Michael Yeates
PTA 7 Marston Avenue Indooroopilly 4068 07 3371 9355


Public Transport Alliance Contact ::Michael Yeates

Public transport that people want now ... at a price that is affordable now! 28 February 2003

Dreams, lack of information, misinformation and pseudo-science … … the problem of Brisbane's numerous, ever-changing Transport Plans

While the concept of "solving" Brisbane's so-called traffic problems is to be applauded, analysis of recent "plans" suggests a deliberate campaign supporting non-integrated "big infrastructure" projects ranging from the SE Busway and its northern extension ($500m +), the Valley Bypass ($300m+), the M1 to the Gold Coast ($1b) and now the $150m "green" bridge to UQ and the latest, the $1b tunnel … and ALL primarily benefit car drivers!

All are based on a "dream" that hopes that somehow these projects will reduce congestion, air pollution and noise. But why and how can that happen if there are many more cars on the road? Why won't "we" continue to use cars once the congestion is reduced? While Cr Hayes is correct in her suggestion that everybody wants other people to use public transport (she usually promotes buses, rarely mentions cycling and needs to be prompted to remember Citytrain), in fact it is BCC Councillors who fail to demonstrate how good the alternatives to using a car really are! Cr Hayes in particular should be leading the way, not just talking about it, by using public transport, not her car.

So what evidence is there to support the claim that the "plans" are no more than "dreams" and rhetoric to "gloss" over the fact that most if not all of the above projects result in substantial benefits for car users?

ONE is the "promise" that the Valley Bypass "would relieve heavy inner city traffic congestion by relocating through traffic and using the space freed up on the roads in the City and the Valley for public transport or streetscape improvements" and that the Bypass "allows road space freed up in the City and the Valley to be used for bus lanes …" and that "traffic volumes in the Valley are expected to drop by 25% on completion of the Bypass". (CVB IAS Newsletter #3 August 1998) Where are the BUS LANES and HOW will the 25% drop be maintained if the roads from Breakfast Creek Road to North Quay (Ann, Wickham and Turbot) remain as they were … with buses stuck in traffic and at bus stops and no cycling space provided on these roads?

TWO is the "promise" from Cr Hayes commenting on the Bypass, she said "by removing through traffic from the city and Valley areas we will be freeing up road space for buses, pedestrians and cyclists in an effort to give the inner city back to the people". (Livable Brisbane October 1998:2). When and where?

THREE is the "promise" in numerous transport plans offering major improvements for public transport and cycling but not implemented. For example, "Council's Transport Plan aims to develop a modern transport system by:

"The council aims to provide the most effective public transport system, with the goal of increasing bus patronage by 5% per year. The Bicycle Brisbane Plan recognises cycling as an essential component of the transport system, and aims to integrate cycling into the transport system as an important mode for personal mobility. It sets a target of 8% of all trips made by bicycle by the year 2005." (Sustainable Energy and Greenhouse Action Plan, BCC May 1999: 19-20, Draft). Why has BCC recently dramatically reduced these targets and the necessary funding to achieve them? On what basis did BCC choose not to fund the Bicycle Brisbane Plan?

The implications are clear! Council is NOT prepared to commit to its numerous "good" plans. It prefers to continue to "sell" road improvements yet not address the consequences. If there are better roads and more roads, why would you and I or Cr Hayes use other than a car? One "solution" is induced congestion ie by maintaining levels of congestion that discourage car use AND encourage use of other modes. The other is "paying for the "privilege" as in London, a strategy "floated" then rejected in the latest "transport plan" yet London and many smaller cities have shown considerable traffic reduction with those who still choose to use their car, paying for the "privilege"…by funding improvements to other-than-car modes to encourage more of the "others" to use those modes!

Air quality and congestion CANNOT be reduced by building MORE roads …the problems simply relocate!