|Submission to the Coordinator General (March 2017)|
|The RTBU welcomes any new and appropriate investment in rail infrastructure in SEQ as it is recognised that current public transport infrastructure is not able to cater for anticipated population growth in SEQ. |
For this reason, RTBU was a strong supporter of the original Cross River Rail (CRR) 2011/2012 reference case project proceeding.
|Submission to Queensland Government (March 2017)|
|The RTBU commends the Queensland Government for taking a strategic, integrated and long-term view of infrastructure planning across the State.|
The challenge of sustaining an extra two million
residents in South East Queensland (SEQ) by 2041 is, without doubt, complex and daunting. The planning process put in place by the Queensland Government, however, will provide a vital framework for policy and importantly investment decisions over the coming decades.
|Investing in Australia's Transport Future (May 2016)|
|The National RTBU's proposal for a $30 billion infrastructure fund to kick-start investment in urban public transport and boost national economic productivity.|
|Submission to the Qld Government (December 2015)|
|The demographic and transport use projections clearly show that major investment is needed in public transport infrastructure and services, however the program outlined in the Draft SIP is heavily weighted towards road projects.|
The RTBU strongly supports the Draft SIP’s focus on
value capture as a mechanism for funding transport
infrastructure projects. We believe the proposed Value Capture Unit will position the Queensland Government as the most innovative state Government in the country when it comes to infrastructure funding.
|The Bus and Train Project (BaT) (October 2014)|
|The RTBU welcomes appropriate investment in rail and bus infrastructure in SEQ as it is recognised |
that current public transport infrastructure is not able to cater for anticipated population growth in
For this reason RTBU was a strong supporter of the Cross River Rail (CRR) project proceeding.
The CRR project was the result of a robust and detailed examination of all the factors over several
years evolving from the earlier Inner City Rail Capacity Study (ICRCS) to determine the best rail
transport outcome for future passenger rail demand in SEQ.
Accordingly CRR was ranked number one of projects ready to proceed by Infrastructure Australia.
|Submission to the BaT Reference Design (April 2014)|
|The RTBU’s is disappointed that the CRR proposal is not going to proceed due to a desire to reduce the scope and the cost. Notwithstanding this, the RTBU welcomes investment in rail and bus infrastructure in SEQ but with reservations relating to the current proposal which is addressed in this paper. |
It is our view that if the BaT Project is to proceed, it needs to make provisions consistent with the future rail capacity throughput that was to be provided by CRR.
|Submission to the Inland Rail Implementation Group (June 2014)|
|Our Union believes the Inland Rail project is one of the most important infrastructure projects to be undertaken in this country since construction of the Snowy Hydro scheme. The project has the potential to revolutionise the movement of transport north-south for the eastern states, and to contribute significantly to Australia’s economic growth and productivity over the next 50 years and beyond.|
|Inland Rail - Learning the lessons of the past to build a railway for the future|
|Submission to Cross River Rail Environmental Impact Statement (August 2012)|
|The CRR is a transformational and intergenerational project that has the potential to enhance significantly the SEQ rail network over the long term. |
Additional enabling infrastructure that deals with capacity constraints and the ability to grow the rail
task in South-East Queensland in the long-term should be part of the CRR project assessment
The RTBU recommends that the Coordinator General take a strategic view of the project and move
beyond the normal and narrow EIS focus of the project boundaries. The Coordinator General should
take a long term, potentially 100 year, approach to this important nation-building project.
|Submission to Cross River Rail - The Coordinator General, Project Manager - Environmental impact statement supplementary report for the Cross River Rail Project|
|Submission to Coordinator General (October 2011)|
Environmental Impact Statement for the Cross River Rail Project
Recommendations contained within this submission are framed with a view to ensuring the EIS satisfactorily recognises the social, economic and environmental benefits of an integrated approach to transport and land use planning.
|Submission to Department of Transport and Main Roads (January 2011)|
|The RTBU identified six critical challenges that must be addressed by this plan: growth in passenger travel; growth in freight travel; growth in traffic congestion; mode share; and funding. |
|Submission to Department of Transport and Main Road (November 2010)|
|The RTBU welcomes proposals for increased public transport mode share targets adopted in Connecting SEQ 2031. However, it is the RTBU's belief that the adoption of even higher public transport mode share targets would be readily achievable and have greater benefits for the community - particularly with respect to the reduction of energy use, carbon emissions and car dependency.|
|Submission to the Department of Planning and Infrastructure (May 2010)|
|The RTBU has previously been concerned about the vast imbalance in funding as between road and rail modes. Such investment has skewed the nature of urban development, increased the costs of transportation (both commuting and freight) and decreased the amenity of urban environments. |
|Submission to Department of Infrastructure and Planning (May 2009)|
|The RTBU strongly supports integrating land use and transport as a strategic direction to achieve the desired future urban form. |
The RTBU strongly recommends the following key principles in finalising the regional Plan and developing the infrastructure plan:
|Acquire land to preserve transport corridors – undertaken urgent action to identify and protect strategic transport corridors. |
Leading infrastructure and services – develop public transport infrastructure and services in advance of when it is required, in particular passenger rail to serve developing urban areas identified in the plan. |
Inner city rail capacity – is a most critical and fundamental issue for SEQ, and in the next phase of considerations the broader implications, such as flows from the Western Corridor to the CBD |
and Trade Coast (North), need to be given adequate consideration. |
Travel demand management – look to moderate the growth in road traffic by introducing a range of travel demand initiatives and encouraging public transport and rail freight, by considering measures such as parking pricing mechanisms and follow London’s congestion charging lead. |
Enhancement of rail freight capability – infrastructure needs to be upgraded, particularly interstate connections from Sydney and Melbourne, including access to the Port of Brisbane, access through or around Brisbane City and provide vital links for freight to the north and regional Queensland, noting that freight and passenger services share a common infrastructure. |
Capital investment – invest in priority transport infrastructure in key corridors to provide for future population and economic growth, noting that passenger and freight rail utilise shared infrastructure. |
Integrated services – ensure passenger transport services seamless transition connections at key nodes, eg integrated bus and rail timetables and ease of physical access. Also improve urban design and increase the focus on delivery of transit oriented development precincts. |