DOCSLIB.ORG

27Th ARRB Full Paper Sae

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

27th ARRB Conference – Linking people, places and opportunities, Melbourne, Victoria 2016 COMPARATIVE CASE STUDY ON COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS FOR TOLL ROAD PROJECTS Chi, S., Bunker, J., Kajewski, S., Queensland University of Technology, Australia ABSTRACT Project evaluation is a process to measure impacts and risks of a project as a public good. Cost-Benefit Analysis is a most commonly used project evaluation methodology for major road projects. Cost-Benefit Analysis conducted for Australian toll road projects have tended to mirror those for non-toll road projects, because they generally treat tolls as a financial transfer. However, a number of project impacts and risk characteristics are unique to toll road projects. It is therefore hypothesised that Cost-Benefit Analysis for toll road projects should treat tolls uniquely, on the basis that risk allocations and concession arrangements are different. This paper reviews Cost-Benefit Analysis methodologies used to evaluate major public road projects. Examining the treatment of project impacts and risks in practice, and the outcomes of the analyses revealed both the advantages and limitations of each extant Cost-Benefit Analysis methodology used in practice. Moreover, the suitability of different methodologies in terms of Cost-Benefit Analysis for toll roads was assessed by studying project characteristics and risk characteristics of each project. Identifying an appropriate treatment of tolls contributes to determining an appropriate Cost-Benefit Analysis methodology for toll road projects. The refined methodology would ensure that all relevant impacts and risks of the toll road project are addressed in decision-making. This will provide a basis for ensuring that the full and true impact to the community is properly assessed. INTRODUCTION The goals of a public project are to increase the well-being of residents and to maintain or increase overall prosperity (Keating & Keating, 2013). Government is responsible for ensuring that the benefits of decisions outweigh the costs to the community. In public governance, evaluation of public projects requires that all project impacts to the community to be assessed appropriately. Project evaluation is a process of assessing and measuring impacts and risks of the project for the purpose of evaluation and decision-making. Project evaluation provides the decision-maker with the ability to structure information, remember and consider all or most aspects of the project (Mackie, Worsley, & Eliasson, 2014). The most commonly used project evaluation methodology to assess major road projects is Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA) (Wee & Rietveld, 2014). The fundamental theorem of CBA is that the estimation of net impacts to the community (Rogers & Duffy, 2012; Wee & Rietveld, 2014). Benefit-Cost Ratio (BCR) is used as a means of net impacts to users and non-users, operators, safety and environmental benefits, wider economic impacts, and costs of the project in present value (Mackie, Graham, & Laird, 2011). CBA is well studied in academic literature, however studies with regard to CBA for toll road projects and the treatment of tolls in CBA are limited. The guidance on the treatment of tolls in CBA in extant guidelines (Queensland Department of Transport and Main Roads, 2011; Rockliffe, Patrick, & Tsolakis, 2012) is also limited. This study focuses on toll roads, which may be provided either publically, privately or in some form of a Public-Private Partnership (PPP). Such major road infrastructure projects can impact the community in the same manner as their non-tolled, public road counterparts, so ought to be subject to project evaluation by the government. However, a number of impacts and risks are unique to toll road projects. The toll itself is unique, because it influences traffic demand on a micro-economic basis. This requires considerations in measuring net benefits of the toll road users, as well as in traffic modelling and forecasting. The price of the toll sometimes is uncertain © ARRB Group Ltd and Authors 2016 1 27th ARRB Conference – Linking people, places and opportunities, Melbourne, Victoria 2016 at the time of the analysis so this uncertainty needs to be assessed in the decision-making. Understanding of the toll price and forecasted traffic volume is vital to estimate toll revenues. In some toll road settings, when the toll road is owned, operated and/or maintained by the private concessionaire, rather than earning revenue directly through receipt of tolls, it receives payments from the host government using one of various methods depending on the concession agreement. The following explains those payments (Brocklebank, 2014): Shadow tolls avoid charging the users tolls; instead the host government is responsible for paying the concessionaire according to traffic volume or total travel distance along the road, in which case and specifically for traffic modelling, the road is considered not to be tolled. Performance-based public sector payments may be paid by the host government to the concessionaire. The concession can include guarantees of toll revenue. Toll revenue risk can be shared with the host government through minimum revenue guarantees. With minimum revenue guarantees, partial or full revenue risk is transferred to the host government whereby it compensates the concessionaire for shortfalls when the toll revenue received by the concessionaire is less than a guaranteed amount. These payments are forms of risk sharing strategies. The risk to the public needs to be properly assessed in project evaluation. However, the concession arrangement of a toll road can be complex with these various payment methods and risk sharing arrangements, which may impact which project evaluation methodology is appropriate and the results of analyses using that methodology. METHOD As has been highlighted, a knowledge gap exists about how the effects of the toll road impacts can be captured in project evaluation, in particular the treatment of tolls. This needs to be investigated due to the uniqueness of toll road project impacts and risk sharing mechanisms. This study investigates how major road projects, including toll road projects, have been evaluated in Australian practice using Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA) and compares the analyses of toll road projects with those of non-tolled road projects. The aim of this study is to examine how CBA is conducted for major road projects and how tolls have been treated in CBA for existing major Australian toll roads. The cases studied include both major non-tolled road projects and toll road projects in Australia. The methodologies of sensitivity analysis, treatment of tolls, and estimation of project capital cost, user benefits and residual value are reviewed. The methodologies and outcomes of the CBA conducted for the study cases are examined. Reviewing and examining CBA cases can highlight the limitations of the practice of CBA for major road projects, as well as the factors that have large significance in the outcomes of the evaluation. This will allow the complexity of project evaluation of major road projects to be explored. THE STUDY CASES Eight Australian major road study cases that include three non-tolled roads and five toll roads were analysed in this study. The following describes background of each case. Non-Tolled Roads Horsham Bypass (HSB) A study was commissioned by VicRoads in order to select preferred route alignment for a future Western Highway bypass of Horsham, Victoria (AECOM Australia, 2014). The bypass was planned to allow for the future traffic growth along the Western Highway that connects Melbourne and Adelaide (AECOM Australia, 2014). Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA) was conducted © ARRB Group Ltd and Authors 2016 2 27th ARRB Conference – Linking people, places and opportunities, Melbourne, Victoria 2016 to choose the preferred alignment based on the Net Present Value (NPV) and Benefit-Cost Ratio (BCR) (AECOM Australia, 2014). The lengths of option route alignments were between 22 and 23.8 km (AECOM Australia, 2014). Singleton Bypass (SNB) A study was commissioned by NSW Roads and Maritime Services (RMS) in order to select a preferred route alignment for a future New England Highway bypass of Singleton (New South Wales Roads and Maritime Services, 2016). The bypass was planned to allow for future traffic growth along the New England Highway, which connects Newcastle and the Upper Hunter region (New South Wales Roads and Maritime Services, 2016). The preferred alignment was chosen based on the measured economic benefits that were calculated in CBA (AECOM Australia, 2012). The lengths of option route alignments were between 19.1 and 22.5 km (AECOM Australia, 2013). West Petrie Bypass (WPB) The section of Youngs Crossing Road is prone to flooding and is frequently inundated (Arup, 2010a). The 1.92 km West Petrie Bypass (WPB) is a proposed new road connecting Youngs Crossing Road and Dayboro Road in the west of Petrie, which is a suburb of Moreton Bay Regional Council to the north of Brisbane (Arup, 2010b; GHD, 2013). A business case was produced for the alignment of the WPB that was selected from the previous study (Arup, 2010a). The business case consists of CBA of the alignment and the environmental and cultural heritage study (GHD, 2013). Toll Roads Airport Link (APL) Airport Link (APL) consists of a 6.78 km section of tunnel and motorway, which is located in Brisbane (BrisConnections, 2016). APL is part of the corridor designated as M7-A7, which connects the south west and north east of Brisbane. APL connects with other M7 elements of Clem Jones Tunnel at its southern end and East West Arterial Road leading to the Brisbane Airport and the Port of Brisbane at its north east end (BrisConnections, 2016). A major interchange at its southern end also connects it with Inner City Bypass expressway and Legacy Way Tunnel, and Bowen Bridge Road. A major interchange mid-tunnel connects it with Gympie Road and Stafford Road, Kedron. CBA conducted for the proposed alignment of APL assesses the viability of the APL project by reviewing BCR calculated in the CBA and also reviews the integration of the Interim Northern Busway Project within the APL project (SKM & Connell Wagner, 2006).
Recommended publications
  • Section 3.7 – Local Area Frameworks

    Section 3.7 – Local Area Frameworks

    Draft Ipswich Planning Scheme 2019 Statement of Proposals 3.7 Local Area Frameworks 3.7.1 Preliminary (1) The Ipswich Local Government Area has been divided into thirty local area strategic planning units based on geographically identifiable communities of interest (areas with identifiable boundaries and within which there are broad land use and planning commonalities) to which individual Local Area Frameworks apply. (2) The thirty Local Area Frameworks provide a more detailed spatial expression of the policies included in the Whole of City Strategic Framework (refer to sections 3.1 to 3.6) for each of the local area strategic planning units by: (a) including a description of the geographic extent of the strategic planning unit to which the Local Area Framework applies; (b) identifying the Valuable Features in the area that are of significance and are to be protected; (c) identifying the most significant Development Constraints that impact on development in the area and that need to be considered and addressed in allocating precincts and for development assessment; (d) setting out the Growth Management outcomes that are to be delivered in the area; (e) identifying the key Infrastructure that needs to be delivered to support growth and development in the area; (f) showing the preferred use of land in the area by including each property in a land use precinct designation; and (g) where there are different development options (including for example building heights, lot sizes, dwelling densities or different land uses) for an area or individual
  • Brisbane City Council (Council)

    Brisbane City Council (Council)

    volume 1 environmental impact statement supplementary report June 2009 Northern Link Environmental Impact Statement Supplementary Report June 2009 PAGE i PAGE 1-3 Northern Link Supplementary Report Table of Contents 1. Introduction 1-7 1.1 Purpose of the Supplementary Report 1-7 1.2 Consultation on the EIS 1-7 1.3 Coordinator General’s Evaluation Report 1-8 2. Overview and Development of the Project 2-9 2.1 Background to the notification of the EIS submission period 2-9 2.2 Further development of the Project 2-9 2.3 Overview of Submissions Received 2-10 2.3.1 Submissions from Government Agencies 2-10 2.3.2 Public Submissions 2-12 2.3.3 Response to submissions 2-14 2.4 Draft Outline Environmental Management Plan 2-14 2.5 Urban Mitigations 2-14 3. Description of the Project 3-16 3.1 General Description of Northern Link 3-16 3.2 Project Design 3-16 3.2.1 Surface Road Connections 3-17 3.2.2 Ventilation Stations and Outlets 3-18 3.3 Project Delivery Mode 3-18 3.3.1 Program and Responsibilities 3-18 3.3.2 Establishment and Preliminary Works 3-20 3.3.3 Tunnel Construction 3-20 3.4 Project Operations Mode 3-22 4. Assessment of the Northern Link Project 4-25 4.1 Traffic and Transport 4-28 4.1.1 Forecast Demand for Northern Link 4-29 4.1.2 Function of Northern Link 4-33 4.1.3 Function of the Project connections 4-36 4.1.4 Traffic Volume Effects on Regional and Connecting Roads and Intersections 4-37 4.1.5 Effects on Local Roads 4-54 4.1.6 Metropolitan Area Network Performance 4-62 4.1.7 Travel Time Benefits 4-65 4.1.8 Local Access Effects 4-72
  • Cross River Rail APPENDIX F VISUAL AMENITY

    Cross River Rail APPENDIX F VISUAL AMENITY

    " # $! ! Cross River Rail APPENDIX F VISUAL AMENITY JULY 2011 Contents Appendix F1 Combined urban, landscape and visual context..............................1 Appendix F-2 Evaluation of key locations.............................................................15 Appendix F-3 Visual assessment...........................................................................33 1.1 Methodology .....................................................................................................................33 1.1.1 Establishment of baseline information............................................................ 33 1.2 Impact assessment........................................................................................................... 35 1.2.1 Sensitivity of location or receptor.................................................................... 35 1.2.2 Visual modification.......................................................................................... 40 1.2.3 Impact assessment description ...................................................................... 41 1.3 Visual assessment of target sites ..................................................................................... 41 1.3.1 Target site 1: Mayne Rail Yard and environs ................................................. 41 1.3.2 Target site 2: The Ekka Station and environs................................................. 46 1.3.3 Target site 3: Victoria Park and the Northern Portal....................................... 53 1.3.4 Target site 4: Roma Street Station
  • Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) Camera System Coding Manual a Transurban Queensland Group Standard

    Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) Camera System Coding Manual a Transurban Queensland Group Standard

    Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) Camera System Coding Manual A Transurban Queensland Group standard Document code ITS-MAN-001 Approval authority Head of Technology Document owner ITS Operations Manager QLD Document author Andrew Warren Confidentiality Statement Information in this document must be kept confidential as per its classification below, and the rules of disclosure. All documents within the Transurban Queensland Group are classified in the following way: PUBLIC documents are intended for anyone, COMMERCIAL IN CONFIDENCE documents are to be kept confidential between restricted individuals within the Transurban Queensland Group and partner organisations. COMPANY CONFIDENTIAL documents are to be kept confidential within the Transurban Queensland Group, and used for normal business activities by the general office population, HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL documents are to be kept confidential to restricted individuals within the Transurban Queensland Group. This document is uncontrolled if printed. ©Copyright Transurban Queensland Holdings 1 Pty Limited ABN 64 169 090 804. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the written permission of Transurban Queensland Holdings 1 Pty Limited. Classification PUBLIC Transurban Queensland Contents 1. Purpose 3 1.1 AirportLinkM7 Tunnel 4 1.2 Legacy Way Tunnel 6 1.3 Clem Jones Tunnel 7 2. Glossary 9 STANDARD This document is uncontrolled if printed Classification Public Page 2 of 9 AUTOMATIC NUMBER PLATE RECOGNITION (ANPR) CAMERA SYSTEM CODING MANUAL 1. Purpose The purpose of this ANPR Camera System Coding Manual is to define the Data blocks for the ANPR camera systems for each of Transurban Queensland’s tunnel assets.
  • 143 Coronation Drive Milton Introduction Knight Frank and Colliers Are Extremely Proud to Present 143 Coronation Drive, Available for Sub-Lease Or Direct Lease

    143 Coronation Drive Milton Introduction Knight Frank and Colliers Are Extremely Proud to Present 143 Coronation Drive, Available for Sub-Lease Or Direct Lease

    CDOP2 Overview CDOP2, 143 Coronation NLA (m2) 7,143 Drive benefits from its No. of levels 6 2 prime location. Typical floor size (m ) 1,256 Site area (m2) 3,495 It places tenants on Brisbane’s busy Coronation No. of car spaces 164 Drive and beside some of Australia’s leading Car park ratio 1:44m2 businesses who share the Precinct. The building offers six levels of prestige office accommodation and two levels of secure basement car parking. It provides an optimum working environment for all employees and creates a big impression with clients. CORONATION DRIVE OFFICE PARK I CDOP I PAGE 15 FOR LEASE INFORMATION MEMORANDUM 143 coronation drive milton Introduction Knight Frank and Colliers are extremely proud to present 143 Coronation Drive, available for sub-lease or direct lease. 143 Coronation Drive forms part of the prestigious Coronation Drive Office Park in Milton. Coronation Drive Office Park is widely recognised as Brisbane’s premier business office park only a very short distance from the Brisbane CBD. Tenants benefit from being close to a range of services and amenities in a unique campus style environment. The park boasts of some of Australia’s leading businesses across a broad range of industries, and the location and amenities provide an optimum working environment for every business or employee. 143 coronation drive milton Building 143 Coronation Drive is perfectly positioned to take advantage of panoramic Brisbane river and Brisbane CBD views. Situated on a prominent edge of the business park, the building has great exposure to passing traffic along Coronation Drive creating excellent signage opportunities and recognition for your business.
  • CLEM7 - 2011 AUSTRALIAN CONSTRUCTION ACHIEVEMENT AWARD I Scope of Work

    CLEM7 - 2011 AUSTRALIAN CONSTRUCTION ACHIEVEMENT AWARD I Scope of Work

    CLEM7 - 2011 AUSTRALIAN CONSTRUCTION ACHIEVEMENT AWARD i Scope of Work The Clem Jones Tunnel (CLEM7) is alternate route to the many roads that were Tunnel construction included: Brisbane’s first major road tunnel and the impassable or closed due to flooding. ■■ 41 evacuation cross passages between the longest and most technically advanced The Project was delivered by the Leighton two mainline tunnels every 120m; tunnel in Australia. The project has an overall Contractors and Baulderstone Bilfinger ■■ A long passage for evacuation from the length of 6.8km and links the Inner City Berger Joint Venture (LBBJV) under a lump Shafston Avenue ramps; Bypass (ICB) and Lutwyche Road in the sum design and construct (D&C) contract. A ■■ Five underground substations, each north of Brisbane to the Pacific Motorway ‘fast track’ design and construction approach consisting of four individual tunnels and Ipswich Road in the south, with an entry was adopted, which enabled LBBJV to excavated in the space between the two and exit ramp at Shafston Avenue. deliver the Project seven months ahead of mainline tunnels; The CLEM7 is the first critical component of schedule and on budget for their client ■■ A dedicated tunnel in each tube, beneath the Brisbane Lord Mayor’s TransApex vision RiverCity Motorway (RCM), who is in a the road surface for cabling; and to ease congestion and cater for the city’s Public-Private Partnership with Brisbane City future traffic needs. The tunnel, which has Council (Council). The Project cost $3 billion, ■■ A smoke duct in the ceiling of each tunnel, 2 the capacity to carry more than 100,000 which includes financing costs and the 9.2m in cross section, to extract smoke in vehicles a day, bypasses Brisbane’s CBD $2.1 billion of design and construction cost.
  • Legacy Way Tunnel

    Legacy Way Tunnel

    Groundwater Level Monitoring Transurban Limited 28-Mar-2018 Doc No. 001 Legacy Way Tunnel Groundwater Level Monitoring (February 2018) 28-Mar-2018 Prepared for – Transurban Limited – ABN: 96 098 143 410 AECOM Groundwater Level Monitoring Legacy Way Tunnel Legacy Way Tunnel Groundwater Level Monitoring (February 2018) Client: Transurban Limited ABN: 96 098 143 410 Prepared by AECOM Australia Pty Ltd Level 8, 540 Wickham Street, PO Box 1307, Fortitude Valley QLD 4006, Australia T +61 7 3553 2000 F +61 7 3553 2050 www.aecom.com ABN 20 093 846 925 28-Mar-2018 Job No.: 60558039 AECOM in Australia and New Zealand is certified to ISO9001, ISO14001 AS/NZS4801 and OHSAS18001. © AECOM Australia Pty Ltd (AECOM). All rights reserved. AECOM has prepared this document for the sole use of the Client and for a specific purpose, each as expressly stated in the document. No other party should rely on this document without the prior written consent of AECOM. AECOM undertakes no duty, nor accepts any responsibility, to any third party who may rely upon or use this document. This document has been prepared based on the Client’s description of its requirements and AECOM’s experience, having regard to assumptions that AECOM can reasonably be expected to make in accordance with sound professional principles. AECOM may also have relied upon information provided by the Client and other third parties to prepare this document, some of which may not have been verified. Subject to the above conditions, this document may be transmitted, reproduced or disseminated only
  • Queensland Motorways Acquisition and Equity Raising 24/04/2014 12:03 Pm Amnot for Release Or Distribution in the United States of America Disclaimer

    Queensland Motorways Acquisition and Equity Raising 24/04/2014 12:03 Pm Amnot for Release Or Distribution in the United States of America Disclaimer

    NOT FOR RELEASE OR DISTRIBUTION IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 24 APRIL 2014 QUEENSLAND MOTORWAYS ACQUISITION AND EQUITY RAISING 24/04/2014 12:03 PM AMNOT FOR RELEASE OR DISTRIBUTION IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA DISCLAIMER This investor presentation (“Presentation”) has been prepared by Transurban Holdings Limited (ACN 098 143 429) (“THL”), Transurban International Limited (ACN 121 746 825) (“TIL”) and Transurban Infrastructure Management Limited (ACN 098 147 678; AFSL 246585) as the responsible entity of Transurban Holding Trust (ARSN 098 807 419) (“THT”) (together, “Transurban”). This Presentation has been prepared in relation to an accelerated renounceable entitlement offer of new Transurban stapled securities (“New Securities”), to be made to: . eligible institutional security holders of Transurban (“Institutional Entitlement Offer”); and . eligible retail security holders of Transurban (“Retail Entitlement Offer”), under sections 708AA and 1012DAA of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (“Corporations Act”) as modified by ASIC Class Order 08/35 and ASIC relief obtained in relation to the entitlement offer (together, the “Entitlement Offer”). Unless the context otherwise requires, capitalised terms and abbreviations have the meaning given in the glossary at the end of this Presentation. SUMMARY INFORMATION This Presentation contains summary information about the current activities of Transurban and its subsidiaries as at the date of this Presentation. The information in this Presentation is of a general nature and does not purport to be complete. This Presentation does not purport to contain all of the information that an investor should consider when making an investment decision nor does it contain all of the information which would be required in a product disclosure statement or prospectus prepared in accordance with the requirements of the Corporations Act.
  • 6 Pavement Surface Condition

    6 Pavement Surface Condition

    FINAL REPORT Project Title: P15: Queensland Trial of High Standard Granular Base TrackStar Alliance Project (Year 4 - 2016/17) ARRB Project No: PRP16023 Author/s: Dr. Jeffrey Lee, Jonathon Griffin, Alan Conaghan Client: Queensland Department of Transport and Main Roads Date: 09/02/2018 AN INITIATIVE BY: TC-710-4-4-8 SUMMARY A significant portion of the Australian sealed road network is composed of Although the Report is believed to be unbound granular pavement layers with a sprayed seal surface. correct at the time of publication, Traditionally, unbound granular pavements are used in rural or light to ARRB, to the extent lawful, excludes moderately traffic applications, with higher quality asphalt, stabilised or all liability for loss (whether arising concrete pavements generally used in urban areas and in more heavily under contract, tort, statute or trafficked applications. otherwise) arising from the contents of the Report or from its use. Where Growing demands on infrastructure budgets has led to the desire to such liability cannot be excluded, it is investigate the use of unbound granular structures for heavy duty reduced to the full extent lawful. applications in Queensland. However, initial construction cost savings Without limiting the foregoing, people resulting from the provision of unbound granular pavements may be should apply their own skill and counteracted by increased maintenance requirements, the risk of premature judgement when using the information distress development and the potential for rapid failure. contained in the Report. The Queensland Department of Transport and Main Roads (TMR) is trialing a heavy-duty unbound granular pavement with a sprayed seal surfacing (denoted as SG(HD) TMR(2017)) incorporating high-standard granular (HSG) basecourse as part of the Centenary Motorway duplication project.
  • Project Description

    Project Description

    BaT project Chapter 3 Project description Contents 3. Project Description ................................................................................................................ 3-1 3.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 3-1 3.2 Overview ...................................................................................................................... 3-1 3.3 Objective and benefits ................................................................................................. 3-1 3.4 Location........................................................................................................................ 3-2 3.4.1 Transport corridor ......................................................................................................... 3-2 3.4.2 Study corridor ............................................................................................................... 3-2 3.5 Adjacent or adjoining infrastructure ............................................................................. 3-2 3.5.1 Existing infrastructure ................................................................................................... 3-2 3.5.2 Other major projects ..................................................................................................... 3-4 3.6 Design .......................................................................................................................... 3-4 3.6.1 Overview ......................................................................................................................
  • Question on Notice

    Question on Notice

    Question on Notice No. 211 Asked on 10 March 2021 MR M BERKMAN ASKED MINISTER FOR TRANSPORT AND MAIN ROADS (HON M BAILEY) QUESTION: With reference to the Director-General’s response during Budget Estimates hearings on 11 December 2020 that the Department of Transport and Main Roads will not support priority bus lanes on the Centenary Motorway following completion of the Centenary Motorway planning study— Will the Minister advise (a) what is the basis for this decision by the department, (b) what specific plans other than priority bus lanes, if any, is the department progressing to improve public transport along this corridor and (c) what is the government’s plan to cut congestion on the Centenary Motorway, particularly for travel to and from suburbs in the electorate of Maiwar? ANSWER: I thank the Member for Maiwar for the question. a) An additional general-purpose traffic lane will deliver travel time benefits for all road users, including public transport passengers. Currently, the number of express pre-paid services delivered in this area is low and does not support the need for dedicated bus lanes. Installing a dedicated bus lane on the Centenary Motorway will exacerbate congestion on the motorway by reducing the number of lanes for traffic to flow through and it presents major challenges in terms of enforcement as it is difficult for the police to undertake enforcement on a constrained, high-volume and high-speed environment. b) The first stage of the proposed Centenary Motorway Upgrade is the Centenary Bridge Upgrade, which includes a new three-lane northbound bridge, reconfiguration of the existing bridge to provide three lanes southbound and improved active transport facilities.
  • Western Brisbane Transport Network Strategy

    Western Brisbane Transport Network Strategy

    Western Brisbane Transport Network Strategy Contents Foreword 1 Strategy highlights 2 Introduction 6 Community input and strategy development 10 Rail 12 Bus 16 Active transport 20 Road and freight 24 Implementation 28 Benefits of the strategy 32 This is a strategic vision to provide a framework for planning and delivery of the transport network in western Brisbane. The information on the maps in this document is not intended for reference to specific parcels of land. It should be treated as indicative only and subject to ongoing refinement. 2009 Contact details: Phone 1800 636 896 www.transport.qld.gov.au/wbtni Foreword Western Brisbane Transport Network Strategy The Western Brisbane Transport Network Investigation In relation to road transport, the Investigation is a coordinated approach to the ongoing supports the need for Brisbane City Council’s development of the transport network for western proposed Northern Link tunnel and it proposes an Brisbane. improved north south road connection including a tunnel linking Toowong to Everton Park. More than a million people were asked for their input into a plan which integrates all modes of transport, Much of the work identified in the Western Brisbane such as rail, bus, road, walking and cycling. Transport Network Investigation is already underway. The rail network is being extended to Richlands and The Investigation commenced in 2007, in large part capacity is being expanded between Corinda and as a means of determining whether the long talked- Darra. The Northern Busway to Kedron is under about Western Brisbane Bypass would happen. construction and so is Airport Link. In addition, the That option was ruled out in 2008 after detailed Brisbane City Council is actively pursuing the Northern traffic projections showed insufficient demand but, Link tunnel.