Liz

This makes absolute sense to me.

StephC

This is the first I’ve heard of the ‘green’ bridge alternative and, on reflection, I have to say that I do not like this option at all.

I’m greatly in favour of a Bellbowrie-Wacol bridge, but anything other than a full vehicle-access bridge would be a waste of time and money.

Green bridges have worked quite well for the South Bank complex and the University of Qld – mainly because there is a heavy student population and a high degree of cross-river pedestrian/cycling activity in these areas.

However, the needs of Bellbowrie and surrounding suburbs are very different. Our major problems are our comparatively small population density and our severely limited access to the rest of the city. No matter where we want to go, other than to Ipswich, we are forced onto Moggill Road (unless you take the slow, unreliable and out-of-the-way Moggill Ferry).

A green bridge at Bellbowrie-Wacol would be next to useless. It would deprive us of one of the major advantages of building a bridge at all – that is, more direct access to the Centenary and south-western suburbs, without having to take Moggill Rd and the Centenary Higway.

As for the other major advantage of a bridge – better access to rail transport to the city – how many commuters in the Bellbowrie area, who are already disadvantaged by distance, will want to drive their cars to the Bellbowrie riverfront, then take a shuttle bus over the bridge (assuming that a bus will be ready to leave straightaway), then get off the bus at Wacol and wait for a train for what is still a fairly long ride to the city? Even on a good day, this is unnecessarily time consuming. On a bad day, if you miss the bus at Bellbowrie, you would then miss your train connection.

In environmental terms, introducing buses to shuttle residents from Bellbowrie to Wacol would be hardly any less polluting than having commuters drive their cars the same distance.

In practical terms, the low population density would not make an added shuttle-bus service very cost effective, so only a limited bus service is likely to operate – making the connection problems for commuters even more difficult.

I for one would not use such a system. It would not offer me any incentive to change any of my existing commuter arrangements – which are to take my car to Grandview Drive or Indooroopilly and catch the bus, or to Chelmer to catch the train for a short ride to the city.

I am acutely aware that we live in an era of global warming and peak oil, but building a green bridge in an outlying area makes no sense – environmental or otherwise.

Preetha

I fully agree with StephC. It will be far more practical to have a bridge along the lines of the Walter Taylor Bridge at Indooroopilly which will give local traffic an alternate route out of the area.

Grant Muller

Thanks for your feedback Steph C and Preetha. You make some good points. The exact shape and location for a bridge is really a discussion for the local community (on both sides of the river), with expert help.

Our brochures and our presentations talk about both a green-bridge and about giving access to local cars as well ie both.

Direct access to the freeway network - with two freeway routes to the city, Logan Motorway to the South and Ipswich Motorway to Ipswich, without crawling through six residential suburbs on a bullock track called Moggill Road, has also got to be a good thing in favour of full access to any bridge.

We have been contacted by people in the Centenary suburbs who would like full vehicular access because they see a strong benefit in better connecting the two communities and greater access to services.

Access to a public transport system that makes sense to use should undoubtedly be a part of the solution (whether that is driving to Wacol Station and catching the train in or catching the bus to the train).

Whichever format is adopted, the bridge solution will be better, cheaper and quicker. Better for residents, quicker for commuters and cheaper for the taxpayer.

A bridge in the area was a condition of the development of Bellbowrie. It was paid for by the developer - it is long overdue to tackle congestion head on.

Peter J

Re Grant’s Comments;

There is no doubt that there is a surging ground swell of support for the construction of a bridge that links Bellbowrie to the Centenary Suburbs, as on face value it appears an economically viable, sensible and a more practical solution than the Kenmore Bypass or even a major upgrade of Moggill Road for that matter, could ever hope to achieve.

Being an everyday traveller for over 13 years from Pullenvale to Paddington via the Western Freeway, I cannot help but notice two very apparent issues. Firstly, the majority of cars (and I have had ample opportunity to count them whilst waiting my turn at the end of Pullenvale Road!) travelling inbound on Moggill Rd have one person in them, and secondly the vast majority of cars that are on Moggill Road at Chapel Hill appear to drive past the Western Freeway access ramp, and continue on towards Indooroopilly, St Lucia, the other basket case Coronation Drive, perhaps the east and southeast suburbs, and then beyond. This illustrates to me that a)people from the western suburbs have become reliant on their cars as the preferred everyday transport method perhaps due to the serious lack of public transport infrastructure, or perhaps due to their destination not being accessible on the locally available public transport route, or they just like paying heaps of $ for the priviledge of using a car, and b)they also have a need to access places other than the City but can only get there via Moggill Road to Kenmore.

These two observations highlight the urgent need to provide an alternative and effective transport corridor from the western suburbs to other current transport arterials (that a bridge from Bellbowrie would provide), be they road, train, bus, or cycle to other destinations as well as the Brisbane CBD. An alternative access for Emergency Services vehicles are other obvious benefits that the a bridge link to the Centenary Suburbs would bring to the Bellbowrie and its surrounding suburbs.

However, I believe that the most compelling argument for the construction of a bridge from Bellbowrie to Riverhills is the obvious benefits associated with a significant reversal of traffic flow along Moggill Road. These permanent benefits cannot be understated, but suffice to say anyone would be hard pressed to come up with any significant or long term drawbacks to this scenario.

Whilst there is no doubt that Moggill Road could do with some practical, more user-friendly modifications ie the review of the Village Entrance, a personnel bridge over the Kenmore State School Crossing, a T3 or dedicated Buslane from the Village to at least Indooroopilly and or the Western Freeway, the construction of a bridge to unite Bellbowrie and Riverhills whether it be ‘green’ or otherwise, is a real alternative to the Kenmore Bypass and would show a responsible government with real and long term vision in addressing the transport needs of Brisbane’s western suburbs.

The Kenmore Bypass concept of the late 1960s is antiquated in both its design and perceived benefits when compared to the reality that is 2008 in the western suburbs of Brisbane.

Peter J

Wendy

A viewpoint from the Wacol/Riverhills side of the river..’Yes’to a Green Bridge, ‘No’ to a full vehicular bridge. We have our own traffic woes over here.
Ipswich Rd is a carpark,between Redbank Plains and Rocklea,from 6-9am weekdays.
Centenary Highway at the Ipswich Rd intersection always has a huge amount of traffic backed back, with the traffic going back to Sumners Rd overpass most mornings between 7-8am.
To avoid this intersection motorists will go through Darra, (Darra residents are complaining about the massive increase in traffic),or they use Wacol Station Rd, a ‘bullock track’ in it’s own right.
Sumner Park industrial area will soon have Bullockhead St closed because of the extra lanes being built on the Centenary Hwy. All traffic will then enter and leave Sumner Park via Sumners Rd to go either Centenary Hwy or Wacol Station Rd. A new $20 million road,(Wolston Rd), will then be built, coming out onto the already congested Wacol Station Rd.
Then we have the anticipated increase in traffic on Wacol Station Road when the RSPCA re-locate to the old Juvenile Remand site, and when the new Police Academy is built along the Brisbane River at Wacol.
Please note that Wacol Station Rd ia a one lane-each way road that was never meant to carry the amounts of traffic that it does now, let alone what the traffic will increase to in the future.
We also have work-in-progress on the new Springfield rail line branching off at Darra, and upgrades to the Darra and Wacol railway stations…what a shame no-one had the foresight to build a branch line to Moggill/Bellbowrie during this time…
Think about a Green Bridge to Wacol Railway Station from the Moggill surrounds - BUT make sure the plans are for the Green Bridge to cross and meet up with Grindle Rd, where the majority of “residents” living there are doing so at taxpayer’s expense, ie, the QDPI cattle and the hundreds of inmates in the Prison Precint.

keiran

–and the hundreds of inmates in the Prison Precint–

I think there’s one point that will stop anyone nearby in Bellbowrie from placing a Yes vote. I bet the psychological impact of a direct access from the prison weighs more on local residents minds than the fact that we’re little/no safer at the moment.

A bridge to Grindle Rd (here for those who don’t know it http://maps.google.com.au/maps?f=q&hl=en&geocode=&q=Grindle+Rd,+wacol&sll=-27.576917,152.909431&sspn=0.026362,0.054245&ie=UTF8&ll=-27.578324,152.903295&spn=0.026361,0.037594&t=h&z=15&iwloc=addr )would help anyone heading to Ipswich or South East, but it wouldn’t do much to help those heading into the city, the vast majority as you put above.

I personally think that this or a bridge to Sumners Rd would be a great PART of the solution but only 1 part.

Richard

The best thing about this bridge is that we all agree a bridge is long overdue and it will help reduce cars on Moggill Road inbound in peak hours and will give access to the Ipswich Rail line. The exact form, location and benefits is one for the communities on both sides to work out when we can get our leaders to agree to build it.

Kev

Peter J, well said! Get that well structured argument out to as many media outlets, wesites, email lists and pollies as you can!

Keiran

Richard - We don’t ALL agree. It COULD reduce the cars on Moggill Rd, but the question needs to be, how many cars are heading inbound on Moggill Rd to go south/east or to Ipswich. I’d personally like to know numbers. It’s possible that instead of helping ease Moggill Rd traffic, this may only increase the traffic outbound.

Robert

From my day to day professional experience the development of solutions in an engineering context starts out at option development. Each option is examined and shortlisted in a staged process based on hard data and criteria until you get the best fit oiption.

Do we have hard data on traffic flows and options development procedures at our disposal? If we do not it may be hard to develop more than what would appear to be plausible sounding options that need further investigation to firm them up.

Obviously a 6 lane highway through Kenmore etc is a totally undesirable option. However ultimately it appears, on the face of it at least, that we will be pushing the politicians and main roads management to have their engineering folk sort out the details e.g. further feasibility work, on any options we produce.

Given all this it looks as if we are limited to deriving good options for further investigation/development. I emphasise “good” as we try to push weak options we are likely to get shot down quite easily by the opposing politician/s (this goes without saying).

Does this sound about right or have I misunderstood the resources and data available to the group?

Peter J

Robert makes a very valid point.

Main Roads have the resources ie traffic counters, traffic engineers, historical data, and most of all time to process this data, that can and as required by them, be relied upon to shoot down any option to the KB that anyone or group may present without any creditable data.

Along with what Robert states, I am not sure exactly what options along with the backup data have been presented by the group or any individual to MR.

The best way forward maybe to insist MR provide their detailed analysis on the reasoning to pursue with the KB (hope it is just not on a 51% support or that the avaialble land was there), along with their detailed analysis of the other options that have/are to be presented to them be they a combination of options or an individual solution. Insist MR carry out the hard yards to provide the expertise to review any options presented, we pay them to do so, so lets get them working on it. Then request MR transparently carry out one of their “surveys” on which option/s is seen as being the best and most suitable by the community, noting that the ‘best’ option could be based on many factors not just one. This way ensures that the government is providing the resources for the people it represents, is seen to be acting in a fair and impartial manner, and thus allows the final decision in the hands of the community.

Along with the above suggestion, we should also continue to review the process and validity of how did the Government go forward with this and any next stages of the proposed KB project or alternatives. I along with others question the validity of that Main Roads survey showing 51% support of the KB when you look at the current Westside News poll (which asks a very simple Yes or No to whether you support the KB) showing overwhelming opposition to the KB. The MR survey may have been right at the time, but there seems to be an anti-KB sentiment growing in the community at present and this maybe due to the increase in media coverage along with people actually having a good think about the ramifications the KB will have. Dr Flegg’s survey showing over 90% support of the KB is discounted by most as a joke, he should have another go and see what he comes up with now.

Peter J

Robert

I agree with you Peter J. Ultimately we would have to work wihin the bounds of due process going forward.

Obviously the big issue at the minute is to turn the ship around i.e. stop the KB (stage 1 and 2) proposals in their tracks and get option studies for good quality alternatives moving e.g. alternate routes, light rail or whatever. We will have to work with MR or other government departments on this.

This may well take a while and sounds a bit “yes minister”, but it will be worth it in the long haul. It gets us what we want.

The powers that be will want their transport solution in the long run (we can see a need too) so we will need to be in there banging on the side of the big stone wheel of government as it rolls along.

I have a strong feeling that if we don’t make sure we obtain and maintain technical/political credibility the big stone wheel is going to roll over the top of us (Bruce will be helping to push it over us no doubt).

This is more a call for strategy going forward than anything so we don’t give anyone anything to shoot at (there has been a few pot shots taken so far). I certainly don’t want to hear the term Nimby again.

At the moment the game appears to be a political rugby match. Once the KB is stopped and the ability to examine further options is at hand, this needs to become a bunch of people and government working to solve a problem.

How does this sound?

Stephanie

Hi.

I am a very big supporter of a traffic bridge from Bellbowrie to Riverhills. I had heard previously (before finding this website) that money had been placed aside by the developer for said bridge. My question is where is the money now and furthermore, where is the bridge? Does anyone know information / reponses from council / main roads etc?