Greater Flagstone and Yarrabilba Urban Development Areas

[ozbob]

From the Logan Leader click here!

Flagstone growth linked to train service

Flagstone growth linked to train service

09 Mar 10 @ 10:28am by Judith Maizey

ONE of Logan's planning leaders has linked the future growth of a satellite city in the Greater Flagstone area to the development of a passenger train service that was mothballed by the State Government last week.

Logan City Council's planning and development committee chairwoman Cherie Dalley, said a rail corridor for a passenger line servicing Jimboomba, Greenbank and Park Ridge was absolutely essential to the proper development of the city's southwest.

Councillor Dalley said the provision of public transport infrastructure was a big issue for the area.

"I am going to make the bold statement (and say) that I am pushing really hard for the State Government to put in the rail line with a bit of Federal money,'' she said.
Cr Dalley's comments follow last week's statement by State Transport Minister Rachel Nolan that a proposal to establish a passenger service on the interstate freight line through Beaudesert was too expensive and unwarranted.

State Government forecasts say the area would not sustain a rail service until at least 2050, but Cr Dalley believes governments should start looking to establish a passenger train service in the area by the time the Greater Flagstone population reaches 15,000 in 2016.

She said the Transport Minister may not have seen the planning for the Greater Flagstone area before making her decision.

"I don't know why she wouldn't have seen this planning. It's not for me to say, I'm not the minister,'' she said.

"I am just giving you my personal viewpoint and a Logan City Council personal viewpoint ... that the only way you're going to get proper transport in that southwest (area) is rail.''

Federal Member for Forde Brett Raguse refused to say when a passenger service was warranted or possible.

"The decision on infrastructure priorities is made at the State Government level,'' he said.

GREATER FLAGSTONE: THE FACTS
Greater Flagstone -

Population: 130,000 people over the next 20 plus years - the equivalent population of Gladstone.
Current population: 4000 people

Area: 10,000ha from Greenbank to Undullah. Of that 10,000ha, about 3000ha is constrained land which is inappropriate for urban development.

Status quo: Infrastructure requirement will be resolved prior to the commencement of any new development.
Major landholders: MTTA, Lateral Properties (the developers of Teviot Downs), Tre Heritage Pacific, New Beith Forest and the Anderson family.

TIME LINE:

November/December, 2009 - Logan City Council consulted with the community about three options.

February 2010 - Option 1, referred to as Centres was chosen as the preferred planning option. It involves locating employment land close to the main centres and residential areas to minimise the need for external travel, and encourage pedestrian and bicycle travel.

2011 - The statutory consultation phase will dovetail with the planning scheme.

October 2011 - Planning scheme finalised.

[Jon Bryant]

Or the Government to not see the benefit of busing a rail line shows they are still using 1960 principles of every person should be able to drive and public transport is a community service.  We are gridlock bound!!!!! 

[ButFli]

The State Government should not be subsidising the business practices of private enterprise. If a developer requires a train service to make their development viable then it is the developer that should be paying for it.

[Emmie]

The State Government should not be subsidising the business practices of private enterprise. If a developer requires a train service to make their development viable then it is the developer that should be paying for it.

I agree - look at the money that has been made out of the Springfield development, with the promise of public transport.

If a private organisation is a major beneficiary of a public transport initiative, then they should contribute a proportion of the costs (not the whole, because there's a more general benefit).  The Regatta Hotel contributed to the building of the Regatta Ferry stop at Toowong and got naming rights (and therefore a lot of free advertising) - a win-win situation.

[#Metro]

The State Government should not be subsidising the business practices of private enterprise. If a developer requires a train service to make their development viable then it is the developer that should be paying for it.

I'm closer to Emmie's position (below).

If a private organisation is a major beneficiary of a public transport initiative, then they should contribute a proportion of the costs (not the whole, because there's a more general benefit).

There are a lot of precedents: public roads are used by private taxi, coach companies, trucking companies and tradies to make money for themselves. Major transport interchanges are located at major shopping centres. Private bus operators are subsidised by Translink etc.

It also works in reverse- there are private projects which solve or alleviate a public problem e.g developer contributions to put ferry terminals in at Regatta or West End. The Airtrain etc.

If the developers made money on the promise or speculation that a public transport service would appear, and if the resident's tax payments/rates aren't quite enough to cover the cost of the project, then, yes, they should pay something for it. Brisbane City Council has developer contributions which are precisely used for this purpose. If the Logan council has something similar they should be asked to contribute something too.

[longboi]

I was thinking something along the same lines tramtrain. LCC could sweeten the deal for the State Government if there was some sort of Public Transport tax or fee placed on developers moving into the Flagstone area.

[#Metro]

It needs to be thought out carefully.
A PT levy would give incentive for councils to encourage car useage, which is unmetered and unmonitored at this stage.

[ButFli]

There are a lot of precedents: public roads are used by private taxi, coach companies, trucking companies and tradies to make money for themselves.

I can't think of any taxi, trucking, coach or tradie companies that proposed to build a depot out in the sticks and then QQ'd when the State Government wouldn't build a freeway to its doorstep to make it viable. That is effectively what the developer wants in this scenario.

Private bus operators are subsidised by Translink etc.

That's not technically correct, is it? Translink contracts private companies to run the services and Translink gets the fares.

I am not against Government putting some money on the table to bring transport to new suburbs. What I am against is a developer complaining when taxpayers' money won't be used to prop up an unviable project.

[#Metro]

That's not technically correct, is it? Translink contracts private companies to run the services and Translink gets the fares.

How the transactions are conducted make no difference in the end. The final effect is a subsidy. The bus service would simply not run without subsidy as fares don't cover the cost of running. I won't deal with this further as it is getting off topic...

The proponents are Logan City Council.
I'm sure the Logan City councillors would wonder why it is ok for Gympie North, some 172 km or so from Brisbane can get a rail service (or Ipswich, Nambour, Gold Coast, Caboolture etc) but not Logan...

They should go for higher density. Why they don't do that  

[longboi]

They should go for higher density. Why they don't do that  

They Are! Logan is going higher density in Woodrige/Logan Central, Browns Plains and Springwood.

There's actually community consultation going on at the moment which is proposing to increase density dramatically around Wembley Rd/Railway Pde. I would post it here but I cbf looking for it  I do know that one of the options calls for Woodridge station to be sunk and built over. Even more radical is a proposal to tunnel Wembley Rd and make the whole area very pedestrian-friendly.

[ozbob]

Deputy Premier and Attorney-General, Minister for Local Government and Special Minister of State
The Honourable Paul Lucas
09/03/2011

New SEQ community moves a step closer

The first development application to provide up to 132 new homes (126 lots) in Flagstone, one of South East Queensland's new communities, has been approved.

Deputy Premier and Minister for Local Government Paul Lucas said the approval of the first lots for the "The Reserve" development at New Beith was the first of two development applications for the entire Greater Flagstone Urban Development Area (UDA).

"This approval puts Greater Flagstone UDA firmly on the radar just five months after it was declared by the State Government," Mr Lucas said.

"Not only will the progression of this UDA provide more diverse housing to South East Queenslanders, it will also provide new job opportunities and stimulate the building industry.

"Developer MTAA expects to begin construction in mid-April and anticipates the marketing of Stage One (51 lots) will commence in May," Mr Lucas said.

"Land prices will vary, starting from around the mid $90,000 mark for 225m2 terrace lots rising to around $130,000 for a villa lot and $190,000 for premium traditional lots of over 800m2.

"House and land packages are expected to start from under $300,000 which will make the area affordable and attractive to a range of buyers, particularly first home buyers and key workers such as nurses and paramedics.

The 7,188 hectare Greater Flagstone UDA site is located 21 kilometres north of Beaudesert and almost seven kilometres west of Jimboomba.

When fully developed over the next 30-40 years, the Greater Flagstone UDA will provide approximately 50,000 homes for a population of around 120,000 people.

"Queenslanders want choice and variety in housing types and they want these in the most appropriate locations," Mr Lucas said.

"This development delivers that, and it will be an affordable, sustainable and connected community demonstrating best practice urban design, and sound community development principles."

The State Government planning and development body, the Urban Land Development Authority (ULDA), is responsible for undertaking planning and development assessment within Greater Flagstone UDA.

Chief Executive Officer of the ULDA Paul Eagles said "The Reserve" will be well serviced by public transport as the area continues to grow.

'"The Reserve" is located approximately 1.2 kilometres east of a proposed future rail station location.

"The development will retain lots of green space including the existing vegetation and creek gully to the east, north and west of the site.

"Significant trees throughout the site will be retained where possible and additional native vegetation will also be planted," Mr Eagles said.

"One of the major objectives of this site is to provide examples to the local business industry of different designs and layouts of housing products.

"The design of the residential development and the homes to be built will use best practice subtropical design and sustainability principles.

The State Government, through Growth Management Queensland, is leading the way with a focused approach to growth management to help shape tomorrow's Queensland.

The approved development application is available from the ULDA's website at www.ulda.qld.gov.au

==============================================================

[mufreight]

Ok Mr Lucas, you have approved the start of development at Flagstone, big deal, BUT WHERE IS THE PUBLIC TRANSPORT? and when do you as Deputy Premier intend to provide that and the other essential services that such development requires. 2081 perhaps?

[colinw]

Mr Lucas should have issued a press release saying "we've authorised a bunch of houses in the middle of nowhere, without even a bus service or a dual carriageway road to serve them".

New Beith area is here:
http://maps.google.com.au/maps?hl=en&ie=UTF8&ll=-27.737934,152.970886&spn=0.01827,0.041585&t=h&z=15

I believe New Beith station is proposed to be near the Pub Lane overpass, not that I expect to see any such station in my lifetime (and I'm only 44).

The closest current public transport service to the area is the Greenbank route 541, which comes off Middle Road at Kallioota St, with some services looping back and others continuing to Park Ridge via Andrew Road.  Beyond Kallioota St toward Greenbank, Spring Mountain & New Beith there is absolutely no service.
http://translink.com.au/resources/travel-information/services-and-timetables/timetables/070819_541,542,543,544.pdf

Nothing much appears to be happening down that way even with ARTC's dual gauge conversion, let alone non-believable promises of passenger trains.

I went through the area a couple of weeks ago, and there has been no change to the status of the apparently abandoned dual gauge conversion project.  The 3rd rail still terminates somewhere south of Kagaru without reaching its intended destination of Bromelton, and still appears to be only clipped to about 1 in 10 sleepers.

At Greenbank the lengthened and dual gauge converted loop still has standard gauge only turnouts, and the dual gauge turnouts remain stacked beside the line exactly where they were 6 months ago.

It appears that ARTC are not finishing off this project any time now, and I'm guessing that the QLD Government (which negotiated the project as part of the handover of the line to ARTC) is not interested in it either.

Anyone know if the proposed intermodal yard at Bromelton is still happening?

[Jonno]

Key planning assumption of this approval wil be 80 to 90% of all trips will be my motor vehicle and the developer will pay fir road upgrades. It will also note that PT only needs to be built when there is enough demand.

[Stillwater]

Heaven help us!  'Affordability' is achieved by not having any services.  Houses in the sticks!  Isn't it amazing that when the developer doesn't propose a park, footpaths, an oval for the kids to kick a football or street lighting, the blurb reads: 'Everything will be done to preserve the natural environment of the area, so sought after by families.'  The trip to the doctor or the shops for a loaf of bread will involve a round trip to Beaudesert, or Jimboomba.  How is all of this reducing the carbon footprint?

[Stillwater]

Maybe other councils should follow the lead of the Sunshine Coast Regional Council and introduce a PT levy.

http://www.sunshinecoast.qld.gov.au/sitePage.cfm?code=transport-levy

[#Metro]

My view is this: if people want to pay to live there, let them. But they should be told the ugly truth: If you want to live here, there is no PT, and its not going to come for a while.

Who could forget the sagas of Springfield rail line ('but, when I bought it, I though the rail line was coming "soon" ') or Kippa Ring and the North Lakes areas ('where is our railway, we have been asking for it for 100+ years').

[Jonno]

My view is this: if people want to pay to live there, let them. But they should be told the ugly truth: If you want to live here, there is no PT, and its not going to come for a while.

Who could forget the sagas of Springfield rail line ('but, when I bought it, I though the rail line was coming "soon" ') or Kippa Ring and the North Lakes areas ('where is our railway, we have been asking for it for 100+ years').

But they do drive, the roads get congested, so they complain to the local politicians, who campaign for upgrades and freeways and before you know it we have a car oriented development.

[colinw]

The trip to the doctor or the shops for a loaf of bread will involve a round trip to Beaudesert, or Jimboomba.  How is all of this reducing the carbon footprint?

I'm not even sure why the Government is touting New Beith as part of the Flagstone development, as it is really part of Greenbank. New Beith area won't be serviced by Beaudesert or Jimboomba. There is now a shopping centre with Woolworths, etc. at the corner of Pub Lane & Teviot Rd. The proposed New Beith station would be directly behind this shopping centre.

Most road trips from the area will most likely be straight up Teviot Road & Middle Road to Browns Plains.  This will funnel a lot more traffic onto the Mt Lindesay Highway, and expect to see Middle Road four laned to the Greenbank roundabout.  Another 10 years and I wouldn't be surprised to see Teviot Road four lane right down to Flagstone, with four laning to Pub Lane sooner than that.

Schools - there is Greenbank primary in Goodna Rd (Springfield - Greenbank arterial), Boronia Hts primary on Middle Rd, and Park Ridge high in Crest Rd.  There is already a school bus service in the area, but no general public transport.  Greenbank primary has expanded from a tiny country primary school to a very large school over the last 20 years, I'd say at least one new primary school will need to be developed in the area soon.

The reason I'm familiar with the area is that my wife & I used to own an acreage block at Spring Mountain, but ended up changing our mind about moving so far away from services and sold it rather than building.  When we bought our land out there in 1998 we were told that rail was coming "within 10 years", but I was sceptical.  Friends who had lived out there for years said they had been hearing the same promises since the 1970s.

Compared to Flagstone, I don't mind development in the New Beith area quite so much, as it is only a few km from the end of decent infrastructure & public transport services. An extension of buses out there would only be another 5km on existing routes like the 541.  Rail to the area would likewise be a line no longer than Brisbane to Loganlea or so - Greenbank is a bit over 30 rail km from Roma St.  The standard gauge alignment is rather good, so with widely spaced stations a line from that area would be much faster than the Beenleigh line. But, until such time as some services are provided, it seems a bit of an odd place to be promoting small block development.

CRR is of course the pre-requisite for providing rail to the area, unless a half baked "change at Salisbury" service was provided or the trains were routed via Tennyson.

[Jonno]

Just read the Save Greenbank website and would like to highlight that they outline none of their concerns other than we don't want high density.  What they do want is to have their larger blocks and then have all the other rate layers pay for them to drive into the city or to where ever their jobs are.

The issue, which common across the whole modern world, is to allow increased density in an urban form that maximizes walking, cycling and public transport usage and only provides enough capacity for the minimum motor vehicle use.

The UDLA in fact do a good job of this (they can do better) but have no influence over the public transport. This is where it all falls down as increased density is creating increased car usage as that is what in effect got planned. It was planned because the public transport planners put a artificial cap on mode share and thus the remaining trips are forced to be by cars.

If these groups focused on that rather than "Go Away" campaigning they might achieve a great outcome.

[#Metro]

The problem is that almost every resident's group pulls out the "NOT HERE" signs and building any housing near them is seen as an attack on their family home- which it is not. If you have very large blocks, and few people, it is going to be hard to get a lot of people within walking distance to a bus stop.

[colinw]

This post and subsequent discussion prompts me to question the proposed satellite city at YARRABILBA, near Logan Village.

This development is one of the satellite cities being proposed by the Urban Land Development Authority, along with Ripley & Flagstone. Flagstone and Ripley are both proposed to receive electric heavy rail services. At this stage it is unclear what public transport will be provided for Yarrabilba.

The development is adjacent to the mothballed Bethania to Beaudesert railway, but as noted in the thread referenced above this may not be suitable for re-opening.  I have therefore created a poll, open for 7 days, to gauge the group's opinion as to where the Yarrabilba urban area fits into the grand scheme of things.

[#Metro]

I have to say that this kind of development, where you attach a city in the middle of la la land and then connect a rail spur to it, at $100 million dollars per kilometre into the middle of nowhere gets me annoyed.

This is exactly the kind of thing that is preventing cash being spent on fixing up the current train system. When you add branches to train lines, you split the frequencies on the branches and you add conflict points, all of which makes the timetable- the most important thing- very complicated and increases the chances that the service will be low frequency.

http://www.humantransit.org/2011/02/what-rivers-teach-about-transit.html

The problem with operating a train service out to Yarrabilla is that it is going to eat up train paths on the Beenleigh/Gold Coast line which already has problems with being unable to cope with 15 minute frequency all day in both directions at the same time. Running buses (or trains) to the train line and then making people change is also unattractive as they would be changing into the Beenleigh line all stops service, which if anyone has taken a ride on, is terrible because it is so slow and stops EVERYWHERE it is enough to send you crazy!!!

I would just run bus services on a busway (that could later be converted to heavy rail if required) or even piggybacking off a freeway with very long stop spacings so average high speed was possible (80 km/hour or higher) to the train line.

With all the land out at Pullenvale and along the existing Rosewood line, you really have to wonder...

[colinw]

This is actually a city in the middle of la-la land without a rail spur, or a busway, or even a four lane main road. It is very much a backwater, currently occupied by some acreage housing and a lot of entirely undeveloped land.

Rail branches only halve the frequency if we persist in running all services to the city.  If you run a shuttle service then there is no need to dilute the frequency, something which Australian rail services generally fail to do, with rare exceptions like the Alamein line in Melbourne.  But as you note, the Beenleigh line is not an attractive service to feed into.

I really do not know what to make of Yarrabilba.  Unlike Ripley & Flagstone there is no clear rationale for it existing.

I'd actually rather kick the army out of Greenbank and send them out to Yarrabilba, then develop the huge Greenbank army reserve, which has the Springfield line running along its western boundary, the interstate (future Flagstone) line along its eastern boundary, and decent motorway links close by.

[#Metro]

Time to search the "political party donations" database at the Australian Electoral Commission I think 

[#Metro]

Rail branches only halve the frequency if we persist in running all services to the city.  If you run a shuttle service then there is no need to dilute the frequency, something which Australian rail services generally fail to do, with rare exceptions like the Alamein line in Melbourne.  But as you note, the Beenleigh line is not an attractive service to feed into.

Which has me thinking about Brisbane....

[BrizCommuter]

I think there needs to be an option for "not build Yarrabilba and limit urban sprawl".

[colinw]

Agreed. I considered putting something like that in.  I shall do so now. 

[#Metro]

Argh! I can't change my vote...

[colinw]

I don't see an option to permit that.  :conf

[#Metro]

Well there are only four votes,
Perhaps lock the thread and create a new poll?

[SurfRail]

I've no problem with the concept of a small city at Yarrabilba.  A city that has an independent rail service to the Brisbane CBD instead of being tacked onto another line, its own water storage and reticulation, quality bus and road links to the Gold Coast and southern Logan, strong local employment, educational, recreational and medical facilities, a structure plan that encourages high densities and active transport, is powered by renewable energy etc...

[colinw]

I'll PM ozbob and see if there's a way to fix it.

[colinw]

Ok, Ozbob has fixed it for me.    You can now click "Remove Vote" then resubmit your vote.

I'll be more careful the next time I set up a poll, must have missed checking a box somewhere.

[ozbob]

If you have already voted, and you wish to change your vote, choose the 'remove vote' option first, then when it reloads you will have all the options to choose from again for a new vote.

[johnnigh]

Yep, Yarrabilba is going to be a city entirely self-contained: all dwellers will work there, no need for commuters to leave the community! 

If you believe that (Regional plan propaganda from the developers) you'll believe anything. No Yarrabilba! 

[O_128]

Yep, Yarrabilba is going to be a city entirely self-contained: all dwellers will work there, no need for commuters to leave the community! 

If you believe that (Regional plan propaganda from the developers) you'll believe anything. No Yarrabilba! 

Just like, north lakes, forest lake and every other stupid housing estate, Springfield being the exception as in 20 years i expect it to have a bigger CBD than ipswich with a sizable amount of gov departments moved there.

[colinw]

Just like, north lakes, forest lake and every other stupid housing estate, Springfield being the exception as in 20 years i expect it to have a bigger CBD than ipswich with a sizable amount of gov departments moved there.

The Government's Conn'ing QLD 2031 therefore proposes to build a Ripley spur line to Ipswich, and not develop the Springfield to Ripley part of the rail corridor within 20 years.  This turns Ripley into the end of a very circuitous route from Brisbane, rather than another town on a second Brisbane to Ipswich main-line.  As our American cousins say, "Go Figure!".

[colinw]

The more I think about it, the more concerned I am by these proposed developments, with the possible exception of Ripley if done properly.

Yarrabilba is nowhere near any decent infrastructure, and the disused rail line past it is only marginally suitable for re-use.

Flagstone is at least on a high quality rail alignment, but developing it still requires building the equivalent of another Ipswich or Cleveland line, and without CRR a rail line down the interstate corridor will not be feasible due to infrastructure constraints in the city.

Ripley at least has the advantage of being on an extension of the Springfield line, so won't require any further branching of services.  Still, I do not like the current idea of extending the rail to Ripley from Ipswich, rather than building the full loop.

I tend to agree with TramTrain that we should be making better use of the land west of Ipswich, and the untapped potential of the Rosewood line.  That combined with good quality development of Ripley & Springfield would be, in my opinion, a much saner strategy than plopping tens of thousands of people way down the interstate line or out in the sticks beyond Logan Village.

[#Metro]

Yep, Yarrabilba is going to be a city entirely self-contained: all dwellers will work there, no need for commuters to leave the community!  Grin

If you believe that (Regional plan propaganda from the developers) you'll believe anything. No Yarrabilba!  protest

"Urban Jails" is what I call this philosophy. And it's rubbish too. People have cars and will use them. Is the Sunshine Coast self contained? Is the Gold Coast self contained? Is Ipswich self contained? The answer is no, no and no. Heaps of people get up every morning and start driving to Brisbane CBD because that's where the high paying jobs are.

These places do not have proper CBDs with high paying jobs. And so people will start driving and the future residents of that community will start agitating for rail which is going to cost $100 million + PER KILOMETRE for a line that could easily lock up 2-3 billion dollars and more train paths for the Beenleigh/Gold Coast lines and split frequencies that could alternatively be spent on fixing up the current system and the truly shocking frequencies of 30 minutes from stations where you can see the CBD from the platform!