Re: BrizTram

[Colin Weaver <colingw@my-dejanews.com>]

In article <36e633b7.0@kastagir.senet.com.au>,
  "SlageL" <slagel@senet.com.au> wrote:
> Could someone explain the difference between the reportedly dean briztram
> and the brisbane light rail as on the gvt website?

BrizTram is definitely dead - it has been replaced with the Brisbane
Light Rail project, which is the new Labor government's version
of the same project.

BrizTram was announced by the former Borbidge/Sheldon (National/Liberal)
government in November 1997.  BrizTram's characteristics were:

- Standard guage (1435 mm), 600V DC overhead
- Approx 15Km network, serving the inner city and surrounding
  suburbs with lines to: Uni of QLD (St Lucia), South Bank,
  QUT/Parliament, Roma St/Countess St, Royal Brisbane Hospital
  (Herston), and a long loop from Fortitude Valley to Newstead
  and Teneriffe.
- Trams were to be styled after the classic Brisbane trams which
  ran up to 1969, but substantially modernised with modern
  traction systems, low floors, and the capability to run as
  multiple units.  This was one of the aspects of BrizTram which
  was criticised by the Labor opposition - leading to their
  claim that BrizTram was "19th century technology".
- Restoration of a number of preserved Brisbane trams, allowing
  heritage/tourist operations on the city circle on weekends.
- Interchange with existing public transport at: South Brisbane
  (CityTrain and South East Transit Busway), Roma Street (CityTrain and
  proposed Western/Coronation Drive Busway),  Countess Street (Inner
  Northern Busway), Brunswick Street (CityTrain), Herston (BCC buses).
  The loop via NewFarm was dropped in about March 1998, replaced with
  a line from the Valley to Teneriffe.
- Projected passenger numbers around 45,000 journeys per day,
  increasing to 55,000 after a few years.
- Proposed stage 3 extension from South Bank to Woolloongabba
  (the 'Gabba cricket ground).
- Proposed stage 4 extension to Milton (Park Road and Lang Park/
  Suncorp Stadium)

BrizTram was successful in gaining $65 Million of Federal funding,
with the balance of the $200 Million plus cost to be made up by
the State Government, Brisbane City Council, and the private
operator under a Build Operate Transfer concession (similar to
the Brisbane Airport Rail Link).

BrizTram was placed on hold immediately after Labor gained power
in the June 1998 election, and scrapped about a month later.  In
late November 1998 (almost one year after the BrizTram announcement),
the Labor government announced Brisbane Light Rail:

- Narrow guage (3'6", 1067 mm, same as QR), probably 750V DC
  overhead (like Sydney Light Rail).
- Proposed use of Dual Voltage light rail vehicles (the
  "Karlsruhe" system), permitting inter operation over
  3'6" guage QR tracks which are electrified at 25KV AC.
  Dual voltage operation is also part of the proposed
  Gold Coast light rail system. (For details on the
  Gold Coast proposal: http://www.gccc-transport.qld.gov.au
  This would be a much larger light rail system than BLR).
- 11.2Km network, nearly the same as the amended BrizTram
  proposal, with minor differences: the line to St Lucia
  has been dropped, terminating at West End instead. The
  South Bank line is slightly longer, running to somewhere
  in the vicinity of Vulture Street station. The George
  Street line runs all the way to Parliament/QUT, instead
  of stopping a block short like BrizTram did.
- Operation of restored BCC trams is unlikely, due to the
  guage difference and probable use of 750V DC overhead.
- BLR is approaching the "point of no return" - the $65 Million
  of federal funding for BrizTram has been transferred to BLR,
  expressions of interest have been called. With no state
  election until just after it goes into service, it is probable
  that BLR will go ahead.
- The Uni of Queensland Student Union is running a campaign to
  have BLR extended to UQ, as per the original BrizTram proposal.
  Details at: http://www.uqu.uq.edu.au
- Being a Labor proposal, the Brisbane City Council has dropped
  its opposition to the scheme, and is now supporting BLR.
  The Lord Mayor (Jim Soorley) has even made public comments
  that it would be possible to "throw the buses of the busways
  and convert to light rail".  This is highly unlikely to
  occur.

While there are some differences between the proposals, the
main reasons for BrizTram being dropped were political. The
government's claim that BrizTram was 19th century technology,
and BLR is 21st century technology is nonsense.  Both systems
were standard modern light rail - but BrizTram was open to
criticism due to the old fashioned appearance
of the proposed trams, and the use of restored trams for
heritage operations.

In my opinion, the technology proposed for BLR does make
more sense than certain aspects of BrizTram.  Using the
same guage as QR seems sensible as it leaves the possibility
of Karlsruhe type operation open.  The one aspect of the BLR
proposal which I do not like is the dropping of the St Lucia
line.  Getting to St Lucia by road is a nightmare during
peak hours, and the buses are caught in the same traffic
jam so public transport is little better.  The CityCat
ferry provides some relief, but it simply doesn't have
the capacity, frequency or reliability to be seen as
a credible alternative (my opinion!)

This account is a spam filter.  Please send e-mail replies to:
colingw<AT>foxboro.com.au

-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/       Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own