Council ol Mayors South E<1Rt Queensland

Public Transport in SEQ Options to deliver value and innovation in future South East

Queensland public transport infrastructure January 2012 5 w -(/)

u c ::J u0 GHD was commissioned by the Council This report not only develops a list of of Mayors (SEQ) to provide advice on priority projects, but proposes a new innovative and value for money options for vision for SEQ Public Transport that puts investment in the public transport network the commuter at the heart of the system. in (SEQ). It is being released to encourage public discussion about options for investing in A key challenge for the investment public transport infrastructure across SEQ. program for public transport infrastructure in SEQ is how to meet the needs of The report does not represent an endorsed a growing region within the financially policy position of the Council of Mayors constrained fiscal environment now faced (SEQ). which will not consider the report by all levels of government. and public reactions to it until after the 2012 local government elections. The A key concern is whether the funds exist Council of Mayors (SEQ) will consider to proceed with the State Government's all options in developing its future input iconic $7700M project. into the next iteration of the Queensland Some SEQ Councils are concerned Infrastructure Plan. that funding the project may delay other important projects in the region, while The Council of Mayors (SEQ) looks forward failure to deliver the project may stymie to further developing a constructive growth of the network. working partnership with the Queensland For these reasons, GHD was asked to Government on planning for the consider whether the objectives of the infrastructure that SEQ will need over the Cross River Rail project can be met in a next decade to maximise the liveability, more cost effective way. sustainability and productivity of this great region. The State Government has invested an average of about $1500M annually over the last four years on public transport infrastructure. GHD was asked to consider what could be delivered if expenditure was maintained at around that level over the next decade, having regard to the priorities in the Queensland Infrastructure Plan and the priorities identified by the Council of Mayors (SEQ). Contents

06 40 Executive Summary On the Main Stage

What Needs to be I 40 page 15 Delivered in the Next Five Introduction to Ten Years? Financing the Plan 142 page 16 Introducing Competitive 45 page State of Play Tension into the System

Current Public Transport 116 page Proposals 46 Major Problems 19 page Conclusion

The Opporunity 20 page

Affordable, Timely and 22 page Innovative Solutions The Cleveland Solution 24 page

Projects Beyond 2022 39 page

Uncer·tarn Critical bottlenecks (such Commission Where Environment as the ) are In recognising that policy strangling the network While vast improvements to the The current planning -the additions of new makers are at the cross roads public transport network have environment is uncertain: branch lines to the SEQ and face several critical been made over the last • The fiscal positions of the network effectively means decisions, the Council of decade, several critical State and Commonwealth train paths compete for Mayors, South East Queensland problems remain: (COMSEQ) has commissioned Governments are track in the congested CBD Servicing areas in the extremely tight- the ability core which progressively GHD to investigate innovative outer network where there and value for money options of the public sector to make dilutes the level of service in are low urban densities for investment in the public large investments in capital outer networks. -the busway system has projects has been greatly transport network in SEQ. It seems increasingly been a very effective diminished. unlikely that the current GHD's approach has been to strategy to address this • The private sector has Cross River Rail proposal answer five basic questions: issue but it is becoming a little appetite to take on can be afforded in the 1. What is the current state of victim of its own success as patronage risk for current fiscal environment play and priorities for public inner city connections congest in peak hours. transport projects -the - Cross River Rail can transport capital private sector is just not address many of the expenditure? • The inner city rail "core" is willing to invest through network connectivity issues 2. Where are the major at capacity and as new traditional PPP models, and bottlenecks in the core problems? branch and spur lines are particularly in public but the solution is expensive introduced, service levels transport projects. and currently unfunded. 3. What does the commuter and frequency in the wider Patronage has generally want from the public network are being • The sheer scale of the transport network in SEQ? increased and is expected Cross River Rail progressively diluted. to continue to grow- this investment may also act 4. What needs to be delivered • The demand for public is placing pressure on to 'crowd out' other in the next five and ten years transport is increasing and services and reliability. projects needed across and what can we afford? the availability of funds to • The costs (subsidy) to South East Queensland as 5. Are there innovative and service that demand is funds become increasingly deliver public transport value for money approaches constrained by a tight services has been steadily scarce to financing and delivering fiscal environment. increasing- in the order of • While rail is described as the priorities and delivering what • There is also a nagging $55 0M in 2007/2008 to 'backbone' of future public the commuter wants? issue of the conflict approximately $700M in transport infrastructure, between Citytrain services 2013/2014. buses carry twice as many and freight movements to passengers as trains and a the Port of and balanced infrastructure across the CBD. plan needs to include all modes of transport.

Public Transport in SEQ I Options to deliver value and innovation infullire South East Queendland public transport infrastructure I January 201121 7 What does the commuter To sum 1t up: GHD recommends a new in want? • South East Queensland vision for SEQ public a In framing our report and commuters want transport that puts the recommendations, GHD has increased service commuter first: The great urban rail (and sought to address the key quality, reliability and The public transport public transport) systems of question- what do SEQ greater frequency and system for SEQ will be the world (both large and commuters (and tax connectivity- "no characterised by high medium sized cities) are integrated networks that payers) really want? timetables-just turn up frequency peak services, adapt various modes of In this regard, South East and go". off peak services that transport for the function Queenslanders are no • South East respond to demand, required (and what the seamless interchanges, different to other urban Queenslander taxpayers commuter needs). real time passenger commuters. They want: want better value for They are true networks of money solutions. information systems, value • Enhanced performance for money, effective independent lines and service reliability These practical desires of integrating with each other delivery and a focus on through common nodes, • Increased service quality SEQ residents are consistent customer service that is where passengers change to with the Council of Mayors. Integrated Network and frequency second to none. other lines. • Better use of assets and COMSEQ wants a public From the users' perspective, increases in productivity transport system that is an they function effectively as engine for regional economic one mtegrated system • Cost reductions per growth, but also one that is regardless of veflicle type, • passenger journey greener and safer and When developing its particular technology and recommendations, GHD has improves quality of life in our mode. • Better connectivity and proposed both a broad opportunities to communities across the In Australia, our public whole of our region. philosophical change and seamlessly transfer to several pragmatic and value transport systems - different modes. for money alternatives. This particularly rail - have evolved from CBD based radial philosophical approach and systems progressively the value for money extending branch lines into alternatives are supported by new suburbs from the core. assessing the role of: In SEQ's radial network, • Different and new each new branch line technologies effectively adds another line through the central • Innovative financing core and can only be • Introduction of new accommodated 15y sharing • operators into the system existing stations and track or Radial Network by building new • System integration. infrastructure.

8 G'{tll!J!Cl Nvtth

f\J,~,mbour

L PJnd!:,hnrough

Sandgate

Ferny Gro..,e

Robma •

V3re1ty· Lakf!!~, .-

Public Transport in SEQ 1 Options to deliver value and innovation in future South East Queendland public transport infrastructure I January 20112 1 9 The Cleveland Solution

As the city grows, the The "Cleveland Solution" In essence, by extracting the solutions become very removes the Cleveland Line Cleveland, Ferny Grove and expensive - hence the services from the Merivale Doom ben lines lrom the core: $7700M1 cost of the current Bridge (almost 50% of its Nearly half of the Cross River Rail proposal. current demand) by ca[Jacity of train paths GHD argues that SEQ can constructing a new rail line on Menvale Bridge continue to compound the from the Park Road Station to become available at central core capacity problem Roma Street Station, via a about one-third of the with more branch lines and tunnel to , CAPEX $2500M then a new bridqe over the current Cross River Rail Fleet and expensive core cost enhancements, or we can river beside (and imitating) the Captain Cook Bridge ana Platform and track space transition the existing radial through the central core is II Stations system to an integrated Riverside Expressway, and network. then via a tunnel under released Herschel Street to a new fi~tt Cleveland Track f. real opportunity to inject The first step to achieve this underground platform mnovat1on, pnvate could be to extract some beneath Roma Street Station. investment, competition 2'~ Track and Power lines from the core and New underground stations and importantly, value for 2ll;li reintroduce them as Bridges would be provided at Park money into the system, is independent lines crossing facilitated the core - this is the basis of Road, Woolloonqabba and Tunnels the "Cleveland Solution". Roma Street, with two new • A higher freq1,1ency elevated stations at Gardens serv1ce 1s acfueved Point (OUT) and Queen Property The First Street. • Citytrain rolling stock is "Cleveland released to the wider Public Utilities After Roma Street Station, network. The "Cleveland Solution" the proposal would then run involves fast tracking of a on surface up the Exhibition Underpinning the "Cleveland Owners Costs "value for money" option to Line corridor, with a new Solution" is innovative address inner c1ty rail Exhibition Station and a new financing, new technology Contingency capacity and transition from a Bowen Hills (West) Station and potential entry of a new "radial" to an "inteqrated" before joining into the Ferny operator. system at a cost or $2500M Grove Line at Breakfast Cross River Rail': Office of the as opposed to the $7700M Creek. Infrastructure Coordinator. Commonwealth of Australia/ April total estimate for Cross River 2011 for the 2017 lnfrastruc ure Rail. The Light Metro operation on Priority List. the Cleveland Line will include the duplication of the track from Manly to Cleveland. The Light Metro will also be segregated from freight movements to the and an additional freight line passing loop will be provided at Norman Park. 10 "Availability contract PPPs" What about the entry of a may offer a mechanism to new operator? Introducing Light Metro The reality is the current fund "value for money" As well as being integrated technology into the SEQ rail fiscal environment prevents m~or public transport networks comb1nin~ various network provides a range of the funding of "mega projects, where contractors modes of trans port Tor the advanta~es for lines not projects" such as Cross and operators are paid on the function required (and what carrying freight, including: River Rail- there is simJJIY no basis of the time the asset is the commuter needs), a made available to the user. • Higher frequency of public funding available for a number of the great urban serv1ces project of this scale. The The model is reasonably public transport systems prOJect is currently unfunded. common in social have more than one • Far greater operational infrastructure but emerging in operator on their network. flexibility There is also empirical evidence over many years of public transport across It could be argued that Improved vehicle consistent cost overruns in several jurisdictions, including 's performance "mega projects" such as for the Gold Coast Rapid monopoly stifles Transit System. • Lower capital and Cross River Rail. innovation. The subsidy to operational costs The key finding of the Matt Adopting an Availability PPP operate the service is MacDonald Report (2002), may also enable accessing of increasin~ from (In the order • Opportunity to introduce a funds from a wider range of oO $5501\71 in 2007/8 to new operator and Review of Large Public Procurement in the UK, HM sources- bonds, a[Jproximately $700M in competitive tension into superannuation funds etc - 2013/14. Furthermore, the system. Treasury, London, National Audit Office was: "high particularly where incentives empirical research and Light Metro technology is levels of optimism in are used and a long contract practical experience show used extensively in m~a-sized life is adopted (e.g. 20+ multiple operators within an project estimates arising Integrated system: European cities such as from underestimating years). Frankfurt, Lisbon and Vienna project costs and duration • Introduces "competitive and is ideally suited to the or overestimating project tension" to the network steeper ~rai:les and tighter benefits". curves of the "Cleveland • Drives innovation Solution". In other words "mega • Can reduce the cost per projects" will almost inevitably passenger journey. experience a budget blowout. There is also no Importantly, the competition ar:>r:>etite for a traditional is driven by what the PPP for a project of this commuter wants due to the scale where capital costs are nature of the availability high, patronage risk would be contracts developed. transferred to the private sector, and the new infrastructure would form part of the Queensland Rail passenger network.

Public Transport in SEQ 1 Options to deliver value and innovatirn in future South East Queendland pubic transpat infrastructure I January 20112 I 11 GHD has also identified The legislative frameworks priorities for the 6-1 0 year are in place to enable Local horizon valued at an Government to accumulate As inner city rail capacity is additional $7500M. funds which can be so critical to the efficiency Several of these projects are hypothecated to nominated and effectiveness of the current commitments but public transport infrastructure entire network - a problem GHD has also assessed and services. that won't qo away- a key some of the current Such projects would need to aspect of GHD's proposals and recommended be subject to needs recommendations centre revised scope and lower cost assessment, rigorous cost around investment of (value for money) solutions. benefit analysis and be clearly $2500M on the "Cleveland Several new projects have articulated in local and Solution". This is a priority also been included where regional plans to ensure project to be delivered over there is a demonstrated need appropriate use of monies. the next 5 years as the and value for money is Direct local government demand over the Merivale achieved. contributions towards Bridge exceeds its capacity. In tight fiscal times, value for public transport could aid Over the last four years the money solutions, based on 1n funding needed has commuter needs- should be infrastructure and/or services invested around $1500M per in a timelier manner than the underlying objective. year in public transport. This would otherwise be the case. report argues the Several councils are already Queensland Government How can Local making substantial needs to continue to invest at Government contritlutions to public contribution? the same level ($1500M per transport, from dedicated year) to build the public Making a contribution to the transport levies (e.g. GCCC, transport network that can provision of public transport SCRC) or direct from rates deliver the services required Infrastructure and services fits (e.g. BCC, MBRC). to meet the mode share well with local government. targets. Local overnment is well Having a stake-in-the-game will encourage local Based on our assumption of placed to define and work government to take a more with major providers and the $7500M to be expended on active role in community State in developing average over a five year promotion and in seeking period, the second staqe of appropriate services that deliver locally and integrate ways to reduce car GHD's analysis involvea dependency across SEQ. assessing and well across JUrisdictions. recommending a range of It also gives local government other priority projects valued a more attractive seat at the at $5000M over the next five table" when determining years. strategic priorities -this would be a positive step forward.

12 Recommended Investment Program

Recommended Investment Program

After assessing other project Table 01: Short Term Years 1 - 5 Table 02: Short Term Years 6- 10 options, GHD recommends the following project priorities and their estimated capital expenditure for the next five years, set out in Tables 01 and 02. Sunshine Coast Connect $420M Eastern Bus Prior~y - Bus lanes New passenger rail stock $500M $160M Carindale to Capalaba Gold Coast Rapid - to Helensvale $850M Inner City Rail (The Cleveland $2500M Solution) 2A $25M South East Buswayto Springwood $420M New Citytrain Stabling Depot at Freight Line Improvements $575M $100M Clapham CBD Bus Infrastructure Capacity $1 OOOM Rail - Springfield to Red bank Plains $200M Program Gold Coast Bus Lanes $30M Northern Busway - Sadlier St to $60M Northern Busway - Chermside to Gold Coast Rapid - Broadbeach to Rode Rd $600M $280M Asp ley Park wood Northern Bus Priority - Rode Rd to $50M Rail - Varsity to Elanora $1 400M Rail - Camera to Helensvale $430M Chermside Sunshine Coast Light Rail (planning $600M Rail - Kuraby to Kingston and Rail- Richlands to Springfield $280M and property) $230M Loganlea Rail - Kepera to Ferny Grove $29M Rail - Acacia Ridge to Flagstone $300M Eliminate Open Level Crossings $400M Translink Station Upgrades $161M Eliminate Open Level Crossings $500M New passenger rail stock $300M Bus Priority $20M Rail - Red bank to Ripley $450M Rail - Lawnton to Petrie third rail track $200M Bus Prior~y $350M Rail - Beerburrum to Landsborough $470M Public Transport 5 Year Priority Program ~ $7,498M Park n' Ride $350M Moreton Bay Rail Link (MBRL) $253M (planning & property) $200M CBD Bus Infrastructure Capacity $25M Program !Public Transport 6 to 10 Year Priority $7,520M Eastern Busway - Main Ave to Program~ $300M Bennetts Rd

Public Transport in SEQ 1 Opuons to deliver value and innCNation in future South East Queendland pubic transport infrastructure 1 January 20112 1 13 GHD recommends the Table 03: Medium Term Priorities following projects to be considered in the medium term, beyond the next 10 years: (Springwood to Loganholme)

Rail - Elanora to Coolangatta

Sunshine Coast Ught Rail Future Stages

Rail- Red bank Plains to Ipswich

Rail - Acacia Ridge to Flagstone (future stages)

Gold Coast Rapid Transit (future stages)

Rail - Gowrie to Grandchester (future stages)

Brisbane Metro

Northern Busway (future stages)

Bus Priority and Park n' Ride

Eastern Busway Future Stages

Redland Bus Priority

14 Introduction

GHD's analysis and • Which projects are recommendations are based relevant to the commuter on some key assumptions needs over the next 5 and and baseline criteria: 10 years? face critical • On average, $1500M is • Are the current projects spent on capital relevant to these needs expenditure for public and do they deliver a transport in SEQ per timely solution to the annum in recent years­ probTem they are seeking this represents up to to address? $7500M over 5 years. • Are the proposals Budget papers indicate value affordable in the current that over the last 4 years fiscal environment? for investment Queensland has invested; network 1n • Do the projects and - 2008/09, $1503M proposals represent value for money investment of GHD's approach has been to -2009/10, $1427M the public transport answer five basic questions: 201 0/11, $1605M dollar? 1 . What is the current state -2011/12, $1112M. The result is not only a list of of play and priorities for • In consultation with priority projects across the public transport capital re9ion but a new vision for expenditure? COMSEQ, GHD has identified public transport SEQ public transport that puts the commuter at the 2. Where are the major projects that are problems? considered key to solving heart of the system. 3. What does the commuter the region's future public want from the public transport needs. transport network in SEQ? • GHD has identified Photo: Adelaide Street, Brisbane (Brisbane Marketing) 4. What needs to be projects and assessed delivered in the next five whether they meet the and ten years and what re9ion's needs and offer a can we afford? vaTue proposition for the taxpayer. 5. Are there innovative and value for money In considering the critical approaches to financing [Jroblems to be addressed, and delivering priorities GHD then assessed and and are they delivering prioritised projects and what the commuter proposals on the basis of wants? answering these questions:

Public Transport in SEQ 1 Options to deliver value and innOJatim in future South East Queendland pubic trans pert infrastructure I January 201121 15 Current Public Tranport Proposals

To identify the range of projects to be assessed in this report, GHD identified priorities and proposals for iJUblic transport Infrastructure 1n South East Queensland documented in several publications including: • 2011 Queensland Budget papers • Queensland Infrastructure Plan 2011 (QIP) • Various SEQIP and QIP publications over recent years • Council of Mayors (SEQ) Getting SEQ Moving 2011-12 Infrastructure Priorities.

16 Table 04: Significant Public Transport Projects (with published estimates)

The 2011 Budget listed However, they were public tran1tor~rojects examined for relevance to the Moreton Bay Rail Link $1147M Sunshine Coast Connect $420M totallin~ $3 25 over 3 existing~ublic transport ~ears. he projects are either needs. orne of these New passenger rail stock (new Rail - Gowrie to Grandchester rail line $1680M eing completed or projects could form the early generation program) $1214M committed by virtue of the Northern Busway- Future Stages stage of the ultimate $29M funding, and consequently configuration (e.g. Coast Rail - Coomera to Helensvale $432M (planning) are not generally new Connect could be an early initiatives, but prior form of CAMCOS). New Stabling Facilities (planning) $35M Rail - Varsity to Elanora $1391 M commitments. A number of other Allied In consultation with Public Transport Projects Rail - Elanora to Coolangatta $840M COMSEQ, GHD identified has also emer~ed as Significant Public Transport Projects= $30,641 M two categories of projects components o the major and proposals: init~atives suchasCross River Rail - Kuraby to Kingston and Loganlea $230M • Significant Public Rail, or other st(sniftcant Table 05: Allied Public Transport Projects Transport Projects_ developments see Table 05). Rail - Lawnton to Petrie third rail track $114M major public trans~ort When we take into account projects specifical y these two categories of Gold Coast Rapid Transit -future stages $2160M identified 1n planning projects, there are currently Rail - New Citytain Stabling Depot at documents, accompanied almost 30 bud3eted, South East Busway (Eight Mile Plains to $100M with cost estimates sigt:Jificant an allied Springwood) $276M Clapham • Allied Public Transport projects listed at a value of Freight Line improvements (coal line Projects _ projects JUSt over $35000fVI that are Redland Bus Priority $156M $2000M identified as components considered pnonttes to grade separations of major projects, or other varytng degrees. CBD Bus Infrastructure capacity program $500M Gold Coast Bus Lanes $31M significant developments. The Significant Public - A number of Significant Tran?port Projects and Allied Eastern Busway Future Stages $3917M Rail - Acacia Ridge to Flagstone $900M Public Transport Projects Publtc Transport ProJects (with capital expenditure became the tar~t prOJects Inner City Rail (Cross River RaiD $7700M Rail - Springfield to Redbank Plains $200M estimates) has also been for thts st~dy. G D revtewed ·d 'f d · bl' h d those proJects and t ent1.1e tn pu IS e recommended priority Rail - Ipswich to Springfield $1800M Rail - Redbank Plains to Ripley $400M ~anntng documents, such as projects over two five year IP (see Table 04). timeframes: Rail - Beerburrum to Landsborough $480M Eliminate Open Level Crossings $770M These projects vary from reasonably current to long . 2012- 2017 Cross River Rail (Stage 2 -Inner City Rail - Landborough to $2160M Uncosted term aspirational f

Public Transport in SEQ 1 Options to deliver value and innovatim in future South East Queendland pubic transpcrt infrastructure 1 January 20112 1 17

The Major Problems

The public transport system In particular, the inner city As the road system becomes So while vast improvements primarily consists of the rail sections of the South East congested, more people are to the public transport and bus infrastructure that Busway are under increasing travelling the longer distances network have been made serves South East pressure and the Victoria to the crr.y on the Gold Coast over the last decade, several Queensland (SEQ). This Bridqe and Adelaide Streets Line, the Caboolture Line and critical problems remain: infrastructure has historically link, Tor example, are Ipswich Line. Services to the • Servicing areas in the evolved to serve the low frequently experiencing extremities of these lines are outer network where urban densities that are significant bus congestion being extended and there are low urban typical of the suburban expanded to meet this during peak periods. densities -the busway developments in SEQ. The Brisbane City Council demand. The inner city rail system has been a very "core", between Roma Street In the past, this model of low has commissioned a $2M effective strategy to density suburbs suited the feasibility stud,Y, on building a Station and Bowen Hills address this issue but it is high mobility offered by the 'green oridge for buses from Station, is now approaching becoming a victim of its capacity with the growth in motor car, out as traffic tfle Bus way to connect to a own success as inner city congestion on the road tunnel under Adelaide Street, extremities of the rail network. connections congest in network grew with Brisbane's effectively extending the The Cross River Rail (CRR) peak hours. population, more pressure Busway riqht through the city. project was conceived to • The inner city rail "core" has been placed on public This transformational project solve this problem. CRR was is at capacity and as new transport services to offer a is projected to cost upwards also an opportunity to branch and spur lines are viable alternative for the of $2000M. address the conflict between introduced, service levels movement of people. The rail system has evolved the Citytrain services and the and frequency in the Photo: Harrison Saragossi Over the last decade, the over a much longer period of freiqht movements to the Port wider networK are being Queensland Government has time and tends to address of Brisbane and across the progressively diluted. city. invested heavily in the the longer journeys across • The demand for public express busway system as a the urban area. Its Recent trends would also transport is increasing strategy to provide an catchments are limited by the indicate the demand for as the population grows efficient public transport geographic location of those investment in public transport and the cost and railway lines and the modes is increasing and the service to the low densities of congestion of the private the dormitory suburbs. that feed its stations. availability of funds to service alternative Increases that demand is now being This strategy has been so In response to the increasing constrained by a restrained • There is also a nagging successful that the busway congestion in the transport fiscal environment. issue of the conflict system 1s now expenenc1ng system, urban densities are between Citytrain significant congestion and increasing around railway It has become apparent that services and freight further investment is required stations, Improved feeder the public transport dollar movements to the Port of needs to be stretched further to fund a number of services and park and ride Brisbane and across the proposals to solve these facilities and new spur lines through prudent project CBD problems. are generating the demand scoping to solve the for additional rail services. immediate problems in the • Investment in public system. transport will be constrained by the availability of funds.

Public Transport in SEQ 1 Options to deliver value and innCNaticn in future South East Queendland pubic transpcrt infrastructure I January 201121 19 The Opportunity

The State Government's To put that into scale, the Table 06: Annual public transport passengers 2003-04 to 2009-10 recently released Integrated system accommodated an Regional Transport Plan for extra 56 million passenqers in SEQ "Connectrng SEQ 2031" 2009-10 compared to 2003-4. 200 • Rail Bus includes an ambrtious tarqet It will need to accommodate 175.3 175.5 of increasing the modal snare an extra 276 million ,~ 0 of regional daily trips taken on passengers by 2031 to meet = RUblrc transport from 7% the State Government's § (2006) to 14% (2031). targets. 0/, c: This ambitious target is ~ Given population growth, that ;g would represent a trebling of achievable- in the six years to ..0 total trips by public transport 2009-10, public transport g;J from 652,000 trips per day to patronage grew by 47%, three lii 50 2 million trips per day. This times faster than population ~ will require a substantial growth. CL'" investment in public transport This has been on the back of a infrastructure and also infrastructure program to 0 operating expenses. improve the network services 2003-04 2004-05 2005-Q6 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 of busways and rail improvements. Source: Trans/ink Transit Authority public transport patronage data. However, failure to make this Note: Excludes passenger board7ngs on ferry services. investment will result in a seriously congested road networl< which is already costing the region around $300UM a year in lost productivity.

20 Substantial investment into This report argues that, Local Government Area public transport needs to notwitnstanding its financial occur right across the region constraints, the State needs as demonstrated by the to continue to spend at public transport dany trip around the same level targets by local government ($1500M a year) to build the Brisbane 360,000 10.3% 860,000 20% 500,000 area (LGA) in Connectinq network that can deliver the SEQ 2031 shown in Table 07. services needed to meet the Ipswich 33,000 6.5% 185,000 12% 152,000 These targets highlight the modal share target. challenge not just of It is a huge challenge, but it is Moreton Bay 72,000 6.2% 190,000 11% 118,000 commuting from greenfield also a huge opportunity for areas in the outer suburbs, SEQ. SEQ residents have but also the need to shown that if public transport Logan 50,000 5.5% 140,000 10% 90,000 significantly increase public is efficient, affordable and transport modal shares in reliable, they will embrace Red land 25,000 5.7% 65,000 10% 40,000 Brisbane and Gold Coast as public transport. the population density of This behavioural change will these cities increase. Gold Coast need to be promoted over 72,000 4.4% 400,000 15% 328,000 Over the past four years, the the next two decades if our State Government llas region is to accommodate Sunshine Coast 40,000 3.6% 175,000 10% 135,000 invested around $1500M a projected population growth year into public transport without compromising Infrastructure in SEQ, productivity, liveability or although investment flagged sustainabifity. a little this year: • 2008-09 ($1503M) • 2009-10 ($1427M) • 2010-11 ($1605M) • 2011-12 ($1112M) (Source: Budget papers)

Public Transport in SEQ j Options to deliver value and innO\Iatim in fuhJre South East Queendland pubic transpat infrastructure I January 20112 j 21 Affordable, Timely and Innovative Solutions

In considering the critical A number of projects Oisted in Listed projects considered necessary and appropriate for Listed projects considered necessary and appropriate for [Jroblems to be addressed, Budget 2011 , QIP) are 2012-2017 year program are: 2017 - 2022 year Program are: GHD assessed and considered to be timely and prioritised projects and valuable investments: Table 08: Project Priorities 2012-2017 year Program Table 09: Project Priorities 2017-2022 year Program proposals on the basis of answenng these questions: • Which projects are relevant to the commuter needs over the next five and ten years? Moreton Bay Rail Link (MBRL) $1147M Gold Coast Rapid Transit (Stage 2) $850M

• Are the current projects New Citytrain Stabling Depot at Clapham $100M South East Busway (Eight Mile Plains to $276M relevant to these needs Springwood) and do they deliver a Gold Coast Bus Lanes $30M timely solution to the Rail - Ripley to Springfield $650M problem they are seeking Rail - Coomera to Helensvale $432M to address? Rail - Varsity to Elanora $1400M • Are the proposals Rail- Kurabyto Kingston and Loganlea $230M affordable in the current Redland Bus Priority $156M fiscal environment? Eliminate Open Level Crossings (over 10 years) $770M Can they be staged to reduce the initial Sunshine Coast Connect $420M investment? Listed projects considered to be beyond the 10 year Program Rail - Lawnton to Petrie third rail track $200M are: • Do the projects and proposals represent value Rail - Beerburrum to Landsborough $470M Table 10: Projects beyond the 10 year Program for money investment of the public transport Translink Station Upgrades $161M dollar? The key questions are: Rail - Richlands to Springfield $270M • Where do South East Queenslanders get the Rail - CAM COS $3960M best value from aollars spent? Rail - Elanora to Coolangatta $840M

• Are we extractinq South East Busway (Springwood to maximum value for users $600M from our systems and the Loganholme) funds allocated? Rail - Ipswich to Ripley $1150M

22 to be Reviewed

As well as some new project Table 11: Significant Public Transport Projects proposals, several proJects proyide an opportunity to revtew the scope, reduce cost and hence improve the value of the investment. These projects to be Cross River Rail (CRR) $7700M reviewed, and the published estimated cost, are: Eastern Busway Future Stages $3917M

Northern Busway Future Stages (part oO $620M

CBD Bus Infrastructure capacity program $500M

Table 12: Allied Public Transport Projects

Rail - New City Train Stabling Depot at $100M Clapham

Freight Une Improvements $2000M

Rail - Acacia Ridge to Flagstone $900M

Cross City Metro $6000M

Public Transport in SEQ I Opions to deliver value and innovation in future South East Queendland pubic transpat infrastructure I January 201121 23 Significant Projects for Review

Cross River The project includes four new Expressway, and then via a Cleveland underground stations at tunnel beneath Herschel Street to a new underground The inner city rail network is Bogqo Road, platform under the Rom a operating close to capacity Woolloongabba, Albert Street Street Station. with the city platforms from and Roma Street and two Roma Street Station to new surface stations at New underground stations Yeerongpilly and the would be provided at Park Bowen Hills experiencing Exhibition. The project also high utilisation and effectively Road and Woolloongabba, no room for expansion. includes a new Citytrain and elevated stations at st~bling facility at Clapham, Gardens Point (Qun and/or In the morning peak hour, the adJacent to Moorooka. Queen Street. Merivale Bridge over the While the Cross River Rail currently After Roma Street Station the operates services on the project is a visionary solution proposal would then run on 19 to tne capac1ty proolems of Gold Coast (4), Beenleigh (7) surface up the Exhibition Line and Cleveland (8) Lines. At 3 inner city rail network, the corridor, with a new Exhibition minute headways the single $7700M estimated cost of Station and a new Bowen the proposal will seriously test northbound track over the Hills (West) Station before bridge is considered to have the borrowing capacity of joining into the Ferny Grove a theoretical capacity for 20 most qovernments ana Line at Breakfast Creek. woulcfonly attract very train paths in the morning This proposal would remove peak hour. This capacity modest private capital. A more affordable solution both the Cleveland Line and restriction is confirmed by the appears to be warranted. the Ferny Grove Line from the delays regularly experienced congested rail network core by tflese services during the Financing a project of this between Bowen Hills and morning peak. scale would necessarily lead Roma St (but would to delays in delivery of other The available capacity on this interchange with the northern inner city network is urgentfy needed public line at those two stations). dominated by the Citytrain transport infrastructure across the rest of the SEQ Critically, the proposal services in the peak liours, network. releases the Cleveland Line significantly impairing the train paths (8 in peak hour) at:lility to operate reliable The "Cleveland Solution" across the Merivale Bridge, removes the Cleveland Line freigflt services across the providing an immediate city or to the Port of services from the Merivale capacity gain of over 70% for Bnsbane. Consequently, the Bridge by constructinq a new qrowth on the Beenleigh and Inner City Rail Capacity rail line from the Park Road Gold Coast Lines. project was developed and Station to Roma Street the Cross River Ra1l proposal Station, via a tunnel to was identified to construct Woolloongabba, then a new two new tracks in tunnel from bridqe over the river beside Yeeronqpilly in the south to (ancfimitating) the Captain north of Bowen Hills. Cook Bridge and Riverside

24 The "Cleveland Solution" is Consideration needs to be made possible by introducing given to minor technical Light Metro rolling stock that works and rescheduling of can negotiate the tighter services to mitigate these corners and steeper grades delays before tlie "Cleveland of the proposed ali~nment Solution" is affected. between Park Roaa and Roma St Stations. Duplication of the Ferny Grove Line, from Keperra to Ferny Light Metro rolling stock has Grove was funded in Budget a capacity of approximately 2011-12 for $29M. 600 passengers per train and The CRR project was originally would operate at 3 to 5 FtnyGtu-;1::! planned to meet the Merivale minute headways to service the demand on the Cleveland Bridge capacity crisis in 2016, but with limited funding its Line. Consequently, the completion has now been Cleveland and Ferny Grove Lines would enjoy a much delayed until 2020. more frequent service. The Clevelend Solution is more affordable, easier to fund The cost of the IJroposal, through an Availability PPP and including a new fleet of rolling stock, is estimated to be could be delivered to meet the 2016 deadline. $2500M. It would release 24 existing 6 car electric multiple The Light Metro operation on unit (EMU) sets back to the the Cleveland Line will include Citytrain network at an the duplication of the track from estimated value of $240M. Manly to Cleveland. The Light Metro will also be segregated A major project such as the from freight movements to the "Cleveland Solution" (or the Port of Brisbane and an Cross River Rail) will take several years to deliver, e.g. 4 additional freight line passing loop will be provided at Norman years to 2016, and overthe next few years rail Park. passengers on the three lines entering the city over the Merivale Bridge will continue to experience increasing congestion and significant delay. R~?1nn 111' A visionary approach- moving to an integrated network- Stage 2. Extracting the Cleveland! Ferny Grove and Doomben fines from the core.

Public Transport in SEQ 1 Options to deliver value and inno.tatim in future South East Queendland pubic transpcrt infrastructure I January 201121 25

The Cleveland Solution - Myths and Facts

Cross River Rail addresses the need for additional inner city capacity to support northern The Cleveland Solution addresses this issue by running both the Cleveland and Ferny Grove corridor rail services soon after 2016- the Cleveland Solution doesn't address this issue. lines as a pair down the Exhibition Line, releasing capacity on the northern and southern corridors.

The Cleveland Solution is not consistent with Connecting SEQ 2031 -An Integrated The Cleveland Solution addresses short, medium and long term requirements to meet future Transport Plan for SEQ which requires the network to meet future transport needs in the transport needs by transitioning the rail network from a radial to a fully integrated system short and long terms. which is consistent with the objectives of Connecting SEQ 2031 - An Integrated Transport Plan for SEQ. However, Connecting SEQ is totally dependent on the timely funding and delivery of Cross River Rail.

The Cleveland Solution would inevitably lead to a reduction in capacity on the Cleveland Line EMU capacity on the Cleveland Line could run at 20 trains per hour or 15000 people per as light rail carries less passengers than heavy rail EMUs. hour to match its predicted growth of 4% pa. Light metro 3 car trains can carry an equivalent capacity to EMU sets but at a far greater frequency because of reduced headways.

Light rail rolling stock can't operate at the same speeds as heavy rail resulting in increased The proposed rolling stock is project specific light metro rolling stock which can operate at transit times for commuters. 80kmh, particularly with higher floors and larger wheels. This is the same speed as heavy rail travels on the Cleveland Line.

The proposed alignment would remove direct services from Cleveland to key inner city areas The Cleveland Solution does not run directly through South Brisbane. However, major of South Brisbane. interchanges at Park Road, Roma Street and Bowen Hills will provide direct access to the heavy rail network as well as key centres such as the .

Commuters interchanging at Park Road and Bowen Hills may not be able to transfer to the The main interchange will always be Roma Street but as the Cleveland Solution allows heavy rail network on the north I south corridor as trains maybe full during peak hour. almost 50% extra capacity across Merivale Bridge, far higher frequency services should be able to be achieved on the north I south corridor and the Gold Coast I Beenleigh lines in particular.

Cross River Rail provides a new station at Albert Street whereas the Cleveland Solution only The Cleveland Solution provides much needed additional access for students at QUT and provides new stations on the river precinct. the growing river precinct. An Albert Street station can be included in the scheme at a higher cost. However, the Portside to lndooroopilly driverless metro proposed for 2017 - 2022 provides for additional CBD underground stations.

Public Transport in SEQ I Options to deliver value and innovaticn in fubJre South East Queendland pubic transpat infrastructure 1 January 20112 1 27 It is understood that congestion on Old Cleveland Roaa is significant in peak The 1km Stage 1 of the periods but the discrete use Eastern Busway - Buranda to of on road bus lanes (in lieu of a bus tunnel) and limited Main Avenue, Coorparoo, was recently completed at a investment in bus stops (in cost of $466M. A section of lieu of a full bus station) may this project known as 2A has provide better value for been funded in the 2011-12 money. Budget and the $25M The proposed solution allocation has been included includes the full bus station in the 2012-2017 Program. proposed for the Myer site, The next stage from Main with wade separated access from Did Cleveland Road, Ave to Bennetts Road is understood to also be in and bus lanes on Old tunnel at a cost of $690M. Cleveland Road at a more affordable cost of $300M. This cost for approximately 1 .5 km of busway is These bus lanes would be considered extravagant given addttional to existing traffic the congestion downstream lanes and would involve in the busway network some widening of the (discussed above) and the roadway and resumption of localised congestion on Old kerbside parking. Cleveland Road. The bus lanes from Carindale to Capalaba (including a direct access into the Carindale Centre) at an estimated cost of $160M are included in the five year program.

Proposed Busway Eastern Busway + 17E· ~50

28 and should be accelerated as a high priority capable of beinq implemented by mid The first stage of the northern 2012. busway is being delivered The alternate proposal is to with the Airport Link tollway construct this section at to Kedron. It will access north surface level (and avoid onto Gyrnpie Road at Sadlier tunnel sections) by widening Street. A study is currently Gym pie Road locally to developing the concept to create a bus lane in each extend the busway from direction (in lieu of kerbside Sadlier Street to P'rince parking only). The work Charles Hospital via Rode would Include establishing Road and then to Braken major stops and other bus Ridqe via Cherrnside and priority measures along Rode Aspley. Sections of this Road and Hamilton Road to busway are proposed to be Chermside. in tunnel or involve acquiring Bus priority should be property for a surface prov1ded at all conflict points busway at significant cost. with general traffic, including Airport Link is due to open to traffic signals as required. Tile traffic in rnid 2012 and is estimated cost of work along expected to increase traffic Gym pie Road is $60M, while volumes on Gyrnpie Road to additional bus priority super saturated levels. This measures on Rode Road and environment will be Hamilton Road are $50M. inappropriate for buses These bus lanes would be accessinq the northern additional to existing traffic busway along Road lanes and would involve and it is unlikely that the major schemes being some widening of the roadway and resumption of considered could be affected kerbside parking. for several years. The further extension of Consequently, as an alternative sc"heme, the first busway facilities including grade separated access to section of the Northern Chermside, and a busway to Busway must facilitate the safe and expedient Aspley would be provided in the second five years, 2017- movement of buses along 2022 at a cost of $600M. this section of Gym pie Road

Public Transport in SEQ I Options to deliver value and mnovation in future South East Queendland pubic transpat infra51ructure I January 20112 I 29 The f:!Opularity of the South East Bus way into the city has resulted in congestion from the busway tunnel onto Street, through the Cultural Centre Bus Station and over the Victoria Bridge into the CBD (note that some bus routes currently utilise the Captain Cook Bridge to ease congestion on the busway). Buses can also experience some delay as they pass throu!=Jh three sets of signalised intersections at the busway tunnel/Melbourne Street, Grey Street/ Melbourne Street and North Quay/William Street. The main delay, however, appears to be at the Cultural Centre Bus Station and can be random in nature. It is not uncommon for buses to experience long queues on the busway between Melbourne Street and South Bank Station heading towards the CBD (in morning peak hour) and from the Cultural Centre stop over the Victoria Bridge (in evening peak hour).

30 The Cultural Centre Bus Current public transport In the short term, operational Station has become the planning suggests that bus modifications could improve funnel for bus services services will only increase the flow of buses through this crossinq the Brisbane River within coming years with the corridor. These modifications to Soutfibank and West End. development of the Eastern could include: and Northern busways, so a It accommodates more 1. Designate bus routes to services than the bus stations viable solution to ease specific stops at the at King George Square congestion is required. Cultural Centre Bus (KGS), Queen Street, The problem appears to be a Station iJiatform (e.g. King Adelaide Street or Southbank combination of factors that George Square) Bus Station (that feed it). may not be solved through a 2. Pre-sell tickets to non single capital work The introduction of the high regular users with platform frequency City Glider serv1ce investment, although planning based ticket sales to West End through the is underway to develop a Cultural Centre Bus Station longerterm solution, such as 3. Re-route the West End has increased the load on a dedicated river bus bridge services (including the City this bus station and. ($500M) into an Adelaide Glider) around the Cultural consequently, it now appears Street tunnel ($1500M). Centre Bus Station, to new stops between Grey to be beyona is operational The Brisbane City Council capacity. and Merivale Streets has commissioned a $2M (estimated cost of $5M) The current mode of feasibility study into an operation at the Cultural extension of tfie South East 4. Grade separate the Centre Bus Station directs Busway into the city via a conflict point between arriving buses to the lead bridge parallel to Victoria general traffic on stop with follow up buses Bridge and a tunnel under the Melbourne Street and the occupying available space on length of Adelaide Street to busway tunnel exit a random basis (as per Post Office Sguare. Such an (estimated cost of $20M). Southbank Bus Station). This ambitious proJect would be A $25M provision for point 3 "free form" platform soon likely to cost in excess of and 4 above has a new bus exhausts its capacity and bus $2000M. bridge across the been queues build as buses wait A cross river bridge (without a included in the program for for available kerb space. tunnel through the city) is 2012-2017. The high proportion of non­ included in tfie Queensland regular users (e.g. tourists) Infrastructure Plan casted at can impede the boarding $500M. process with driver ticketing We have made provision for also creating random events $1 OOOM of expenditure to that throw tfie operation of progress this iJroject in the the station, and its Program for 2017-2022. approaches, into congestion.

Public Transport in SEQ 1 Options to deliver value and innovatioo in future South East Queendland pubic transpcrt infrastructure I January 20112 I 31 and Ride In Toowoomba, the population is forecast to The Program includes Increase from 160,000 to investment for specific elements of the Northern and 230,000 by 2031 . Eastern Busways and the Toowoomoa acts as a focal point for interstate and CBD Bus Capacity Program. Hence, complementary Intrastate freight movement, as three major highways investment will need to be converge in Toowoomba. made for various bus priority improvements and park ana As a result, Toowoomba ride facilities feeding the streets carry a high Busway system. concentration of commercial/ The 2017-2022 Program heavy vehicles and its central includes $350M for bus business district provides a priority and for park highway function for heavy $350M vellicle through traffic. and riae facilities. The proposed Toowoomba Bypass will divert some of th1s commercial traffic around the city, but traffic on the city road network will continue to frustrate public transport services. A suite of bus priority facilities has been proposed to ensure public transport provides a viable option to Toowoomba residents. A $20M provision for bus priority facilities in Toowoomba has been included in the 2012-2017 Program.

32 Allied Projects for Review

The Cross River Rail project included a new stabling facility at Clapham. The existinq Mayne Stabling Yard has littfe opportunity for expansion and with the anticipated future growth in the Cltytrain services a new stabling facility will be requ1rea. A stabling yard on the southern s1de of the city would be desirable and the facility proposed for the Cross River Rail project at Clapham 1s an appropnate Investment. These stabflng yards are estimated to cost $100M.

Public Transport in SEQ 1 Options to deliver value and innruatim in future South East Queendland pubic transpat infrastructure I January 20112 I 33 The existing rail corridor is relatively narrow and a fourth track w1ll require some The Cross River Rail project property acquisition and included a tunnelled section engineerinq solutions to from Yeerongpilly to Park accommodate the fourth Road to release surface track track. This proposal will also currently shared with the need to include the grade Gold Coast Line for freight seP£1ration of a freight line into movements across the city the Tennyson Line at and to the Port of Brisbane. Moorool

34 Toowoomba Access The 2010 SEQIPP had a The Cross River Rail tarqet completion timeline of improvements to resolve the 2026-31 for the project, conflict between public although the 2011 QIP transport services and the commits only to a Surat freight line to the Port of Basin rail corridor feasibility Brisbane raises the associated study to be conducted 2011- issue of freight access down 2013. the range from Toowoomba. While important to freight Public transport services movements of mining and between Brisbane and agricultural to the Port of Toowoomba could benefit Brisbane, its public transport from a more modern and benefits are fairly minimal in faster alignment of the rail line the short or medium terms. between Grandchester and As such, the rail project is Gowrie, particularly the range beyond the scope of this crossing. The twice weekly report. Westlander service currently The Council of Mayors (SEQ) takes over 4 hours to current list of prionty projects complete the trip. Regular includes funding for a second Citytrain services terminate at range road crossing around Rosewood. Toowoomba which would The existing rail alignment reduce heavy freight from Gowne to Grandchester movements through the is very slow and has been Toowoomba CBD. The rail identified for realignment to project would be a logical improve freight access to medium term complement to Bnsbane, particularly coal to this urgent priority, and would the Port of Brisbane and is be a key investment in the already running at capacity. strategic freight network for the region. As such the line will be unable to cope with expected It is likely that substantial expansion of the mining investment from the industry in the Surat Basin. resources sector would be needed to fund the Gowrie to The Gowrie to Grandchester Grandchester project. rail realiqnrnent project involve several kilometres of tunnelling and is ex[Jensive, listed in the 2009 SEQIPP with an estimate of $1400M.

Public Transport in SEQ 1 Opuons to deliver value and R'Jnovation in full.Jre South East Queendland pubic transprrt infrastructure I January 201121 35 Rail - Acacia Ridge to Flagstone There is increasing pressure for urban and light industrial development to occur in the southern corridor to Beaudesert. With siqnificant urban development being considered from Parkinson to Boronia, Flaqstone and Bromelton, tnere is an opportunity to utilise the existing standard gauge track to prov1de an emtiryonic passenger rail serv1ce from these developments to greater Brisbane. The proposal would be to construct island platform stations at Flagstone, Boronia and Parkinson and a new standard qauge platform at Salisbury. This infrastructure would facilitate a 15 minute frequency diesel-powered shuttle service to the Beenleigh and Gold Coast Lines at Salisbury station. The stations, track and rolling stock for the Flagstone rail service is estimated to cost $300M.

36 Brisbane Cross Consideration has also been The Cross City Metro is a - Ports ide to given to an extension further visionary project to facilitate In 2007, the Lord Mayor's west to the quality development of Taskforce lnvestiqation via the suburbs of Kenmore, 1nner Bnsbane as the city (LMTFI) identitiecfthree inner Jindalee and Mount matures in a "Peak Oil" Ommaney at a cost of environment. It is unlikely to city metro lines (University, Hospital and Sports Lines) as $2000M. be justified within the 1 0 year shallow tunnel, "tube" style The Metro as a medium term horizon but the $4000M first shuttle services. project: stage to lndooroopilly should be considered for delivery in In 2008, the Inner City Rail Effectively links the the medium term (2022- Capacity Study considered valuable peninsulas of the 2027). how these lines may conflict Brisbane River with a high or synerqise with the Cross freguency shuttle service The extension from River Rail (CRR) proposal and to facilitate and connect lndooroopilly to Darra at a cost of $2000M would also concluded that a metro line, more intensive potential like the University Line - from developments along the be beyond the ten year horizon subject to the ability St Lucia to Teneriffe - could river. of the project to attract PPP complement the CRR and . • Connects a new "string" funding. form a subsequent stage to 1t of inner city stations (at (referred to in this study as Albert Street. Centenary Funding forth~ planning and Cross River Rail Stage 2). Place and James Street) property acqu1s111on GHD has assessed both offset to the east of the associated with the Brisbane these proposals and has existing CBD rail stations Metro of $200M has been given consideration to an with potentially high included in the Program extension of the University dens1ty developments 2017-2022. Line concept in the form of a along the river. Driverless Underqround • Significantly enhances Metro on a corridor from accessibility across the lndooroopilly, in the west. to river and forms another Portside, in the east. via key plank in the goal of Bulimba. The line would transitioning the system integrate with the Citytrain from a radial to an network at interchanges at integrated network of lndooroopilly and South independent lines. Brisbane. Tfle project cost is approximately $4000M for ?roposed this stage. e r a

Public Transport in SEQ 1 Oplons to deliver value and R1natation in future South East Queendland pubic transport infrastructure I January 201121 37 The residents in the Petrie to Kippa-Ring corridor have waited some time for heavy The 12km heavy rail spur line rail. The project enjoys support from all siaes of from Petrie to Kippa-Ring is being funded by the iJOiitics at the local, state and Commonwealth, State and Commonwealth levels and will be delivered in 2014. Morten Bay Council governments following a Funding has been committed 2010 Federal election by the Commonwealth commitment. ($742M). Queensland ($300M) and Moreton Bay The project had been Regional Council ($105M). discussed for over 50 years would be remiss however, and was submitted to It Infrastructure Australia for not to note that a less funding in 2008 as a heavy expensive, higher frequency rail spur line. The project customer focussed solution proposes six stations at an could be achieved for the average spacing of 2km and residents of the corridor if a a term1nus on tfie edge of the high frequency busway or suburb of Kippa-Ring. light rail was considered. The spur line configuration A light rail or bus shuttle will be required to share would interchange at Petrie platform space through the Station on the main northern network core of CBD stations line with potentially higher and consequently this service frequency services to will struggle to achieve Caboolture. attractive frequencies of The advantage of a bus or serv1ce. light rail based transit would be its ability to penetrate further into the low density . The 2011-12 Budget makes a $253M provision for planning/property and early works that is induded in tlie 2012-17 Program.

38 Projects Beyond 2022

Longer term public transport projects considered to be beyond the current ten year program, but worthy of future consideration are sfiown in Table 13:

Table 13: Projects Beyond Ten Years

South East Busway (Springwood to Loganholme)

Rail - Elanora to Coolangatta

Sunshine Coast Ught Rail Future Stages

Rail - Redbank Plains to Ipswich

Rail - Acacia Ridge to Flagstone (future stages)

Gold Coast Rapid Transit ~uture stages)

Rail - Gowrie to Grandchester (future stages)

Brisbane Metro

Northern Busway (future stages)

Bus Priority and Park n' Ride

Eastern Busway Future Stages

Redland Bus Priority

Public Transport in SEQ 1 Options to deliver value and innovatim in future South East Queerdland pubic transpcrt infrastructure I January 20112 I 39 What needs to be delivered in the next 5 and 1 0 years?

There are a range of pressure points for public transport infrastructure rn SEQ but the priority should be _given to providinrJ a reliable and frequent servrce for users and 1o overcome existing issues critical to the safe and smooth operation of the public transport system.

40 Recommended Investment Program

After assessing project Table 14: Public Transport 5 Year Priority Program, 2012-2017 Table 15: Public Transport 5 Year Priority Program, 2017 - 2022 options, GHD recommends the project priorities with estimated capital expenditure (QLD Bud qet) for the next five year penoas, 2012 - 2017 and 2017 - Sunshine Coast Connect $420M Eastern Bus Priority - Bus lanes $160M New passenger rail stock $500M 2022 as: Carindale to Capalaba Inner City Rail (The Cleveland $2500M Gold Coast Rapid - to Helensvale $850M Solution) Eastern Busway 2A $25M South East Busway to Springwood $420M New Citytrain Stabling Depot at Freight Une Improvements $575M $100M Clapham CBD Bus Infrastructure Capacity $1000M Rail - Springfield to Redbank Plains $200M Program Gold Coast Bus Lanes $30M Northern Busway- Sadlier St to $60M Northern Busway - Chermside to Gold Coast Rapid - Broadbeach to Rode Rd $600M $280M Aspley Park wood Northern Bus Priority - Rode Rd to $50M Rail - Varsity to Elanora $1400M Rail - Camera to Helensvale $430M Chermside Sunshine Coast Ught Rail (planning $600M Rail - Kuraby to Kingston and Rail - Richlands to Springfield $280M and property) $230M Loganlea Rail - Kepera to Ferny Grove $29M Rail - Acacia Ridge to Flagstone $300M Eliminate Open Level Crossings $400M Translink Station Upgrades $161M Eliminate Open Level Crossings $500M New passenger rail stock $300M Bus Priority Toowoomba $20M Rail - Redbank to Ripley $450M Rail - Lawnton to Petrie third rail track $200M Bus Priority $350M Rail - Beerburrum to Landsborough $470M Public Transport 5 Year Priority Program~ $7,498M Park n' Ride $350M Moreton Bay Rail Link (MBRL) $253M Brisbane Metro (planning & property) $200M CBD Bus Infrastructure Capacity $25M Program I Public Transport 6 to 10 Year Priority Program~ $7,520M Eastern Busway Main Ave to $300M Bennetts Rd

Public Transport in SEQ 1 Options to deliver value and innavatirn in future South East Queendland pubic transpcrt infrastructure I January 20112 1 41 Financing the Plan

Is there a Role for the The model is reasonably Adopting an Availability PPP The incorporation of an Private common in social may also enable sourcing of effective incentive regime can brinq significant benefits to The current fiscal infrastructure and emerging in funas from a wider range of public transport across sources- bonds, pubfic transport users and environment prevents the the State budget. funding of "meqa projects" several jurisaictions. superannuation funds etc - particularly where incentives Specifically, the benefits are such as Cross River Rail - An Availability PPP is the in terms of service levels, there is simply no public model being used to finance are used and a long contract life is adopted (20+ years). reduced costs to the State funding available for projects and deliver the Gold Coast per passenger trip or of this scale. There is also no Rapid Transit. It is critical for opportunities kilometre travelled and appetite for a traditional PPP "Availability" contracts, or with relatively modest returns improved market share to for a project of this scale hybrid sdiemes, generally to offer value to investors, public transport with where capital costs are high and in the case of public involve the builder and/or Improved asset utilisation. and the patronage risk is operator taking some limited transport, this can be transferred to the private achieved by adoption of The availability model offers patronage risk through a sector, particularly public reasonably lenqthy contract the State a real opportunity performance regime (risk and to extract maximum value in transport proJects. reward) covering: terms ancf up front capital risk shanng. public transport infrastructure In general, the private sector • Availability (e.g. related to and service provision in SEQ. appetite for demand risk is Furthermore, a key issue for vehicles/rolling stock very low, if not non-existent. available to operate Government in acfopting this Public transport projects are services and limited funding m_odel for public . v1ewed by pnvate Investors service cancellations) and transport IS recogms1ng that 1t and equity as even less reliability (e.g. on time can set the standards of the attractive than toll roads­ running performance) of service it seeks for and the recent Australian serv1ces customers. track record in that regard is, This will enshrine at best, patchy. • Vehicle and other facilities' standards- can be very performance in a well­ "Availability contract PPPs" constructed 'risk and reward' broad in scope, e.g. may offer a mechanism to cleanliness, average fleet regime that rewards delivery funa "value for money" major above agreed standards and age, removal of graffiti, public transport projects, on-board facilities such as applies penalties where where contractors and real time passenger performance drops below operators are paid on the agreed standards. information etc, basis of the time the asset is made available to the user (at • Customer service contractually agreed levels of standards - coverinq service quaflty and aspects such as calf operational performance). resrJOnse times, on platform/station staff, Internet and other media facilities, ticketing systems etc • Revenue protection.

42 How can As well as the levies already Government make in place, the Gold Coast Crty Contribution? Council is also makinq capital Making a contribution to the contribution towards the Gold provision of public transport Coast Rapid Transit, and the Moreton Bay Regional Infrastructure and services fits well with Local Government. Council is making a capital Local Government is well contribution of $1 OSM toward the Moreton Bay Rail Line. placed to define and work with major providers and the Having a stake-in-the-game State in developing will encourage local appropnate serv1ces that government to take a more deliver effectively locally and active role in community integrate well across promotion and in seeking jurisaictions. ways to reduce car The legislative frameworks dependency across SEQ. are in place to enable Local A levy on rateable properties Government to accumulate may offer a mechanism for funds which can be local government to take a hypothecated to nominated more active role in public public transport infrastructure transport provision in a range and services. Such projects of ways; from policy would need to be subject to development, Improved needs assessment, rigorous advocacy capacity, cost benefit analysis and be development of clearly articulatea in local and demonstration/pilot projects, regional plans to ensure 'seed funding' for projects or appropriate use of monies. straight investment in A local government levy for operations or infrastructure. public transport could aid in Clear rules would need to be funding needed infrastructure put in place settinq out the and/or services in a timelier purposes for wh1ch any manner than would otherwise public transport levy could be be the case. Gold Coast City used. Another key Council and Sunshine Coast consideration would be Regional Council already whether any such levy should have such levies in j:Jiace, be applied on a regional basis while Brisbane City Council across all local government makes a substantial jurisdictions in SEQ or on a contribution to public selective, localised basis. transport out of its rates revenue each year.

Public Transport in SEQ 1 Options to deliver value and innovatim in future South East Queendland pubic transpat infrastructure I January 201121 43 .1 I Introducing Competitive Tension into the System

There is a growing norms and procedures Futhermore, allocative recognition around the world (e.g. staffing levels and efficiency (producing outputs that the provision and pay scales aetermined most closely meeting market operation of transport across sectors rather than demands) is more lil

i,,

'

Public Transport in SEQ 1 Options to deliver value and lnnavatioo in future South East Queendland pubic transpcrt infrastructure I January 201121 47 Incorporated, "''1;nt!cr incorporated, ,' by leave '" ''·'ave 1.

II

~ ""!j Q c >- ,..j «:J c"' <.) :!5 <.) Q &.... - "'<'! -Co) Ul ·-c -B ::i 0 Q= Cfl (.)

(,'\