Ipswich council responds to Helidon to Calvert Inland Rail concerns with Grandchester residents worried about level crossing

About 50 trains a day will travel through new level crossings in Ipswich, forcing cars to stop and wait every half-hour.

The proposed Inland Rail route from Helidon to Calvert is one of two routes which will go through Ipswich.

IPSWICH City Council has yet to finalise its formal objections to the 47 km stretch of Inland Rail which will run through rural areas to the city’s west via the Lockyer Valley.

The federal government’s $15 billion freight rail project will connect Melbourne and Brisbane via New South Wales.

The Helidon to Calvert (H2C) section is one of two that will run through Ipswich alongside the Calvert to Kagaru (C2K) section, which extends south east into the Scenic Rim region.

Division 1 councillor Sheila Ireland raised issues with the Helidon to Calvert route of the Inland Rail with the council’s consultant Richard Hancock.

Construction of a new dual gauge rail line, which is being delivered by the Australian Rail Track Corporation, is set to include an 850 metre long tunnel through the Little Liverpool Range near Laidley.

The H2C route will travel through Placid Hills, Gatton, Laidley and Grandchester and it is planned to include 26 rail bridges.

Ipswich councillors were set to endorse the organisation’s objections via a formal submission in response to the ARTC’s draft Environmental Impact Statement at last month’s full council meeting.

The EIS was released to the public on March 31 with council officers undertaking a detailed review of the document to identify whether all potential impacts on local residents have been identified.

The council spent about $13,000 for external support on reviewing the complex document.

A response was due on June 24.

A formal response has been delayed with veteran councillor Sheila Ireland raising concerns.

The council has lodged an interim submission with its Inland Rail consultant Richard Hancock saying there was still a few weeks to make adjustments.

Mr Hancock is paid by the federal government but he acts on the council’s “best interests”.

Cr Ireland said she and fellow Division 1 councillor Jacob Madsen had been “hammered” by Grandchester residents about a planned level crossing on Grandchester-Mount Mort Road.

The federal government’s $15 billion freight rail project will connect Melbourne and Brisbane via New South Wales.

It is one of two level crossings currently planned for the H2C route, with four included in the C2K route.

“The current design has an embankment going up over the railway line and back down again,” Mr Hancock said.

“The rail line is on an embankment so the rail line itself is somewhere between two and three metres above the road surface. So although it’s a level crossing, it’s a level crossing that goes up to an embankment and then back down the other side again.

“That’s the flood plain of Western Creek.”

Mr Hancock said these issues had been raised in the council’s submission.

“Council doesn’t feel that the EIS has adequately addressed the Queensland Level Crossing Safety Strategy,” he said.

“Council produced feedback on the feasibility and design. The feedback was council does not accept level crossings on council roads.”

In response to Cr Ireland’s concerns about flooding being exacerbated by the level crossing, Mr Hancock said there were “some issues” with the ARTC’s flood modelling which had been identified and need to be addressed.

He said no alternatives have been proposed to this design at this stage but a bridge over the top of the road wasn’t feasible.

It is estimated about 50 trains a day will travel through this new level crossing on Grandchester Mount Mort Road.

Traffic will have to stop at the new boom gates every half an hour.

The H2C route will travel through the Lockyer Valley. Lockyer MP Jim McDonald.

“I think that (residents are) expecting for us to come out and do something but I just feel we’re supporting this interchange,” Cr Ireland said.

“It’s really hard, I don’t know where I stand I guess.

“I don’t know what the solution is. They’re really not happy in Grandchester.”

It’s understood councillors already had three months to submit any feedback to council officers to respond to the EIS prior to last month’s meeting.

Mr Hancock said the next stage of the process would involve negotiating how it will be designed.

“The intention is to get agreement on the design solutions between council and ARTC,” he said.

Division 4 councillor Kate Kunzelmann queried the impact on emergency vehicles, considering the road would be regularly blocked.

“ARTC have used a standardised assessment to assess the safety of level crossings which look at the number of trains, the number of vehicles, the frequency of trains and calculates the likelihood of a fatality,” Mr Hancock responded.

“They’ve calculated that on the roads in Ipswich (the risk) as very low but not zero.

“They’ve used that to justify level crossings is an appropriate solution of these roads. We pushed back on that.”

Councillors voted unanimously to refer the matter to the Growth, Infrastructure and Waste Committee meeting on Thursday for further discussion.

Read more stories by Lachlan McIvor here.