train speeds shouldve remained static (unless QR was run by the NSW Govt).

What should be advocated (and what I believe Nikko is advocating) is the hub and spoke model. Feeder buses radiating (spokes) from Train Stations or Busway Stns (the hubs). Then you get the long-haul trains or buses doing the longer distance trips at a higher frequency and higher average speed. This way you remain competive to the car.

Also: One should be aiming for >80% of residents to live within 400 metres of a bus/transit stop.

EDIT: Typos

Yeah the hub and spoke model is definitely the way to go, it certainly works (or did when I lived there) in Canberra, even though the mass transit is still only long bendy buses but it is the right system.

As for PT versus the NSBT, I dont really see that the two compete all that much in that, as Maroon said, the tunnel is a bypass for the CBD, taking more traffic off the roads within the CBD (hopefully). And lets not forget all the PT initiatives that are planned and taking place by BCC and State Govt, Council is talking about light rail, Beattie wants to put a new rail tunnel or bridge under the river and through the city, its all positive stuff.

You are never going to stop people from using the car in a matter of years, which is what would need to happen for this tunnel to not be a necessity. Yes people who live in some affected suburbs have the shits, but when it comes down to it you cannot live within 5 km of the CBD of the fastest growing city in the country and assume that nothing is going to change and that the city isnt going to suffer growing pains.

I am totally opposed to this project on a number of grounds:
1. The money involved is huge amount to pour into a road and could buy some brilliant PT projects in the area. We need to make it easier to catch public transport not easier to drive. Car owners in Brisbane are continually rewarded for selfish behaviour (i can hear the howls of protests from some of you forumers already - he he). Catch a bus/train and chill out! Or drive to a train stn/bus stop. Or better still, get proactive and lobby council/govt for better PT in your area.
2. I wouldn't want to live near any of the air stacks. NIMBYism has its roots in some valid arguements about why should people in one area have to put up with a decrease in quality of life for others who want to drive faster.
3. Traffice chaos and communities torn apart/disrupted at the portals (eg. Bowen Hills/Albion and Woolloongabba. I lived in the Gabba once and the traffic was terrible. A 4 lane tunnel ain't gunna fix it!
4. More roads are NOT the way to create a vibrant and liveable city.
5. The only people to benefit from this project in the long run will be the engineering and construction companies (using PT-using taxpayers money of course!). Funnily enough - Campbell Newman happens to be an engineer by profession. What a coincidence! The traffic will be just as congested in a decade's time - and the price of petrol will only go up.

The words "SHORT" and "SIGHTED" come to mind.
I await your fiery replies (or words of encouragement).

Yup, and all these lessons can be learned from the experience of Sydney. We're having problems now because of decisions in the past 30 years to promote roads (which amazingly, are just as bad), and neglect the rail network.

You folks up in Brissy should seriously consider a tram network. You at least have a state govvy and a council which can afford it and is willing to spend the money.

Down here on the other hand, they call an $8bn rail line a 'BIG PROJECT', when the network actually needs something like $20 or $30 billion. There's so many holes in the network it's not funny.

But only about 25% of your trips are to work or work related (or so claims the Household Travel Survey from the Transport Data Centre). What about everything else? :bleh: EDIT: Typos

Nearly ALL my trips from Mon-Fri are work related. I drive to the bus in which is at my g/f's house. The only time i dont catch buses is on weekends when traffic is less busy (except 10am sat). Its inconvienient on wk'ends to use the bus.

In brisbane there are buses that go to community centres and there is a bus (the great circle line 598 599) that travels to every major shopping centre in brisbane. there is some adequate systems that dont travel to the city but there could be more. In a lot of cases one person may want to travel somewhere where the demand is low from their area and consequently, they have to use 2 buses to get there. In that case id rather drive

In Oz, we are still living in the 60s and embracing the car as the only means of transport. Its quite pathetic really...

If you think your country is backwards when it comes to public transit, you should visit the US.

You folks up in Brissy should seriously consider a tram network. You at least have a state govvy and a council which can afford it and is willing to spend the money

The problem with that is that a tram network would really only provide desirably coverage on the southside along existing transport corridors(SE Busway, Western Corridor), where they would be directly competeing with freeways. The only CBD entrance from the north would be through the valley which is already extremely congested with traffic which would create a severe bottleneck with same sort of problems as Sydney's City Circle has and Brisbane could soon end up with between Roma St. and Brunswick Street.

Brisbane's streets are too narrow as well to have trams running down the middle. I really don't like going along certain roads in the north west because they're four lanes with no median. Just a double unbroken line.

Trams are no longer suitable for Brisbane's streets.

My personal preference would be to have a light rail/tram system in place to service all areas within 4km of the city with further services stretching down the river to the Cruise Ship terminal, to UQ and along the current SE Busway. Then have normal rail and buses servicing the rest of Brisbane as a hub and spoke system, which could work effectively with very little change to the current ticketing system.

I also wonder what it would take to get all school children on PT for school, because that is where at least half of Brisbanes peak hour traffic comes from.

Of Course, None of this is going to make any difference to the amount of traffic that has no choiice but to go through the CBD unless the NSBT is built.

Subsidise school travel. 50c or $1 each way. That would get plenty of students onto PT because it would be cheaper for their parents to do that than to drive.

Nearly ALL my trips from Mon-Fri are work related. I drive to the bus in which is at my g/f's house. The only time i dont catch buses is on weekends when traffic is less busy (except 10am sat). Its inconvienient on wk'ends to use the bus.

In brisbane there are buses that go to community centres and there is a bus (the great circle line 598 599) that travels to every major shopping centre in brisbane. there is some adequate systems that dont travel to the city but there could be more. In a lot of cases one person may want to travel somewhere where the demand is low from their area and consequently, they have to use 2 buses to get there. In that case id rather drive


Not really, there's only 4 or 5 on the northside and 2 or 3 on the southside that don't run in or through the city.

The GCL is a good link for communities to get to major shopping centres, great for school students too...but it's not really an ideal cross town service. It takes at least an hour from Indooroopilly to Carindale.

Buses are relied on way too much in Brisbane and it's really time for the main form of transport to shift it's focus onto trains. As Smghead said, if at least 80% are within 400m of rapid transit that has around 80-100% on-time running, transport has succeded. We just need a minister and a permier with the balls to commit to bringing fast, cheap, efficient, clean heavy rail to nearly all of Brisbane and People will follow. Just look at the Gold Coast line, a very big success, if only planners weren't so shortsighted, it probably could even be utilised better.

My personal preference would be to have a light rail/tram system in place to service all areas within 4km of the city with further services stretching down the river to the Cruise Ship terminal, to UQ and along the current SE Busway. Then have normal rail and buses servicing the rest of Brisbane as a hub and spoke system, which could work effectively with very little change to the current ticketing system.

I also wonder what it would take to get all school children on PT for school, because that is where at least half of Brisbanes peak hour traffic comes from.

Of Course, None of this is going to make any difference to the amount of traffic that has no choiice but to go through the CBD unless the NSBT is built.

Yep, this should be the last major road infrastructure implementation for a few years letting the government focus on transport.

As for the light rail to the cruise ship terminal...funnily enough, I was thinking about it today and I was thinking extending the Doomben line to Hamilton through the disused baloon loop, although they'd need to do something about the crossing on Kingsford Smith Drive...all the rail and ROW is already there.
I was also thinking of light rail along the INB to Herston, then crossing over to Newstead to run along the old New Fam Branch to that fast growing, high density area.

UQ is in dire need of more transport options aswell, the buses are ALWAYS packed to the brim, and are so slow running along Coro drive, there's almost no point to catching them.

It could also connect to the Northshore Hamilton development.

One question I have is the future planning beyond the NSBT. Will each of the proposed tunnels be connected to each other ?

Ie I am heading south on the NSBT and could exit to take the Western Distributor Tunnel?
Or will it be a case of exiting and then getting on to the other tollway?

If this is the case it's crap, why build a ring road that is more like a 1/2 eaten burger ring.

Ok, say you are coming south on the NSBT stage 2(Lutwyche Rd by-pass), you would exit at Mayne and connect onto the exiting elevated section of the ICB. From there , you continue south towards the existing RNA tunnel. There, you can enter the NSBT Stage 1(Gabba-Bowen Hills) or continue along the existing ICB route towards the Western Distributor entrance at Normanby.

3) Nikko is also correct in that the average speed of buses are just slow. In 1991, it was calculated that the average speed of buses in Brisbane was 28kmh. Car was 50kmh, Train was 44kmh. Now in 2005, I'm sure car speeds have decreased to below 1991 train speeds and bus speeds have fallen too, while train speeds shouldve remained static (unless QR was run by the NSW Govt).

Busses on the Busway manage an average of 60km/h (Even stopping at all stops). It's far faster than the train. (Though if you built a train network as recently as the busway was built you could probably do much better again.)

What should be advocated (and what I believe Nikko is advocating) is the hub and spoke model. Feeder buses radiating (spokes) from Train Stations or Busway Stns (the hubs). Then you get the long-haul trains or buses doing the longer distance trips at a higher frequency and higher average speed. This way you remain competive to the car.

The brilliance of the Busway is that feeder busses become core route busses, allowing them to only stop when people want to be let off, saving the precious time that extra stops take.

You folks up in Brissy should seriously consider a tram network. You at least have a state govvy and a council which can afford it and is willing to spend the money.

Trams don't address the issue of adding capacity at all though. They infact make matters worse by adding an extra mode to account for at intersections and take up road space. (Which would further justify the need for a bypass tunnel)....

I also wonder what it would take to get all school children on PT for school, because that is where at least half of Brisbanes peak hour traffic comes from.

Indeed. I live a street away from the local state primary school, and it causes it's share of traffic chaos, being designed for 200-300 students and now serving about twice that number. Worse though is the local private college, with 3,500 odd students (does everything from childcare through to year 12). In a city council with only 180k residents, there are several traffic lights in the morning that may take 2-4 changes to get though.... In the suburbs of all things.

Subsidise school travel. 50c or $1 each way. That would get plenty of students onto PT because it would be cheaper for their parents to do that than to drive.

School Travel is already subsidised, most of the students being driven go to exclusive private schools and I don't think the money is either here or there. It's more of the paranoid protectiveness that these parents feel.

The main problem facing governments is the cost of putting in PT infrastructure in already dense areas. The cost of resumptions is just too much for them to bare. What they really need to do is focus all new development down areas that have or are planned to have adequate, rapid public transport. It's appalling that extensive new development is allowed in areas that are '25min from the cbd'* *-at 1 am and 130kph. With no thought given to the traffic this creates. We will be paying in terms of road infrastructure in central Brisbane for the mistakes made in outer suburbs for years to come.

One of the biggest problems with Transport is the buck passing (and the luck of bucks passing) between Federal, State and Local governments. Brisbane city council has to take the burden for traffic generated in outlying councils who until very recently have been happy to offload their problems on their big neighbour. (Look at Logan city for instance, there are wonderfully landscaped roads that seem to be resurfaced well before they need it, while some of Brisbane's roads don't even have a flat surface let alone money to spend on 'nice' landscaping down medians.

The other problem is of course, that we live in a democracy... well kinda. People will not accept traffic becoming worse to benefit increased PT. What they want is to keep at least the same traffic AND get increased PT. And that's not likely to change while the country has a car mentality. (Primarily a function of NEEDING a car in most areas).

Busses on the Busway manage an average of 60km/h (Even stopping at all stops). It's far faster than the train. (Though if you built a train network as recently as the busway was built you could probably do much better again.)

Buses are nearly always at capacity during the day.

The busway does well to serve the south eastern region, yes, but what about the Western, along Coro drive? what about the Northwestern along Kevin Grove and South Pine roads? what about the northern along Gympie and Sandgate roads? what about the Eastern along Old Cleveland road?

Ok, say you are coming south on the NSBT stage 2(Lutwyche Rd by-pass), you would exit at Mayne and connect onto the exiting elevated section of the ICB. From there , you continue south towards the existing RNA tunnel. There, you can enter the NSBT Stage 1(Gabba-Bowen Hills) or continue along the existing ICB route towards the Western Distributor entrance at Normanby.
But would it be a freeway style connection, or stuck with traffic lights??

So just how much of Brisbane's attractive inner city streetscapes and housing is to make way for all of these interchanges - the outer suburbs are starting to sound, look and smell, more attatractive if the inner city is going to be ringed by freeways and overpasses and on/off ramps and cars and trucks and tunnel portals and cars and trucks and cars and trucks and concrete and signs and barriers and freeway lamp posts and cars and trucks and more cars and trucks.

Nice one Brizzy! :nono:

Geez 17 floors, thats a bit extreme isnt it. At this stage we are mostly talking about a tunnel which has portals which, if you look at tunnel portals in every other city are not normally that much of an eyesore. As for freeways and over passes, most of that is already built in the shape of the ICB, and the relatively small area that is still yet to be taken up with this stuff, is not in the middle of a residential area and will not spoil anyones views.

But you are correct, if you dont want the sounds, looks and smells of inner city living then move to the suburbs. I live within 6km of the city centre, most people consider that fairly inner city, and all I can hear right now are the birds chirping and the bell of the ice-cream truck going by.

GMAC - if you look what happening to Paddington/Petrie Tce when they widened Hale St - a big highway right through the guts of one of Brizzy's most historic and beautiful areas and an interchange taking up valuable inner city land at Normanby. Then they cut through Victoria Park with the ICB. Now they want to draw even more traffic onto these roads from freeeway tunnels from the AIrport and Lutwyche Rd tunnel.

I agree that a bypass is needed but I think this plan is messy and will end up a traffic nightmare with all the bottenecks it will create, not to mention the continued lack of backbone by the govt in the PT area. If they wanked over PT planning as much as they did over road and tunnel planning - what a great network we'd get.

I also don't agree with you suggestion that living in the inner city has to mean putting up with ugliness and traffic congestion. you can create vibrant, walkable and liveable inner city areas - Its a fairly normal occurence for most cities in Europe.
Don't mean jump down your throat - i feel strongly about this sort of thing :)

But would it be a freeway style connection, or stuck with traffic lights??

freeway standard like this. Will intercept with the ICB and Lutwyche Rd and will cater for the Airport link which will connect as well.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v232/Maroon1/TunnelExit.bmp

17 floors, were not going to lose any city streets. the portals are located on already busy roads or vacant craphole land. Every city needs fast moving roads to ease congestion on the slower roads. Without the tunnel, there would be more traffic in the CBD and that would create a loss of inner city vibrancy.

Dont say that PT will fix everything coz it wont. It wil never happen. What has the SE Busway done the Pacific MWY. Dick all i believe!

Although necessary, I'm not the biggest fan of the Bowen Hills interchange...mainly because I live 500m away and travel through those streets everyday, so it will affect me quite a bit.

The Bowen Hills interchange is really poorly designed anyway. I highly doubt that Lutwyche Road can cope with any more traffic than the current peak hour carpark.

Dont say that PT will fix everything coz it wont. It wil never happen. What has the SE Busway done the Pacific MWY. Dick all i believe!
Thats because Dick brains sit in their cars oblivious to the fact 50+ buses have already whizzed past them. It's backward thinking like this that guarantees peak hour commuting problems will get worse. All we need to do is set up a system where at least the bulk of the population can get to<>from work easily by PT and lesiure trips are when people use the car, unless you'd rather not battle weekend traffic.


17 floors, were not going to lose any city streets. the portals are located on already busy roads or vacant craphole land. Every city needs fast moving roads to ease congestion on the slower roads. Without the tunnel, there would be more traffic in the CBD and that would create a loss of inner city vibrancy.

I think he knows were not goign to loose streets, and actually, I think he would rather see less streets. he talking about the visual impact of areas that have bypasses and whatnot runnign right through them. Making them dirty, shitty and whatnot. Deterring desirability for the area and in turn, loosing vibrancy. Those craphole areas could have been developed into underground stations with a mixed use development on top.

But would it be a freeway style connection, or stuck with traffic lights??

That would all be freeway connections. Finally the qld government is building decent interchanges.(Gateway/M1/Logan interchanges, these proposals Vs. Centenary/Ipswich roundabout)

Will the Airport link feed directly out of the portal, or will you take the proposed flyover to head east, then exit futher up towards Sandgate Road??

This would of been alot easier if the Goss Government built the Airport Motorway back in the 90's.

Oh and I think it is silly that you can't take the NSBT and then exit to head towards the West at Bowen Hills. It should be a full interchange.

As far as I've heard, the Airport Link will be elevated over the railyards (fucked idea) and then go into a tunnel around Albion.

I think he knows were not goign to loose streets, and actually, I think he would rather see less streets. he talking about the visual impact of areas that have bypasses and whatnot runnign right through them. Making them dirty, shitty and whatnot. Deterring desirability for the area and in turn, loosing vibrancy. Those craphole areas could have been developed into underground stations with a mixed use development on top.


Thanks Nikko - spot on as to what I was trying to say. Its a shame that the last area of prime inner city land is going to be used for a friggin' freeway interchange - could have been a great area for mixed use devt and parkland. But instead, we have to make it more swish for car drivers to whizz around the place at $1.20 a litre. And why do we need a freeway to the airport when there's a train line that's just been built along the same corridor! One step foward, two steps back! Doh! Jesus Christ - any smart city around the world is laying off freeway building and focussing on PT - wake up Brisbane!

Thanks Nikko - spot on as to what I was trying to say. Its a shame that the last area of prime inner city land is going to be used for a friggin' freeway interchange - could have been a great area for mixed use devt and parkland. But instead, we have to make it more swish for car drivers to whizz around the place at $1.20 a litre. And why do we need a freeway to the airport when there's a train line that's just been built along the same corridor! One step foward, two steps back! Doh! Jesus Christ - any smart city around the world is laying off freeway building and focussing on PT - wake up Brisbane!


Would you want to live at Bowen Hills train yards?

Im all for PT upgrades coz i use it every day coz its cheaper and less frustrating then driving. I just think no matter how much money u spend on PT, it will never massively change.

Also, with the intorduction of hybrid cars, the pollution rates should drop soon anyway. Ill wait for your fiery reactions!

Would you want to live at Bowen Hills train yards?

Im all for PT upgrades coz i use it every day coz its cheaper and less frustrating then driving. I just think no matter how much money u spend on PT, it will never massively change.

Also, with the intorduction of hybrid cars, the pollution rates should drop soon anyway. Ill wait for your fiery reactions!

Ok - why wouldn't you want to live at a redevelopment of the Bowen Hills railyards? Presumably the railyards would go - hence "redevelopment". They did it to Southbank and Roma Street.

On the issue of hybrid cars, yes pollution levels would drop. But that doesn't mean traffic congestion would. Overuse of the private car contributes to more than just pollution. It has lead to a "de-socialisation" of cities, eg. suburbs on the edge of town with no services and poor access for those without cars, increasing isolation. Also there is a general degrading of quality of life aspects by road-building, including noise and visual scarring of the built environment. A street full of people ineracting with one another is much better than a busy road full of cars (hybrid or otherwise). Furthermore - not everyone can afford a car or drive one.

You may be right about you point on behavioural change though - car use is firmly entrenched in Brisbane. But that doesn't mean it should be entrenched further and further by freeway devt.

I work at the airport and drive in every day, I'd love to have a few more options for the drive in. Yes there is a train, but it is seriously over-priced and not very conveniant.

Any interchange should be like the Big Dig in Boston. Have it all underground to save on space. If the government is serious about fitting in extra people in the SE region they will need to urbanise the old rail yards. An ugly elevated tollway will be an eyesore.

Ok - why wouldn't you want to live at a redevelopment of the Bowen Hills railyards? Presumably the railyards would go - hence "redevelopment". They did it to Southbank and Roma Street.

You may be right about you point on behavioural change though - car use is firmly entrenched in Brisbane. But that doesn't mean it should be entrenched further and further by freeway devt.

The rail yards i would think will be there for a long time. Where else are they going to put the trains?

The reason for my push for this tunnel is coz Brisbane is so stuck in its ways with car travel. if the city is not cleared out, then it will only get worse and the inner city communities will lose thier interaction as you say.

The rewards of the tunnel is that ppl who ride the bus to work will benefit as Gympie / Lutwyche Rds will become Busway routes and will eliminate a lane of traffic. Also the toll would be a major derterant for frequent travel and would possible encourage PT patronage.

With the rail yards, if they ever do get redevloped, there is still a lot of land left and the creek will act as a natural barrier from the freeway. You would have to build over the railway though. Expensive!

You all do realise that the elevated freeway over the railyards is already built. It was built as part of the Inner-City By-pass a few years ago. The only additions would be fly-over connections from the NSBT stage 1 to the ICB and a deviation away from the Kingsford-Smith end of the ICB towards Albion, where the viaduct would go underground.

As far as I've heard, the Airport Link will be elevated over the railyards (fucked idea)

Agree with you there.

Not because I'm pro-PT, but because it's such a great place for expansion and an urban village, similar to QUT's (which is what I think you're unhapy about, too)

And why do we need a freeway to the airport when there's a train line that's just been built along the same corridor!

If it wasn't so damn expensive...It's starting to see a rise in numbers now so maybe in the future it will be lowered to translink prices. My suggestion is to charge all at full fare, no concessions. That way it would still be a premium service, but cheap enough as an attractive offer. I think a few stations on the airport line should be upgraded to high-level (Eagle Junction, Bowen Hills, Brunswick. St, Central, the other half of Roma. St, South Brisbane, Southbank, Yeerongpilly, Loganlea and Beenleigh) just for ease of transfer. It may not seem like much but making it as user-friendly as possible will be a big hit, also the network could use some station upgrades.

The rail yards i would think will be there for a long time. Where else are they going to put the trains?

Citytrain are the only major users of Mayne yards. It's slowly becoming less used by QRN because the inner city location is too inconvienient having to navigate around suburban trains (esp. in peak)

I'm sure a substantial amound could be sold off for redevelopment.

You all do realise that the elevated freeway over the railyards is already built. It was built as part of the Inner-City By-pass a few years ago. The only additions would be fly-over connections from the NSBT stage 1 to the ICB and a deviation away from the Kingsford-Smith end of the ICB towards Albion, where the viaduct would go underground.
Wouldn't this still mean it will still use up part of the railyards? Plus if this was the case, the current 4 lanes of the section would not handle the huge increase in traffic.

Like Nikko said and I've mentioned heaps of times, this is prime land for a great urban village.

It would be a great area for a model green innner city village. Close to PT and the city/valley - close to the hospitals. I reckon I'd live there if the design was well chosen (ie no salmon pink apartments with palm trees!).

Anyway - this is a little off topic.........

It would be a great area for a model green innner city village. Close to PT and the city/valley - close to the hospitals. I reckon I'd live there if the design was well chosen (ie no salmon pink apartments with palm trees!).

Anyway - this is a little off topic.........

Grand Theft Auto Vice City... ;)

[QUOTE=Anyway - this is a little off topic.........[/QUOTE]

Yeah - The tunnel ppl

Yeah, because what we were talking about is so far away from the tunnel....

Airport Link to reduce traffic
http://www.questnews.com.au/article/2005/07/07/2643_northern_news.html

JULY 7: The proposed Airport Link from Bowen Hills to Toombul could reduce traffic by 20 per cent on Kingsford Smith Drive and Lutwyche and Gympie roads, according to Brisbane City Council's pre-feasibility study.

Cr Tim Nicholls (Hamilton) said the link, Brisbane's second tolled road, would begin at Bowen Hills where the North-South Bypass Tunnel ended.

``It's really important that we get this under way so people understand what's been proposed and we can manage impact,'' he said.

A memorandum of understanding outlining responsibility for Airport Link was approved by the council on June 28 and is awaiting acceptance by the State Government, the council's partner in the project.

Cr Nicholls said the memorandum outlined the roles and responsibilities of the parties involved in the major project.

``The council and the State Government are funding the feasibility study into the link, and it's estimated to cost $20million,'' he said.

``To govern the relationship between both partners, they make up a memorandum of understanding.

``It's a really positive thing and it's a sign that both the council and State Government are getting on with major infrastructure on the north side of the city.''

Brisbane Lord Mayor Campbell Newman said the involvement of the Government would not restrict the public's access to information about the project.

``I certainly won't be supporting anything less in the way of scrutiny,'' Cr Newman said.

The Government is paying $16 million of the $21 million for a feasibility study into Airport Link.

The council's transport and major projects committee chairman Graham Quirk said further Government funding for Airport Link was dependent on the feasibility study.

Consortium withdraws from tunnel tender

JULY 7: The lack of a financier is one of the reasons given for the decision by an international consortium to pull out of the bidding for the North-South Bypass Tunnel.

The withdrawal of French company Bouygues means Leighton Holdings, which has subsidiaries in the remaining two consortiums, is guaranteed to win the tender for the tunnel.

Brisbane City Council transport and major projects committee chairman Graham Quirk said he had been told about the decision by Bouygues, which he said was the elite partner in the Brisbane Express Motorway Consortium.

The consortium also included Egis Projects and McConnell Dowell.

Cr Quirk, who has remained at arms-length from Bouygues to ensure probity in the tendering process, said he had been told by the council's major infrastructure projects office that Bouygues ``felt it was not ready''.

``The others had left the starting blocks quickly and I think they felt left behind,'' he said.

Cr Quirk said he was awaiting a letter from Bouygues, but understood the company did not have a financier in place.

He said there had been no problems when Leighton Holdings had subsidiaries in two consortiums bidding for the Mitcham-Frankston Freeway in Melbourne.

``(There are) financial and tolling companies other than Leightons in both consortiums that will ensure that the pencil is kept sharpened,'' Cr Quirk said.

A spokesperson for Bouygues would not comment on the company's withdrawal.

I read something in the local paper today about a new proposal to add bus lanes to the airport link tunnel rather than adding the buslanes to Bowen Bridge Rd. I read it really quickly and being a local paper they didnt give much detail but has anyone else heard anything on this?

I read something in the local paper today about a new proposal to add bus lanes to the airport link tunnel rather than adding the buslanes to Bowen Bridge Rd. I read it really quickly and being a local paper they didnt give much detail but has anyone else heard anything on this?

that wouldnt be right. the only buses that would use it would be the 331 & 341 because they are the only bus routes that dont stop between RBH and Chermside. How would ppl catch a bus in a tunnel and why would u waste traffic space for the sake of 10 buses an hour only during peak periods.

I know that Lutwyche Rd / Gympie Rd will inlcude Bus Lanes upon completion of the tunnels

Apparently a bus tunnel will share space with the airport link underneath Lutwyche. Rd.


Bah, where's my subway?

There is an article about it in the City North News this week. It shows a map of the two Airport Link options. Personally, I think the Western Option is far better, as it cuts out the need for the stupid viaduct over the Mayne Railyards, and would also go beneath a much busier road. But I think the BCC prefers the so called Central Option which goes under Sandgate Rd.

http://www.questnews.com.au/images/2005/08/04/cnn04aug05001.jpg


Time to speak up

CITY NORTH NEWS

AUGUST 4: A six-week public consultation starting August 15 will offer residents their only chance to comment on proposed routes for the $1.3-$1.5 billion Airport Link.

The TransApex pre-feasibility study, released in March, identified the central and western options for Airport Link.

Brisbane City Council's preferred route was the central option, which includes a bridge over Enoggera Creek near Grafton St, Windsor, connection to Albion Overpass and a tunnel north of Albion Rd to Wooloowin station.

The western option from Bowen Hills, under Lutwyche and Gympie roads, was second to the central option but re-emerged as a contender last week.

This route along Lutwyche Rd may be co-located with the State Government's $530 million Northern Busway, and includes a tunnel through Windsor Memorial Park to bypass the Lutwyche commercial area, and another from Lutwyche Rd to the East-West Arterial.

On Tuesday, the State Government and the council signed a memorandum of understanding detailing their involvement in the 12-month, $21 million feasibility study for Airport Link.

Cr Tim Nicholls (Hamilton) said the public consultation period would offer residents a chance to comment on their preferred tunnel routes.

``The actual route the tunnel will take is not yet decided,'' Cr Nicholls said.

``At this stage, anywhere in that entire corridor is open for the tunnel.''

The preferred route is expected to be chosen by November.

Airport Link is scheduled for completion in 2012.

Highway lanes certain
From Quest South~West News

AUGUST 3: Plans to widen the Centenary Highway will not hinge on an upgrade of the Ipswich Motorway.

The State Government is planning to upgrade the highway, with two transit lanes from Toowong to Darra.

A spokesman from the Department of Main Roads said Federal Government indecision on the motorway would not hold up Centenary Highway plans.

However, he did say planning would take into account a possible upgrade of the motorway.
The Federal Government has yet to decide whether to upgrade the motorway or build a Goodnabypass.
It has given no guarantees as to when it will make an announcement.

The State Government earmarked the Centenary Highway transit lanes as part of the SEQ Infrastructure Plan.

The spokesman said the extension of the highway was a long-term project to be designed with neighbouring road and transport projects in mind.

Planning for the highway extension would take into account a proposed $300million rail line from Darra to Springfield.

It would also take into account Brisbane City Council's proposed tunnel from Toowong to the Inner City Bypass and the upgrade of the Boundary and Kelliher roads intersection.

``When built it will help reduce congestion to the north and south of the Centenary Highway interchange,'' the spokesman said.

Plans for the transit lane project will take two years to complete and building is expected to start in 2006/07.

Bikeways being built along the highway at Fig Tree Pocket took into account the widening of that road.

^ Good news for the 'Western Freeway'. Why it has 2 names i dont know. In the future, you will be able to drive from Springfield to Hamilton using entirely freeway standard roads. good stuff

You already can, almost. Just go Logan Mwy and Gateway.

^ Good news for the 'Western Freeway'. Why it has 2 names i dont know. In the future, you will be able to drive from Springfield to Hamilton using entirely freeway standard roads. good stuff


The Centenary Highway was built first, the exit to Moggil Road was where it use to end. (If you take the exit you can notice enough land on the right hand side where the southbound lanes would of been)

The Western Freeway I believe was built in 2 stages. Moggil Road to Toowong (Again you can notice the old fwy on the Western side at the Moggil Rd interchange)

The second stage was to link to the Centenary.

They should scrap the North South Bypass tunnel - its a waste of money and is probably already billions over budget bankrupting BCC - probably;) In any case its adios Newman. (my prediction so remember this post).

Build the Northern link to the Airport - that is a much better idea and people actually like it - unlike the NS Bypass tunnel which people aparently dislike.

The shit will hit the fan soon.

^
The problem is that most people don't hate it.....either they don't care or it seems a vaugly good idea. The only people I've heard really disliking it are environmental freaks and residents closeby enough to be affected by the construction/extra traffic. It isn't likely to be particularly over budget yet, especially to the tune of billions....

I think Newman will go though, but that is another story.

^
It isn't likely to be particularly over budget yet, especially to the tune of billions....

Hrmm - ;)

JayT, dont try to destroy our city with your bs.

Build the tunnel!

I agree.

with the project going to cost $1.5 billion approx - and with the private sector contributing a fair chunk of that - i doubt the project will be billions over budget!

In 10 or 15 years time once the NSBT and Airport link are built, people will look back saying "How did we ever live without it".

It's called progress.


Remember life before, the busway, bus tunnel, daylight saving ppfftt...


Embrace change!

JayT, dont try to destroy our city with your bs.

Build the tunnel!
Malt – so young, so naïve. I don't like the idea of a N-S tunnel however the Airport tunnel is a great idea and should be built.

What I said about the tunnel in that previous post still stands The shit will hit the fan when the media finds out, remember this post.

After doing a review of the Environmental Impact Statement for the North South Bypass Tunnel last semester I joined the list of people opposing the project. The EIS had a lot of fundamental flaws which I wasn't particularly happy with. Especially in relation to impacts on the urban environmental surrounding the portals and the lack of detail in relation to effects on Norman and Enoggera Creeks. They also failed to take into consideration the economic effects of business in the Wooloongabba area, especially considering they are putting an UNFILTERED air stiack smack bang in the middle.

^ mmmmmm - gotta love a lung full of tunnel traffic fumes....cough cough...bloody asthma...

Yes isn't it great that they aren't even bothering to filter the stacks... :rant:

The NSBT is not a well planned piece of infrastructure, it's a misguided politic promise.

I find it classic QLD, that you will not be able to drive along the ICB and then turn south to take the ICB.

Say for example the Riverside has had a 10 car pile up. How else would they fully divert traffic around - without traffic lights or exiting a freeway/expressway/tollway...

It's just bad luck. If you were heading North on the ICB you wouldn't be needing to get on the NSBT anyway, so why build an overpass for it. It's the same on the Gateway - if you're heading south, you can't get onto the Pacific Motorway heading north. It's not convenient, but it's logical and saves a lot of money.

Then it is not a true ring road (ICB/Hale Street, NSBT, Riverside)

It should be built so you can drive all the way around the inner ring road in any direction without stopping at any traffic lights.

They should also look at North Quay and remove traffic lights in that area, by cut and cover options, or closing the last exit northbound.

Then it is not a true ring road (ICB/Hale Street, NSBT, Riverside)

It should be built so you can drive all the way around the inner ring road in any direction without stopping at any traffic lights.

They should also look at North Quay and remove traffic lights in that area, by cut and cover options, or closing the last exit northbound.

It's not supposed to be a ring road. There's no real reason why you would travel like that, it would be faster to deal with the odd traffic light and just go the other way.

Hmm maybe, but the NSBT might largely eliminate alot of traffic pouring off Hale St onto the Riverside Expressway. Those lights at North Quay also give some short gaps in the traffic to allow others to merge further on. They're not really the busiest exits though (so hard to justify expensive work on them). But they are rather vital to the small subsection of traffic that uses them (To get to the transit center etc)

You also won't be able to turn into the NSBT from the Captain Cook Bridge and visa versa. The two southern portals are both directed southbound exit, northbound entry. So it won't be a ring road.

^ why would you need to? you would just go up Hale St to the ICB.

Similary, you cant turn right onto the ICB travelling northbound because you would just use the M3 into the city

After doing a review of the Environmental Impact Statement for the North South Bypass Tunnel last semester I joined the list of people opposing the project. The EIS had a lot of fundamental flaws which I wasn't particularly happy with. Especially in relation to impacts on the urban environmental surrounding the portals and the lack of detail in relation to effects on Norman and Enoggera Creeks. They also failed to take into consideration the economic effects of business in the Wooloongabba area, especially considering they are putting an UNFILTERED air stiack smack bang in the middle.

ABS - is there anywhere on the net i can view that document without getting a bias repsonse coz im doing a uni assignment on the NSBT

www.nsbt-eis.com has every document related to the EIS in pdf format.

thanks abs. i found shiteloads of docs when i searched it a lil deeper.

Well the website has every excrutiating detail (or lack thereof) for the NSBT. Look particularly at the Terms of Reference, which outlines everything that SHOULD have been in the EIS and compare it with the actual contents within the EIS. You'll find in some cases they have cut corners and left out things that were in the ToR. Generally they have complied with the ToR.

They should scrap the North South Bypass tunnel - its a waste of money and is probably already billions over budget bankrupting BCC - probably;) In any case its adios Newman. (my prediction so remember this post).

Just as a note: if a BCC election was held today, not only would Newman win office again, but Labor would lose up to 14 of their 17 seats.

It's not quite adios just yet.

Malt – so young, so naïve. I don't like the idea of a N-S tunnel however the Airport tunnel is a great idea and should be built.

What I said about the tunnel in that previous post still stands The shit will hit the fan when the media finds out, remember this post.

Yes im Naive because i support this tunnel.

Of course anyone who does is Naive, and only JayT and his fellow greenpeace protesters (not saying you are one, just that thats who you are siding with) are the only ones aware of the truth.

Of course anyone who does is Naive, and only JayT and his fellow greenpeace protesters (not saying you are one, just that thats who you are siding with) are the only ones aware of the truth.

Relating pro-PT to Greenpeace is just antoher prime example of why people drive. Damn, europeans get it....why can't we?

lol im not.

Im relating the specific people who complain about this project to greenpeace, theres a difference.

I support PT which you would know, since weve both been on here for some time.

But if your idiotic enough to ignore the fact that driving will never go away, then leave plz.

Cars in not long wont emit pollution, so what argument will they/you come up with then.

Oh it's all clap-trap about how it's a good idea that works for the common good. Nevermind the fact that people are crowded onto [insert form of PT here] and the most sociopathic amongst us (i.e. me) are just intolerant of others (because their hygiene standards are somewhat lower than mine).

Yes, I support expansion of public transport, but I also find it odd that to many around here, driving is as sinful as masturbation is to hardcore Christians.

I take PT when its convenient.

Its that simple.

If there was a bus that arrived outside ym house regularly that went to the city, id take it often.

Fact is there isnt one, on top fo that driving is more private.

It wont go away, so deal with it

lol im not.

Im relating the specific people who complain about this project to greenpeace, theres a difference.

I support PT which you would know, since weve both been on here for some time.

But if your idiotic enough to ignore the fact that driving will never go away, then leave plz.

Cars in not long wont emit pollution, so what argument will they/you come up with then.

I'm in no way saying cars will ever go away. That's the mindset of our society and it will never change. I'm saying there should be a more convienient option for those who want to take/enjoy to take public transport.

As for emissions, I don't give a shit. I actually want an 8-litre Pontiac Parisienne as my first car :) But I'm just concerned about the traffic jams and the urbanity issues that cars come with, that's all.

No need to be an arsehole, that's all I have to say on the matter.

Oh it's all clap-trap about how it's a good idea that works for the common good. Nevermind the fact that people are crowded onto [insert form of PT here] and the most sociopathic amongst us (i.e. me) are just intolerant of others (because their hygiene standards are somewhat lower than mine).

Yes, I support expansion of public transport, but I also find it odd that to many around here, driving is as sinful as masturbation is to hardcore Christians.

It's not clap trap, you simply enjoy the privacy of your car. So do most other people, thats why most families feel the need to have 2 cars. And that mindset won't go away, but I think it's far from being rediculous that PT should be less of a priority over roads. More people are moving to Brisbane, and more people are going to be unlicense/don't have a car. There needs to be a good system in place for situations like that. There are also people who know that there is an alternative than sitting in mind-numbingly boring traffic jams for an hour while trying to get to/from work. People that WANT to use PT have to be catered for aswell.

i beleive this tunnel has two good arguments for and against. I think the priority tunnels should be the airport tunnel and the northern link tunnel from ICB to Western Fwy.

The NSBT is a cross city road which means ppl who drive to work in the city (around 50% of city workers) wont benefit from it. 2/3 of current CBD traffic is cross town traffic. This will create less congestion and pollution in the cbd.

On the other hand, the pollution concentrations in neighbourhoods is an issue and should most definately be filtered!

but im sure in the long run when Trans Apex is complete, i reckon no matter how much PT we throw at ppl, the convienience will still be driving and even though numbers will rise, it will never take over.

Cars in not long wont emit pollution, so what argument will they/you come up with then.

1. Not everyone can afford to buy and run a car, no matter what it emits.
2. Car-based urban devt leads to ugly roads filled with noisy traffic, unslightly flyovers, freeways an other assorted concrete shit, rather than people/pedestrian friendly environments.
3. Is an inefficient form of devt as it requires goods, services and people to be transported over longer distances.

1. Not everyone can afford to buy and run a car, no matter what it emits.
2. Car-based urban devt leads to ugly roads filled with noisy traffic, unslightly flyovers, freeways an other assorted concrete shit, rather than people/pedestrian friendly environments.
3. Is an inefficient form of devt as it requires goods, services and people to be transported over longer distances.

True!

And as Brisbane densifies its population as is stipulated in the regional planning leglisation people are going to be less inclined to buy cars. In many cities around the world where densities are high people wouldn't even think of driving cars into town, many don't even own cars. Brisbane is heading this way with all the suburban and inner city redevelopment of unused space for medium density residential buildings and the creation of high density hubs around transport nodes. We will see a massive drop in car use in this city even though the population is skyrocketing.

Hey JayT, can you explain why the airport link is OK and the NSBT is not? I cant see the difference.

Either one by itself is quite pointless, but together they would make quite an efficient transport bypass.

AirportLink now has its own section in the BCC website, including some high level details of alignments etc. I live right next to Wooloowin station so this impacts me quite a bit, I wonder how option 1's "cut and cover" works will impact on the railway line, given that it looks like its done from Albion to Wooloowin stations! IIRC the ICB tunnel under the RNA grounds took quite some time.

http://www.brisbane.qld.gov.au/BCC:STANDARD:307754790:pc=PC_1964

If the cut and cover options is selected, and you catch the northern train lines - expect nightly delays, or bus shuttles from Bowen Hills to Toombul.

As for the plan, I don't understand why they have not got a direct link from Stafford Road to the East West Aterial?? ID10Ts

edit...wrong thread!!