Richlands to Springfield Central - Stage 2

[Fares_Fair]

I merely point out the incongruity of the Sunshine Coast population of 330,000 with a single line track and work stopping early on dual tracks in April 2009
and compare this to the Springfield situation with a population of less than 1/10 (around 22,000) and getting duplicated track, albeit over just 9.5km.
IMHO, it's a salient point.

That's not an argument against Springfield, rather an argument FOR the case that the Government has been completely negligent in its duty when it comes to the 300,000+ Sunshine Coast residents.

But it is, which area has the greater need, and the greater growth ?

Are you telling me that a population of only approx. 22,000 current residents and a total of 86,000 by 2030
needs a dual rail track compared to the Sunshine Coast population of 330,000 current residents and a population of 508,000 in 2031.

Bear in the mind also that the Sunshine Coast line also is a national north south freight corridor, and shares with freight and long distance services as well.


Regards,
Fares_Fair.

[O_128]

I merely point out the incongruity of the Sunshine Coast population of 330,000 with a single line track and work stopping early on dual tracks in April 2009
and compare this to the Springfield situation with a population of less than 1/10 (around 22,000) and getting duplicated track, albeit over just 9.5km.
IMHO, it's a salient point.

That's not an argument against Springfield, rather an argument FOR the case that the Government has been completely negligent in its duty when it comes to the 300,000+ Sunshine Coast residents.

But it is, which area has the greater need, and the greater growth ?

Are you telling me that a population of only approx. 22,000 current residents and a total of 86,000 by 2030
needs a dual rail track compared to the Sunshine Coast population of 330,000 current residents and a population of 508,000 in 2031.

Bear in the mind also that the Sunshine Coast line also is a national north south freight corridor, and shares with freight and long distance services as well.


Regards,
Fares_Fair.

Politicians don't work on common sense its to get reelected, there is no political motivation to upgrade the SC line hence its now behind springfield, kip paring and CRR

[ozbob]

You are forgetting about Forest Lake and Ellen Grove (Carole Park) which is also part of the logic behind the Springfield line.

No one disputes ( well maybe some in Government ) that the Sunshine Coast is a very high priority and I have said so many many times.  No reason to not be happy that Springfield is going ahead,  in time that will be extended through the Ripley Valley and onto Ipswich as well.

Frankly, with the quality of the opposition and Government it is almost as though we need a public transport party to start really moving forwards.  The Greens have sold out to cars, don't hold much faith in them either.

We are heading for an almighty transport failure unless the tide is turned.

[Stillwater]

Ozbob as the new Member for Ashgrove!  Start campaigning and the ALP and LNP will take notice. 

Seriously, I thought there was some agreement signed between the Springfield developer and the State Government that once he did certain things and got the new satellite city to a critical mass level, the state was obliged to put in the public transport.  There may even be a developer contribution to the cost of the Springfield Line.

Contrast that with the state mandated Caloundra South city, future home to 50,000 people, where no public transport funding has been committed so far, and the CAMCOS corridor was altered to free up more land for smallbox houses.  Supposedly, by having smaller blocks, land will be more affordable.  What will happen, in reality, is that the developer will be able to market properties to start-up homeowners in a price range they can afford and he can maximise profits.  Yes, we can tick the housing AFFORDABILITY box, but not the LIVING AFFIORDABILITY box.  Many people at Caloundra South will require two cars.  Lack of duplication to Landsborough will mean limited (and crowded) transport to Brisbane and Nambour.  Most will drive to the station, exacerbating the parking woes there.  Their cost of living will be higher compared with those having reasonable access to public transport.

[somebody]

The Greens have sold out to cars, don't hold much faith in them either.

Really?  Why do you say that?

[SurfRail]

Contrast that with the state mandated Caloundra South city, future home to 50,000 people, where no public transport funding has been committed so far, and the CAMCOS corridor was altered to free up more land for smallbox houses.  Supposedly, by having smaller blocks, land will be more affordable.  What will happen, in reality, is that the developer will be able to market properties to start-up homeowners in a price range they can afford and he can maximise profits.  Yes, we can tick the housing AFFORDABILITY box, but not the LIVING AFFIORDABILITY box.  Many people at Caloundra South will require two cars.  Lack of duplication to Landsborough will mean limited (and crowded) transport to Brisbane and Nambour.  Most will drive to the station, exacerbating the parking woes there.  Their cost of living will be higher compared with those having reasonable access to public transport.

I've looked at the ULDA plans and I really don't seem to have the same concerns everybody else has.  The issue for me is not what is planned (a reasonably central rail station and potential feeder bus routes), but how well and how soon they will be implemented.

[ozbob]

The Greens have sold out to cars, don't hold much faith in them either.

Really?  Why do you say that?

Joke? 

For a party that is allegedly for public transport and rail they failed to ensure that these modes were treated equitably with cars with the carbon stuff.  I still haven't given up all hope though, they can and should ensure that some amendments are made in the Senate.  Time will tell if their hearts are truly green ...

[colinw]

I merely point out the incongruity of the Sunshine Coast population of 330,000 with a single line track and work stopping early on dual tracks in April 2009
and compare this to the Springfield situation with a population of less than 1/10 (around 22,000) and getting duplicated track, albeit over just 9.5km.
IMHO, it's a salient point.

That's not an argument against Springfield, rather an argument FOR the case that the Government has been completely negligent in its duty when it comes to the 300,000+ Sunshine Coast residents.

But it is, which area has the greater need, and the greater growth ?

Are you telling me that a population of only approx. 22,000 current residents and a total of 86,000 by 2030
needs a dual rail track compared to the Sunshine Coast population of 330,000 current residents and a population of 508,000 in 2031.

Bear in the mind also that the Sunshine Coast line also is a national north south freight corridor, and shares with freight and long distance services as well.


Regards,
Fares_Fair.

What is this "us vs them" crap?  Play that game and nobody will get anything at all. NOT PRODUCTIVE!

Springfield is a good project, and represents - for once - decent practice at getting rail into an area as it develops rather than years after. Saying it is undeserving is the same thing as saying that sprawl without infrastructure is good.  Undermine it in favour of your own area at your own risk. The precedent would be a terrible thing.

You are also overlooking that it provides overflow capacity for Ipswich line stations nearby, serves Forest Lake and parts of Inala, and eventually extends to Ripley & Ipswich. All areas that are significantly closer to Brisbane than Sunshine Coast, and as such make more sense as places to commute from.

What I said - and I will repeat it once more - is that given that Springfield is going ahead and is recognised as a good thing, then surely it strengthens the case for the Sunshine Coast getting a proper upgrade as well.  I was NOT saying that Sunshine Coast shouldn't go ahead, so please do not try to imply that I was.

Springfield needs what - maybe 14km of dual track rail once built, to support at least 100,000 people (including Forest lake), and also supports a doubling of rail frequency through the dense Western suburbs.  In what way is this unjustified vs how may km of new double track rail for 300,000 people? We need both!  (And to do Sunshine Coast properly we also need Trouts Road and CRR).

[Fares_Fair]

I merely point out the incongruity of the Sunshine Coast population of 330,000 with a single line track and work stopping early on dual tracks in April 2009
and compare this to the Springfield situation with a population of less than 1/10 (around 22,000) and getting duplicated track, albeit over just 9.5km.
IMHO, it's a salient point.

That's not an argument against Springfield, rather an argument FOR the case that the Government has been completely negligent in its duty when it comes to the 300,000+ Sunshine Coast residents.

But it is, which area has the greater need, and the greater growth ?

Are you telling me that a population of only approx. 22,000 current residents and a total of 86,000 by 2030
needs a dual rail track compared to the Sunshine Coast population of 330,000 current residents and a population of 508,000 in 2031.

Bear in the mind also that the Sunshine Coast line also is a national north south freight corridor, and shares with freight and long distance services as well.


Regards,
Fares_Fair.

What is this "us vs them" crap?  Play that game and nobody will get anything at all. NOT PRODUCTIVE!

Springfield is a good project, and represents - for once - decent practice at getting rail into an area as it develops rather than years after. Saying it is undeserving is the same thing as saying that sprawl without infrastructure is good.  Undermine it in favour of your own area at your own risk. The precedent would be a terrible thing.

You are also overlooking that it provides overflow capacity for Ipswich line stations nearby, serves Forest Lake and parts of Inala, and eventually extends to Ripley & Ipswich. All areas that are significantly closer to Brisbane than Sunshine Coast, and as such make more sense as places to commute from.

What I said - and I will repeat it once more - is that given that Springfield is going ahead and is recognised as a good thing, then surely it strengthens the case for the Sunshine Coast getting a proper upgrade as well. I was NOT saying that Sunshine Coast shouldn't go ahead, so please do not try to imply that I was.

Springfield needs what - maybe 14km of dual track rail once built, to support at least 100,000 people (including Forest lake), and also supports a doubling of rail frequency through the dense Western suburbs.  In what way is this unjustified vs how may km of new double track rail for 300,000 people? We need both!  (And to do Sunshine Coast properly we also need Trouts Road and CRR).

Show me where I have implied that ?
I certainly have not meant to.

I am stating the facts of growth and population and comparing the 2.
It's more than a compelling argument IMHO.
The governents priorities are indeed twisted and possibly by the political seats held in that area - how else does one explain the incongruity?

Regards,
Fares_Fair.

[colinw]

Seems like we have misinterpreted each other.

I don't see anything incongruous about Springfield - a short rail link for a relatively close in development.  It was planned from day 1 - announcement around 1994 - as a satellite city development close to Brisbane & Ipswich that would include high quality motorway and rail links. Implementation has lagged a little - maybe 3 years behind original schedule of "by 2010" but is consistent with what always was planned. I think it should be applauded as an example of what needs to be done, and should be done elsewhere (e.g. Caloundra South).

What IS incongruous is that the Sunshine Coast has been allowed to develop to the size it has without ever having a decent quality rail link. Systematic planning failure by Governments & Councils of all flavours, going back at least 30 years.

Ditto the 100 year delay getting rail to Redcliffe, resulting in one of the largest urban areas anywhere in Australia that has no rail link at all.

And as for plans like Yarrabilba and Flagstone - ugh!!!!  It would be insane if either of those went ahead before rail reaches Caloundra & Maroochydore.

Incidentally I don't think the problems with getting rail to the Sunshine Coast are specific to any particular political party, but rather reflect the safe nature of the seats on the Sunshine Coast. Neither party sees electoral gain, unlike Redcliffe or Gold Coast where seats can and do swing.  The one time we saw any action on the coast was when there was a marginal Government held seat (Glasshouse).  Once that was lost, the duplication project stopped with indecent haste - something which our lazy & complacent media, and moribund state opposition, have both been completely remiss in failing to challenge.

FWIW, I think both Springfield and the Sunshine Coast need decent double track railways. Two of them in the case of the coast - one to Nambour and one to Maroochydore. I don't think we'll see Sunshine Coast any time soon 'though, because it is not politically attractive & requires a huge investment compared to Springfield. I very much doubt any Government is going to stump up the money for it, just as I don't think CRR will ever be built.

[somebody]

just as I don't think CRR will ever be built.

Really?  I think it will eventually.  It will take massive traffic congestion and rail overcrowding to achieve it though.

[colinw]

I'm feeling a bit pessimistic today!   (Probably work induced - I'm currently battling an outbreak of bean-counter driven short term thinking here, despite everyone knowing it'll cost us more in the medium to long term)

Don't underestimate the capacity of Queensland to resist change and resolutely do nothing in the face of evidence that doing so will be expensive & damaging.  Its almost our state sport!

If you are right and it does get built - and I hope you are - we'll manage to delay doing anything to the point where it costs several times what it should have. Just like the MBRL is costing well over a billion when it was reliably costed at about $200M only a decade previously.

I guess that is what bothers me the most about the whole 2031 palaver.  Lots of lots of projects pushed off into the 10+ year time frame (i.e. beyond the projected survival of the Government, hence we don't need to do anything).  There is no way on earth we can afford to build everything in those documents unless we start now and have a steady rate of roll-out over about 20 years.

[Golliwog]

I also think part of why Springfield is going ahead is that it's population is closer to the new rail line than the SC, where you would also need investment in feeders or Park n' Rides. Again, not saying I don't think either should go ahead, but I'm just glad they're doing something with them.

From a cynical political point of view, its much easier to make the Springfield residents happier than the SC ones. To fully please the SC commuters you would need the duplication and realignment, improved feeders/parking, upgrades between Cab-Bris to allow them to run express again (either that or p%ss off all those commuters south of Cab). Voters are also unlikely to care about freight, other than the trivial "too many big trucks near my house is bad" opinion.

[somebody]

Don't underestimate the capacity of Queensland to resist change and resolutely do nothing in the face of evidence that doing so will be expensive & damaging.  Its almost our state sport!

Like with the 393 I guess.

Voters are also unlikely to care about freight, other than the trivial "too many big trucks near my house is bad" opinion.

I doubt many would make that connection.  Or the one to increased prices of groceries.

[colinw]

I also think part of why Springfield is going ahead is that it's population is closer to the new rail line than the SC, where you would also need investment in feeders or Park n' Rides. Again, not saying I don't think either should go ahead, but I'm just glad they're doing something with them.

From a cynical political point of view, its much easier to make the Springfield residents happier than the SC ones. To fully please the SC commuters you would need the duplication and realignment, improved feeders/parking, upgrades between Cab-Bris to allow them to run express again (either that or p%ss off all those commuters south of Cab). Voters are also unlikely to care about freight, other than the trivial "too many big trucks near my house is bad" opinion.

I think you're right about that Golliwog.  Springfield is "low hanging fruit" for an attractive looking solution with lots of happy press releases attached, as is MBRL.  Whack in 10 or 15km of rail, a few feeder buses and park & ride and you can pull a George W Bush & declare "mission accomplished" and then ignore the area for the next 50 years (think Cleveland line).

Sunshine Coast is very much harder, as it is a much larger & more spread out area, involves many more km of track, and has capacity implications that stretch all the way back to Brisbane.  Add in Nambour and it dwarfs anything else that has been done in recent years except the original electrification & Gold Coast. And speaking of Gold Coast - the full implications of that line are still playing out - duplications just a decade after original opening, CRR required, triple line required on the Beenleigh Line, etc.  CAMCOS will trigger the same & more, which makes it very attractive for the Government to put in the too hard basket. Add in safe seats that are unlikely to change hands and the imperative for Government action just isn't there.

[O_128]

just as I don't think CRR will ever be built.

Really?  I think it will eventually.  It will take massive traffic congestion and rail overcrowding to achieve it though.

Ehh I'm on the fence, the BCC planner I spoke to last week is pretty certain it will fall over, though at the same time he was using that as a justification for the tunnels. Id say CRR has about a 50% chance.

And in reply to tram train with the us v them argument is right as look at the station upgrades 200million to please everyone with half baked upgrades rather than 10 stations being fully redone.

[colinw]

... the BCC planner I spoke to last week is pretty certain it will fall over ...

Used to working under Newman, eh?  I'm sure he's got a good idea of what his old boss is likely to do.

I think hell will freeze over before a Campbell Newman led LNP Government builds CRR.

[somebody]

I think hell will freeze over before a Campbell Newman led LNP Government builds CRR.

That's true, I feel.

Which is one reason he won't promise to reverse the massive fare rises.

[colinw]

Indeed, and in the absence of any sensible policy statements & commitments, that is one reason why my swinging vote will now NOT be going to the LNP.

[Golliwog]

I think hell will freeze over before a Campbell Newman led LNP Government builds CRR.

That's true, I feel.

Which is one reason he won't promise to reverse the massive fare rises.

Thats the definite vibe I'm getting from him. Didn't he already criticise it and call it a Labor dream or something? Then proposed quad South Bank+South Brisbane as a temporary solution.

Indeed, and in the absence of any sensible policy statements & commitments, that is one reason why my swinging vote will now NOT be going to the LNP.

I still don't know who I'm going for. Not fussed on either of the majors, but at this stage would probably go Lab over Lib, though probs going to put and Indie 1st.

[colinw]

Same boat as you - don't really like either Tweedledee or Tweedledum. I have no reason to want to keep Bligh, and the thought of premier Andrew Fraser is nearly as terrifying as Campbell Newman.

Probably put Greens first (the Greens candidate who has run previously in my electorate is a very decent, articulate & sensible person - hope she runs again).

I suspect we're going to be fighting over diminishing scraps for a few years to come.  The whole 2031 thing, UrbanLink, CoastLink, etc. is a mirage.

[Fares_Fair]

Seriously, I thought there was some agreement signed between the Springfield developer and the State Government that once he did certain things and got the new satellite city to a critical mass level, the state was obliged to put in the public transport.  There may even be a developer contribution to the cost of the Springfield Line.

Correct SW.


Regarding Springfield.
I had the opportunity to talk to Scott Emerson MP (Indooroopilly) Shadow Minister for Transport, Multicultural Affairs and the Arts this afternoon
before the Public Transport Forum held at Kawana State College at 5:30pm.

I arrived exactly at the same time as Jarrod Bleijie MP and Scott so took the opportunity to chat as we headed in.
I asked about the Springfield line and how it came about.
He explained (in short) that there was a deal between the State Government and the developer to build a certain amount of the roads and infrastructure and that the State Government would then come to the party with the rail link construction provided certain criteria were met.

Looks like I let it go through to the keeper.
ozbob breathes sigh of relief ...  

Regards,
Fares_Fair.

[Gazza]

The thing is too, I think the cost benefit ratio for the Springfield line would have been higher than SC line upgrades.
Again, not saying that the SC line upgrades shouldn't happen, and the standard of service they are limited to providing due to the constraints would be holding back patronage, but the following is the reality.

Is Q1 2009 the most recent release of load data for QR?....Anyway, I've used them.
http://www.queenslandrail.com.au/AboutUs/MediaCentre/InformationSpeeches/Documents/Passenger%20Load%20Survey%202009.pdf

Morning boardings.
Nambour - Elimbah = 873 

Now I don't know the exact number of boardings for Richlands, but I'll assume it would be pretty similar to Oxley or Darra. After all, its got a huge park and ride and a good feeder bus, and the urban form is similar.

Oxley = 1303
Darra = 1429

What I'm getting at is that there are single stations on other lines that get more passengers than 10 SC line stations put together.
The 600 P&R spaces that get filled at Richlands are basically making up 2/3 of the SC line patronage.

And we haven't even considered the patronage that will come from the extension to Springfield and Springfield Central.

What is also interesting to note is the number of services.
Corinda-Milton got 7190 pax across an average of 21 services (Some stations got more than others due to the multiple express patterns)
Nambour-Elimbah got 873 across 5 services.

So 4 times the services is getting 8 times the pax, so that's where the bang for the buck is.

Now again, I'm not saying the duplication shouldn't happen, because its good to have a decent inter city rail network, but when it does get finished, the line would still probably be less popular than the Springfield line because the urban form along it doesn't support intensive all day use, the majority of the population is out of the lines catchment, and the changes to allow that to happen could take years....The GC line is what, 15 years old now, and still the areas around stations aren't fully developed (Especially Nerang, Coomera and Ormeau)
Also the fact remains that even with speed improvements, coming all the way from the SC every day to work in Brisbane is arduous, so just how many people could you convince to do that on a daily basis?

So from the planners standpoint, for Springfield, they only have to lay 15km of track, and they end up with a line that will be more popular than the Nambour line, at a fraction of the cost.

[Arnz]

873+(roughly estimated 100-110 odd from 7 stations beyond Nambour - most of that 100+ odd probably be from the Eumundi-Cooroy-Gympie areas) if you count the Yandina-Gympie folks on the single peak train to/from Gympie, which was not included in the 2009 Passenger Load report.

I wonder if the recent reports are accessible via FOI.

[Gazza]

True about the pax beyond Nambour, but it's still only 1000 pax or so across a line 123km long (Or 873 across 55km of line if we only consider to Nambour)

Versus a mere 20km of line to Richlands carrying 10772 passengers (Lets estimate 800 pax use Richlands)

So the Richlands/Springfield train is more 'efficient'.

[Stillwater]

The calculations are invalid if they concentrate solely on passenger numbers.  The Sunshine Coast Line is important to freight carrying capacity.  The Springfield Line and the Gold Coast Line do not carry freight.  To compare like with like, all freight trains and Travel Trains should be removed from the SC Line and the North Coast Line.  Illogical.  Much of the conflict on the SC Line is due to freight and passenger trains sharing a single track with short passing loops.

[Golliwog]

873+(roughly estimated 100-110 odd from 7 stations beyond Nambour - most of that 100+ odd probably be from the Eumundi-Cooroy-Gympie areas) if you count the Yandina-Gympie folks on the single peak train to/from Gympie, which was not included in the 2009 Passenger Load report.

I wonder if the recent reports are accessible via FOI.

Not sure. When I last contacted QR/TL the response I got was that their policy is not to release the load count any more for safety reasons. Not sure how that would come into play wrt a FOI request.

[somebody]

873+(roughly estimated 100-110 odd from 7 stations beyond Nambour - most of that 100+ odd probably be from the Eumundi-Cooroy-Gympie areas) if you count the Yandina-Gympie folks on the single peak train to/from Gympie, which was not included in the 2009 Passenger Load report.

I wonder if the recent reports are accessible via FOI.

Not sure. When I last contacted QR/TL the response I got was that their policy is not to release the load count any more for safety reasons. Not sure how that would come into play wrt a FOI request.

What safety reasons?  That makes no sense to me.

[HappyTrainGuy]

There were safety concerns with the counters falling asleep and bumping their heads on the long journey.

[Arnz]

The calculations are invalid if they concentrate solely on passenger numbers.  The Sunshine Coast Line is important to freight carrying capacity.  The Springfield Line and the Gold Coast Line do not carry freight.  To compare like with like, all freight trains and Travel Trains should be removed from the SC Line and the North Coast Line.  Illogical.  Much of the conflict on the SC Line is due to freight and passenger trains sharing a single track with short passing loops.

That's probably one of the stronger points for the Sunshine Coast case, considering freight revenue off the government's part ownership in QRNational, as well as the fees off the freight operators for using the state-owned track to some extent brings in revenue for the government.  I would think the government if they're even smart enough wouldn't want to miss out on this money making opportunity, and would put this as a higher priority over the upgrades of most of the passenger lines (with the obvious higher ranked priorities being CRR, alongside with the Springfield extension and various Ipswich/NCL south of Caboolture triplications).  The initial costs of realignment and duplication for freight and passengers may not come cheap, but the revenue would pay for it many times over. 

The main beneficiaries of the duplication and realignment may be freight, but benefits do definitely pass down to all QueenslandRail passenger services (More reliable Traveltrain network and improved City network services and reliability)

[Stillwater]

Yep.    So there is a revenue stream there to tap in order to do the work.  Why won't they even start staged upgrades of the line?  Longer passing loops on the new alignment benefit freight and passenger trains alike.

[Golliwog]

What safety reasons?  That makes no sense to me.

It wasn't said directly but they seemed to be implying terrorism.

[somebody]

What safety reasons?  That makes no sense to me.

It wasn't said directly but they seemed to be implying terrorism.

If true, then why's the 2009 survey still available?  It's easy to infer that the old heavily loaded stations are the same as the current ones.

I don't buy it.

[SurfRail]

What safety reasons?  That makes no sense to me.

It wasn't said directly but they seemed to be implying terrorism.

What horse-dust.  Bombthrowers don't need official patronage counts to do their handiwork - they can do their own if necessary.

[Gazza]

1) Terrorists would be more likely to hit
Melbourne or Sydney.

2) I don't think terrorists are going to get into the minutae of which station is busier than the other.... They'd just go to Central and blow themselves up.

3) Networks which have had actual terrorist attacks, such as the underground, still post detailed stats, (Google "tfl tube performance"

[#Metro]

Not sure. When I last contacted QR/TL the response I got was that their policy is not to release the load count any more for safety reasons. Not sure how that would come into play wrt a FOI request.

Safety? Perhaps they shouldn't publish a timetable either!!!

[O_128]

1) Terrorists would be more likely to hit
Melbourne or Sydney.

2) I don't think terrorists are going to get into the minutae of which station is busier than the other.... They'd just go to Central and blow themselves up.

3) Networks which have had actual terrorist attacks, such as the underground, still post detailed stats, (Google "tfl tube performance"

Pretty pathetic, theres obviously things we arent supposed to see cough SC line.

[Gazza]

mufreight would love the tube stats, since it even covers how often the lifts are working.

[ozbob]

Joint Statement:

Premier and Minister for Reconstruction
The Honourable Anna Bligh

Transport and Multicultural Affairs
The Honourable Annastacia Palaszczuk
23/10/2011

WORK UNDERWAY ON SPRINGFIELD RAIL LINK

Premier Anna Bligh today turned the first sod on a new 9.5 km rail line that will link Brisbane with one of the fastest growing regions in Australia.

The $475 million Richlands to Springfield project officially starts construction this week.

The Premier said that through a competitive tendering process for the delivery of the project the taxpayer gained $171 million in cost savings and a new station at Springfield near the Springfield Link Bridge.

"We fast tracked this project and it is great to see work underway on another vital piece of rail infrastructure for South East Queensland," said the Premier.

"This is a major transport initiative of the Queensland Government to support one of the fastest growing areas in Australia, with more than 21,000 people currently living in greater Springfield.

"The area's population is expected to reach 105,000 during the next twenty years, and we're building the transport infrastructure to meet this growing region's needs."

The Government opened Richlands station, which was part of the $800 million stage one of the Darra to Springfield project, early to help after the floods and already 2,500 trips are made every weekday on the line.

"The new 9.5km rail line is expected to take two million work hours and will create about 3,200 jobs during construction," said the Premier.

"This investment will provide residents with a clean, green alternative to car travel.

"It'll encourage people to use public transport as their preferred way to travel, ultimately reducing reliance on local roads.

"During morning peak the new rail line could potentially take up to 2,500 cars off the Centenary Highway, with the train trip from Springfield Central to Brisbane expected to take about 40 minutes."

Transport Minister Ms Palaszczuk said the Springfield community would benefit from the two new stations being built as part of the project - Springfield Central Station near the Orion Shopping Centre and Springfield Station near Woodcrest College.

"By the time the project is finished in 2013, two years ahead of our original estimates, this will be part of an integrated public transport alternative," Ms Palaszczuk said.

"Both new stations will link with buses and the South East Queensland cycle path network."

Ms Palaszczuk said a new interim bus service - Route 535 (from Orion Springfield to Richlands train station) - would start in February next year.

Ms Palaszczuk said the $850,000 a year bus service, delivered by Westside, would run half-hourly every morning and afternoon, Monday-Friday, between 5.08am-8.20am and 4.33pm-7.05pm.

"The interim buses will run 145 times a week and offering 6800 weekly seats.

'This is about giving people options and delivering an effective public transport alternative," Ms Palaszczuk said.

"It will serve emerging developments in Springfield Lakes including Education City and gives residents another option to the park 'n' rides at Goodna and Richlands train stations.

"Sixteen bus stops will be installed for the new bus route and four new buses added to the network."

"As part of the project, we're also building a 5.1km cycle path connecting Springfield Central and Springfield to Richlands Station and the South East Queensland cycle network as part of the project.

"There will also be about 2.1km of shared-use pedestrian and cycle paths around the stations at Springfield Central and Springfield and both stations will have secure bike storage facilities."

Member for Bundamba Jo-Ann Miller said local people would benefit from two new stations being built as part of the project.

"We'll be getting two stations, Springfield Central Station near the Orion Shopping Centre and Springfield Station near Woodcrest College," she said.

"It's great that work is now underway on this vital piece of infrastructure for local area."

Springfield Land Corporation Chairman Maha Sinnathamby said this is a great announcement for the entire Western Corridor.

"This is long term planning at its best. These twin rail stations will open up new opportunities for Australia's fastest growing area," Mr Sinnathamby said.

"I know the people of Greater Springfield will support and use this vital piece of infrastructure."

[ozbob]

Note Springfield Lakes station is now to be named Springfield.