#Project: Brisbane Cross River Rail (Planning Phase)

[Levathian]

I thought it was more to do with construction and their "precious" exam schedule. If construction trucks and who-knows-what wafts through the campus during exam time it would cause all mayhem. Then you'd have "stinky unproper commoners" buses going through constantly, how would they cope?

A lot of streets in UQ have limits of 30km/h, would you really want buses going that slow? It's contact time with their golden streets would be extended (heaven forbid).

[l_blue_l]

Are there plans to extend the city glider service to UQ with a new pedestrian / green bridge?

[Clam]

I wish the Eastern Busway would plunge underground immediately west of the UQ Lakes Station (as the cost of one water hyacinth riddled "lake") and pop up underneath Indooroopilly.

Alas.

[Orfeo]

Originally Posted by yommy

I thought it was more to do with construction and their "precious" exam schedule. If construction trucks and who-knows-what wafts through the campus during exam time it would cause all mayhem. Then you'd have "stinky unproper commoners" buses going through constantly, how would they cope?

much like beastjim said, the complaint was buses passing through campus, though they didn't like the idea of construction noise there's always something U/C there anyway. to start off they weren't even supportive of busses stoping on campus at all, they wanted just a pedestrian bridge with the station at Dutton Park.

the compromise was that a station could be at St Lucia, but would not connect to the road network. I'm told the contract is air tight.

Originally Posted by yommy

So if you are ever at UQ and need to be rushed off in a ambulance for something that is time critical, you will wish they connected it and gave you that 5min ride to PA.

security will transport people themselves across to the busway station where they can be picked up by ambulance.

i'm not convinced this is safe.

[yommy]

Originally Posted by Orfeo

much like beastjim said, the complaint was buses passing through campus, though they didn't like the idea of construction noise there's always something U/C there anyway. to start off they weren't even supportive of busses stoping on campus at all, they wanted just a pedestrian bridge with the station at Dutton Park.

the compromise was that a station could be at St Lucia, but would not connect to the road network. I'm told the contract is air tight.



security will transport people themselves across to the busway station where they can be picked up by ambulance.

i'm not convinced this is safe.

The point was not that buses could go into their uni, its that there is no connection at all, the road ends, with not even a driveway access to the the bridge. To me that is a stupid design, the example of getting the ambulance was just one reason why a connection from the stop to the UQ streets would have been a smart idea, all emergency services could have used it, and the uni its self could have used it for access to that end of the uni with out having to disturb other parts of the campus. Although the latter doesn't count for much, if UQ wanted for what ever reason to close of access from the the st lucia side it would be more possible.

[beastjim]

Going to bump this thread.

So the shape of this rail tunnel is really starting to take place. We now have the southern portal, at Yerrongpilly, stations then planned for Boggo Road Urban Village, Woolloongabba, Lower Albert Street, Roma Street, RNA and Bowen Hills. I've done up a quick map for the conceptually challenged: http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UT...69086&t=h&z=13

[beastjim]

Media Statement

Minister for Transport
The Honourable Rachel Nolan

Wednesday, September 15, 2010

Yeerongpilly next stop for Cross River Rail as Southern portal announced

A new four platform surface station at Yeerongpilly has been added to the Cross River Rail project to cater for more services from Yeerongpilly to the CBD.

Transport Minister Rachel Nolan has announced that the preferred location for the southern tunnel portal for the project will be just north-east of the existing Yeerongpilly train station.

“Both Cross River Rail services and surface services would stop at the new Station,” Ms Nolan said.

“That means that by 2016 the number of trains at Yeerongpilly would almost double in the two-hour morning peak period– that’s a train about every 5 minutes bound for the CBD.

“Cross River Rail services would get from Yeerongpilly to the new underground station in Albert Street in just 10 minutes – less than half the 21 minutes it now takes to get to Central today.

“In the off-peak period, services would increase from a service every 30 minutes to a service at least every 15 minutes.”

Cross River Rail was named as the linchpin of the draft Connecting SEQ 2031: An Integrated Regional Transport Plan for South East Queensland – because of the project’s potential to revolutionise the SEQ rail network by adding more capacity to the inner city rail network.

The new station would be on the eastern side of the existing station and would be the last station Cross River Rail trains use before entering the north-south tunnel, which is expected to be about 10 kilometres long.

“The main reason for the location for the southern portal here is because it was the best option for maximising new services while minimising property impacts,” Ms Nolan said.

Investigations were undertaken between Fairfield and Moorooka along the existing train line to determine where the tunnel could surface in the south.

“Many areas were considered, including Fairfield, Yeronga, Yeerongpilly and Moorooka,” she said.

“Yeerongpilly was found to be the preferred location as it provides the best balance between cost, community impact, community benefit and rail operations.

“For example if we were to portal at the Clapham Rail Yard we would need to find another 15 hectare land site for stabling on or close to the rail line.

“That’s equivalent of 15 hectares of land, which would be about the size of three Suncorp Stadiums.

“The location that has been chosen will also service the proposed Yeerongpilly transit oriented development, which was identified in the 2010 Growth Management Summit as a location where high quality and frequent public transport is required.”

Ms Nolan said with the preferred location for the southern portal now determined, potential property requirements had also been identified.

“Based on the current design of the southern portal and new station, 66 properties (125 land owners) will be required, compared to the 197 properties (376 land owners) that would have been required if the tunnel was to surface in Fairfield,” she said.

“Of the land required for the current design, about 84% is industrial land further south than Yeerongpilly.

“The project team will be working closely with property owners whose properties have been identified as required for the southern portal and new station – I understand this may be a difficult time for the owners and I strongly encourage them to contact the project team if they have any questions.”

Member for Yeerongpilly Simon Finn welcomed the decision of a new station and transport options.

“Today’s announcement will provide greatly improved public transport services for local residents,” he said.

“It provides a balance between property impacts, future growth demands and project cost.“

Ms Nolan said the project’s final reference design was expected to be completed later this year, which will include details of the full tunnel route, what new infrastructure will be needed and how the project could be constructed.

Consultation events planned for October-November will be an opportunity for the community to provide feedback on the reference design and I encourage people to get involved,” she said.

Events will be advertised in due course in The Courier-Mail, mX and local Quest papers as well as in the next edition of the Cross River Rail newsletter, which will be out in October.

“To keep informed about planning for Cross River Rail visit www.crossriverrail.qld.gov.au or call the project team on 1800 462 730.”

The statement also confirms that Clapham Yard will be converted into stabling for the project, to help take pressure of the Mayne Railway yards.

Some Higher Res images for the Yerrongpilly (why do we have suburbs with such annoying names to spell)





Going to sink the station under the road level, which allows them to open up retail opportunities above ground as well. Seems to be a bit of a theme to be honest. Not necessarily a bad thing.

[crazyknightsfan]

Definitely not a bad thing - will do wonders for the amenity of the Yeerongpilly TOD.

[Clam]

I am SO PLEASED with this portal location. Frankly, every step of the way the right decisions have been made. And at a decent pace. We'll have a full construction plan by November. I just want it starting asap.

On my train home a bunch of families were at the side of the road hanging signs over the fence about "preserving Yeerongpilly". Because huge sheds and CA$H 4 CARZ lots are so important to our heritage. I don't think they understand that the people watching them from the trains are the ones who want the thing dug faster.

[Levathian]

Not to sound rude, but when you look at the location for the portal, and what is being seized for construction, you're not losing much of value.

[La Tour d'Argent]

Originally Posted by Clam

On my train home a bunch of families were at the side of the road hanging signs over the fence about "preserving Yeerongpilly". Because huge sheds and CA$H 4 CARZ lots are so important to our heritage. I don't think they understand that the people watching them from the trains are the ones who want the thing dug faster.

'Preserving Yeerongpilly', what the hell are those NIMBYS on. They should be hanging signs reading "Please start adding value to our suburb now!
start digging, post haste!". But wait, what am I thinking, Yeerongpilly has a tight nit country town feel about, it possesses a certain innocence which the locals are very jealous of; the rail project will some how spoil this.

[Alphaville]

The stupidity of the NIMBY never fails to astound me.

Do they not realise with one of Australia's best PT projects on their doorstep what this would do for their land value/general quality of life.

[cjb287]

Never! A tunnel is change and change always = BAD

[Map Born]

Look at that southern portal map, number the rail lines from left to right - my question is why are lines 2 & 3 abandoned?

Much of the locals concerns could've been abated had the area retained more of the original alignment instead of 4 new lines.

With the station redevelopment being below current ground level, this Wilkie St could've been temporarily closed and a cut & cover tunnel constructed for one or two of the lines. TOD or not, any tenancies of new shops would struggle within a station environment even if services are 15 mins or better.

Interesting how a TOD is more conducive to that area than around Moorooka station.

Personally, I think Yeerongpilly is a long way out of town.

It also does not allow for the Corinda - Yeerongpilly line to be utilsed more with an option of routing some Ipswich & Springfield line trains down this new tunnel. That is perhaps a missed opportunity, but am sure the rail buffs will have an answer.

[Macca-GC]

I highly doubt we will be seeing any capacity constraints in the inner sections of the Ipswich line in the near future.

I think all of this design is definately the right decision. The one thing I'm not sure about is why the design shows the station as having/needing 6 platforms. That's as many as Central! I think it's just a bit of overkill of they go to that extreme.

[KJBrissy]

Are they not getting rid of the existing platforms? From my glances of the pdf's that was my understanding.

Map Born, if any trains are to come from Corinda they would still be able to use the surface route. There is no indication that they would be unable to use the tunnel.

To go cut and cover would be difficult as you would need to raise the street level (and you would've demolished the properties anyway.

[TOCC]

They will close the existing platform, they are building the new station adjacent to the older station purely to minimize disruption to the network....

This area was chosen due to the costs, topography, ability to link to he Tennyson loop if required and the ability to utilize the Marooka stabling yards

[Aussie Bhoy]

I'm kind of surprised at how far out of town this tunnel starts, and then dupliates the existing line until it gets to Wollongabba (Yeronga, Fairfield, Dutton Park, Park Road), 4 stations worth. What's the point of that?

Originally when this project first appeared I just assumed the tunnel would start near Park Road, there's lots of empty space around the old rail yards there for a portal, and even with a slight slope, it shouldn't have any problem getting underground enough by the Gabba.

[KJBrissy]

Park Road is too close to the river to get the grade. there will only be the Park Road Station underground, the rest will be permenant express stations for services using CRR.

Fairfield/Dutton Park has too many resumptions and heritage properties.

[Macca-GC]

Originally Posted by TOCC

They will close the existing platform, they are building the new station adjacent to the older station purely to minimize disruption to the network....

This area was chosen due to the costs, topography, ability to link to he Tennyson loop if required and the ability to utilize the Marooka stabling yards

See, to me, just closing the old platforms and building the new station beside it (on land resumed from residential housing) makes very little sense to me, both from an economic and political perspective.

Surely it would be much cheaper and reduce the number of resumptions, particularly at the southern end of Wilkie Street, if they closed the station for 2 years (or whatever the construction period is), kept trains running straight through there, did all the work around the existing station and reopen it 2 years later with the surface tracks leading to new platforms where the old ones were and the tunnel tracks leading to new platforms gained from resuming some (but less) land?