A proposal I have come up with that is scaled back from the Original. Also includes a Centenary Highway upgrade and infill at Ellen Grove. Also shows two connecting bus routes that would see an increase of frequency.
3 Likes
I think It’s definitely worth considering.
That 515 bus might be frequent enough to avoid the need to extend line to Ipswich CBD.
Would you like to see it extended west towards Amberley - Rosewood?
That area is quite undeveloped and also it could pose risks to the security of the air base. Provisions could however be made and corridors could be safeguarded for future use.
Not really. I’d like all trips to be extended to Yamanto, though.
Amberley, to me, looks like a suitable place for DRT, than can take people to Karrabin station or Yamanto shopping centre.
Amberley/Willowbank population is tiny. It is currently served by the 515 at an hourly interval and could connect to a potential yamanto station. Any thoughts of people using PT to commute to the base is unrealistic.
I agree with others that the yamanto to ipswich CBD is not a priority and probably will realistically never happen. Springfield to Yamanto should be the primary focus. So I think the map shown here is a good idea.
As opposed the rail lines that runs right next to or directly through RAAF richmond, RAAF edinburgh, Holsworthy barracks, greenbank military area, Joint operations command just to name a few
3 Likes
I’m only asking because some of my rail enthusiast friends have been speculating about it getting cancelled, with seemingly little evidence to back up their points. Was wondering if someone had any further insight perchance.
(Stage 1 of 3-step “YIMBYism” effort; SEQTA, 2025).
In my head, I think this is a likely case. But I just want some credible sources to back this rumour up..
You can’t cancel something that hasn’t started… all that is happening is a business case afaik.
11 Likes
Its also a shame that work on extending the Western Freeway bikeway from Ellen Grove to Springfield Central (running parallel with the Centenary Highway) hasn’t precipitated as well. Despite it being landmarked as a high-priority.
2 Likes
If govt wants to reprioritise anything out that way, will be toowoomba-rosewood-ipswich upgrades in conjuction with inrail line would be higher imo as toowoomba is a city with 128k+ population
1 Like
My understanding of QLD planning history suggests governments undertake their prioritisation with a sharp eye on growth potential, rather than servicing existing population centres (see discussion around almost a century of delay on the Redcliffe line). Growth estimates suggest the area between Ipswich and Rosewood is likely to expected to deliver a lot of growth in coming years, and Ripley continues apace. I wouldn’t write this project off yet, but i do fear the current climate of cost blowouts and the existing pipeline means it will just sit on the backburner for decades to come.
2 Likes
The Gold Coast line isn’t finished, that might be a clue as to how projects tend to be delivered in Queensland - in bits and pieces over long periods of time.
Perth generally just builds the whole line end-to-end, only really goes back if development skips forward.
2 Likes
This was originally to be delivered along with the rail extension to Springfield. However, when there was a change in government midway through the project, the bikeway was canned (they proceeded with widening the motorway though).
The best hope for an extension of the bikeway from Ellen Grove to Springfield will be to bundle it with any future motorway widening projects (i.e. multi-decade horizon).
There simply is no interest at any level of government in building major active transport corridors as a stand-alone project.
2 Likes
Yes, that’s where it is at present. It is not an absolute given that it would be heavy rail.
More details > https://www.ipswich.qld.gov.au/About-Council/Initiatives/Advocacy/Ipswich-to-Springfield-Central-Public-Transport-Corridor
1 Like
Seems to be the classic path that major projects take to be delivered in Queensland. The project delivery and execution is itself an obstacle.
Projects tend to be front-loaded. Big plan, lots of marketing… then over time the project is stripped right down, both timelines and budget blows out, and it’s delivered in pieces.
There is also a huge list of $b projects, also unfinished or unstarted ahead of this one. So very likely to be delayed for a bit (e.g. 20 years).
Recommend running a whole heap of buses off the end of the line, and seeing if we can get incremental extension at least.
1 Like
Unless it’s a Freeway Those are prioritised!!
1 Like
I cannot cope with the government/s thinking it is acceptable to meet a rail line with anything else other than a rail line.
Putting a BRT and heavy/light rail together is absolute madness and I feel like I’m going insane with the number of proposals that are built on this.
Buses are not the answer.
I don’t believe in assessing the mode when it’s meeting an existing project - e.g., buses should have never been on the table with the extension of GCLR as it was not a bus project. Buses should not be on the table for an extension of the Springfield RAIL line.
6 Likes
I cannot cope with the government/s thinking it is acceptable to meet a rail line with anything else other than a rail line.
Agree. Feeder buses running perpendicular to rail are acceptable, but using buses as a rail extension along major corridors is not.
5 Likes