I’ll agree with you insofar that 9 stations over that distance on a proposed heavy rail alignment is overkill. Some of the stations on the website noted above are barely a kilometre apart, resulting in some discrete communities being served by more than one station, and whoever cooked that particular iteration up does appear to have put forward a plan that mixes up what the intended purpose and outcomes of heavy rail and alternative modes would be (at least to my mind).
I think the right number would be more like 4 or 5 stations. Those might be Redbank Plains, Ripley, Deebing Heights, Yamanto and UniSQ. Given the shorter distance between Deebing Heights and Yamanto, one of those would probably drop out if you went with 4. I’ll withhold judgement on whether a station is needed at Augustine Heights given the proximity to Springfield Central already.
What I will say is that an interchange near the Cunningham Hwy will prevent people from further afield like me from clogging up their other roads like we do now .
Thank you for your persistence and effort - as mentioned, it’s hard to believe a single track and only a single Springfield station could have been the outcome otherwise.
Bus access is terrible for Forest Lake residents travelling to/from Richlands station.
Each afternoon the 460 bus gets stuck in traffic on the Centenary Motorway, so that multiple trainloads of people are left to wait baking in the afternoon sun (there’s no shade), often for up to an hour. The PID screen at the bus stop is so unreliable to the point that it’s not even worth looking at.
Getting to the station is no better, with buses often running a few minutes behind schedule, and thus missing the train.
As mentioned, bus access from Inala is even worse!
Ellen Grove station definitely would have been beneficial for Forest Lake residents, but now that Ellen Grove is being developed with many new estates popping up, those residents are also left without PT access.
I remember being shocked at reading the proposal for a single track railway. They had a habit of doing single track, they did it for both Brisbane Airport and Gold Coast Line. It took years to rid Ferny Grove and Gold Coast lines of single track sections.
The point of the Springfield line is to be a regional spine with a pretty strong commuter-rail flavour (much like all the other QR Citytrain lines). It makes sense to keep building it out as heavy rail.
You could draw some parallels to The Wave I guess.
Like it, there’s an easier-for-heavy-rail corridor on the closer-to-Brisbane-city end (the Springfield-Yamanto stretch) with wide stop spacing through a relatively young area.
Unlike it, there’s no pressure to get the harder-for-heavy-rail part through a more established area (Yamanto-Ipswich) done by 2032, which is what justifies the alternate mode up north.
Now, I’m not convinced Yamanto-Ipswich is an immediate priority, but I think it’s probably worth doing eventually. Certainly Springfield-Ripley-Yamanto is, because that’s supporting a huge amount of greenfields development.
Also needed are a bunch of HF/BRT routes like the 515, to be the crossbeams to the two rail line’s pillars.
Just thinking of a different direction, what if Yamanto-Riverlink was constructed as LR, and the heavy rail line did a turn south towards Boonah? Yes, I realise there’s not much demand currently, but I’m trying to think of Etsy might be needed in 30, 40, 50 years time.
Maybe have the Ipswich LR extend to Brassall as well? I think Ipswich is going to need some form of mass transit in the medium term.
This would provide Forest Lake residents with a 15-min frequent bus connection to Richlands station rather than having to rely on an hourly feeder bus service.
If the 100 BUZ were to be extended all the way to Richlands station, however, I’d recommend that Willawong bus depot acquire more 14.5m TAG axle buses, to cater to the increase in catchment.
A guess would be that the business case will not be finished before 2032. The Olympics are swallowing up funding. Springfield may get to use the Lions training ground for the Olympics. But I can’t see an Olympic infrastructure reason to connect Ipswich to Springfield apart from the population boom occurring between Ripley and Springfield.
I like this idea as it seems like a simple way to fix the existing ugly mess (access to Richlands station from Forest Lake/Inala).
One possible issue is that 100 buses running along Forest Lake Boulevard between Lochwood Avenue and Joseph Banks Avenue could be going either inbound or outbound - it wouldn’t be easy for passengers waiting to tell. There’s only two bus stops in this section (one on either side), but they are immediately after the bus takes a left turn. During peak, the 100 already runs every few minutes so there will be 100 buses everywhere!
This isn’t an issue with the N100 because it only runs outbound.
Otherwise, an extension to the 100 route seems like a good short-term idea.
Really though, something needs to be done to ensure easier connection to Richlands station for residents in the Heathwood/Forest Lake area (i.e. the 460, which is unreliable because it gets held up in the city) and Inala/Doolandella (i.e. the 101, with its pathetic hourly services and inconsistent routing).
Inala residents shouldn’t need to do a massive loop through Forest Lake to get frequent access to Richlands station!
Would it not be simpler and easier to upgrade the 460 to a BUZ, and work on some bus priority measures on the centenary? At the very least the increase in frequency would ensure even with traffic there shouldn’t be too much of a wait
There is zero chance that the state government will consider bus priority on the Centenary Motorway. Even TMR’s proposal to widen the motorway to 6 lanes AND build a new parallel arterial road still didn’t include bus priority.
According to TMR’s FAQs about the Centenary Bridge duplication project:
The state government simply have no interest whatsoever in bus priority measures on the Centenary Motorway.
The other option as you mention is to turn 460 into a BUZ. The western suburbs don’t currently have a BUZ, and BCC have indicated they will do a bus network review for the western suburbs - but only after the northern and eastern suburbs, so this is unlikely to be any sooner than the end of the current council term (and possibly later if they decide to roll out metro buses to Carseldine and Capalaba first).
It would be great to have the 460 run BUZ frequency outside of peak times (and especially on Sundays, when it currently runs hourly).
During peak times, I’m not convinced it will improve things much. Inbound, the bus often misses the train even though already runs every 15 minutes. Outbound, the buses get stuck in the city and you’ll end up with no bus for 45 minutes then 3 buses in the next 10 minutes. It’s just too unreliable with traffic on the motorway.
I also don’t think deploying more buses into heavily congested areas is the best use of buses/drivers.
The 460 is best used as a feeder bus. Forest Lake residents already have the 100 BUZ to access the city, and the train from Richlands gives quicker access to the inner western suburbs (Indro, Toowong, Milton). The majority of inbound passengers disembark at Richlands station for this reason.
The only benefit the 460 bus has for passengers beyond Richlands station is to Mt Ommaney. It should terminate there.
Unfortunately, to realise the full potential of the 460 as a feeder bus, the Springfield line needs to run trains more frequently. That’s supposed to happen when CRR launches, but who knows? The existing infrastructure already supports 15 minute trains all day to Springfield now, so there’s no argument you can make to TMR that frequency improvements on the line need to coincide with CRR.
EDIT: sorry for derailing this thread to grumble about the 460…
I would support this kind of proposal, and I think it’s a reasonable one to push for.
However, council will claim that this idea is “contingent on widening of the Centenary Motorway first to accommodate bus lanes”, which is conveniently outside of their jurisdiction.
Meanwhile the state government seem more interested in a new tunnel, which will be of no benefit to bus users.
This would also require bus priority between the CBD and Centenary on-ramp at Indro. Council may be willing to reinstate bus lanes on Coronation Drive (mayyyybe….), but I just can’t see them doing anything on Moggill Rd. They had the opportunity to do something with the roundabout upgrade and did not.
I guess we will see with Old Cleveland Rd and Gympie Rd corridors what kind of priority the council thinks is adequate for the Berties.
From what I heard, the locals didn’t want any changes to the 122 and this was apparently supported and advocated for by the local councillor, hence why the 122 does not go to Richlands station (even though it should)
Queeeensland Tranzzzport & MAIN ROADS - keeping you moving in 1973
It’ll be a “road based transit vehicle”. Operationally, a “systems executive” will sit at the front of this “road based transit vehicle”, a centre aisle along the length of the “transit vehicle” will allow for “advanced ergonically inspired passenger seating”, thus leading to a more relaxing “transit experience” for the not simply a user, but a “customer”. These customers, will be able to enter/leave the “road based transit vehicle” by “access points”, at the both the front and toward the rear of the vehicle.
Suggested names for the breakthrough World-Class project include, [although no offical information is yet available] 1) the “Better Urban System”, the “[just beyond] Brisbane Urban System” and the “Beautiful-Wave Urban System, or simply “BUS” for short! A secret photo of a “BUS” System prototype was recently captured, in an undisclosed location
.
