Opinion piece

Housing, transport and planning in southeast Queensland

At the end of May Deputy Premier Anna Bligh launched the updated Infrastructure Plan for Southeast Queensland (1).

This “$20 billion” plan provides clues as to the housing and transport challenges that lie ahead for the region.

It was announced that Brisbane, Logan, Redcliffe, Redlands, Pine Rivers and Caboolture will accommodate a large proportion of growth, and that in Pine Rivers and Caboolture most of it will be on undeveloped “Greenfield” sites.

The western corridor around Ipswich will also accommodate growth in Greenfield developments.

These developments on the urban fringe can be problematic.

The 2005 Regional Plan adopted a “balanced” approach to housing – acknowledging the post war trend for suburban fringe housing, but emphasising that more housing needed to be close to public transport and activity centres in existing urban areas.

Greenfield development requires large tax payer subsidies for new power, water and transport infrastructure.

And as well as leading to loss of biodiversity and traffic congestion, housing on the fringe is not as cheap as the development industry would have us believe.

It may offer short term savings on house and land, but these are offset by higher ongoing costs.

The far flung location coupled with lack of public transport options means households often need more than one car and petrol bills strain budgets.

Griffith University researchers found that fringe dwellers are the most vulnerable to rising oil prices which will make it harder to meet mortgage repayments (2).

In addition to this, poor housing design leads to higher energy bills.

We must learn from the mistake of allowing the huge North Lakes development to proceed without linking it to the northern rail line.

For the good of the region most future development in Pine Rivers and Caboolture Shires should be in underutilised land surrounding train stations such as Strathpine, Petrie, Narangba and Burpengary.

Development west of Brisbane should occur around new heavy rail infrastructure and include more local employment options.

If it does not we will see a continuing increase in carnage on the Ipswich motorway, regardless of how much money goes into upgrades and bypasses.

To the State’s credit it has already started work on the rail link between Darra and Springfield in the west.

But another concern raised by the revised Infrastructure Plan is government’s overall reluctance to prioritise rail over roads and busways.

Anyone who uses buses and trains knows that trains are more efficient, even if the bus is on a busway.

Murdoch University Professor Jeff Kenworthy emphasises how rail competes better with cars than buses due to smoother rides, higher speeds and greater reliability.

In a study of more than 80 urban regions he discovered there were no regions where the average speed of bus systems exceeds 26km/hr, while rail systems averaged between 34-43km/hr, in comparison to a general road traffic speed of 34km/hr (3).

Current government initiatives such as rail line duplications on the Ferny Grove, Gold Coast and Ipswich lines are steps in the right direction.

But its time for the Infrastructure Plan to be redeveloped – guided by a hard-headed analysis of the relative costs and benefits of investing in rail versus roads and busways.

The rail link between Darra and Springfield must continue on as a four track line through the Ripley Valley linking back into Ipswich.

The transport corridor between Petrie and Kippa-Ring must be developed as rail, possibly servicing North Lakes.

The northern line must extend to coastal centres such as Maroochydore and Mooloolaba, and the southern line to Coolangatta.

In Brisbane, its time to junk the amateurish “TransApex” road projects and analyse the option of tunnelling for heavy rail between major activity generators such as the CBD and UQ St Lucia.

Tunnelling is occurring now to build the new busway from Roma Street to Queen Street.

This is a positive project but the unfortunate reality is that it will be at capacity within two weeks of opening due to the limited capacity of buses.

The billions spent on short lengths of busway could be even better spent on placing a comprehensive network of transit lanes on existing roads across the city, while investing leftover funds into improving the frequency and coverage of services.

Drivers need not fear because they will finally have a safer, cheaper, greener and more convenient alternative to the car.

Congestion will reduce considerably once a quarter of trips are on public transport and this will benefit couriers, tradespeople and others who still have to drive.

Chris Hale is an urban economist, researching land use and transport at the University of Queensland's Centre for Transport Strategy. c.hale2@uq.edu.au
Tristan Peach is a part-time tutor and lecturer in urban planning at QUT t.peach@qut.edu.au

Endnotes

(1) Bligh, A. (Tuesday 29 May 2007) $20.2 billion earmarked for infrastructure in greater Brisbane, Queensland Government Media Release.
(2) Dodson and Sipe. (2005) ‘Oil Vulnerability in the Australian City’ in Urban Research Program Research Paper 6.
(3) Kenworthy, Murray-Leach and Townsend (2005) ‘Sustainable urban transport’ in The natural advantage of nations: business opportunities, innovation and governance in the 21st century. Earthscan, London.

Media 27 June 07

Fast track rail improvements for Southeast Queensland

Despite its flaws, Queensland Rail’s City Train network is still one of the most reliable public transport systems in Australia’s capital cities and should be expanded so that more people have access to it.

The City Train rail network is on time for the vast majority of trips (92.6% on-time average in peak hour 2005/2006) compared with Sydney where the system only reached a 92% on-time average 12 in every 20 days (54% of the time).

In Melbourne, the on-time performance of the Connex rail network recently dropped to 90.8% as a result of a damaged train fleet, and Connex was forced to pay compensation to regular users.

“Rail has greater speed and capacity than cars and buses, and will best cope with meeting the transport needs of the growing region,” said CAST spokesperson Tristan Peach.

It is safer, faster and more comfortable than cars and buses, with international research on 80 cities showing there were no regions where the average speed of bus systems exceeds 26km/hr, while rail systems averaged between 34-43km/hr, in comparison to a general road traffic speed of 34km/hr.

“In Southeast Queensland current and planned rail upgrades need to be prioritised by the State Government, with money to be taken from low-priority road projects such as the disastrous Airport Link tunnel,” said Mr Peach.

“We are also encouraging frustrated rail commuters to write to Transport Minister Paul Lucas to tell him what needs to be improved,” said Mr Peach.

CAST believe rail improvements need to be fast-tracked such as:

(1) The rail link between Darra and Springfield must continue on as a four track line through the Ripley Valley linking back into Ipswich.

(2)The transport corridor between Petrie and Kippa-Ring must be developed as rail, possibly servicing North Lakes.

(3) The northern line must extend to coastal centres such as Maroochydore and Mooloolaba, and the southern line to Coolangatta.

(4) Work needs to be done with timetable integration, for example the Ipswich train (coming from Caboolture) often narrowly misses the connecting Ferny Grove train at Bowen Hills, which can lead to a wait of up to one hour

(5) Improved bike and pedestrian paths and lighting around railway stations

MEDIA CONTACT: Tristan Peach 0416-478-615QR CityTrain

References

QR CityTrain
http://www.corporate.qr.com.au/Images/QR%20Annual%20Report%202005_06_tcm15-14708.pdf

Sydney Rail Corp
http://www.transportregulator.nsw.gov.au/publications/reports/ontime_running04/on_time_running.pdf

Connex Melbourne http://www.connexmelbourne.com.au/news_comp/index_feb.asp

Kenworthy, Murray-Leach and Townsend (2005) ‘Sustainable urban transport’ in The natural advantage of nations: business opportunities, innovation and governance in the 21st century. Earthscan, London.

Media 18 June 2007

Hazardous cycle lane blockage on Victoria Bridge

A frustrated cycling commuter contacted CAST this morning to report that the inbound cycle lane on Victoria Bridge (Brisbane City) was blocked when she rode across the bridge at 8:30am (Monday 18 June).

After further investigation it was confirmed that the lane was blocked by a long, metal temporary fence which still remained after 9am despite being reported to the Brisbane City Council call centre.

Cyclists were forced to suddenly merge with heavy vehicle traffic because there was no prior warning signage and no opportunity for cyclists to turn around and get off the bridge onto the footpath.

“This dangerous and unnecessary hazard shows the kind of contempt the Government has for cyclists,” said CAST spokesperson Tristan Peach.

“Government would never allow an important car route to be blocked unnecessarily without warning,” said Mr Peach.

“Cyclists are treated like second class citizens in Brisbane, and we demand an apology for this mistake and and assurance that it will not happen again,” said Mr Peach.

This bike lane is popular with the many cyclists coming from West End, South Brisbane, Highgate Hill and Dutton Park.

The barrier may have been left on the road after an event or road closure on the weekend.

CAST believe Brisbane needs a full network of cycle paths and lanes to encourage more people to use their bike as a mode of transport for accessing work, shops and other services.

“Brisbane’s current cycle network is a hotch potch of fragmented paths along creeks and occasional bike lanes on roads that randomly disappear,” said Mr Peach.

CAST also want to see more bicycle lockers at railway stations to encourage people to cycle for shorter trips.

“Some well used railway stations have only four bike lockers, which are all in use, while people who lock their bikes to fences or poles risk having them stolen,” said Mr Peach.

Media 14 June 2007

Council budget - “Moving Brisbane” in the right direction?

Brisbane City Council’s 2007/2008 transport budget is a slight improvement from last year, but has still failed to get the balance right.

Initial analysis shows that $450million (69%) is devoted to roads; $173mil (27%) to public transport; $24mil (4%) to walking and cycling; and $2.5 million (>1%) to travel demand management.

“The Lord Mayor and Councillors will not achieve their election mandate of reducing congestion until spending on walking, cycling and public transport exceeds road spending,” said CAST spokesperson Tristan Peach.

“Brisbane does not need any new major roads – what we need are public transport, walking and cycling networks that carry 30 to 40 percent of trips – only then will congestion be reduced,” said Mr Peach.

“By wasting money on unnecessary road projects the Council is putting a huge additional burden on ratepayers, and wasting money that should be spent on climate change programs and increasing the rainwater tank rebate,” said Mr Peach.

The $173 million for public transport is a $44 million increase from the $129 million allocation for public transport in 06/07 budget.

CAST believe this money needs to go into cost effective projects that have major benefits for public transport users.

“This year we want to see a comprehensive network of T3 lanes rolled out across the city, more high frequency BUZ services and more buses feeding into train stations,” said Mr Peach.