^^ Station is at grade, as previously announced.
I've gone from excited when I first heard about the "Metro", to now just feeling blah. I don't think I really care now whether this gets built or not.
Of course at first I thought it was going to be something like a light rail system taking over the busway, and with an underground tunnel at South Brisbane. Bit by bit it's been degraded and become less promising..
Thats not correct.Which, unless you were actually going to build a metro, was always going to happen.
The cost vs the benefit was always diabolical.
Was that a recent change to the design due to the disagreement between governments? That is a poor outcome for the project and Brisbane. My understanding was that the point of the underground station was to help alleviate the congestion currently experienced at-grade and would obviously have had a significant place-making benefit. The outcomes of the original business case should be called into question.^^ Station is at grade, as previously announced.
It may be so, but it took the council under 12 months to come up with the initial design yet in 15 months they can't redesign small section. So it takes 15 months to say we're going to do nothing. Sound like someone has budgeted wrong and they are slowly cutting back until it is below the already increased budget.I think its got more to do with the fact that the QLD government hates the LNP Brisbane City Council than any hatred of PT.
If they hated PT they wouldn't be spending money on a busway extention to Springwood or a rebuild of Loganlea station for example.
Not quite the case though, they did redesign the small section in line with the states demands, however that 'small section' is a significant infrastructure project in itself in which the two layers of government couldn't agree on in of cost, design or construction process.It may be so, but it took the council under 12 months to come up with the initial design yet in 15 months they can't redesign small section. So it takes 15 months to say we're going to do nothing. Sound like someone has budgeted wrong and they are slowly cutting back until it is below the already increased budget.
Reality is that the Benefit to Cost Ratio for this project was assessed as 2.4 by infrastructure australia.It's always easy to make stuff up. I was talking reality.
What's the BCR of the latest plan compared to the first? What's the cost of the latest plan with all the cost savings (close to the process of the first plan, no)?
My only issue with your comment is that you claimed the BCR was diabolical, however assessment on the project at local and federal government level actually classified it as a very good BCR. Your comment wasn’t based on any actually assessments.I refuse to believe that a more than $1B project, with small increases in frequency compared with an essentially free network review would come out with a BCA of that scale. Add to that some small road closure options and it would be even better.
By the way, I've always been sceptical of BCA as, they are heavily weighted towards roads, then road based PT. It's purely a box ticking exercise.