Brisbane Cross River Rail - Brisbane Development Association

bda.org.au

Brisbane Cross River Rail - Brisbane Development Association

Moving to an Integrated Network Philosophy


The Cleveland Solution

Explained

Delivering what the commuter wants through

value for money solutions

John Cherry | Executive Director, COMSEQ

David Edwards | Manager, Strategy and Market Development

Martin Peelgrane | Manager, Major Transport Projects

Steve Kanowski | Business Leader, Transport Strategy & Economics

Moving to an Integrated Network Philosophy


What we’ll cover

Introduction – GHD’s commission

Current state of play and what the commuter wants

The Cleveland Solution explained

Finance and Operations

Questions and Answers

John Cherry

David Edwards Martin Peelgrane Steve Kanowski

Moving to an Integrated Network Philosophy


GHD’s Commission

COMSEQ asked GHD to answer five basic questions:

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

What are the current priorities for public transport capital expenditure?

Where are the major problems?

What does the commuter want from the public transport network in

SEQ?

What needs to be delivered in the next five and ten years and what

can we afford?

Are there innovative and value for money approaches to financing and

delivering priorities and delivering what the commuter wants?

Due to the cost and scale of Cross River Rail ($7.7B), the Cleveland Solution

formed a major aspect of the COMSEQ report.

Moving to an Integrated Network Philosophy


Current State of Play

Uncertain planning environment….

• State and Commonwealth governments are fiscally challenged

• The private sector won’t take on patronage risk

• Demand is still there and the cost to deliver public transport services is

steadily increasing

• Bottlenecks such as the Merivale Bridge must be fixed – Cross River Rail in

its current form is unlikely to be funded

• Industry needs certainty to plan and invest with confidence

Moving to an Integrated Network Philosophy


Back to basics – what do SEQ commuters really

want?

South East Queenslanders are no different to other urban commuters – they

want:

• Enhanced performance and service reliability

• Increased service quality and frequency

• Better connectivity

• Opportunities to seamlessly transfer to different modes

Ultimately, they want no timetables – they just want to “turn up and go”

Moving to an Integrated Network Philosophy


Best Practice Public Transport Network

Philosophies

• The great urban public transport systems of the world (London, Paris, Lisbon,

Frankfurt etc) are true networks of independent lines that integrate with each other

through common nodes, where passengers can interchange to other lines.

• However, in Australia, our urban rail systems have evolved from CBD based, radial

systems that progressively extended branch lines into the new suburbs from the core.

Moving to an Integrated Network Philosophy


What role does Cross River Rail play?

CRR moves SEQ towards an integrated network

CRR solves the capacity constraint on Merivale Bridge

CRR is a visionary solution

CRR is a well presented project proposal – Infrastructure Australia rates it

BUT……..

CRR is unfunded and unaffordable in the current fiscal environment

And the LNP is committed to looking at innovative alternatives should they win

government

Moving to an Integrated Network Philosophy


Moving to an integrated network philosophy –

The “Cleveland Solution”

The Cleveland Solution is a key step in moving towards an integrated network

philosophy

It offers:

• Value for money

• Different and cost effective technology

• Innovative financing

• Competitive tension through introduction of a new operator

And most importantly, it responds to what the commuter wants – greater

frequency.

Moving to an Integrated Network Philosophy


The existing rail

network with branch

line extensions:

MBRL & CAMCOS

branch lines

Extension to

Springfield

Moving to an Integrated Network Philosophy


The Cleveland

Solution – moving to

an integrated network

Extracting the

Cleveland/Ferny Grove

and Doomben lines

from the core

Moving to an Integrated Network Philosophy


The Cleveland Solution – what’s involved?

Moving to an Integrated Network Philosophy


The “Cleveland Solution”

• 5km from Park Rd Station to Roma

Street Station (partly at grade, 3km in

tunnel and 1.3km elevated over river)

• 3.8 km from Roma Street Station to the

Ferny Grove Line at Mayne Yard

(largely at grade)

• 6 New Stations at Park Road,

Woolloongabba, QUT/Queen St, Roma

St, Exhibition and Bowen Hills

• Citytrain interchange at Park Road,

Roma Street and Bowen Hills

• 1.4 km heavy rail passing loops at

Norman Park

• 12 km Manly to Cleveland 2nd track

• New fleet of 50 x 45m Light Metro

• Depot at Hemmant, and stabling yards

• Release 24 x 6 car EMU sets

• CAPEX $2.5B

• Operational within 4 years

Moving to an Integrated Network Philosophy


Moving to an Integrated Network Philosophy


Moving to an Integrated Network Philosophy


Moving to an Integrated Network Philosophy


Moving to an Integrated Network Philosophy


Moving to an Integrated Network Philosophy


Moving to an Integrated Network Philosophy


The Cleveland Solution – breakdown of costs

Moving to an Integrated Network Philosophy


Myths and Facts – the cost estimate

Myth

The $2.5B cost is way below what it would actually cost.

Fact

The $2.5B cost is a pre feasibility estimate based on 2011 rates.

One needs to understand the scope of the works involved to be able to

challenge the accuracy of the cost estimate.

Moving to an Integrated Network Philosophy


Myths and Facts – the capacity question

Myth

The Cleveland Solution does not provide the long term capacity across the

Merivale Bridge when compared to Cross River Rail.

Fact

With the Cleveland Solution, growth on the Gold Coast and Beenleigh Lines

across the Merivale Bridge will be again approach its capacity by the late

2020s.

With the CRR Scheme, growth on the Cleveland and Beenleigh Lines across

the Merivale Bridge will exceed its capacity by the early 2020s.

The longer term solution for either options may be to go to 9 car trains on the

Gold Coast and Beenleigh Lines.

Moving to an Integrated Network Philosophy


Myths and Facts – levels of service

Myth

Commuters on the Cleveland and Ferny Grove lines will get poorer levels of

service in terms of journey times, seating and frequency.

Fact

The light metro rolling stock will be project specific to operate at equivalent

speeds to EMUs (80kph) and be configured to suit the seating requirements of

the journeys involved.

Light metro vehicles will operate on a higher frequency than the current EMU

rolling stock and consequently provide a higher level of service.

Moving to an Integrated Network Philosophy


Myths and Facts – engineering constraints in

the CBD

Myth

The alignment proposed for the Cleveland Solution won’t work due to the

constraints of existing infrastructure in the CBD.

Fact

Light metro technology allows rolling stock to negotiate corners as tight as 30m

radius and gradients as steep as 6%.

This means the Cleveland Solution can be aligned under the tight geometric

constraints of city streets and deliver a far more cost effective alignment than

Cross River Rail.

Moving to an Integrated Network Philosophy


Myths and Facts – level crossings, grade

separations and signalling

Myth:

The expenditure for level crossings, grade separations and signalling is not

included in the project budget.

Fact:

Grade separations to replace existing level crossings were costed under a level

crossing replacement program.

Light metro, like light rail, can stop and start more quickly than EMUs, can

operate on line of sight and would not require a sophisticated signalling system.

Moving to an Integrated Network Philosophy


Myths and Facts – what about freight?

Myth

The Cleveland Solution does not address the movement of freight through the

city train network.

Fact

Correct – the Cleveland Solution does not improve the conflict between freight

and city train services on the Gold Coast Line. This conflict is to be managed

under a separate project identified in the Public Transport Priorities Program to

provide an additional track for freight between Yeerongpilly and Park Road.

Moving to an Integrated Network Philosophy


The Cleveland Solution – light metro technology

The Frankfurt U Bahn

Moving to an Integrated Network Philosophy


The Cleveland Solution – light metro technology

Light Metro, Paris

Moving to an Integrated Network Philosophy


The Cleveland Solution – finance and operations

Having more than one operator of an urban passenger rail system is not

uncommon.

An “unbundled” system using “Availability” PPP contracts would lead to:

• Real competition “for” the market (the right to operate) and competition “in”

the market (competing for passengers)

• Innovation in the “product” offered – ticketing, service standards, facilities,

information etc

• Lower costs per passenger carried and services that are responsive to

customer needs

Adopting an Availability PPP may also enable sourcing of funds from a wider

range of sources – bonds, superannuation funds etc – particularly where

incentives are used and a long contract life is adopted (+20 years).

Moving to an Integrated Network Philosophy


Availability PPP: Case Study 1 – Canada Line, Vancouver

Project Attributes

• Driverless Automated Light Rail System

• 19 km (12miles) / 16 stations

• 3 water crossings, 2 bridges, 9 km tunnelling

• Estimated 100,000 pax per by 2010

• Public/private partnership (P3)

• Design-Build-Finance-Operate (DBFO)

• 35-year concession agree

• third line in TransLink’s SkyTrain metro network

Project Finance

S$1.l]

C$1.47 bn total cost:

35% InTransitBC (Private Sector)

22% Canadian Federal Government

17% TransLink

13% Vancouver Airport

12% Province of British Columbia

1% City of Vancouver

Monthly availability payments are

made from public sector entity to

private sector entity, InTransitBC,

based on the following

performance measures:

• Vehicle availability and

schedule performance

• Quality of service (passenger

accessibility, comfort and

convenience, and maintenance

and upkeep of vehicles and

stations )

• Meeting ridership thresholds

• Canada Line Availability

Moving to an Integrated Network Philosophy


Availability PPP: Case Study 2 – Gold Coast Rapid Transit

The GCRT is a A$1 billion 18 year PPP contract with

the Queensland Government to design, build, finance,

operate and maintain a light rail public transportation

system, with operations to commence in 2014. The

Project’s private financing will include $365m of debt

and $65m of equity.

Equity financing will come from Marubeni Group

(26.7%); International Public Partnerships Limited

(26.7%): Keolis SA (10%); Aveng Australia (10%); and

Plenary Group, in a strategic alliance with Palisade’s

Australian Social Infrastructure Fund (26.7%).

Consisting of 14 light rail vehicles and 16 stations, the

GCRT will service a 13 kilometre route between the

Gold Coast University Hospital and Broadbeach.

Patronage numbers are expected to grow to 50,000

passengers per day.

Moving to an Integrated Network Philosophy


The Cleveland

Solution – the

first step

towards a fully

integrated

network

Moving to an Integrated Network Philosophy


www.ghd.com

Moving to an Integrated Network Philosophy

More magazines by this user
Similar magazines