Mary to Bay Rail Trail in the Fraser Coast Region

Rev 1 - November 2009

MARY TO THE BAY RAIL TRAIL

THE MARYBOROUGH TO HERVEY BAY RAIL TRAIL A CONCEPT AND ROUTE FEASIBILITY REPORT

FRASER COAST BICYCLE USER GROUP INC.

Principal Investigators Andrew Graham, David Jurss and Dave McLeod Edited by Craig Thompson

November 2009 Rev 1 - November 2009

Rev 1 - November 2009

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Colton (north of Maryborough) to Pialba rail line was opened by the Minister of Railways, Mr Robert Philp, on 18 December 1896 with all the appropriate pomp, ceremony and partying befitting the occasion. The rail line was extended to Urangan in 1913. The rail line was used for passenger services and the cartage of freight e.g. sugar cane.

For many decades, major events on this line were the annual Railway Picnics with trains coming from as far away as Kingaroy, Monklands (Gympie), North Bundaberg, Cordalba and Maryborough. Train movements were complex and huge numbers of excited passengers would descend on one of Hervey Bay’s beaches for memorable picnics. The Urangan yards would be full of waiting trains often with sets backed out onto the pier as well.

Regular passenger services ceased in August 1972. Freight steadily declined in the next couple of decades and Cabinet finally decided in July 1993 that the line would close. In 1995 the line was lifted from Urangan back to Takura. The rail corridor and station sites from Pialba to Urangan were sold with the former Hervey Bay City Council purchasing the majority of the land. The Fraser Coast Regional Council continues to develop a shared path (known as the Links Corridor) along the urban section from Urraween Road (west of Main Street) to the Urangan Pier and the vast majority of this shared path is now constructed or about to be constructed.

Since 2004 the Fraser Coast BUG has advocated for the redevelopment of the old rail corridor from Colton to Urangan as a rail trail. This could serve a new wave of tourists who could walk, cycle or ride horses (with some restrictions on access) for recreational purposes. Close to the urban areas the rail trail could also serve as a commuter route. Extension of the trail from Maryborough to Colton would allow Maryborough to be used as the southern terminal.

The concept of the Mary to the Bay Rail Trail was conceived, connecting the Mary River at Queens Park to Hervey Bay at the Urangan Pier (see Figure E1). Fraser Coast BUG enlisted the help of Rail Trail advocate Andrew Graham to help develop the Mary to the Bay Rail Trail concepts and alignment, and this report is a summation of the efforts of Andrew and Fraser Coast BUG members in particular David Jurss and Dave McLeod.

Figure E1 – Mary to the Bay Rail Trail Alignment Rev 1 - November 2009

After extensive mapping research and fieldwork, it was considered that the only alignment that potentially would meet the criteria for a regionally significant recreation trail would lie along the Urangan – Pialba – Colton – Aldershot – Maryborough route. Consideration was given to another potential alignment based on the disused branch railway from Urraween west as far as Churchill Mines Road, then southwards along Churchill Mines Road to Dundathu and then following the Maryborough to Hervey Bay Road past St Helens Primary School. However, this route was rejected as a first working preference because the levels of recreational rewards were lower than those associated with the preferred alignment via Colton. However, if the Colton-based alignment cannot be developed, the Churchill Mines Road option could be reconsidered. It would also have some value as a link trail for more local and district use in association with the preferred alignment.

The most difficult part of the trail to determine an alignment is the section from Maryborough to Colton. A number of alternate alignments using existing unformed roads, existing streets and rail corridors either unused or with very infrequent use were considered. The recommended alignment includes:

Trail Section and Option Distance Sub- totals (km) (km)

Queens Park to A.J. Zemek Bridge 'Rails with trails' option based on the existing railway corridor from Ferry Option C Street westwards as far as Russell 4.33 Street (refer Figure E2)

A.J. Zemek Bridge New rail crossing option to the north of Option E the A.J. Zemek bridge (see Figure E3) 0.45

A.J. Zemek Bridge to intersection of Quarry Rd & Bruce Highway Rail Trail alignment north of the Baddow Option I Infrastructure Depot (see Figure E4) 2.85

Quarry Rd (currently unformed) link Option K including a new rail trail bridge (see 1.00 8.63 Figure E4)

Quarry Rd intersection to Aldershot Park 3.38 See Figure E5

Aldershot to Colton 3.43 See Figure E6 & E7

Colton to first branchline level crossing 0.83 7.64

First level crossing to Churchill Mines Rd 5.30

Churchill Mines Rd to old Takura station 7.20

Old Takura station to Nikenbah (Chapel Rd) 7.89

Nikenbah (Chapel Rd) to Urraween Road (west 3.99 24.38 of Main St intersection)

TOTAL 40.65

Rev 1 - November 2009

Figure E2 – Queens Park to A.J. Zemek Bridge

Figure E3 –A.J. Zemek Bridge Rev 1 - November 2009

Figure E4 –A.J. Zemek Bridge to intersection of Quarry Rd & Bruce Highway

Figure E5 –Quarry Rd Intersection to Aldershot Park

Rev 1 - November 2009

Figure E6–Section through Aldershot

Rev 1 - November 2009

Figure E7–Aldershot north to Colton

The disused railway from the old Colton junction to Urangan represents the true rail trail section of the proposed Mary to the Bay Rail Trail. The western section from Colton junction to old Takura station remains in exclusive State ownership although it is no longer connected to the main railway system. Many items of railway infrastructure (including most bridges) remain in place although the rails have been removed in several locations along the line and some bridges have been damaged in bushfires.

Rev 1 - November 2009

The eastern section, from Takura to Urraween Road (west of Main Street), already is leased from the State by the Fraser Coast Regional Council (as an ‘inherited’ lease) with a view to development of a rail trail. All rails, sleepers and bridge infrastructure have been removed in this eastern section but all culverts remain in a functioning condition and sound condition. All drains at all old level crossings are functioning but the small cattle-grid spans, typically 2.8 m (9 foot 3 inches) across, have been removed and will require replacement.

For this true rail trail section, there is trail-development considerations which require addressing early in the planning process, including: • Alignment and infrastructure tenure and transfer processes • Bridge retention/condition and conversion/replacement options • Assessment of specific trail safety criteria (particularly fire and flood issues) • The nature and possible trail surface treatments of the ballasted railway roadbed • Options for providing for and managing multiple recreation user groups (walkers, horses, cyclists) at stream crossings.

In the case of the Mary to the Bay Rail Trail, protection of the remaining bridges from fire damage will be essential to preserve future options for their use in a recreational trail. To maximize trail planning options, this is an important and high priority task. Figure E8 to E11 show the bridge locations.

Figure E8 – Colton Branch First level Crossing to Churchill Mines Road

Rev 1 - November 2009

Figure E9 –Churchill Mines Road to Takura Station

Figure E10 –Takura Station to Nikenbah

Rev 1 - November 2009

Figure E11 –Nikenbah to Urraween Road (west of Main Street)

This concept and route feasibility report is intended to form the basis of subsequent development of a “vision” statement for the Mary to the Bay Rail Trail outlining the standard of facility, cost, tourism potential, staging and ongoing maintenance and management arrangements. It is hoped that Fraser Coast BUG could develop this vision statement in conjunction with staff and Councillors from the Fraser Coast Regional Council and interested parties within the wider community.

Details of this report may be copied and used on a “not for profit” basis providing full acknowledgement is given to the Fraser Coast Bicycle User Group Inc.

Rev 1 - November 2009

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION...... 1 1.1 Brief history of the Mary to the Bay Rail Trail proposal...... 1 1.2 Existing support in strategies, plans and endorsements...... 2 1.3 Current Queensland regional recreation trail developments...... 2 1.4 Recreation trail opportunities in the Fraser Coast region...... 2 1.5 Approach and report format ...... 3 1.6 Land tenure...... 4

2. COLTON-URANGAN BRANCH RAILWAY HISTORY ...... 5

3. TRAIL PROPOSAL - MARYBOROUGH TO COLTON...... 7 3.1 District Section - Maryborough to Bruce Highway ...... 7 3.1.1 Local Section - Queens Park to A. J. Zemek Bridge...... 7 3.1.2 Local Section - A. J. Zemek Bridge (footpath and by-pass options)...... 9 3.1.3 Local Section - A. J. Zemek Bridge north to intersection of Quarry Road and Bruce Highway...... 11 3.2 District Section - Bruce Highway alignment to Aldershot Park ...... 14 3.2.1 Restriction of the trail alignment to the Bruce Highway to Aldershot trailhead – 3.4 km ...... 14 3.2.2 The Deadmans Creek crossing and underpass options ...... 15 3.2.3 Restriction of trail location under the railway overbridge ...... 15 3.2.4 The Saltwater Creek crossing and underpass options ...... 15 3.3 District Section – Aldershot Township ...... 16 3.3.1 Planning factors for the route and facilities in Aldershot...... 16 3.3.2 The route through Aldershot – 1.2 km (trailhead to boundary) ...... 17 3.4 District Section – Aldershot to Colton ...... 18 3.4.1 Planning factors for the Aldershot to Colton section – 3.4 km ...... 19 3.4.2 Local Section - Aldershot to Peridge Road ...... 20 3.4.3 Local Section - Peridge Road to USL boundary ...... 20 3.4.4 Local Section - USL boundary to Colton (locked level crossing) ...... 21

4. TRAIL PROPOSAL - COLTON TO URANGAN BRANCH FIRST LEVEL CROSSING.. 22 4.1 Planning considerations...... 22 4.2 Description of the current road – 0.83 km...... 22

5. RAILTRAIL SECTION PLANNING ISSUES - COLTON TO URANGAN...... 23 5.1 General planning considerations ...... 23 5.1.1 Rail trail alignment and infrastructure tenure, transfer and responsibilities . 23 5.1.2 Bridge retention/condition and conversion/replacement...... 26 5.1.3 Specific recreation hazard and safety issues...... 29 5.1.4 Trail pad surfaces on the ballasted railway roadbed...... 29 5.1.5 Treatment of level crossings ...... 30 Rev 1 - November 2009

6. RAILTRAIL SECTION - COLTON BRANCH FIRST LEVEL CROSSING TO CHURCHILL MINES ROAD (5.3 KM)...... 31

7. RAILTRAIL SECTION - CHURCHILL MINES ROAD TO TAKURA STATION (7.2 KM) 32

8. RAILTRAIL SECTION - TAKURA TO NIKENBAH (6.3 KM)...... 33

9. RAILTRAIL SECTION – NIKENBAH TO URRAWEEN ROAD NEAR MAIN STREET (4 KM) 34

10. PREFERRED ROUTE OPTIONS AND DISTANCES...... 35

11. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS...... 36

12. REFERENCES...... 36

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Identification criteria for regional trails, adapted from Queensland Outdoor Recreation Federation 2006b...... 3 Table 2. The location, state and characteristics of the 17 bridges located between Colton and the intersection of Urraween Road and Main Street, Urangan. See footnote for bridge construction terminology...... 26 Table 3. The options for retention and conversion, by-pass options, or for re-building of the bridges located between Colton and Takura...... 27 Table 4. The options for re-building and by-pass options for the removed bridges located between Takura and Urraween Road...... 28 Table 5. The railtrail alignment sections from Colton to Takura, showing the distances between formal road access locations together with comments on potential fire or flood hazards/refuges, access/escape routes or other safety issues...... 29 Table 6. The distances for the key trail sections together with the lengths of the preferred options and subtotals for key planning sections...... 35

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. A diagrammatic map of the Fraser Coast Region showing the general location and suggested route of the Mary to the Bay Rail Trail proposal. This route is based only on land that could be publicly accessed, either presently or after leasing by council. Figure 2. Options A, B and C for the Maryborough urban section of the recreation trail commencing from the Queens Park trailhead. The base map is from the Queensland Digital Cadastral Database. Figure 3. The recreation trail route options suggested at the A. J. Zemek Bridge based on the existing footpath (option D), a new level crossing for pedestrians and cyclists (Option E) and a future planning route for avoiding the bridge (Option F). The base map is from the Queensland Digital Cadastral Database. Figure 4. The immediate and future planning options for recreation trail planning to the north and west of the A. J. Zemek Bridge. A rewarding recreation trail alignment based on Options H and J could be implemented immediately. The base map is from the Queensland Digital Cadastral Database. Rev 1 - November 2009

Figure 5. The only publicly accessible alignment between the Quarry Road – Bruce Highway intersection and Aldershot lies along the Bruce Highway. There is no other constructed and publicly accessible crossing of the North Coast Rail Line available. The base map is from the Queensland Digital Cadastral Database. Figure 6. The proposed trail alignment through Aldershot township. Because the Bruce Highway is an unsafe recreational environment for horse riding, the Aldershot park is proposed as a trailhead for horse riders coming south from Colton and beyond. The base map is from the Queensland Digital Cadastral Database. Figure 7. The trail alignment from Aldershot north to Colton. The 20 m wide surveyed road casement runs along the eastern boundary of the railway land from Aldershot to the Colton locked level crossing. Note that the existing road from the Colton locked level crossing to the old branchline first level crossing is not located on the surveyed road casement but traverses Unallocated State Land. The base map is from the Queensland Digital Cadastral Database. Figure 8. The western section of the proposed rail trail (marked in yellow) between the level crossing nearest to the old Colton Junction and the Churchill Mines Road level crossing. Culverts mapped from old track plans are shown as blue dots. Bridge locations are marked by blue squares. Some old bridges have been replaced by culverts (see main text). The distances in kilometres shown along the trail (red dots) are taken from the original railway junction for ease of reference to infrastructure descriptions. The base map is from the Queensland Digital Cadastral Database. Figure 9. The mid-western section of the proposed rail trail (marked in yellow) between the Churchill Mines Road level crossing and the old Takura station. Culverts mapped from old track plans are shown as blue dots. Bridge locations are marked by blue squares. Some bridges have been partly burnt (see main text). The distances in kilometres shown along the trail (red dots) are taken from the original railway junction for ease of reference to infrastructure descriptions. The base map is from the Queensland Digital Cadastral Database. Figure 10. The section of the proposed rail trail (marked in yellow) from the old Takura station to the crossing of the Maryborough Hervey Bay Road near the old Nikenbah station. Culverts mapped on old track plans are shown as blue dots. Bridge locations are marked by blue squares. All bridges between Takura and the coast have been removed (see main text). The distances in kilometres shown along the trail (red dots) are taken from the original railway junction for ease of reference to infrastructure descriptions. This section is currently leased by the Fraser Coast Regional Council with a view to development as a recreation trail. The base map is from the Queensland Digital Cadastral Database. Figure 11. The coastal end of the proposed rail trail (marked in yellow) between the Maryborough to Hervey Bay Road (near old Nikenbah station) and the intersection of Urraween Road and Main Street. Culverts mapped on old track plans are shown as blue dots. Locations of the removed bridges are marked by blue squares. The distances in kilometres shown along the trail (red dots) are taken from the original railway junction for ease of reference to infrastructure descriptions. This section is currently leased by the Fraser Coast Regional Council with a view to development as a recreation trail. The green line adjacent to Main Street marks a current development proposal for a rail trail to Pialba that will link with the existing rail trail running to the Urangan Pier. The base map is from the Queensland Digital Cadastral Database.

Rev 1 - November 2009

PHOTOGRAPHIC REFERENCE APPENDICES

Appendix A. Local and Interstate Examples of ‘Rails with Trails’ Appendix B. Maryborough City ‘Rails with Trails’ Option Appendix C. A. J. Zemek Bridge Issues Appendix D. Maryborough City Options G, H, I, J and K Appendix E. Bruce Highway Alignment Appendix F. Aldershot Township Appendix G. Aldershot to Colton Appendix H. Colton to Branch-line First Level Crossing Appendix I. Bridges, Sites of Removed Bridges and Cattle Grids Appendix J. Bridges for Recreation Trails

Rev 1 - November 2009

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Brief history of the Mary to the Bay Rail Trail proposal

Before local government amalgamation in 2008, the former Hervey Bay City Council purchased the abandoned and dismantled rail corridor section from Pialba to Urangan, excluding the former station sites at Scarness, Torquay and Urangan. A section between Main Street and Hunter Street was subsequently sold to facilitate development of the Pialba Place Shopping Centre. The Council constructed a high-quality shared path for some 85% of its length (Hunter Street to Elizabeth Street and King Street to Urangan Pier). Fraser Coast Regional Council has continued to build the urban link and construction work is currently underway for a section in Pialba from Old Maryborough Road to Torquay Road, connecting to the former Pialba railway station.

The former Hervey Bay City Council also entered into a lease for the section from Takura to Pialba and constructed a further 400m within Pialba from Boat Harbour Drive to Old Maryborough Road. The existing developed section of the rail trail has received good local support and national publicity from Railtrails Australia (see http://www.railtrails.org.au/index.htm).

Since its inception in 2004, the Fraser Coast Bicycle Users Group (Fraser Coast BUG) has supported the development of the rail trail concept based on the closed Colton to Urangan branch line, both within the Urraween to Urangan urban complex and also for the peri-urban and rural areas to the west. Following the announcement by the Queensland State Government of the development of the Brisbane Valley Rail Trail, further community support developed rapidly for a regional rail trail in the Fraser Coast area. The concept was extended to provide a recreational trail connection from Maryborough through Aldershot and Colton and then onto Urangan and Pialba (Figure 1). This extended proposal is now known as The Mary to the Bay Rail Trail.

Fraser Coast BUG enlisted the help of Rail Trail advocate Andrew Graham to help develop the Mary to the Bay Rail Trail concepts, and this report is a summation of the efforts of Andrew and Fraser Coast BUG members in particular David Jurss and Dave McLeod.

Page 1 Rev 1 - November 2009

1.2 Existing support in strategies, plans and endorsements

Details of support for the general concept and specific planning directly relevant to the ‘Mary to the Bay Rail Trail’ proposal are to be found in: • Fraser Coast Regional Sport, Recreation And Open Space Strategy (Tredwell Management 2006) • Maryborough City Council Recreational Walk and Cycle Network Plan (ARUP 2003). • Hervey Bay Living Streets Strategy – A Walk and Cycle Plan (Eppell Olsen & Partners August 2003)

Development of the Mary to the Bay regional trail would further support the publicised aim of the local authority for the region to become an accessible tourist destination. The Fraser Coast BUG supports development of the Mary to the Bay trail and from preliminary discussions, the concept has both interest and support from the horse riding community.

The trail concept also has been endorsed by the final Mayor of Maryborough, Barbara Hovard (now a Fraser Coast councillor) with a personal expression of support.

1.3 Current Queensland regional recreation trail developments

Over the last decade, regional recreational trail development in Queensland has extended from a ‘nature based’ focus (e.g. the Great Walks of Queensland) to a ‘whole of landscape’ approach. The Sunshine Coastal Pathway (Caloundra to Noosa) and the Moreton Bay Cycleway (Redland Bay to Deception Bay) are perhaps the best known examples of advanced development and implementation for regional recreation trails.

Both the concept and planning of regional recreation trails were further supported by the South East Queensland Regional Trails Project. This study and its reports were funded by the State Government and the Council of Mayors, South East Queensland (see Queensland Outdoor Recreation Federation 2006a and related reports). Subsequently, on the 22 January 2007, the then Minister for Infrastructure, Anna Bligh, announced $3.6 million funding by the State Government for the 140 kilometre long Brisbane Valley Rail Trail. This proposal was listed in the Active Trails report as the top priority recreation trail for development in South East Queensland. We believe this decision adds weight to our requests for support for the Mary to Bay Rail Trail in the Fraser Coast Region.

1.4 Recreation trail opportunities in the Fraser Coast region

All of the proposed Mary to the Bay Rail Trail would offer a regionally significant recreation opportunity for walking, trail running and cycling. It would also provide a regionally significant opportunity for trail-based horse-riding in safe and rewarding environments with an environmentally sound setting. At present, comparable trail opportunities are not available in the Hervey Bay and Maryborough district. The sandy trails on nearby Fraser Island are not suited to cycling, are not available for horse riding, and are not immediately accessible, on a day to day basis, to most Fraser Coast residents.

Page 2 Rev 1 - November 2009

1.5 Approach and report format

Planning for the Mary to the Bay Rail Trail has been based on the premise that the trail, considered in its entirety, would be a ‘regionally significant’ recreation trail based on the identification criteria set out in Table 1. This table is adapted from an earlier version (Queensland Outdoor Recreation Federation 2006b, Appendix 3) with alterations reflecting more general trail use and recent local government amalgamations.

Table 1. Identification criteria for regional trails, adapted from Queensland Outdoor Recreation Federation 2006b.

Regional trail criteria* Criterion description Community service role Links between or traverses key regional tourism / ecotourism / recreation sites and population centres (preferably with regional public transport) Trail function High value recreation and / or ecotourism experience, and / or links to other key recreation / tourism / ecotourism features Fitness role High (often prerequisite) but allows for lower fitness levels on shorter near-urban sections Recreation role High, distinct opportunity for whole regional community Demand High at user group level Source and access time for Most users from across one or more regional local government areas; car travel time majority of users up to 2 hrs Distinctiveness / values of Unique or highly distinctive and/or diverse landscapes, habitats, landscape-based opportunity cultural associations and experiences Regional representation of Similar opportunities are uncommon within 2 hrs of driving and may not occur opportunity elsewhere in the region Marketing Residents and all visitors Universal access Where possible^ AS Walking Track Classes^ Occasional 1 (mass tourism and urban sections), mostly 2 to 4, rarely 5 Duration (relative scale) Short, medium, long day trips, extended (multi-day) Construction Formed / hardened, or un-formed with markers; typically limited multi-use; may use extended sections of roadside shoulder in ‘rural’ settings Use of road surface Use of road-surface (other than designated cycle lanes) very rare but may be essential for short and critical links Signage Where appropriate in relation to landscape settings, well signed with trailhead, directional and suitable levels of interpretive signs * The confirmation of a trail category using these criteria should be based on the best overall similarity with multiple criteria rather than by exclusion based on a single difference in the criteria. ^ Categories for “universal access” walking are generally expressed in terms of provision of walking tracks of Australian Standards Class 1 although Class 2 tracks and some level Class 3 tracks may also be suitable.

Even a cursory examination of the above criteria descriptions will support the proposition that the Mary to the Bay Rail Trail will be regionally significant. In particular, the landscape settings immediately adjacent to the proposed rail trail are largely natural to near natural– mostly the Wallum vegetation featured on the report cover photograph. These are the settings most commonly desired by trail based recreation participants.

Page 3 Rev 1 - November 2009

In this report addressing preliminary planning and development issues for the Mary to the Bay Rail Trail, the general potential alignment for further planning and development is described sequentially: • from Maryborough to Colton and on to the Colton branchline level crossing, and • from the first level crossing on the Colton branchline to Urraween (west of Main Street).

This approach was taken because the planning and construction issues associated with the two parts are very different, the near-coastal part being a true ‘rail trail’ development while options for the inland part are essentially limited to recreation trail developments located within surveyed road-casements, both formed and unformed.

The section of the rail trail from Urraween Road (west of Main Street) to Urangan Pier is not discussed in any great depth in this report. The majority of this section has already been constructed, and Fraser Coast Regional Council is committed to completing this urban link. Construction of the section from Urraween Road (west of Main Street) to Boat Harbour Drive is expected to be completed in 2010, leaving only the section from Elizabeth Street to King Street to be constructed. However this urban section is a key part of the Mary to the Bay Rail Trail concept.

1.6 Land tenure

No private freehold land was considered in this report. The options canvassed during the study were restricted to land which currently is, or has the immediate potential to be, publicly accessible. Typical examples are the land parcels of the disused branch railway which have been, or could be, leased by Queensland Transport (now the Department of Transport and Main Roads) to an approved entity, typically a local authority and surveyed road casements (both formed and unformed) usually administered by a local authority. Near Colton, the route could use one section of a ‘road off alignment’ but this is a long established road and appears to run over Unallocated State Land.

As noted in the text (3.2.1) very great improvements in both the feasibility and recreational reward for the Maryborough to Aldershot section could be achieved by use of a small section of private land well suited for resumption as a ‘footpath’ (as is possible under legislation for local authorities). However, no further details are provided to avoid landowner distress or conflict.

Page 4 Rev 1 - November 2009

2. COLTON-URANGAN BRANCH RAILWAY HISTORY

As some understanding of the history of the closed railway is essential for any rail trail, whether in the proposal stage or as interpretation for users, a brief outline of the history of the Colton to Urangan branchline is provided. Some details for the town of Aldershot are given also as that town was also a major influence on the traffic on the branch railway. The references consulted in the preparation of this précis are listed separately in the References section.

In 1863 coal was found on the southern bank of the Burrum River. The Burrum Coalfields then played a major role in the early development of the Maryborough and Hervey Bay region and were a stimulus for railway links from Maryborough to Burrum and Howard by 1883. Following district development, a Government survey to Pialba for a railway line was completed in 1882-3. The planned alignment started about 11 kilometers (seven miles) north of Maryborough to avoid crossing the Susan River. After delays up to 1887 associated with a private capital railway and mining proposal, followed by a “battle of the routes” in 1888, the “Railway Construction Guarantee Act” was passed in 1895 with the Burrum Divisional Board agreeing to act as guarantor for half of any losses incurred.

The contractors, McArdle and Thompson, started work on 28 April 1896 for a contract price of £25,200. The main materials camp was at Stockyard Creek near Walligan. Up to 250 men were employed with up to 70 children in the camp. By October 1896 the line reached Aalberg (later renamed Nikenbah) and the contractors’ locomotives were used to cart the cane out to the mills for that season. The line was opened at Pialba by the Minister of Railways, Mr Robert Philp, on 18 December 1896 with all the appropriate pomp, ceremony and partying befitting the occasion.

By the early 1900s the railway line was busy. Excursion trains ran frequently and cane was hauled from Nikenbah, Urraween and Kawungan sidings. In May 1906 a horse-drawn tramway was built from Walligan to the junction of Upper and Lower Mountain Roads to load cane.

A deepwater port at Urangan was a key feature of railway proposals starting from the first companies established in the 1880s. So it was not surprising that around 1910 Maryborough Chamber of Commerce petitioned the Government for the railway line to extend to Urangan and a deep water port to be established. Finally the rail link was established in 1913 and the pier was opened in 1916. The pier was 3.4 kilometers (3690 feet) long overall.

The likely origins of the names of stations and stops are as follows: Ninderbung Ironstone (indigenous) Takura Porcupine (indigenous) Stockyard Creek from the stream name Walligan dry creek (indigenous) Nikenbah in 1896 named Aalberg probably after the fourth largest city (now spelt Ålborg) in Denmark -a Danish Church cemetery is located nearby on Aalberg Road; name changed to Nikenbah in 1897, this being derived from either the indigenous word for “she oak” (J. Kerr notes) or from the names of two Councillors at that time, Mr Nicholas Tooth and Mr Bartholomew Urraween running stream (indigenous) Kawungan rocks, rocky ridge (indigenous) Pialba butcher bird (indigenous) Scarness a composite name to avoid confusion with Scarborough Torquay after the English town of same name Urangan a shell (indigenous)

Page 5 Rev 1 - November 2009

Three sidings were located on the line away from stations or stops. At 4 miles 21 chains, a siding for the Burgowan Coal Company was opened in 1963 and closed in 1986. Just to the east, the Churchill Colliery siding (later named the Globe Colliery and then the Howard Colliery siding) joined the branch by a Y layout at 4 miles 35 chains and 4 miles 47 chains from at least 1946 to 1973. A ballast siding and small quarry were located at about 13 miles 70 chains just inland from Urraween station. Another siding at a large Ballast Reserve was considered at 6 miles 76 chains but apparently was not constructed.

Although not located on the branchline, Aldershot is another settlement important in the early life of this railway. In 1888 the Queensland Smelting Company was floated and located at Aldershot where there was ample water available from Saltwater Creek. Ore was railed from all over the State to the works siding for smelting. A large town grew up either side of the railway line. In 1906, the smelter closed and the town languished. Today Aldershot is a a growing town ideally situated as an intermediate access point to the proposed Mary to the Bay Rail Trail.

The former Pialba-Urangan rail corridor (from Old Maryborough Road to the Urangan Pier) was purchased from the State Government by the former Hervey Bay City Council in the 1990’s. The State Government sold the former station sites at Scarness, Torquay and Urangan (part thereof) to private developers and some subsequent medium density residential development has occurred. The old rail corridor from Takura to Pialba is now leased to Fraser Coast Regional Council. The section from Colton to Takura is still controlled by the State Government and the track remains virtually intact.

The former rail corridor from Pialba to Urangan has been developed sequentially as a high standard urban recreational and commuter facility as follows: 1. A 3.5m wide shared path has been constructed from Hunter Street (Pialba) to Elizabeth Street (Urangan); 2. A 3.5m wide shared path has been constructed within Pialba between Boat Harbour Drive and Old Maryborough Road; 3. A 6m wide path has been constructed from King Street (Urangan) to the Urangan Pier; 4. The former Hervey Bay City Council sold the section between Main Street and Hunter Street to the Pialba Place developer allowing unimpeded development of that site. The connection between Main Street and Hunter Street now occurs via a partially upgraded shared path along Old Maryborough Road; 5. Construction of a path between Old Maryborough Road and Torquay Road Extension is currently underway; 6. Council recently announced construction of the section between Urraween Road (west of main Street) and Boat Harbour Drive with an expected opening in 2010. A temporary path facility has been provided to facilitate reconstruction of the adjacent Main Street.

When all the above works are completed, the only inner-urban section that will remain unformed is between Elizabeth Street and King Street. Walk and Cycle Infrastructure Charges are currently being collected to fund this work. Completion of this link is vital for urban connectivity.

Page 6 Rev 1 - November 2009

3. TRAIL PROPOSAL - MARYBOROUGH TO COLTON

3.1 District Section - Maryborough to Bruce Highway

3.1.1 Local Section - Queens Park to A. J. Zemek Bridge

Figure 2. Options A, B and C for the Maryborough urban section of the recreation trail commencing from the Queens Park trailhead. The base map is from the Queensland Digital Cadastral Database.

Option A: Roads and pathways from Queens Park on Walker St to A. J. Zemek Bridge (immediate and future options) – 3.3 km

This urban alignment option lies along Walker Street from Queens Park westwards to the A. J. Zemek Bridge. The planning basis for this option is the proposed shared two metre wide pathway along the entire eastern section of Walker St, as shown on Atlas Map 5 of the Maryborough City Council Recreational Walk and Cycle Network Plan (ARUP 2003).

Positive features of this alignment include: • direct access to the preferred trailhead at Queens Park in central Maryborough, with full public facilities, shops and intercity transport nearby, • direct access to two take-away food shops in the vicinity of the hospital, • good access to a motel and caravan park off Walker St, • protection of some major intersections by traffic lights, and • a wide road with adequate room for a bike lane or yellow advisory treatment to be marked until such time as the shared pathway is completed.

There are two serious disadvantages of this alignment: • exposure to peak hour traffic and high intensity traffic around the hospital, and • a potentially long development period for the shared pathway.

Page 7 Rev 1 - November 2009

Option B: Roads and pathways from Queens Park on Kent, Croydon and Sussex Sts (immediate and future options) – 3.46 km via Walker St or 3.97 km via Croydon St

This urban alignment option is based on Sussex Street westwards from Queens Park. The proposal is based on the recognition of the problems associated with Option A for some recreation cyclists and groups (e.g. family groups of parents with younger children), specifically the heavy traffic along Walker Street. As Sussex Street does not extend westwards all the way to the old railway corridor, the route must either use a section of Walker Street via St Clair Avenue, or divert via Farrell, Kent and Croydon Streets to reach the A. J. Zemek Bridge.

Attractive features of this option are: • good access to the preferred trailhead at Queens Park in central Maryborough, with full public facilities, shops and intercity transport nearby, • a section of existing shared pathway at the east end of Sussex Street (along the southern side), • comparatively quiet traffic conditions along Sussex Street and on Farrell, Kent and Croydon Streets, and • provision of a link to the Russell Street cycling route facilities leading to the Sunbury State School for local use.

Potential disadvantages of this route include: • the low probability of development of a shared pathway along the whole length of the alignment, • possible constraints in terms of road space and/or community attitudes on development of a marked on-road cycling lane, and • the development of a safe crossing at the Russell St intersection.

Option C: ‘Rails with Trails’ development between Ferry St and Russell St rail overbridges (future options) – 4.33 km

This option is based within the land of the existing railway corridor from Ferry Street westwards as far as Russell Street. It is worthy of serious planning consideration as the use of the railway line from Baddow Junction into the old Maryborough Railway Station is now extremely limited. This section of line is used now only for provision of train access to and from the Downer EDI Rail engineering plant, typically for delivery or repair of rolling stock. The intensity of commercial use of this section of line is identical to that of the line through Queens Park and along the Lennox St footpath where public access is unrestricted (see Appendix A: Local and interstate examples of ‘Rails with Trails’). Photograph A-4 provides an example of a well-used shared pathway immediately adjacent to a busy metropolitan rail line in Melbourne.

A detailed photographic review of this alignment option (from adjacent public land) is presented in Appendix B: Maryborough City ‘Rails with Trails’ Option. Except in the vicinity of the Rocky Street underpass, there is adequate space for such a trail along the southern side of the existing rail corridor. The Pallas Street overbridge has sufficient space (both vertical and horizontal) for the trail to pass below the road. At Russell Street, there is enough space between the eastern side of the southern abutment of the overpass and the adjacent house fence to provide for pedestrian and bicycle access. (This space gives access to a buried water main.) The problems associated with the stairs on the Russell St bridge and its bizarre ‘contra- flow’ cycle lane may be easily solved through the use of a bicycle tyre channel on the edge of the steps (see example in Appendix B, Photograph B-16).

There is no option to continue along the rail corridor to the west of the Russell Street bridge because the vacant span space has been filled in rather than bridged.

Page 8 Rev 1 - November 2009

3.1.2 Local Section - A. J. Zemek Bridge (footpath and by-pass options)

Figure 3. The recreation trail route options suggested at the A. J. Zemek Bridge based on the existing footpath (option D), a new level crossing for pedestrians and cyclists (Option E) and a future planning route for avoiding the bridge (Option F). The base map is from the Queensland Digital Cadastral Database.

Option D: A. J. Zemek Bridge existing footpath and road crossings (immediate options) – 0.54 km

The A. J. Zemek Bridge has a footpath on the southern side only (see Appendix C: A. J. Zemek Bridge Issues). There is no provision for a footpath on the northern side and the intensity and nature of the traffic precludes walking on the northern roadway verge. Atlas Map 5 of the Maryborough City Council Recreational Walk and Cycle Network Plan (ARUP 2003) indicates that the shared pathway is to be developed on the hospital (northern) side of Walker Street. If this intention is carried out either a new pedestrian/cycle bridge will be required, or safe passage across the bridge for recreational users will require a crossing of Walker St as there is no feasible access under the bridge on its eastern side to pass under to the footpath side of the bridge. If the subsequent preferred alignment to the Bruce highway lies along Option H (along the eastern side of the cemetery land), a second crossing of Walker Street would then be required. Alternatively, there may be enough publicly accessible land to allow access to pass under the western span of the road bridge. This would require detailed investigation and survey beyond the scope of this study.

Atlas Map 5 of the Network Plan also indicates that the two metre pathway recommended for Walker Street between the A. J. Zemek Bridge and the Bruce Highway will be on the northern side of Walker Street.

Option E: Rail crossing alignment south of the Baddow Infrastructure Depot (future option) – 0.45 km

The single track siding to the QR Baddow Infrastructure Depot is not a busy railway line. Immediately to the north of the A. J. Zemek Bridge, a level crossing for pedestrian and cycling use is suggested as a solution to the problems with the footpath location. A nearby example is the pedestrian and cycling crossing adjacent to the intersection of Goldsmith and Morning Streets (see Photograph B-9). This long-established Morning Street crossing is unprotected.

Page 9 Rev 1 - November 2009

Before the old Maryborough Station was closed, the Morning Street pedestrian crossing was subject to much higher levels of rail traffic than presently access the Baddow Infrastructure Depot. Currently an informal road crossing exists at this location, possibly established for QR access purposes. To the east of the siding, an access track from Walker Street leads to this informal level crossing and passes through land owned by the local authority. The gradients associated with this option are appropriate to cycling and pedestrian use.

Page 10 Rev 1 - November 2009

3.1.3 Local Section - A. J. Zemek Bridge north to intersection of Quarry Road and Bruce Highway

Figure 4. The immediate and future planning options for recreation trail planning to the north and west of the A. J. Zemek Bridge. A rewarding recreation trail alignment based on Options H and J could be implemented immediately. The base map is from the Queensland Digital Cadastral Database.

Planning constraints for the concept of the Mary to the Bay Rail Trail in the form of limited options for publicly accessible routes (as detailed subsequently), mean that all options for the trail alignment must pass the Bruce Highway Service Centre located at the unconnected intersection of the Bruce Highway and Quarry Road. This location offers a wide range of food services and facilities and is already a focal destination for the recreation activity in the vicinity, this being limited largely to on-road club-based cycling. It would be a focal destination for recreational users of the Mary to the Bay Rail Trail.

As shown on Figure 4, there are six options for locating the Mary to the Bay Rail Trail for the local section north of the A. J. Zemek Bridge.

Option F: Alignment in Council land, unconstructed road casements and future development land (future planning option) – 3.3 km

To the east of the A. J. Zemek Bridge, on the north side of Walker St, lie (i) land owned by the local authority referred to the Option E description above, (ii) a large area of undeveloped land, and (iii) the Maryborough rifle range. The future of this Federally-owned rifle range is reported to be under review. If this Federal land is sold and subsequently developed in conjunction with the undeveloped parcels and local authority land, there should be an excellent opportunity to provide (and fund) an alignment for the Mary to the Bay Rail Trail that will avoid the problems posed by the A. J. Zemek Bridge.

However, the timescales for such a development are unknown and cannot be relied on with any certainty for the present proposal.

Page 11 Rev 1 - November 2009

Option G: Bruce Highway Pedestrian Bridge (funding announced), TAFE “future intent” pathway and northern Bruce Highway link (future planning option) – 5.66 km for Nagel St and Bruce Hwy or 5.3 km mainly along Nagel St

Atlas Map 5 of the Maryborough City Council Recreational Walk and Cycle Network Plan (ARUP 2003) shows that a two metre wide path is planned from the A. J. Zemek Bridge west to the Bruce Highway. More recently, the Minister for Transport and Main Roads, the Hon. Paul Lucas, announced funding of $450,000 to construct “a two-metre wide overpass across the Highway, providing a safe and easy link for pedestrians, including students cycling or walking to Maryborough TAFE” (Press Release 5 June 2007). West of the highway, Atlas Map 5 shows “future intent” for provision of access to the Maryborough TAFE College with connections to the Riverside Christian College and Andrew Petrie Park. The mapping indicates that the (relatively quiet) roads are to be used until pathways are established. The same press release also announced $351,000 for a 1.3 kilometre shared pathway to be built along the Gayndah Road.

Once the Bruce Highway pedestrian and cycle overpass bridge is completed, the option of using the above sections of pathway and road for recreational purposes will be more attractive. A significant increase in cycling commuters to the TAFE College in Nagel Street could be anticipated. The road casement and road surface of Nagel Street are wide (Photographs D-1, D-2). North of the TAFE College, the recent development of a housing estate may complicate access issues. However, there are two alternatives for accessing the Bruce Highway from Nagel Rd based on surveyed but unconstructed roads. Of these, the western alternative joining the Bruce Highway opposite the service centre opposite the Quarry Rd intersection appears the more attractive as it would minimize exposure to the Bruce Highway.

Despite the planning uncertainty and the interim use of road surfaces, this route is attractive as it would place the recreational cyclists on the western side of the Bruce Highway prior to using the western span of the rail overpass (as discussed in section 3.2.3 below). This overpass is located a short distance to the north of the intersection beyond Deadmans Creek.

However, easy recreational access to all-day and every-day toilet and drinking water facilities would need to be identified for this section of the route (perhaps at the TAFE College or the west side of the Showgrounds) because safe recreational access to the Service Centre (on the eastern side of the highway) would be a problem. This problem could be solved if an underpass below the Deadmans Creek bridge on the Bruce Highway was established, as is suggested in section 3.2.2 below.

Irrespective of the connections north to Colton and the proposed rail trail, a circuit based on this option to safely link with Options H/I and J/K presented below would be a rewarding and mostly off-road recreational cycling development for Maryborough residents.

Option H: Roads and pathways (immediate and future options) – 2.8 km

The alignment for Option H is based on a surveyed road (referred to in this report as Kent Street Extended) located between the old North Coast rail corridor and lands to the west, including the Maryborough Cemetery at the southern end. Presently most of this road is only a rough and unmaintained track. The major holes and depressions fill with water after rain and the surface is often boggy for extended periods of time making it unsuitable for recreational use (Photographs D-3 to D-7).

Page 12 Rev 1 - November 2009

Option I: Rail Trail alignment north of the Baddow Infrastructure Depot (future option) – 2.85 km

To the north of the Baddow Infrastructure Depot, the rails have been removed from the previous alignment of the North Coast Railway Line (Photographs D-8 and D-9). Land parcels for the old railway appear to remain in state ownership as far as Quarry Road. (Beyond Quarry Road the land has been sold and is now privately owned.)

This section of the old railway could provide a classic rail trail setting for the recreation trail. As the old trackbed is elevated and well drained, development of the recreation trail would be more easily undertaken than on the adjacent poorly drained road or road margins.

Option J: Industrial Estate roads and pathways (immediate and future options) – 1.76 km

At present, the only link from the eastern end of Quarry Road to the west (to the Bruce Highway Service Centre) is via the industrial estate, along the sealed surfaces of Industrial Avenue and Enterprise Street roads (Photographs D-10 to D-15). No constructed footpaths have been provided in this area even on a recently erected bridge. Industrial Avenue forms the link to Maryborough, via the Bruce Highway, for the residents of the small housing estate located along Neil Street.

While the present levels of road traffic are low, the present rate of development of the industrial estate is rapid so that higher traffic volumes can be anticipated. It could be argued that recreational use may be greatest at weekends, thus decreasing the hazard level for recreational cyclists. However, in the longer term, a more acceptable and rewarding solution is needed for a regionally significant recreation trail. While the existing sealed road surfaces provide a present use option, a future option could be provision of footpath connections to the west for the residents of Neil Street.

Option K: Pathways and new cycle bridge (future option) – 1.0 km

Between the southern end of Neil Street and the Bruce Highway Service Centre, a surveyed but unconstructed road casement exists, being the alignment of Quarry Road (Photographs D-16 to D-21). Currently, this alignment is regularly slashed.

At the bottom of the slope the alignment crosses the small creek that runs from Industrial Avenue. Although normally a small trickle, debris levels indicate that, in heavy rain, water level may rise to more than 1 metre above bank level. There is no existing crossing and, within the road casement, water levels are too deep, even at low flows, for recreational use without erection of some appropriate bridge structure.

If the chosen alignment followed one of Options F, H or I, then Option K along the Quarry Street road casement would be the long-term preferred option in terms of recreational setting and safety. Construction of a shared pathway bridge at the gully would be an essential feature of the development.

Page 13 Rev 1 - November 2009

3.2 District Section - Bruce Highway alignment to Aldershot Park

3.2.1 Restriction of the trail alignment to the Bruce Highway to Aldershot trailhead – 3.4 km

Other than the road casement of the Bruce Highway, there is no publicly accessible connection between the Bruce Highway Service Centre (at Quarry Road) and Aldershot township. To the west, one previously existing (though relatively unsatisfactory) option has been broken by the re-alignment of the North Coast Rail Line. To the east, any other local options for passing under the railway do not involve existing or potential publicly accessible land and are therefore beyond the scope of this study. (Such options should, however, be considered by the Fraser Coast Regional Council as a matter of priority to enhance regional recreation opportunities.)

It is envisaged that the Bruce Highway section of the Mary to the Bay Rail Trail will be restricted to walkers and recreational cyclists only because of the nature and intensity of road traffic and the safety implications for recreational stock. In all locations there is sufficient space within the road casement for a recreation pathway to be positioned safely.

Five impediments to easy development of this trail section exist on this part of the Bruce Highway: • Obtaining safe passage across or under the Bruce Highway from the eastern side at or near Quarry Road • The crossing of Deadmans Creek to the north of the Quarry Rd intersection, • The restriction of safe recreational passage below the North Coast Rail Line overbridge to the abutment area adjacent to the western span, • The crossing of Saltwater Creek on the outskirts of Aldershot, and • Obtaining safe passage across or under the Bruce Highway from the western side across into Aldershot.

Page 14 Rev 1 - November 2009

3.2.2 The Deadmans Creek crossing and underpass options

On the eastern side of the Bruce Highway, the facilities available at the Quarry Road Service Centre (including the Sexie Coffee cafe) will be a focus for most recreational walkers and cyclists in this area of Maryborough City (Photographs D-15, E-1). However, as detailed in the following section, the only feasible and safe location for a recreation trail under the North Coast Rail Line overbridge lies on the western side of the Bruce Highway.

To the north of the Quarry Road Service Centre complex, the Bruce Highway crosses Deadmans Creek (Photograph E-2). Usually, this creek is a small stream if not a mere trickle. However, during heavy rain, as in the 2007-8 wet season, the creek can be a deep raging torrent.

At Deadmans Creek, the present Bruce Highway bridge lacks full-width road-shoulders appropriate for on-road cycling use. The present traffic intensity and the narrow road-shoulders on the bridge are totally inappropriate for use by recreation walkers and cyclists. Some alternate pedestrian and cycling crossing of Deadmans Creek therefore will be required such as a new high-level pathway bridge, a low-level creek pathway crossing or a ‘clip-on’ pathway attached to the existing road bridge.

Each of these options holds its own problems. Both a new pathway bridge and a ‘clip-on’ pathway would be expensive. The low-level crossing could present access problems during extended periods of wet weather.

However, one positive aspect of the present bridge at Deadmans Creek is that it offers the opportunity for construction of a recreation trail underpass beneath the roadway to provide for a safe change of side across the highway for recreation trail users. Examples of similar constructions are presented in Photographs E-3 and E-4. If, on further investigation, the more feasible location for then underpass is adjacent to the northern abutment, the creek crossing would be required on the downstream (eastern) side of the highway.

3.2.3 Restriction of trail location under the railway overbridge

Just to the north of Deadmans Creek, the overbridge that carries the North Coast Rail Line has been constructed to provide for a future dual carriage highway beneath (i.e. two lanes in each direction). The present highway is positioned under the eastern span. The eastern abutment is so close to the narrow eastern shoulder of the highway that there is no room for a pathway to be placed or constructed on that side.

Although the western span may be used for duplication of the highway in the near future, there appears to be sufficient space for (i) a pathway to be positioned adjacent to the base of the western abutment of the rail overbridge, and (ii) a full width two lane road.

3.2.4 The Saltwater Creek crossing and underpass options

While passage beneath the North Coast Rail Line is restricted to the western side of the highway, Aldershot township lies on the eastern side immediately to the north of Saltwater Creek. This is a more significant stream than Deadmans Creek. The Bruce Highway was inundated at this location during the 2007-8 wet season (Photograph E-5).

Thus, the above problems of a creek crossing and a change of side for the recreation trail are replicated at this locality. As the more feasible location for the Saltwater Creek underpass appears to be adjacent to the northern abutment (Photograph E-6), the creek crossing would be required on the upstream side of the highway.

Page 15 Rev 1 - November 2009

3.3 District Section – Aldershot Township

Figure 6. The proposed trail alignment through Aldershot township. Because the Bruce Highway is an unsafe recreational environment for horse riding, the Aldershot park is proposed as a trailhead for horse riders coming south from Colton and beyond. The base map is from the Queensland Digital Cadastral Database.

3.3.1 Planning factors for the route and facilities in Aldershot

The planning constraints limiting the location and use of the southern access into Aldershot were detailed in Section 3.2.1 above. The planning constraints for the route northwards out of Aldershot are (i) the lack of an operational level crossing at the old Colton Junction and (ii) the absence of any other potential crossing of the railway between Aldershot and old Colton Junction. It is considered most unlikely that the locked and gated crossing at Colton would be modified and opened for only recreational use (Photograph G-18). It is likely that safety issues relating to recreational livestock using an unprotected crossing would be of concern and that the costs of automatic gates, lights etc. would be prohibitive for the levels of recreational use.

These planning constraints mean that the use of Colton Road through the pine plantations is not a feasible option. The rough trail leading north from Lenthall Street is on a powerline easement and also suffers from the same railway infrastructure constraints.

Page 16 Rev 1 - November 2009

There are no other surveyed roads leading from Colton to the east or south. There appears to be no public access to, or beyond, the rail crossing of Saltwater Creek on a substantial bridge that, under other circumstances, could offer a route under the railway to Maryborough. This is an issue that the Fraser Coast Regional Council might further investigate.

In contrast to the Bruce Highway section of the trail, the route through Aldershot to Colton and beyond is suited to use by horse riders as well as cyclists and walkers. Accordingly, Aldershot would be the southern trailhead for horse riders and any other recreational stock users (e.g. donkey teams, lama tours or dog sleds as now found in SEQ). To facilitate recreation and tourism use and development of these kinds, trail head facilities such as human and stock water, toilets, hitching rails, a shelter shed and a stock float/trailer parking and turning area would be required. There appears to be adequate space in the Aldershot park for these facilities. Planning also should account for the needs and concerns of the Aldershot residents.

3.3.2 The route through Aldershot – 1.2 km (trailhead to boundary)

In the light of the constraints set out above, the proposed route through Aldershot lies along Vaughan Street, Dunn Street, through the Aldershot parkland, onto the extension of Shiplick Street, briefly on Shiplick Street to the level crossing and over the railway to Bronze Street and continuing to its northern end.

The features of the route through Aldershot are portrayed in Photographs F-1 to F-7 showing the existing park facilities adjacent to Murray Street, the eastern entry of the park, the satisfactory road conditions leading towards the level crossing, the relatively narrow but safe setting of the level crossing (determined by the need for vehicles to slow down in order to execute two turns to take the crossing), the features of Bronze Street (where the trail would have to be located on the footpath or on the road because of the excavated drain adjacent to the railway fence) and the location of the start of the new trail northwards to Colton.

Page 17 Rev 1 - November 2009

3.4 District Section – Aldershot to Colton

Figure 7. The trail alignment from Aldershot north to Colton. The 20 m wide surveyed road casement runs along the eastern boundary of the railway land from Aldershot to the Colton locked level crossing. Note that the existing road from the Colton locked level crossing to the old branchline first level crossing is not located on the surveyed road casement but traverses Unallocated State Land. The base map is from the Queensland Digital Cadastral Database.

Page 18 Rev 1 - November 2009

3.4.1 Planning factors for the Aldershot to Colton section – 3.4 km

The planning constraint represented by the locked level crossing at old Colton Junction has been discussed above. Because it is most unlikely that this constraint can be overcome, there is no publicly accessible route from Aldershot to old Colton Junction other than along the surveyed, unconstructed and un-named road casement that runs along the east side of the North Coast Railway (Figure 7).

As of 8th February 2008 this road casement appeared to have no administrative impediments to its use for a recreation trail alignment. On that date, a check of the Queensland Government digital cadastral database (DCDB) at Maryborough showed that there were no road closures, either in whole or in part, recorded along this section. Neither did the computer check show records of any licences issued over the road casement. No printed copy of this search result could be obtained as there was no provision for doing so from a public counter search.

Experience elsewhere in recreation trail planning at another location in Queensland suggests that a written confirmation of this situation should be obtained as soon as possible. The current status of the road casement should be maintained by objection (from state, local government and general public stakeholders) to any proposals to close (whether in whole or in part) or licence the road.

The current lack of a gate in the fence across the surveyed road casement at the conceptual intersection with the similarly surveyed but unformed Perige Road is a minor problem but will require some negotiation with state and local government administrators (typically the recently amalgamated Department of Environment and Resource Management) as well as the adjacent land owner whose stock appear to graze both the unformed road and the adjacent land.

While the whole of the western side of this road casement from Aldershot to Colton is fenced on the western side along the railway land, there is no comparable fence along the eastern side. Land use, trail safety and public liability concerns will determine whether full fencing is required or if the cheaper option of grids or self-closing gates could be employed.

The terrain between Aldershot and Colton consists of sedimentary rocks; the Burrum Coal Measures nearer to Aldershot and the overlying Elliot Formation at the Colton end (Ellis 1968). The soils developed on these rocks feature poor internal drainage and the relatively flat to gently sloping land surface hinders rapid runoff of surface water. Throughout this section of the trail alignment, the principal planning constraints are poor surface drainage and soils that are boggy when wet.

These two factors are considered to be amongst the greatest problems for trail management in the longer term. Boggy trail surface conditions typically result in creation of by-passes and ‘trail braiding’ while general poor drainage leads to overland flow and erosion of the trail surface. The potential for erosion is exacerbated when water is channelled along boggy and depressed sections of the trail surface.

There are no simple trail design or construction strategies to overcome these problems. Provision of adequate side and cross drainage will be essential along with use of an erosion resistant load-bearing trail bed placed on the existing soil surface. Restrictions on trail use during prolonged or extreme wet weather may still be required.

Despite these water-related problems, there are no locations where standing or running water occurs within the surveyed road casement between Aldershot and Colton, and indeed, infrequently further on along the proposed trail. Around Colton, arrangements for provision of water for recreational stock use will need to be determined through consultation with potential recreation user groups.

Page 19 Rev 1 - November 2009

There are no direct constraints on trail development associated with the vegetation in this district section. Field inspection showed that, north of Aldershot, all the western side of the 20 metre (1 chain) road casement has been cleared in the past. In the northern part of this section, adjacent to the Unallocated State Land (USL), the western side of the surveyed road casement has been cleared completely and a roughly graded surface established. However, this rough grading merely incised the road into the existing soil surface by about 150 mm resulting in additional drainage and water flow problems.

Photographs relevant to most of these planning constraints are presented in Appendix G.

3.4.2 Local Section - Aldershot to Peridge Road

From Aldershot north, the surveyed, un-named and unformed road casement proposed for use by the recreation trail is effectively the northern continuation of Bronze Street in Aldershot (see Photograph F-7). A suitable crossing of the deep excavated drain at the northern end of Bronze Street will need to be planned and constructed.

Along this unformed extension of Bronze Street, the vegetation has been cleared in the past and generally remains clear adjacent to the fenceline beside the railway (Photographs G-1 and G-2). There are numerous locations where poorly drained and boggy sections on the proposed trail alignment were found to be adjacent to culverts under the adjacent railway line. Surface water flows were concentrated in these culverts and the discharge was concentrated across the fenceline (Photographs G-2 and G-3).

A large degree of mitigation of this ‘inherited’ drainage problem could be obtained by continuing the channelled flow from the eastern side of each railway culvert in an open drain leading to similar sized culvert under the recreation trail pad. This would require the cooperation of, and coordination with, Queensland Rail in planning and construction.

As is found for the whole distance from Aldershot to Colton, the railway property fence is well constructed and maintained. Its standard is appropriate for separation of recreational users from the railway land, including recreational stock users. In this local section there is no fenceline separating the surveyed road from the adjacent property to the east. There is no gate in the fenceline along the Perige Road surveyed casement (Photograph G-4). Although not directly relevant to trail planning, it is not known whether this fenceline represents the southern or northern casement boundary of Perige Road, or if indeed it lies on Peridge Road at all.

As can be inferred from Photographs G-1, G-2 and G-4, and also shown in detail in Photograph G-9 for the subsequent local section, there is the opportunity to locate walkers and cyclists on a trail pad proximal to the railway fence while recreational stock users could utilise a wider path slashed through the vegetation on the road casement.

3.4.3 Local Section - Peridge Road to USL boundary

A pictorial representation of this section is to be found in Photographs G-6 to G-10. With the exception of the issue of the Bronze Street drain crossing, all the trail planning issues and options in the above section apply to this local section also.

The precise location of the gate and associated fenceline (Photograph G-10) are uncertain in relation to the property boundary, though it may be inferred that they do lie on the southern boundary of the USL land parcel.

Page 20 Rev 1 - November 2009

3.4.4 Local Section - USL boundary to Colton (locked level crossing)

This section is an existing management road serving the USL land parcel to the east. A pictorial representation of the section is to be found in Photographs G-11 to G-18. Here the trail location is either well cleared and grassy or graded to bare soil (and incised as already described above). It also features a moderate incline climbing up to the old Colton station site (Photographs G-14, G-15 and G-17). This grade presents a new set of drainage problems along the road surface (Photograph G-17) that will require cross-drainage solutions at frequent intervals along the existing roadway. At present, the poor on-road drainage exacerbates the ‘boggy soil’ problem.

The section offers the option for a separate recreational stock trail away from the railway fence. Provision of fencing along the eastern side of the surveyed road on the USL boundary does not appear to be a trail planning issue.

Signage at the locked level crossing at Colton indicates that it would be an offence to attempt to enter the railway property to cross the railway line. There is no vehicle access west to the Bruce Highway in the nearby vicinity. This may raise some safety and management concerns in that the area of this trail section is, on a district scale, quite remote and inaccessible except by four wheel drive vehicle or trail bikes.

Page 21 Rev 1 - November 2009

4. TRAIL PROPOSAL - COLTON TO URANGAN BRANCH FIRST LEVEL CROSSING

4.1 Planning considerations

A pictorial representation (in sequence) of this section is given in Photographs H-1 to H-8 and the cadastral layout is shown on the upper part of Figure 7. The section of road links the locked level crossing at Colton to the first level crossing on the old Urangan-Pialba branchline (Photograph H-7). It is the final section of road-based trail alignment before the ‘rail trail’ proper would commence, heading more or less east to Urangan (Photograph H-8).

The key trail planning issue for this section is associated with the status of the current but very old road from the Colton locked level crossing to the first level crossing on the old Urangan Branch. It is a ‘road off alignment’ as shown in Figure 7 that has been in this position for an extended period of time (Photograph H-5). This ‘road off alignment’ is a relatively common occurrence but carries a number of implications for management and liability. These problems and other associated issues are well known to local governments.

A solution to the ‘road off alignment’ problem at this location may need to consider: • the long-established nature of the present ‘off-alignment’ road section, • ownership of the land on which the existing ‘off-alignment’ road is located, • the loss of vegetation and other environmental impacts associated with a new ‘on- alignment’ road, and • the more swampy nature of the wallum soils under the surveyed alignment.

This process would be best addressed by appropriate consultation and negotiation undertaken by the local authority (as the likely constructor and manager of the recreation trail) with the Department of Environment and Resource Management (as administrator of the USL).

4.2 Description of the current road – 0.83 km

Although long established, this section of road is merely graded into the soil rather than being properly formed with a crown and side drains (Photographs H-1 and H-2). The road crosses one minor drain which appears to have been excavated on the eastern side of the road. Closer to the branchline level crossing substantial volumes of water flowed down the road during the 2007-8 wet season (Photographs H-3 and H-4). At least some of this water originated from a concentration of overland flow through the cattle grid on the western side of the branchline level crossing (Photograph H-6) emphasising the importance of retaining existing drainage arrangements along the old railway. This is an important aspect to be raised with Queensland Rail and Queensland Transport prior to the preparation of the contract for infrastructure removal.

The current road surface would be suitable for use for the recreation trail alignment except in very wet weather when the boggy and possibly slippery soil conditions would not be appropriate for either recreational or management vehicle use.

Page 22 Rev 1 - November 2009

5. RAILTRAIL SECTION PLANNING ISSUES - COLTON TO URANGAN

The disused railway from the old Colton junction to Urangan town represents the true rail trail section of the proposed Mary to the Bay Rail Trail. The western section from Colton junction to old Takura station remains in exclusive State ownership although it is no longer connected to the main railway system. Many items of railway infrastructure (including most bridges) remain in place although the rails have been removed in several locations along the line and some bridges have been damaged in bushfires.

The eastern section, from Takura to Urraween Road (Main Street), already is leased from the State by the Fraser Coast Regional Council (as an ‘inherited’ lease) with a view to development of a rail trail. All rails, sleepers and bridge infrastructure have been removed in this eastern section but all culverts remain in a functioning condition and sound condition. All drains at all old level crossings are functioning but the small cattle-grid spans, typically 2.8 m (9 foot 3 inches) across, have been removed and will require replacement (see Photograph I-14).

5.1 General planning considerations

5.1.1 Rail trail alignment and infrastructure tenure, transfer and responsibilities

Rail Corridor Tenure. The rail corridor from Takura to Pialba currently is leased for a 30 year period, originally to the Hervey Bay City Council (HBCC) and continuing to the post- amalgamation Fraser Coast Regional Council (FCRC). The HBCC contact officer for these arrangements was Janet Campbell. In early 2008, no details of any other lease over the corridor were known to the Rail Network and Strategy Branch, Queensland Transport for either of the sections west or east of Takura.

Typically the corridor is one chain wide, with some slightly wider sections at major drainage lines. Near Colton, the first level crossing on the branch line marks the boundary between two property lots of the railway corridor. A full listing of the property lots involved has not been undertaken as this information is not available to the Fraser Coast BUG. It appears that no access to the un-leased rail corridor is available for a professional, detailed and formal engineering study unless an “access licence” has been issued.

As with most Queensland rail trail developments, any formal action by the Department of Transport and Main Roads (TMR) will only be initiated after rail services have been formally concluded and after the relevant council(s) formally indicates its interest in leasing the rail corridor for community purposes. Typically, no leasing entity other than a council or a State department meets the public liability requirements of TMR in this use of a rail corridor.

Page 23 Rev 1 - November 2009

Infrastructure Removal. Regardless of the present Mary to the Bay Rail Trail study, TMR is planning for removal of the residual railway infrastructure from Colton to Takura. It is anticipated that uplift will occur over a two year timescale (possibly late 2009 to 2010) and that the contract for the operation will be bundled with other similar work to be scheduled in the region.

The general steps in this process usually are: • An access road is bulldozed adjacent to the railway formation to provide access for the contractor’s equipment required for cutting and lifting the track and sleepers and for magnetic screening the ballast for residual metal. From a trail planning perspective, no disruption of the current drainage patterns should be caused by this bulldozing. • Any vegetation required to be destroyed in this process will be mulched and distributed on the site. These two stages of clearing have important implications for potential locating trail structures, particularly if the cycleway and horse trail are to be separated. There are also some minor implications for loss of vegetation, particularly trees (both native and exotic) that may be regarded as being of amenity value along the potential rail trail. • All structurally sound concrete culverts are left in position and cleared of any obstruction by the contractor. Culverts are removed only if in a state of collapse. In the case of the Urangan Branch, no such instances of unsound culverts have been encountered in a preliminary reconnaissance of the corridor. • All bridges are removed unless identified as being required for retention for some appropriate purpose or reason (see next section below). If the abutments to the removed bridges are stable, formed in concrete or in concrete slabs with steel rail supports, they are left in position. Any other abutment types will be removed and the formation graded down to the base level at a 1 in 3 grade batter. • Sleepers are assessed for their soundness and financial value. Those of value are removed with a tractor fitted with a fork lift attachment. The remaining sleepers are typically “pit burnt” in an appropriate manner under any required permits. This has implications for the potential use of some sleepers in ‘corduroy crossings’ of swampy areas by horses along the trail. (An example of a sleeper-based crossing already is established by QR at one location.) • All infrastructure at level crossings is removed other than the boundary fencing. The land and road surfaces are then restored as arranged between TMR, the contractor and the relevant Council. • All other railway infrastructure such as warning signs, level crossing, mileposts, telephone- wire posts, trolley set-off timbers etc. are removed unless identified as being required for retention for some appropriate purpose or reason. If such items are required to be retained they will be marked, typically with spray paint on the ground around the item. • After all other salvage actions are completed, the ballasted alignment may be ‘screened’ for small metal components and may be given a ‘light grading’ to remove the undulations resulting from sleeper removal.

Infrastructure Retention and Identification Processes. Where an expression of interest in use of the rail corridor for community purposes by a council has been given, and interest in retention of infrastructure that would otherwise be removed has been made (e.g. for historic value, interpretation or “atmosphere”), negotiations can be undertaken to identify the items to be retained or preserved. The appropriate actions are then included in the tender document for the infrastructure removal contractor.

In general terms, the following considerations apply. Smaller items of infrastructure that are required for future use may be either noted for removal and storage, or marked appropriately on the site for retention. Examples might include level crossing signs, speed signs, mileposts, trolley set-off timbers and side rails. Bridges will only be retained if a council accepts them on an “as is, where is” basis, and undertakes all future liability associated with the structures. If a council does accept bridge infrastructure on these terms, the council may then modify the structure (e.g. add decking and handrails) as required.

Page 24 Rev 1 - November 2009

As will be discussed later, retention of bridges is a key issue in the proposed development of this rail trail. In addition, as some of the rails on the Pialba Branch are over 100 years old; there is a strong case for retention of a number of lengths to preserve the various manufacturer’s names and dates for use in landscaping items. Examples of this approach are known from South Australia where, on the old Port August wharf, marked rail sections have been formed into attractive round topped posts and powder-coated.

Environmental Contamination Issues. It is well known that, in the past, an arsenic-based weed spray was used for the control of vegetation within rail corridors (and widely elsewhere) in Queensland. Prior to development of modern timber preservation techniques and the use of such treated timber in bridges, insecticide treatments of bridge timbers were undertaken. Bridge timbers on the Colton to Takura branch feature the injection points and plugs associated with this treatment. No details relating to environmental concerns associated with either of these treatments are available from the TMR Rail Network and Strategy Branch. Further inquiries are required if a future Mary to the Bay study team requires more detail. As of early 2008, more information could be obtained from Paul Fitzgerald (2007), Senior Advisor Environmental Services, QR, telephone (07) 3235 1238 to determine if any relevant sections or sites are currently listed on the QR Environmental Services Environmental Management Register. It should also be determined if the Environmental Protection Agency has any relevant sections of sites on its register of contaminated land. In regard to weed spray use, if there are no listings, it appears that there is no need for further consideration. Currently, abundant vegetation regeneration is occurring beside and along the rail formation throughout its extent and no suppression of seeding germination or regeneration is evident.

From discussions with State Officers associated with the current development of the Brisbane Valley Rail Trail, it is understood that no soil contamination issues have been identified and no remedial work undertaken in the recently opened trail section from Moore to Linville. In proposed sections closer to Ipswich, the wholesale excavation of the old rail corridor for the recycled water pipeline has overshadowed any issue of past weed spray use.

Fencing. Fencing requirements, condition and responsibilities need to be clarified because there is a complex setting of State, Council, State leases and private ownerships adjacent to the corridor. There may be opportunities to develop a collaborative approach to fence restoration, if required.

Fire protection. In the case of the Mary to the Bay Rail Trail, protection of the remaining bridges from fire damage will be essential to preserve future options for their use in a recreational trail. To maximize trail planning options, this is an important and high priority task. The options for initiatives and responsibilities need to be clarified as soon as possible due to vegetation build-up under and adjacent to the structures, these areas typically being the wettest and most fuel-productive sections of the landscape. It seems that in some locations, soil was excavated from under short bridges to retain a water pool below, possibly to reduce the chance of fire damage.

In the longer term, the fire protection policy required (if any) will be determined by (i) the results of the detailed feasibility study in terms of state and condition reports and feasibility based on modification costings (handrails, decks); and (ii) the attitude of the council to liability, funding and trail management.

Page 25 Rev 1 - November 2009

5.1.2 Bridge retention/condition and conversion/replacement.

As set out on the mapping in Figures 8 to 10, the Colton to Urraween Road (east of St Joseph Drive) section of the branchline originally had 17 bridges. A summary of the characteristics, condition and the various fates of these bridges is presented in Table 2. Appendix Photographs I-1 to I-13 show each of the remaining bridges or the sites of demolished bridges. Please refer to the separate digital portfolio of bridge photographs and to the separate digital infrastructure summary document for further details of bridges.

Table 2. The location, state and characteristics of the 17 bridges located between Colton and the intersection of Urraween Road and Main Street, Urangan. See footnote for bridge construction terminology.

Bridge No. and Present State Span detail Pylons, plinths and distance from abutments Colton Junction 1 (near 1.5 km) Replaced by box - - culvert 2 (near 3.5 km) Intact; moderate Wood girders; 3 spans each 6.096 m Wood pile piers; concrete slab condition, some (20 feet) long; total 18.288 m. abutments with rail retainers termite attack 3 (near 4.2 km) Replaced by pipe - - culvert 4 (near 5.8 km) Replaced by 5 box - - culvert 5 (near 6 km) Intact; moderate to Wood girders; 6 spans each 6.096 m Wood pile piers; cast concrete good condition (20 feet) long abutments with dry stone protective apron (some stones removed) 6 (near 6.5 km) One span and one Wood girders; 2 spans each 6.096 m Wood pile piers; concrete slab pier burnt out (20 feet) long abutments with rail retainers 7 (near 8.3 km) Intact; moderate to Wood girders; 15 spans each 6.096 Mostly concrete piers (at least 10), good condition m (20 feet) long remainder wood pile piers; cast concrete abutments with stone protective side aprons 8 (near 9.1 km) Intact; moderate to Wood girders; 4 spans each 6.096 m Wood pile piers; cast concrete good condition (20 feet) long abutments with stone protective side aprons 9 (near 10.3 km) Four spans and Wood girders; 7 spans each 6.096 m Five concrete piers; the one wood one pier burnt; (20 feet) long pile pier burnt out; cast concrete unburnt timber in abutments moderate to good condition 10 (near 12.6 km) Replaced by a six - - box culvert 11 (near 13.4 km; Removed Originally wood girders; 10 spans Eight concrete piers remain; Black Swamp) each 6.096 m (20 feet) long wooden piers adjacent to abutments are missing; concrete slab abutments 12 (near 13.6 km) Filled in - -

13 (around 14.9 Removed Originally wood girders; 10 spans Very substantial concrete plinths km, Stockyard each 6.096 m (20 feet) long remain; higher eastern abutment- Creek) end pier remains; concrete abutments have been demolished 14 (near 15.5 km) Removed 1 span of 5.486 m (18 feet) No piers remain; concrete slab abutments 15 (near 16.2 km, Removed 10 spans each 6.096 m (20 feet) Concrete piers remain; cast near Moes Road) long concrete abutments

16 (near 19.2 km) Removed Steel girder; 1 span 9.144 m (30 Cast concrete abutments feet) long; 17 (near 24 km) Removed 1 span of 5.486 m (18 feet). Not known

Terminology: Girders are the horizontal timbers supporting the sleepers and rails. Piers support the girders and may be constructed of wooden pile sets or cast concrete. The short horizontal round timbers (parallel to the girders) atop piers are called corbels. In a few cases, the wooden pile pier sets were placed on cast concrete plinths.

Page 26 Rev 1 - November 2009

Except at the Stockyard Creek and Black Swamp bridges, all remaining abutments, whether of cast concrete or concrete slab construction, appear in good condition. From records painted on abutments, it seems the last maintenance of the remaining bridge timbers was carried out around 1989/1990. The condition of the bridges timber varies according to age. Some termite infestation was noted.

In terms of trail planning and management issues, the bridges, the boggy soils of the associated drainage depressions and the deeper creek crossings rank as probably the most serious constraints and concerns. The feasibility of conversion, rebuilding or development of bypasses may determine the success of the whole proposal, or alternatively limit the distance and scope of the rail trail development west from Urangan.

For the Colton to Takura section, the suggested options for bridge retention and conversion, by- pass options, or for re-building of burnt bridges are listed in Table 3. This assessment is based on the very wet conditions in the district during February 2008. Photographs of bridges designed for recreational use are presented in Appendix J.

Table 3. The options for retention and conversion, by-pass options, or for re-building of the bridges located between Colton and Takura.

Bridge No. Total Present State Conversion, Rebuilding and Trail-use Options Length

1 (near 1.5 - Replaced by box No action required km) culvert

2 (near 3.5 18.3 m Intact; moderate This bridge appears suitable for conversion for walkers and km) condition, some cyclists, at least. Instead of converting this bridge for horse termite attack; three use, the terrain is suitable for construction of a corduroy spans bypass on either of the sides. 3 (at 4.2 km) - Replaced by pipe No action required culvert 4 (near 5.8 Replaced by a 5 box No action required km) culvert

5 (near 6 km) 36.1 m Intact; moderate to This bridge appears suitable for conversion for walkers and good condition; 6 cyclists, at least. Instead of converting this bridge for horse spans use, the terrain is suitable for a corduroy bypass on either of the sides. 6 (near 6.5 12.2 m One span and one At this location, instead of rebuilding the bridge, the terrain is km) pier burnt out; one suitable for a corduroy bypass (for walkers, horses and span remains cyclists) on the northern side. The inclines up to the formation will have to be cut into the abutments due to the presence of adjacent excavated waterholes. The remaining wood (3 spans) could be salvaged for repair of other bridges. Alternatively, light-weight capacity spans could be rebuilt for cyclists and walkers only (see Appendix J). 7 (near 8.3 91.5 m Intact; moderate to This bridge appears suitable for conversion for walkers and km) good condition; 15 cyclists, at least. Instead of converting this bridge for horse spans use, the terrain is suitable for a corduroy bypass on the northern side. 8 (near 9.1 24.1 m Intact; moderate to This bridge appears suitable for conversion for walkers and km) good condition; 4 cyclists, at least. Instead of converting this bridge for horse spans use, the terrain is suitable for a corduroy bypass on the northern side. The inclines up to the formation will have to be cut into the abutments due to the presence of adjacent excavated waterholes. The waterholes represent a potential water source for stock. 9 (near 9.3 42.7 m Four spans and one At this location, instead of rebuilding the bridge, the terrain is km) pier burnt; timber of suitable for a corduroy bypass (for walkers, horses and remaining unburnt cyclists) on the southern side. The inclines up to the formation three spans in will have to be cut into the abutments due to the presence of moderate to good adjacent excavated waterholes. These waterholes may be a condition water source for stock. The remaining wood (3 spans) could be salvaged for repair of other bridges. However, the presence of the five concrete piers makes rebuilding an attractive option for use by walkers and cyclists. 10 (near 12.6 Replaced by a 6 box No action required km) culvert

Page 27 Rev 1 - November 2009

Preliminary consideration of load testing of remaining bridges on the Brisbane Valley Rail Trail suggests that even quite old bridges remain suitable for adaption to recreational use.

As noted above, all bridge infrastructure has been removed from the section from Takura to Urangan. In the cases of the Black Swamp and Stockyard Creek Bridges, no alternative road- based routes can be identified and these bridges must be rebuilt (with or without low-level stock-use bypasses). For this section, the suggested options for bridge re-building and/or by- pass options are listed in Table 4. As noted above, this assessment is based on the very wet conditions encountered in the district during February 2008. The table also refers to the examples in Appendix J of bridges designed for recreational use.

Table 4. The options for re-building and by-pass options for the removed bridges located between Takura and Urraween Road.

Bridge No. Total Present Trail-use Option Length State

11 (near 13.4 61 m Removed No simple by-pass option exists due to width and depth of stream in km, Black flood and depth of main stream channel (see bridge photograph Swamp) portfolio); eight concrete piers of the nine original remain, the one wooden pier having gone; the tops of the piers stand well above flood level and the abutment stands about 1 m above the pylon tops; suggest rebuilding of girders and decking on concrete additions to top of plinths for 10 spans each 6.096 m (20 feet) long; see Gympie Museum trestle bridge example in Appendix J. 12 (near 13.6 Filled in No action required km)

13 (around 61 m Removed No simple by-pass option exists due to width and depth of stream in 14.9 km, flood and depth of main stream channel (see bridge photograph Stockyard portfolio); all plinths remain and are very substantial being 1.2 m (4 Creek) feet) wide and of various lengths depending on distance below old rail level to take width of old pier sets; plinth tops were submerged to a depth of at least 0.8 m in the February 2008 floods; suggest rebuilding of girders and decking on concrete or metal additions to top of plinths for 10 spans each 6.096 m (20 feet) long; see Gympie Museum trestle bridge example in Appendix J. 14 (about 15.5 5.5 m Removed Standing water remains in an excavation under old bridge; a by-pass km) option exists by use of a 10 m of corduroy trail surface on northern side (see bridge photograph set); alternatively rebuilding would require 1 span using at least 7.5 m girders placed on top of, and set back over, the remaining concrete slab abutments. 15 (about 16.2 60.1 m Removed No guaranteed by-pass option exists due to width of stream in peak km, near Moes flows; tops of piers remained well above water during February 2008 Road) floods; suggest rebuilding of girders and decking on the concrete piers - top dimensions 0.5 m x 2.7 m (9 feet x 1 foot 8 inches) - for 10 spans each 6.096 m (20 feet) long; use original cast concrete abutments; see Appendix J for examples.

A cheaper option would be to rebuild only two or three spans over the main stream course with inclines to low-level corduroy bypasses adjacent to each abutment. The spans should be wide enough and with high sides to cater for horse riders. 16 (near 19.2 9.1 m Removed There is no by-pass option at this location due to standing water km) under the (removed) old bridge span; rebuilding required; suggest steel girders for single span 9.144 m (30 feet) long set onto original cast concrete abutment which is in good condition The span should be wide enough and with high sides to cater for horse riders. (See bridge photograph example in Appendix J).

If, perchance, the land between the old railway line and the main road is in public ownership, there is the possibility that the bridge could be by-passed completely by a direct connection to the Maryborough Hervey Bay Road from the western abutment. 17 (near 24 (5.5.m) Removed At this location, no pedestrian access is catered for on the south side km) of Urraween Road. A replacement bridge may be required to cater for local pedestrian and off-road bicycle traffic. However, the main railtrail alignment lies on the other side of the road. Road crossings by pedestrians and young/elderly cyclists in this area can be challenging due to traffic density.

Page 28 Rev 1 - November 2009

5.1.3 Specific recreation hazard and safety issues

The western portion of the true rail trail section of the proposed route, from near Colton to just west of the Black Swamp bridge includes extended sections of near natural countryside that are relatively remote from habitation and roads. Accordingly, in this section, consideration must be made of two relevant recreation safety issues, floods and fires, and of the opportunities for avoidance, escape and rescue routes.

West of Churchill Mines Road, the proposed rail trail lies along the northern boundary of the lease over USL for the firing ranges of the gun club. As the design of all official firing ranges is based on an adequate ‘safety trace’ for each range within the boundary, there is no safety issue for users of the proposed trail proving they do not leave the trail and trespass on the firing range. Adequate signage and maintained fencing should ensure no problems in this regard.

These safety issues considered are addressed in Table 5.

Table 5. The railtrail alignment sections from Colton to Takura, showing the distances between formal road access locations together with comments on potential fire or flood hazards/refuges, access/escape routes or other safety issues.

Section Length Comment

Colton branchline first 5.25 km On the proposed trail, there is an open area adjacent to the locked Colton level crossing to mainline level crossing that may be suitable for an evacuation / assembly area Churchill Mines Road in the event of fire. The larger area to the west of the railway line would not be level crossing quickly accessible to horses in an emergency because of sound fencing and locked gates.

Along both sides of the old branch line, fire trails are located in Unallocated State Land, providing both access and a degree of fire protection. The rifle range facilities adjacent to the railway west of Churchill Mines Road also provide access and it is highly likely these assets will be defended against fire.

No major deep drainage lines or deep flooding threats exist in this section.

The firing ranges at the gun club present no safety issues for users of the railway corridor. Because of the distances of ranges away from the railway line, it is unlikely that any noise of firearm use would present a problem to horse riders.

Churchill Mines Road 7.22 km Along both sides of the old branch line, fire trails are located in Unallocated level crossing to State Land, providing both access and a degree of fire protection. Near the 11 Takura km distance from Colton (see Figure 9), the extensive area of bare ground in the old quarry provides an ideal fire refuge area.

No major deep drainage lines or deep flooding threats exist in this section.

At the three major stream crossings, Black Swamp (Bridge #11), Stockyard Creek (Bridge #13) and the major creek near Moes Road (Bridge #15) there are no associated risks of being trapped by floods as all weather road access ‘escape routes’ are available from either side of the bridges.

5.1.4 Trail pad surfaces on the ballasted railway roadbed

The ballasted roadbed of the old Urangan branchline is generally 3 m to 4 m wide, an ideal width for a regional recreation trail designed for multiple user groups.

The roadbed generally provides a well drained alignment and construction base for the proposed rail trail. Only in the section with a long cutting between the 13 km and 14 km marks (see Figure 10) was any significant drainage problem noted. In this location, water seeping from the cutting walls drains to the sides of the ballasted roadbed into a soggy depression and flows only slowly downhill to the southwest. The problem could be solved by clearing of the drains at the time of trail establishment.

Page 29 Rev 1 - November 2009

Except for the section between the 11 and 12 km marks (see Figure 9), the ballast used for the roadbed usually is a loose river gravel, sometimes mixed with slag fragments presumably from the Aldershot smelters. The unconsolidated nature of the river gravel ballast makes it unsuitable for forming the pad of the proposed recreation trail; mountain bike tyres sink into the surface, it is not easy to walk on, and the poorly sorted composition (with occasional large fragments) makes it unsuitable for horse use. Closer to Pialba, the local limestone from the small quarry near the old Urraween siding has been used in the ballast mix.

In some overgrown inland areas, and in some wetter coastal locations already leased by council, the loose river gravel and/or limestone has been bound by weedy vegetation or grass. Presently these sections can be ridden on but the surface will break up once wear and tear destroys the vegetation or grass cover.

To ensure that the proposed trail (i) appeals to the widest range of recreational users, and (ii) is erosion resistant and therefore, cheap and easy to maintain, the loose river gravel will need to be capped by a suitable material mix that will compact forming a stable surface with a load bearing capacity suited to use by the approved recreational users and occasional management vehicles. Experience with rail trails in other states, particularly in Victoria, has shown that the better the trail surface, the greater the numbers and, to some extent, the diversity of recreational participants.

The periodic intense rainfalls that characterise this sub-tropical region contrast with the lower intensities experienced in southern states. Accordingly, erosion of the trail surface is a much greater threat to on-going management costs, environmental impacts on adjacent areas and recreational rewards for the users. Again, experience has shown that the extra costs of installing an impervious surface, such as concrete or asphalt (including sprayed asphalt with or without a rounded fine gravel capping), is justified in terms of significantly lower maintenance costs in the long term.

This aspect of the trail planning will require professional engineering advice following input from the likely recreational user groups. This input should be obtained in a preliminary phase of consultation with the most likely user groups.

5.1.5 Treatment of level crossings

Based on observations during early 2008, one of the principal concerns for trail planning at level crossings is maintenance of existing drainage patterns or provision of alternatives with comparable capacity. Apart from this consideration, the treatment of level crossings for trail development will depend on the vision for the trail. There are a number of reasons that may make fencing of the trail land desirable such as use of grazing as a fire management practice or establishment of a revegetation program (for shade and/or aesthetics). In these circumstances, the boundaries will need to be fenced and the level crossing intersections provided with some suitable combination of gates and grids to exclude or retain stock (as appropriate) while allowing recreational users (walkers, bicycles and horses) as well as management vehicles easy access.

Typical combination options are: • Farm-type or grids (for easy bike passage and vehicle access) and gates (for horse use) • Light weight and narrow grids (for bike use only) and gates (for horse use and management vehicle access) • The use of ‘kissing gates’ for easy bicycle passage and adjacent conventional gates for horse use and management vehicle access).

All adjacent fencing and posts should be retained, particularly at level crossings. Specific mention should be made in the asset removal contract that fence posts and strainers constructed of railway line sections are not to be removed.

Page 30 Rev 1 - November 2009

6. RAILTRAIL SECTION - COLTON BRANCH FIRST LEVEL CROSSING TO CHURCHILL MINES ROAD (5.3 km)

Figure 8. The western section of the proposed rail trail (marked in yellow) between the level crossing nearest to the old Colton Junction and the Churchill Mines Road level crossing. Culverts mapped from old track plans are shown as blue dots. Bridge locations are marked by blue squares. Some old bridges have been replaced by culverts (see main text). The distances in kilometres shown along the trail (red dots) are taken from the original railway junction for ease of reference to infrastructure descriptions. The base map is from the Queensland Digital Cadastral Database.

Page 31 Rev 1 - November 2009

7. RAILTRAIL SECTION - CHURCHILL MINES ROAD TO TAKURA STATION (7.2 km)

Figure 9. The mid-western section of the proposed rail trail (marked in yellow) between the Churchill Mines Road level crossing and the old Takura station. Culverts mapped from old track plans are shown as blue dots. Bridge locations are marked by blue squares. Some bridges have been partly burnt (see main text). The distances in kilometres shown along the trail (red dots) are taken from the original railway junction for ease of reference to infrastructure descriptions. The base map is from the Queensland Digital Cadastral Database.

Page 32 Rev 1 - November 2009

8. RAILTRAIL SECTION - TAKURA TO NIKENBAH (6.3 km)

Figure 10. The section of the proposed rail trail (marked in yellow) from the old Takura station to the crossing of the Maryborough Hervey Bay Road near the old Nikenbah station. Culverts mapped on old track plans are shown as blue dots. Bridge locations are marked by blue squares. All bridges between Takura and the coast have been removed (see main text). The distances in kilometres shown along the trail (red dots) are taken from the original railway junction for ease of reference to infrastructure descriptions. This section is currently leased by the Fraser Coast Regional Council with a view to development as a recreation trail. The base map is from the Queensland Digital Cadastral Database.

Page 33 Rev 1 - November 2009

9. RAILTRAIL SECTION – NIKENBAH TO URRAWEEN ROAD NEAR MAIN STREET (4 km)

Figure 11. The coastal end of the proposed rail trail (marked in yellow) between the Maryborough to Hervey Bay Road (near old Nikenbah station) and the intersection of Urraween Road and Main Street. Culverts mapped on old track plans are shown as blue dots. Locations of the removed bridges are marked by blue squares. The distances in kilometres shown along the trail (red dots) are taken from the original railway junction for ease of reference to infrastructure descriptions. This section is currently leased by the Fraser Coast Regional Council with a view to development as a recreation trail. The green line adjacent to Main Street marks a current development proposal for a rail trail to Pialba that will link with the existing rail trail running to the Urangan Pier. The base map is from the Queensland Digital Cadastral Database.

Page 34 Rev 1 - November 2009

10. PREFERRED ROUTE OPTIONS AND DISTANCES

Table 6. The distances for the key trail sections together with the lengths of the preferred options and subtotals for key planning sections. Trail Section and Option Distance Preferred Sub- (Preferred option underlined) (km) option totals (km) (km)

Queens Park to A.J. Zemek Bridge Option A On Walker St 3.30 Option Bi Via part Walker St 3.46 Option Bii Via Croydon St 3.97 Option C 'Rails with trails' 4.33 4.33

A.J. Zemek Bridge Option D Existing footpath 0.54 Option E New rail crossing 0.45 0.45

A.J.Zemek Bridge to intersection of Quarry Rd & Bruce Hwy Option F Future option 3.30 Option G TAFE & Bruce Hwy 5.66 Option G TAFE Rd 5.30 Option H Kent St extended 2.80 Option I Railtrail 2.85 2.85 Option J Industrial Ave 1.76 Option K Quarry Rd 1.00 1.00 8.63

Quarry Rd intersection to Aldershot Park 3.38 3.38

Aldershot to Colton 3.43 3.43

Colton to first branchline level crossing 0.83 0.83 7.64

First level crossing to Churchill Mines Rd 5.30 5.30

Churchill Mines Rd to old Takura station 7.20 7.20

Old Takura station to Nikenbah (Chapel Rd) 7.89 7.89

Nikenbah (Chapel Rd) to Urraween Road 3.99 3.99 24.38 (near Main St intersection)

TOTAL 40.65

Page 35 Rev 1 - November 2009

11. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

In this project, the assistance of a number of members of the Fraser Coast BUG is gratefully acknowledged. In particular mention is made of the hospitality shown by BUG members to Andrew and Anne Graham during fieldwork visits. All photographs are by Andrew Graham unless otherwise captioned. High resolution versions of the photographs are available for future use in rail trail planning on application to the Fraser Coast BUG. Brock and Associates provided much appreciated support for the project by providing the printed copies for circulation to the Fraser Coast Regional Council.

The version of the Digital Cadastral Data Base used for preparation of property boundary maps in this report is a “not for profit” licenced copy current to about March 2005. These maps are based on or contain data provided by the Department of Natural Resources & Mines, Queensland (NR&M) [2005]. In consideration of NR&M permitting use of the data, we acknowledge and agree that NR&M gives no warranty in relation to the data (including accuracy, reliability, completeness or suitability) and accepts no liability (including without limitation, liability in negligence) for any loss, damage or costs (including consequential damage) relating to any use of the data.

12. REFERENCES

References consulted in the compilation of the history précis

http://www.frasercoast.qld.gov.au/council/documents/Hervey_Bay.pdf; 22.4.2009 http://www.herveybay.qld.gov.au/stayPlay/museum/museums.shtml; 22.4.2009 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aalborg; 22.4.2009 Christiansen, Joan (1991) They came…and stayed – A history of Hervey Bay. R. & J. McTaggart and Co., Pialba, Qld. Ellis, R.F. and Moore, S.K. (1979) The Pialba – Urangan Branch and the Maryborough Picnic Trains. Australian Railway Historical Society Bulletin June 1979 Kerr, John. (1994) Pialba Urangan Branch (4432). Edition 1994 March 17. (Notes provided to the rail trail project by his widow, Dr Ruth Kerr.) Matthews, Tony (1995) River of Dreams. A history of Maryborough and District. Vol. 2, Ch. 52 The Aldershot Smelting Works. pp. 514 -519. Maryborough City Council, Maryborough, Queensland.

General References

ARUP (2003) Maryborough City Council Recreational Walk and Cycle Network Plan Ellis, P.L. (1968) Geology of the Maryborough 1:250,000 Sheet Area. Report No. 26, Geological Survey of Queensland. Government Printer, Brisbane. Queensland Outdoor Recreation Federation (2006a) Active Trails. A Strategy for Regional Trails for SEQ. Queensland Outdoor Recreation Federation Inc., Brisbane. March 2006. 23pp. Queensland Outdoor Recreation Federation (2006b) Active Trails. A Regional Trails Strategy for SEQ. Project Report. Queensland Outdoor Recreation Federation Inc., Brisbane. March 2006. 153 pp. Queensland Outdoor Recreation Federation (2006c) Review of Recreation Participation and Demand Studies for Trail-based Recreation Activities: Technical Report No 1 to the SEQ Regional Trails Strategy. Queensland Outdoor Recreation Federation Inc., Brisbane. March 2006.

Page 36 Rev 1 - November 2009

Queensland Outdoor Recreation Federation (2006d) Inventory of Recreation Trails In and Around SEQ And A Summary of Trail Availability in SEQ: Technical Report No 2 to the SEQ Regional Trails Strategy. Queensland Outdoor Recreation Federation Inc., Brisbane. March 2006. Queensland Outdoor Recreation Federation (2006e) Development of a Strategic Trail Assessment Methodology: Technical Report No 3 to the SEQ Regional Trails Strategy. Queensland Outdoor Recreation Federation Inc., Brisbane. March 2006. Queensland Outdoor Recreation Federation (2006f) Review of Considerations Applicable to Recreational Trails Planning, Development and Management in SEQ: Technical Report No 4 to the SEQ Regional Trails Strategy. Queensland Outdoor Recreation Federation Inc., Brisbane. March 2006. Fraser Coast Regional Sport, Recreation and Open Space Strategy. - Tredwell Management Services 2006)

Page 37 Rev 1 - November 2009

Appendix A. Local and Interstate Examples of ‘Rails with Trails’

Page 38 Rev 1 - November 2009

Photograph A-1. A “Rails with Trails” example at Macalister station in Queens Park, Maryborough, on the rail line to Downer EDI Rail workshops.

Photograph A-2. Another section of the “Rails with Trails” example in Queens Park, Maryborough, on the rail line to the Downer EDI Rail workshops.

Page 39 Rev 1 - November 2009

Photograph A-3. A “Rails with Trails” example along the footpath of Lennox Street, Maryborough, on the rail line to Downer EDI Rail workshops.

Photograph A-4. A “Rails with Trails” example in Melbourne. The Upfield Bikeway runs along a shared pathway immediately adjacent to the Upfield metropolitan railway line. Note that the pathway is separated from the railway only by a discontinuous post and rail fence.

Page 40 Rev 1 - November 2009

Appendix B. Maryborough City ‘Rails with Trails’ Option

Page 41 Rev 1 - November 2009

Photograph B-1. The view west along the rail corridor from Ferry Street with the Tooley Street footbridge visible past the curve. The suggested trail location is on the LHS of the view (i.e. the southern side of the corridor).

Photograph B-2. The view west along the rail corridor from the Tooley Street footbridge to the Pallas Street bridge. The suggested trail location is on the LHS of the view (i.e. the southern side of the corridor).

Page 42 Rev 1 - November 2009

Photograph B-3. The view east along the rail corridor from the Pallas Street bridge back to the Tooley Street footbridge. The suggested trail location is on the RHS of the view (i.e. the southern side of the corridor).

Photograph B-4. The view west along the rail corridor under the Pallas Street bridge. There is room under the bridge for the suggested trail location on the LHS of the view (i.e. the southern side of the corridor).

Page 43 Rev 1 - November 2009

Photograph B-5. The view west along the rail corridor from the Pallas Street bridge. The suggested trail location is on the LHS of the view (i.e. the southern side of the corridor).

Photograph B-6. The view east along the rail corridor from the Rocky Street underpass. The suggested trail location is on the RHS of the view (i.e. the southern side of the corridor).

Page 44 Rev 1 - November 2009

Photograph B-7. The Rocky Street underpass viewed from the south side of the rail line. The features of the rail bridge, the roadside drain and the rail embankment present some challenges for trail planning and construction at this location.

Photograph B-8. The view east from the Morning Street rail foot crossing. The suggested trail alignment is on the RHS of the view (i.e. the southern side of the corridor).

Page 45 Rev 1 - November 2009

Photograph B-9. The Morning Street rail foot crossing. The suggested trail alignment is in the foreground of this view (i.e. the southern side of the corridor).

Photograph B-10. The view west from the Morning Street rail foot crossing towards the Russell Street bridge. The suggested trail alignment is on the LHS of this view (i.e. the southern side of the corridor).

Page 46 Rev 1 - November 2009

Photograph B-11. The view east from midway between the Morning Street rail foot crossing and the Russell Street bridge. The suggested trail alignment is on the RHS of this view (i.e. the southern side of the corridor).

Photograph B-12. The view west from midway between the Morning Street rail foot crossing and the Russell Street bridge in the mid-distance. The suggested trail alignment is on the LHS of this view (i.e. the southern side of the corridor).

Page 47 Rev 1 - November 2009

Photograph B-13. The view east from the Russell Street bridge. The suggested trail alignment is on the RHS of this view (i.e. the southern side of the corridor).

Photograph B-14. The access to/from the rail corridor along the eastern side of the Russell Street bridge on the southern side of the frail corridor. The sign warns of a buried water pipe under this access between the bridge abutment and the house fence.

Page 48 Rev 1 - November 2009

Photograph B-15. The view north from footpath from the Sunbury State School up to the Russell Street bridge. The suggested trail alignment from the rail corridor is on the RHS of the bridge. Note the unusual contra-flow bicycle lane that is clearly signed on the RHS of the roadway.

Page 49 Rev 1 - November 2009

Photograph B-16. The problems associated with the stairs on the Russell Street bridge and its bizarre ‘contra-flow’ cycle lane may be easily solved through the use of a bicycle tyre channel on the edge of the steps. This example is from the Logan area, south of Brisbane.

Page 50 Rev 1 - November 2009

Appendix C. A. J. Zemek Bridge Issues

Page 51 Rev 1 - November 2009

Photograph C-1. The view east along Walker Street from near the A. J. Zemek Bridge. The planned shared pathway would be on the northern side of the road (LHS in this view).

Photograph C-2. The view west along Walker Street at the A. J. Zemek Bridge. The planned shared pathway would have to cross to the southern side of the road before this location (LHS in this view).

Page 52 Rev 1 - November 2009

Photograph C-3. The A. J. Zemek Bridge showing the footpath located only on the southern side of the bridge (LHS in this view) and the limited space for developing an underpass in the span east of the rail line.

Photograph C-4. The track though local government land leading west off Walker Street to an informal crossing of the rail siding to the QR Baddow Infrastructure Depot.

Page 53 Rev 1 - November 2009

Photograph C-5. The existing informal crossing of the rail siding to the QR Baddow Infrastructure Depot just north of the A. J. Zemek Bridge on Walker Street. Photograph by D. McLeod.

Photograph C-6. The eastern side of the A. J. Zemek Bridge on Walker Street showing the location where the proposed recreation trail would rejoin the Walker Street footpath after crossing the rail siding on a ‘pedestrian and cycle use’ crossing.

Page 54 Rev 1 - November 2009

Appendix D. Maryborough City Options G, H, I, J and K

Page 55 Rev 1 - November 2009

Photograph D-1. Option G. The view north along Nagel Street from near the TAFE Campus. The fence along the showgrounds land is seen on the RHS of the view.

Photograph D-2. Option G. The view south along Nagel Street from near the TAFE Campus. The fence along the showgrounds land is seen on the LHS of the view.

Page 56 Rev 1 - November 2009

Photograph D-3. Option H. The view north from Walker Street towards the QR Baddow Infrastructure Depot. In this report, this side street off Walker Street is referred to as Kent Street Extended.

Photograph D-4. Option H. The view north past the QR Baddow Infrastructure Depot onto the unmaintained section of Kent Street Extended. The Maryborough Cemetery is on the LHS of the view.

Page 57 Rev 1 - November 2009

Photograph D-5. Option H. The view north of the QR Baddow Infrastructure Depot between the old railway line (RHS) and the forested land to the north of the Maryborough Cemetery (LHS). In this report, this side street is referred to as Kent Street Extended.

Photograph D-6. Option H. Somewhat south of Quarry Road on Kent Street Extended at a location well to the north of the QR Baddow Infrastructure Depot. Vegetation debris in the photograph was the result of a mini-tornado that hit this area in early 2008.

Page 58 Rev 1 - November 2009

Photograph D-7. Option H. Approaching Quarry Road on Kent Street Extended. Vegetation debris in the photograph was the result of a mini-tornado that hit this area in early 2008.

Photograph D-8. Option I. The Baddow Railtrail Option. A view looking southwards towards Baddow. The rails appear to have been lifted but the land remains in State ownership.

Page 59 Rev 1 - November 2009

Photograph D-9. Option I. The Baddow Railtrail Option. A view looking southwards along the State land (towards Baddow) from the constructed section of Quarry Road that likes to the east of the Neal Street intersection.

Photograph D-10. Option J. The industrial estate existing roads and future pathways option. Looking southwest towards the Bruce Highway from the intersection of Neil Road, Quarry Road and Industrial Avenue. This road services a small housing development along Neil Road.

Page 60 Rev 1 - November 2009

Photograph D-11. Option J. The industrial estate existing roads and future pathways option. Looking towards the Bruce Highway from the intersection of Production Street and Industrial Avenue. There are no footpaths constructed in the industrial estate.

Photograph D-12. Option J. The industrial estate existing roads and future pathways option. Looking towards the Bruce Highway across the bridge with the inset view showing the drainage line running north towards the Quarry Street alignment. There are no footpaths constructed on this recently made bridge.

Page 61 Rev 1 - November 2009

Photograph D-13. Option J. The industrial estate existing roads and future pathways option. There is a complex intersection on Industrial Avenue at the Bruce Highway with Enterprise Street running to the right.

Photograph D-14. Option J. The industrial estate existing roads and future pathways option. The view north along Enterprise Street just to the east of the Bruce Highway. The Bruce Highway Service Centre (pictured below) can be accessed from the northern end of this street.

Page 62 Rev 1 - November 2009

Photograph D-15. The Bruce Highway Service Centre offers a wide range of food services and facilities. It is a focal destination for recreation activity in the vicinity.

Page 63 Rev 1 - November 2009

Appendix E. Bruce Highway Alignment

Page 64 Rev 1 - November 2009

Photograph E-1. The view south along the Bruce Highway to the Quarry Road Service Centre that will be a key ‘attractor location’ for trail users. The trail planning issue at this location is finding a safe location to cross the highway.

Photograph E-2. The view north along the eastern side of the Bruce Highway at the Deadmans Creek bridge just north of the Quarry Road Service Centre. It is proposed that the planned shared pathway would cross the creek and pass under the highway at this location. This is necessary as the only possible placement for a pathway under the North Coast Rail Line overbridge (visible in the distance) is on the west side of the highway.

Page 65 Rev 1 - November 2009

Photograph E-3. A pathway constructed beneath a road bridge in the Currimundi Creek area, Sunshine Coast; an example of a trail underpass.

Photograph E-4. The Moreton Bay Cycleway passes under the Haughton Highway bridge at the southern end of the Redcliffe Peninsula.

Page 66 Rev 1 - November 2009

Photograph E-5. The Saltwater Creek bridge on the Bruce Highway at Aldershot on 14 February 2008 shortly after the roadway re-opened after flooding.

Photograph E-6. The northern end of the Saltwater Creek bridge is high enough for a recreation trail to pass below except at times of extreme flooding.

Page 67 Rev 1 - November 2009

Appendix F. Aldershot Township

Page 68 Rev 1 - November 2009

Photograph F-1. The view of the park in Aldershot adjacent to Murray Street. This area is proposed as the trailhead for horse riders ending their ride from Colton and beyond.

Photograph F-2. The view into the Aldershot park from the south-eastern access connecting to Shiplick Street.

Page 69 Rev 1 - November 2009

Photograph F-3. At the corner at the south end of Shiplick Street there is adequate room for a recreation trail or for on-road cycling and horse- riding.

Photograph F-4. The approach to the Aldershot level crossing looking from the southern end of Shiplick Street.

Page 70 Rev 1 - November 2009

Photograph F-5. The view east across the protected level crossing at Aldershot. The crossing is narrow but the setting requires vehicle to slow and exercise caution for the double turn from Shiplick Street into Bronze Street.

Photograph F-6. The view south down Bronze St looking back towards the Aldershot level crossing. The excavated drain adjacent to the railway fence precludes location of the trail anywhere other than on the eastern footpath or on the roadway.

Page 71 Rev 1 - November 2009

Photograph F-7. A surveyed road casement continues alongside the railway past the end of Bronze Street. The trail would have to cross the deep excavated drain that turns into Silver Street at this point. There is an informal gate through the fence across the unformed road (inset).

Page 72 Rev 1 - November 2009

Appendix G. Aldershot to Colton

Page 73 Rev 1 - November 2009

Photograph G-1. Looking north on the eastern side of the railway along the proposed recreation trail alignment on the surveyed but unconstructed road. The vegetation adjacent to the railway fence has been cleared in the past.

Photograph G-2. Again looking north on the eastern side of the railway but a little to the north of the previous photograph. This is a poorly drained area where a culvert under the railway concentrates surface water flows onto the proposed trail alignment.

Page 74 Rev 1 - November 2009

Photograph G-3. Detail of another railway culvert located further to the north from previous examples. The drainage problem extends onto the adjacent surveyed but unconstructed road proposed as the recreation trail.

Photograph G-4. Looking westwards towards the railway line along the fence line that marks a boundary of Perige Road, another surveyed but unconstructed road. There is no gate in the section of the fence across the surveyed road adjacent to the railway.

Page 75 Rev 1 - November 2009

Page 76 Rev 1 - November 2009

Photograph G-5. Just to the north of the ‘Perige Road’ fenceline (above) is another poorly drained area where water from a railway culvert (inset) concentrates surface flows on the eastern side of the railway.

Photograph G-6. Further north from the ‘Peridge Road’ fenceline the boundary of the railway fence is cleared. The vegetation is swampy wallum (note the characteristic Banksia tree on the RHS). Typical wallum soils are boggy when wet.

Page 77 Rev 1 - November 2009

Photograph G-7. Somewhat further to the north of the ‘Perige Road’ fenceline is yet another poorly drained area where water from a railway culvert (inset) concentrates surface flows on the eastern side of the railway.

Photograph G-8. Closer to the gate shown in a following photograph, the cleared fenceline along the boundary of the railway fence is cleared and some wallum species are re-establishing.

Page 78 Rev 1 - November 2009

Photograph G-9. On the 20 metre wide surveyed road casement there are opportunities to develop a horse trail separated from the walking and cycling trail, and away from the railway fenceline. However, as shown on the inset, the soils may present problems for stock use in wet weather.

Photograph G-10. The gate in the fence which is probably located on the southern boundary of the extensive area of Unallocated State Land that is located east of the railway line in the vicinity of the old Colton Junction station. The surveyed road continues along the railway north of the gate.

Page 79 Rev 1 - November 2009

Photograph G-11. North of the gate at southern boundary of the Unallocated State Land, the surveyed road casement continues beside the railway. It has been cleared and is regularly maintained by slashing.

Photograph G-12. To the south of old Colton Junction, drainage problems occur along extended sections of the surveyed road casement.

Page 80 Rev 1 - November 2009

Photograph G-13. As noted in Photograph G-9 above, there are further opportunities to develop a horse trail separated from the walking and cycling trail but within the surveyed road casement.

Photograph G-14. Closer to Old Colton Junction the surface of the surveyed road casement has been roughly graded but without provision of the adequate drainage required for wet weather use by either land managers or recreationists.

Page 81 Rev 1 - November 2009

Photograph G-15. From Aldershot to Colton, although the proposed recreation trail is neither in a true rail-trail nor a rails-with-trail format, it does have the great advantage of safe train-spotting and benefits from the open space of the railway alignment.

Photograph G-16. In the vicinity of old Colton Junction, there are extended sections of attractive wallum vegetation. Research findings show natural vegetation is the preferred setting for most trail-based recreational pursuits.

Page 82 Rev 1 - November 2009

Photograph G-17. A view to the north from just south of the locked level crossing at old Colton Junction. From Aldershot to Colton, the railway fence adjacent to the surveyed road is both well constructed and maintained, providing a safe recreational environment. Surface water can run along the graded surface as shown by the patterns of gravel wash.

Photograph G-18. Looking west across the locked level crossing at old Colton Junction. Note the stock grid fitted between the gate and the rails. It is considered most unlikely that this crossing would be opened, modified and fitting with automatic warnings just for recreational users. As a result, the route from Aldershot to Colton must be located on the eastern side of the railway.

Page 83 Rev 1 - November 2009

Appendix H. Colton to Branch-line First Level Crossing

Page 84 Rev 1 - November 2009

Photograph H-1. A view taken from a short distance from the North Coast Rail Line looking along the existing road running north-east from the locked Colton level crossing to the open level crossing on the old Pialba branch-line. The road is graded but not otherwise formed.

Photograph H-2. A view further along the existing road towards the open level crossing on the old Pialba branch-line. Typical wallum understorey vegetation can be seen on the eastern side of the road near where the surveyed road casement is located suggesting more swampy conditions in that area.

Page 85 Rev 1 - November 2009

Photograph H-3. Even closer to the open level crossing on the old Pialba branch-line, there is clear evidence of water flows along the road surface in the form of washed leaf accumulations and gravel wash.

Photograph H-4. A closer view from the above location showing leaf and gravel wash on the road surface indicating strong water flows during the 2007-8 wet season.

Page 86 Rev 1 - November 2009

Photograph H-5. On the western side of this old road, a few old fence posts indicate that the road has been in this position for a very long time.

Photograph H-6. During the 2007-8 wet season, the drain under the crossing grid of the old branch-line level crossing channelled strong water flows south towards and onto the road, as shown dramatically by the bent-over grass.

Page 87 Rev 1 - November 2009

Photograph H-7. The open level crossing on the old Pialba branch-line. The level crossing marks the boundary between railway land parcels and is an appropriate start point for the ‘true’ railtrail.

Photograph H-8. Looking east from the open level crossing along the route of the proposed railtrail to Pialba. By 2007 at least, the branch-line was no longer connected to the main railway system.

Page 88 Rev 1 - November 2009

Page 89 Rev 1 - November 2009

Appendix I. Bridges, Sites of Removed Bridges and Cattle Grids

Page 90 Rev 1 - November 2009

Photograph I-1. Bridge #2 (approximately 3.5 km from Colton). This intact bridge is in moderate condition with some termite attack evident in older timbers. Each of the three spans is about 6.1 m long. The piers are of wooden piles. The abutments are constructed of concrete slabs retained with rail sections.

Photograph I-2. Bridge #5 (approximately 6 km from Colton). This intact bridge is in moderate to good condition. Each of the six spans is about 6.1 m long. The piers are of wooden piles. The abutments are of cast

Page 91 Rev 1 - November 2009

concrete construction. At the far end, some rocks of the dry stone wall protective apron have been removed.

Photograph I-3. Bridge #6 (approximately 6.5 km from Colton). One span, a set of abutment piers and part of the central pier set have been burnt out. The remaining unburnt timbers are in good condition. Each of the two spans is 6.1 m long. The abutments are constructed of concrete slabs retained with rail sections.

Page 92 Rev 1 - November 2009

Photograph I-4. Bridge #7 (approximately 8.3 km from Colton) viewed from the Urangan end. The timbers vary in condition. Each of the fifteen spans is 6.1 m long. Most of the piers are cast concrete. The abutments (not shown) are of cast concrete construction.

Photograph I-5. Bridge #8 (near 9.1 km). This intact bridge is in moderate to good condition. Each of the four spans is 6.1 m long with wood pile piers. The abutments are of cast concrete construction with stone protective side aprons.

Page 93 Rev 1 - November 2009

Photograph I-6. Bridge #9 (approximately 9.3 km from Colton). Several spans and part of a central wooden pier set have been burnt out. The remaining unburnt timbers are generally in good condition. Each of the original seven spans is 6.1 m long. Most piers and the abutments are of cast concrete construction.

Photograph I-7. Bridge #11 (approximately 13.4 km from Colton) on Black Swamp. All timber components have been removed. Originally there were ten 6.1 m spans. Eight cast concrete piers and the concrete slab abutments remain. Debris levels indicate that the tops of the piers were not submerged in the February 2008 floods.

Page 94 Rev 1 - November 2009

Photograph I-8. Site of Bridge #13 (approximately 14.9 km from Colton) on Stockyard Creek. All cast concrete plinths are submerged (see next photograph). Debris levels indicate that the flood level peak was higher than this in February 2008 when the deepest water in the creek channel would have been in excess of 2 m. The original height of the bridge can be gauged from the railway embankment on the far side of the creek.

Photograph I-9. Site of Bridge #13 (approximately 14.9 km from Colton) on Stockyard Creek. The water level was about 1 m higher than this at flood peak in February 2008. Most of the very substantial cast concrete

Page 95 Rev 1 - November 2009

plinths are submerged. The arrow indicates the location of the far end of the next plinth that is just submerged.

Photograph I-10. Site of Bridge #14 (approximately 15.5 km from Colton). All timber bridge components have been removed. The abutments are of typical concrete slab and retainer rail construction. Originally there was a single 5.5 m span with wooden girders and piers.

Page 96 Rev 1 - November 2009

Photograph I-11. Site of Bridge # 15 (approximately 16.2 km from Colton). The cast concrete piers and abutments remain. At the time of this photograph the water level was 1.35 m below the tops of the piers. Debris levels indicate that the tops of the piers were not submerged during the February 2008 floods.

Photograph I-12. Site of Bridge # 16 (approximately 19.2 km from Colton). Before removal this was a single 9.144 m span steel girder bridge. The cast concrete abutments, obscured by plant growth, remain on either side of a weed-covered water pool.

Page 97 Rev 1 - November 2009

Photograph I-13. A section of the eastern abutment of Bridge # 16 (approximately 19.2 km from Colton). The cast concrete abutments are in good condition.

Photograph I-14. The western abutment of the cattle grid and drain on the eastern side of Chapel Road at Nikenbah. The cast concrete abutments are in good condition. The 3.7 m (12 feet) wide cattle grid span was 2.8 m (9 feet 3 inches) placed on a 0.3 m (1 foot) abutment ledge. This drain carries high volumes of water after moderate to heavy rainfall.

Page 98 Rev 1 - November 2009

Appendix J. Bridges for Recreation Trails

Page 99 Rev 1 - November 2009

Gympie Gold Museum Bridge This wooden trestle bridge was specially built to give internal access at the historical museum in Gympie. It is a standard trestle construction with treated wooden piers, corbels, girders and decking. The pier sets are at 6.1 m (20 foot) spacings (as on most of the longer bridges on the old Pialba branchline). The diameter of the piers is 0.25 m (10 inches). The maximum decking height is about 6 m. The design and railing support system would be applicable for replacing or adapting old Queensland Rail timber bridges.

Photograph J-1. Recreational bridge example. Gympie Gold Museum.

Photograph J-2. Recreational bridge example. Gympie Gold Museum.

Page 100 Rev 1 - November 2009

Photograph J-3. Recreational bridge example. Gympie Gold Museum.

Photograph J-4. Recreational bridge example. Gympie Gold Museum.

Page 101 Rev 1 - November 2009

Photograph J-5. Recreational bridge example. Gympie Gold Museum.

Photograph J-6. Recreational bridge example. Gympie Gold Museum.

Page 102 Rev 1 - November 2009

Powelltown (Victoria) This simple walking track bridge is 6.1 m (20 feet) long. It would be a satisfactory replacement design for removed or burnt bridge spans for pedestrian and cycling use (cyclists dismounted, with give way rules).

Photograph J-7. Recreational bridge example. Powelltown, Victoria.

Photograph J-8. Recreational bridge example. Powelltown, Victoria.

Page 103 Rev 1 - November 2009

Warragul (Victoria) The cast concrete span of this urban shared pathway bridge is approximately 9 m (near 30 feet) long.

Photograph J-9. Recreational bridge example. Warragul, Victoria

Photograph J-10. Recreational bridge example. Warragul, Victoria.

Page 104 Rev 1 - November 2009

Photograph J-11. In Gippsland, Victoria, the Noojie Trestle is an old railway bridge modified for recreation use. As was standard Victorian Railways practice, the solid timber decking is 4.55 m (15 feet) wide. In contrast, Queensland railway bridge sleepers are only 2.3 m (7 feet 6 inches) wide.

Photograph J-12. Expanded metal mesh is a potential surface for recreational use of old railway bridges. This example short span example is from a National Park in the Otway Ranges, Victoria.

Page 105 Rev 1 - November 2009

Photograph J-13. A general view of the low-level bypass of the old Stoney Creek Trestle on the East Gippsland Railtrail.

Photograph J-14. At the old Stoney Creek Trestle on the East Gippsland Railtrail, the low-level bypass has a concrete surface on the inclined sections.

Page 106 Rev 1 - November 2009

Photograph J-15. Detail of the expanded plastic mesh used to hold wet concrete on the inclined sections of the old Stoney Creek Trestle on the East Gippsland Railtrail.

Photograph J-16. A Brisbane City Council recreation bridge specifically designed for horse riders at Pullenvale. The sign states that “horse riders must dismount to cross bridge”.

Page 107