Transport Planning

<html><body>
<p>...so says the first problem on the North East Link's <a href="https://northeastlink.vic.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0009/308169/NEL-Business-Case-Appendix-A.pdf">investment logic map</a>.</p>

<p>According to the business case documents released for the North East Link over the weekend, each problem outlined has a weighting with the lack of orbital connectivity scoring 40%; the other two problems, inefficient freight movements between north &amp; south-east and congestion and heavy vehicles on local roads, are weighted at 35% and 25% respectively.</p>

<p>The investment logic continues - economic growth and increase economic opportunity for households in the north-east are listed as two benefits that are shared between two problems.  The stated strategic response is to increase the capacity of the transport network which in turn flows through to a 'provide additional infrastructure' action.</p>

<p>At the end of the logic chain 'construct a new motorway link, upgrade existing arterial roads and motorways, upgrade pedestrian and cycling links and PT improvements' are all listed as assets (outcomes).</p>

<p>The North East Link will bridge the gap between the Eastern Freeway and Metropolitan Ring Road ('construct new motorway link'), add more lanes to the Eastern Freeway between the link &amp; Springvale Road ('upgrade existing arterial roads and motorways'), create more pedestrians and cycling links and will introduce a new busway for Doncaster ('PT Improvements').</p>

<figure><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public//pictures/article-images/nelink_bus_case_investment_logic_map.png" rel="gallery-all" title="Investment logic map from the North East Link business case"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="621" src="/sites/urban.melbourne/files//styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/nelink_bus_case_investment_logic_map.png?itok=Z9peODGv" title="Investment logic map from the North East Link business case" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>Investment logic map from the North East Link business case</figcaption></figure><p>In the <a href="https://northeastlink.vic.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/308172/NEL-Business-Case-Appendix-D.pdf">options assessment</a>, we come across a phrase that doesn't get a run all that often, "while Melbourne has strong radial connections that support access to the central city, other trips are not as well-served by the transport network".</p>

<p>It goes on to describe the lack of transport network connectivity between the north and eastern/south-eastern regions of Melbourne only through the lens of mega-road projects when it could just as easily apply to the lack of orbital connectivity on the Public Transport network or the complete lack of action on the port rail shuttles programme.</p>

<p>"The north east’s location between two urban growth corridors and between the major cross-city connections of the M80 and the Eastern Freeway – along with the lack of a freeway-standard orbital connection in this part of the city – means that the region’s arterial road network is used for freight and commuter trips across Melbourne."</p>

<p>The business case finds the North East Link will 'give workers in Melbourne's north-east access to 56,000 new job opportunities and deliver $12.5 billion in Gross State Product to our economy'.  It's a pity the state government hasn't looked at this kind of study for orbital rail lines, especially through the eastern arc from Heidelberg to Monash via Doncaster and Box Hill.</p>

<figure><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public//pictures/article-images/nelink_bus_case_job_density.png" rel="gallery-all" title="Job clusters in metropolitan Melbourne, map from the North East Link business case"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="438" src="/sites/urban.melbourne/files//styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/nelink_bus_case_job_density.png?itok=CfesP-6m" title="Job clusters in metropolitan Melbourne, map from the North East Link business case" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>Job clusters in metropolitan Melbourne, map from the North East Link business case</figcaption></figure><p>In a nod to the previous East-West Link argument that Melbourne needed alternative cross-town road connection, the North East Link's business case acknowledges the three broad types of trips that use the existing M1 (Monash/West Gate/Citylink) corridor: radial trips from the east and west, trips from the south-east to the airport and trips from the south-east to the Hume Freeway/interstate journeys.</p>

<p>The North East Link would increasingly cater for the south-east to airport and interstate journeys when built, the business case says.</p>

<p>The Andrews Government are running with the North East Link all the way to the state election in November, as the likelihood of another community backlash on the same scale as the one prior to the last state election on the East-West Link is unlikely to eventuate, the only way this project would not proceed looks set to be determined by voters on November 24th.</p>

<p>Despite <a href="https://www.urban.com.au/news/property-council-weighs-into-urban-debate-with-its-great-cities-research-project">more voices</a> calling for the Australian government to change their wayward city and infrastructure development ways, the logic, and furthermore in the context of our road building extravaganza of the past five decades, of completing the ring road makes sense.  Leaving something unfinished - an entire orbital road network for instance - would hang around a political party's neck like a noose for a very long time.</p>

<p>There's no doubt there'll be a significant uplift in transport network capacity, journey times shortening, auto-centric businesses will flourish with the opening of the North East Link.  But it will be temporary - we know that will be case based on our own experiences of freeway upgrades and we know it will be the case because of ongoing high population growth.   </p>

<p>It's one thing to complete a road network for the easy distribution of freight and cars by road to and from the north and south-east, but when our city's set to grow by another 3 million people over the coming decades, there comes a point where we have to say, like many other cities with greater populations than us, enough of the business-as-usual way of doing things.</p>

<p>If orbital connectivity is worth so much to the potential of the Victorian economy, presumably because so much of the state's economic activity is located within metropolitan Melbourne, then it stands to reason we can't just only have road connectivity, but orbital rail connectivity as well.</p>
</body></html>

Alastair Taylor

'Melbourne's poor orbital connectivity is constraining the economic potential of Victoria'

<html><body>
<p>It seems that no matter which party is in government on Spring Street there's always one eye on the long-term development of central Melbourne. After an intense two days of East-West Link and Melbourne Metro news, it was the Planning Minister's turn to be in the spotlight on Friday.</p>

<p>The Fishermans Bend Urban Renewal Area has been expanded to include the area situated north of the West Gate freeway between both the West Gate and Bolte bridges, bumping the total amount of land located in the area to 455 hectares, up from 250 hectares.</p>

<p>As the new government is about to embark on a new round of engagement activities for a revised Fishermans Bend Urban Renewal Plan, it's time to go over transport initiatives that adorned previous plans and start a conversation about elevating transport to the same level as local resident group's have raised height limits, schools and community facilities as planning downfalls.</p>

<h2>The short-lived heavy rail legacy</h2>

<p>Back in July 2014 the Planning Minister at the time approved the <a href="https://www.urban.com.au/news/fishermans-bend-strategic-framework-plan-released">Fishermans Bend Strategic Framework Plan</a> and the documents depicted a "rail investigation area" which matched up with the Napthine government's Melbourne Rail Link project. Now that the Andrews government has selected Swanston Street as its preferred route to increase heavy rail capacity through the inner city, it - technically - leaves Fishermans Bend in limbo.</p>

<p>When Denis Napthine assumed the Premiership Public Transport Victoria released its long-term train network plan. At this point the Melbourne Metro Rail Tunnel project, a product of the Brumby Government, still featured heavily in the plans and the Andrews Government appears to have retrieved the Brumby-era plans from the archives.</p>

<p>However keen observers will have noticed a second cross-city tunnel running from Clifton Hill to Fishermans Bend was present at later stages of the network's projected development.</p>

<figure><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/schematic_stage_4_0.png" rel="gallery-all" title="Melbourne's heavy rail network plan from March 2013"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="426" src="/sites/urban.melbourne/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/schematic_stage_4_0.png?itok=vXS32HuW" title="Melbourne's heavy rail network plan from March 2013" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>Melbourne's heavy rail network plan from March 2013. <a href="/forum/ptvs-network-development-plan-for-metropolitan-rail">See all maps</a> in the forum.</figcaption></figure><p>Cast your mind back to the early days of the Ballieu/Napthine government: they were conducting studies into extending the rail network to Rowville, Doncaster, Melbourne Airport and Avalon Airport. This second cross-city tunnel looks to be drawn on the map because with the introduction of a future Doncaster line, something from the existing Clifton Hill group - South Morang and Hurstbridge lines - needed to move to make space for Doncaster services.</p>

<p>The <a href="http://ptv.vic.gov.au/assets/PDFs/projects/Doncaster-rail-study-Final-recommendations-report-PTVs-response.pdf">final recommendations</a> from the Doncaster study were that a new branch line from Victoria Park was to cost between $3 and $5 billion and the preferred terminus would have been at the Doncaster park-and-ride, well short of Doncaster Hill where the community expressed a desire to have the line end. The Doncaster line has since, in one sense, been buried.</p>

<p>The focus of this piece is not Doncaster, but it's relevant to keep it in the back of your mind.</p>

<h2>Fishermans Bend, a new town: a fresh look at rail technology</h2>

<p>If the numbers flung about are to be believed (and I believe they're conservative given the long timeframe they're attached to) - that Fishermans Bend will house 80,000 residents and be the workplace for 40,000 new employees by 2050 - then thinking needs to be bigger than trams and likewise needs to be less city-centric and more inclusive of the west.</p>

<p>Now that Fishermans Bend has doubled in size with a fifth precinct that according to the MPA's <a href="http://www.mpa.vic.gov.au/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/FBURA-Recast-Fact-Sheet-April-2015.pdf">fact sheet</a> will be focused on attracting new jobs at commercial/industrial premises and include all the remaining land excluding the Port of Melbourne then the strategic transport direction for Fishermans Bend must step up a notch.</p>

<p>Previous plans have placed 'potential' stations in Fishermans Bend along an East-West axis (excluding the Napthine Government's proposal) and the stations have been located along Plummer Street - an artery that has also had tram routes proposed. The West Gate Freeway now sits right in the middle of the entire renewal area and by the same token the focus for mass transit should also be right through the centre of Fishermans Bend.</p>

<p>Sydney is pushing ahead with a new fully automated mass-transit link through its north-western 'burbs and plans are afoot to extend it to provide the harbour city with a second north-south rail crossing through North Sydney, the CBD and out to south west where an existing rail line would be converted to work with the new mass-transit technology.</p>

<p>Last year the NSW Government announced they had awarded a contract to Alstom to provide its <a href="http://www.alstom.com/products-services/product-catalogue/rail-systems/trains/products/metropolis/">Metropolis solution</a> for the line that will also run through the converted Chatswood-Epping rail link. Alstom <a href="http://www.alstom.com/Global/Transport/Resources/Documents/brochure2014/METROPOLIS%20-%20Product%20sheet%20-%20EN%20-%20LD.pdf?epslanguage=en-GB">say the Metropolis system</a> is a "turnkey system approach that includes signaling, electrification, trackworks as well as maintenance services".</p>

<p>The NSW Government has lead the pack and decided to depart from developing new lines to be compatible with existing rolling stock and infrastructure and instead develop new rail lines to serve a specific purpose.</p>

<p>Back in 2013, I wrote <a href="https://www.urban.com.au/news/vancouvers-skytrain-network-a-model-for-melbournes-future-rail-lines">Vancouver's Skytrain Network - a model for Melbourne's future rail lines</a> and the braindump below revolves around utilsing a system such as the one being implemented in Sydney or Vancouver for Fishermans Bend - and beyond.</p>

<h3>The aim</h3>

<ul>
<li>Enable fast and efficient journeys to be made into and out of the Fishermans Bend Urban Renewal Area from an easterly/city and westerly direction as well as include maximum connectivity to existing mass transit lines.</li>
	<li>Lower the cost to acquire any land required for a mass-transit line through Fishermans Bend by locking down a route and station locations as part of strategic planning process before too much property changes hands.</li>
	<li>Conduct a full frontal assault on West Gate Freeway and Bridge traffic volumes by providing a high-quality alternative to driving from residential areas in the inner west / south west to more centrally located employment areas.</li>
	<li>Begin the journey and set the city-wide precedent of building new forms of mass transit for Melbourne that are more frequent, adaptable, reliable and cheaper to run than traditional heavy rail services.</li>
</ul>
<h3>The idea</h3>

<p>26 kilometres of rapid transit encompassing a new 10 kilometre line from the CBD to Newport, split roughly 4 kilometres underground from Swanston Street to the West Gate Freeway / Bolte Bridge interchange and 6 kilometres elevated - including a new lower Yarra bridge - from the interchange to Newport. The other 16 kilometres would come from the conversion of both the Newport-Williamstown branch and the existing Newport-Altona-Laverton loop.</p>

<p>At the CBD end, the tunnel would begin at the CBD South/Flinders Street station to be built as part of Melbourne Metro Rail Project under Collins Street, then run under the Yarra and loosely along the West Gate Freeway corridor to the Bolte Interchange. Utilising the large tract of land that already exists at the interchange, the line would transition to elevated structure along the West Gate Freeway corridor where after Todd road the line would then rise to a height of 58-60metres above the Yarra (same height as the West Gate Bridge) then descend along Burleigh Street in Newport and turn south to run above the existing rail corridor into Newport station.</p>

<p>Underground stations would include: CBD South/Flinders Street (under Collins Street and connectivity with the subterranean superstructure to be built as part of the Melbourne Metro Rail Project would be provided), Southern Cross, Sandridge-Lorimer (south of the West Gate Freeway on Ingles Street). Elevated train stations would include: Wirraway (at West Gate Freeway/Salmon Street), to the immediate west of Todd Road and at Newport.</p>

<p>The Williamstown and Altona lines would see existing stations re-used and expanded where required - for instance at Seaholme a second platform would need to be built - or rebuilt where a grade separation necessitates it. Grade to elevated structures would be built to the south of Newport and a dedicated set of track would be built alongside the existing rail corridor between Newport and the Altona junction. A new station at Altona North (at Maddox Road - grade separated) would be built for the rapid transit line to service the employment precinct to the south and residential areas to the north.</p>

<p>Operations, depot and maintenance facilities would be based at Newport workshops and services would connect at Aircraft/Laverton, Newport, Southern Cross and CBD South/Flinders Street ensuring entire rail network connectivity.</p>

<p><iframe frameborder="0" height="480" scrolling="no" src="https://www.google.com/maps/d/embed?mid=zNF8lPbNaAaM.kOTLXjLN6xmw&amp;ll=-37.8284973,144.92428064&amp;z=13" width="100%"></iframe></p>

<p><span style="font-size:10px;"><a href="https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer?mid=zNF8lPbNaAaM.kOTLXjLN6xmw&amp;ll=-37.8284973,144.92428064&amp;z=13">View larger map</a></span></p>

<h3>The services</h3>

<p>With Newport and CBD South/Flinders Street housing three platforms, three distinct services are made possible: City-Williamstown, City-Altona-Laverton and City-Newport. The third platform at CBD South/Flinders Street and Newport would allow the operations centre to add and remove service frequency through what's likely to be most heavily used part of the line as demand increases and decreases throughout the day and on special occasions.</p>

<p>Instead of the three different types of service currently running off the two lines south of Newport, it would be simplified by removing existing Werribee services from the Altona loop permanently; existing Williamstown shuttles and Altona shuttles would disappear and Werribee trains would run all stations between Footscray and Newport then use the express route to Laverton and then stop all stations to the end of the line.</p>

<h3>The cost</h3>

<p>I deliberately mentioned the North West Rail Link earlier as the project above would be a total solution just like the NWRL. I used it as a base for estimating costs <a href="https://www.urban.com.au/news/the-alamein-line-time-for-a-new-purpose">earlier this year</a> and came up with a $360 million per kilometre cost for the entire package (23 kilometres of new rail line and a total pricetag of $8.3billion).</p>

<p>If we isolate the new track from Newport to the CBD from the existing line conversions - which reducing the project's scope to be just Newport to the CBD is well within the realm of possibility, 4 kilometres of tunnel and 6 kilometres of elevated track (including a bridge) would be $3.6billion.</p>

<p>There are eight existing level crossings along the route from Newport to Laverton via Altona - three of which are adjacent to two stations (Westona and Altona) and there are two existing level-crossings on the Williamstown branch, one of which is adjacent to a station (North Williamstown).</p>

<p>Owing to its length (12.5km), on paper, Altona would be more expensive to convert than the Williamstown branch yet its the added number of grade separations as well as two existing stations that need to be rebuilt (on top of a new station and extra platforms required at Aircraft/Laverton) that would send the cost-per-kilometre sky high.</p>

<p>Williamstown's shorter length (3.5 km) and less grade separations (one of which could arguably just close entirely - Giffard Street) and station rebuilds required would make its cost-per-kilometre far less and thus a prime candidate for conversion if a phase approach were taken. If I were to take a guess, Altona would be somewhere between $150 and $200 million per kilometre, and Williamstown somewhere south of $150 million per kilometre.</p>

<h3>The odds and ends</h3>

<p>The logical conclusion is that this new rapid transit line would extend east from the CBD but I reiterate that's not the focus today. The primary focus is ensuring that the revised Fishermans Bend Strategic plan includes far more than just "possible future station locations".</p>

<p>Fishermans Bend is what many ancient cities did in the Georgian era: we're creating our New Town. And if the rhetoric about 'forests of towers' and 'more community-focused' doesn't disappear into the ether and these appeals to the base by the new government actually come to fruition, the revised Fisherman Bend plan will be more prescriptive than what we're used to.</p>

<p>Mass-transit in a new, dense, grander and enlarged central city has every right and must be in the plan that guides the development of Fishermans Bend over the coming decades.</p>

<h2>Footnote: water transport shouldn't be overlooked either</h2>

<figure><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/bris_city_cat_flotilla.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="The Brisbane River with a flotilla of Citycat ferries. Image: Wikipedia"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="373" src="/sites/urban.melbourne/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/bris_city_cat_flotilla.jpg?itok=ONTcvdAX" title="The Brisbane River with a flotilla of Citycat ferries. Image: Wikipedia" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>The Brisbane River with a flotilla of Citycat ferries. Image: <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:CityCat_and_City_Ferry_flotilla_returns_to_the_river_14_February_(5728364964).jpg">Wikipedia</a></figcaption></figure><p>It's not exactly mass-transit but as the entire arm of Fishermans Bend is opened up and depending on the strategic direction of the new employment precinct, water transport should likewise feature in any new revised strategic plan.</p>

<p>We can only assume the addition of the employment precinct in Fishermans Bend will mean that some of the industrial and advanced manufacturing facilities presently located in the precinct will remain while other sites - like General Motors Holden's facility - will be cleared, cleaned up and redeveloped.</p>

<p>The new employment precinct will be located in the City of Melbourne and I'm willing to wager the urban designers at council will no doubt want to get stuck in to the entire waterfront area. More intensive land-uses on the water's edge will naturally be conducive to new maritime transport services.</p>

<p>Perhaps taking a leaf out of Brisbane's book at its <a href="http://www.brisbane.qld.gov.au/traffic-transport/public-transport/citycat-ferry-services">Citycat services</a> should be on the cards?</p>
</body></html>

Fishermans Bend transport: fast, frequent and automated

<html><body>
<p>On Monday night, Engineers Australia held their annual <a href="http://www.engineersaustralia.org.au/events/transport-year-review">Transport: year in review</a> event at the Park Hyatt which included four panelists in front of a 100+ strong audience. Commentary was broad-based and thoroughly interesting if politics and city building piques your interest.</p>

<p>The panelists included The Age Transport reporter <a href="https://twitter.com/adamlcarey">Adam Carey</a>, Grattan Institute CEO <a href="http://grattan.edu.au/people/bio/john-daley/">John Daley</a>, Member of the Ministerial Advisory Committee for Plan Melbourne Professor <a href="http://sydney.edu.au/business/staff/johnsta">John Stanley</a> and CEO of the Committee for Melbourne <a href="https://twitter.com/committee4melb">Kate Roffey</a>.</p>

<p>Each of the panelists provided a wide range of views starting with Adam Carey giving his perspective on the way Transport policy played out both at the start of the year and during the election campaign.</p>

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-cards="hidden" lang="en">
<p>On <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/ewlink?src=hash">#ewlink</a>: 'nobody in our community can explain why <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/ewlink?src=hash">#ewlink</a> is a good project' - John Daley <a href="https://twitter.com/GrattanInst">@GrattanInst</a> <a href="http://t.co/laLl16Ivjr">pic.twitter.com/laLl16Ivjr</a></p>
— Urban.com.au (@UrbanMelbourne) <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://twitter.com/UrbanMelbourne/status/541856978708873216">December 8, 2014</a>
</blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script><p>John Daley's focus on transparency and governance is best characterised when he lamented "We are in a world where there is no transparency in the way [transport] projects are selected". The audience liked John's quip when he labelled the elephant-in-the-room 'East-West-East link' project as well.</p>

<p>Kate Roffey focused on many issues but one which stuck out was the poignant reminder that in the not too distant future the new government will be dealing with the winding down of the automotive manufacturing sector. Kate Roffey also argued that many of the Public Private Partnership (PPP) projects such as the Pakenham/Cranbourne corridor project should be prioritised as it predominantly involved private capital and that it will go a long way to offsetting the impending job pain.</p>

<p>John Stanley brought a planning angle to the discussion and painted a picture when he highlighted the contrast in thinking at a State and Provincial level in Victoria and Canadian provinces of Ontario and British Columbia.</p>

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en">
<p>John Stanley - 'I asked Ontario and BC reps what major road projects are underway, they looked at me like I was from a different planet'</p>
— Urban.com.au (@UrbanMelbourne) <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://twitter.com/UrbanMelbourne/status/541861110404501504">December 8, 2014</a>
</blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script><p>Similarly John Stanley opined that Melbourne should slow its growth on the fringe and the heavy lifting for transport projects over the longer term should focus on connecting new residential development in the middle ring, where most of the metropolitan area's jobs are located.</p>

<h2>Q&amp;A Session</h2>

<p>Post presentations, the Q&amp;A session took on a more free-flowing discussion with many of the overarching themes revolving around:</p>

<ul>
<li>Will the new Infrastructure Victoria agency have teeth? To what extent will local government have a role in both Infrastructure Victoria and the Metropolitan Planning Authority?</li>
	<li>Bi-partisan approach to transport policy and prioritisation is resulting in a sense in the community that nothing is being done to attack congestion, with the contrast being made with Sydney where a panelist believed the opposite were true.</li>
	<li>William McDougall, sitting in the audience (who previously presented at our <a href="https://urbanmelbourne.info/transport/2014/02/01/gmug-2013-william-mcdougall-on-future-transport-trends-for-cities">2013 Melbourne Knowledge Week event</a>), queried the panel on whether they believed the current models used to assess the public net worth of a project were adequate.
	<ul>
<li>One answer highlighted by Kate Roffey was the approach that UK cities are taking, in particular the Greater Manchester region. A summary of this approach can be seen in a <a href="http://www.kpmg.com/AU/en/IssuesAndInsights/ArticlesPublications/Documents/uk-city-deal-economic-growth-productivity.pdf">recent publication</a> by KPMG and the Property Council of Australia.</li>
	</ul>
</li>
	<li>The middle ring of Melbourne needs to have far more focus on connectivity, with arterial road expansion in conjunction with accelerated introduction of more smart bus and local bus routes.</li>
	<li>Each panelist was asked to comment on "what should the new government have done or set in motion by January 1 2015". Their responses varied however an ever present theme amongst them: setting <em>real</em> expectations on the transport policies taken to the recent election.</li>
</ul>
<h2>Comment</h2>

<p>Transport policy and projects did play a large role in media coverage during the year and in particular in the lead up to and during the election campaign as Kate Roffey pointed to in her opening remarks. Can voter's minds be further expanded to include land-use and how it affects them on top of the standard kitchen table policy areas of jobs, health and education?</p>

<p>I'd argue in no uncertain terms that the way we house ourselves and the way we transport ourselves - the fundamental way we use the land we inhabit - to and from school, work and leisure (remember: living isn't all about working!) should be the top issue with health and education playing a secondary yet complimentary role.</p>

<p>Transport for so many across Melbourne is about being forced into utilising private vehicles traveling to, from and within auto-centric suburbia which leaves these people at higher risk of vulnerability to external factors such as fuel price spikes. The lazy politicians in both the Liberal/Labor parties and in the road lobbies will bleat on about the need for a "balanced" approach to transport policy and expenditure but this just flies in the face of reality.</p>

<p>Sustainable and public transport use has increased in terms of mode share over recent years but continuing high population growth means that already over-used private transport is still growing and contributing to increasing congestion in the mode of transport that most Melburnians are locked in to. It's a vicious circle.</p>

<p>Perhaps when prosecuting the case for prioritising public transport over private transport investment - especially to the centre-right of the political spectrum as they appear to be struggling just that little bit more than the centre-left - the argument should be framed around some of the core Liberal values of individual choice and competition.</p>

<p>Individuals (and families) for the most part have limited choice in the way they spend their transport dollars and this lack of competition deprives the individual from pursuing the maximum amount of job and lifestyle opportunities compared to those living in competition-rich areas.</p>

<p>Is it not a quasi neo-liberal/conservative philosophy to maintain and ensure the individual (and family unit) has as much access to opportunities as possible for their own life pursuits?</p>

<p>Sitting in worsening traffic, bereft politicians talking of 'balancing transport priorities' and in reality applying expensive band-aid status quo solutions (more commuter Freeways) without attacking the core problem - that there's simply too many people required to use cars in the first place - is unproductive, lazy and likely to further fracture society by locking away opportunities.</p>

<p>Further reading: <a href="https://theconversation.com/lonely-over-christmas-a-snapshot-of-social-isolation-in-the-suburbs-34810">Lonely over Christmas: a snapshot of social isolation in the suburbs</a>.</p>

<p><em>Lead image courtesy Norman Bear.</em></p>
</body></html>

Highlights from Engineers Australia transport year in review

<html><body>
<div>
	At present the Australian GST is levied at 10% on the majority of goods and services produced in Australia which are then on sold to Australian individuals and businesses.  The money raised by the GST is then put through a process called <a href="http://www.gstdistributionreview.gov.au/content/Content.aspx?doc=reports/interimmarch2012/Chapter1.htm" target="_blank">Horizontal Fiscal Equilisation</a> where the Federal government then allocates each state and territory an amount based on the HFE formula.  </div>
<div>
	 </div>
<div>
	Given the primary income for State/Territory Governments is GST and the basic consumer and business processes already exist, adapting the GST could be argued as one of the most prudent ways for Governments to raise more revenue to pay for transport infrastructure expansion or interest bills on debt used to build new infrastructure.  As GST is linked to consumption, the more money spent in the economy, the more money raised.</div>
<div>
	 </div>
<div>
	Cities are the engine rooms of any economy - it's where the overwhelming majority of us choose to live and work.  Living near to centres of employment, social and retail hubs offers up choice - and the great enabler of this choice is transport.  Without efficient transport modes providing greater capacity we're unable to get to where we need to go in order to work, go shopping or conduct our lifestyles how we see fit.  </div>
<div>
	 </div>
<div>
	Sourcing capital to build new or expand existing infrastructure has become an interesting exercise to watch over the past 1-2 decades with a multitude of Public Private Partnerships having built differing pieces of city transport infrastructure all around the country.  Governments of both persuasions have increasingly looked to the private sector to fund projects like Citylink and Eastlink as ideology from both sides has incrementally shifted Governments away from directly raising revenue in order to fund expansion or use as capital for the respective State/Territory's needs.  </div>
<div>
	 </div>
<div>
	This PPP trend has produced a dubious outcome where public secrecy of big ticket infrastructure projects like the East-West link in inner Melbourne becomes commonplace and the taxpayer - the ultimate user - does not have a clear picture of the true benefits due to the Government's fear of compromising Private Sector investment.  </div>
<div>
	 </div>
<div>
	Yes - I'm advocating a tax increase and one which isn't offset by other sectors of our entire taxation regime.  </div>
<div>
	 </div>
<div>
	We require a two-pronged approach to provide greater transport capacity and alternatives to the existing private transport regime: secure a reliable funding source (this article) and expand Infrastructure project assessment capabilities downstream of Canberra (future article).</div>
<div>
	 </div>
<div>
	<strong>The reliable fund source</strong>
</div>
<div>
	 </div>
<ul>
<li>
		Raise the GST rate by 2.5% to 12.5%</li>
	<li>
		State and Territory Governments are required to create Infrastructure funds to be managed by their respective Funds Management agencies, for instance <a href="http://www.vfmc.vic.gov.au/" target="_blank">Victoria's Funds Management Corporation</a>
</li>
	<li>
		The extra revenue raised above the existing 10% of GST should bypass the HFE process and be directly returned to the State or Territory the good or service was bought from and paid directly into the Infrastructure funds.</li>
	<li>
		The Infrastructure funds should have an enshrined purpose to purely fund transport infrastructure investment - public transport, roads and ports.</li>
</ul>
<div>
	 </div>
<div>
	Key to all of this is communicating the increase in the GST is for a specific purpose: Infrastructure investment.  Without this critical point, what I outline below is pointless and similarly having infrastructure spending decisions distanced, in part, from the political process as much as possible should be the secondary goal. This could be achieved via State-based Infrastructure agencies like the Federal <a href="http://www.infrastructureaustralia.gov.au/" target="_blank">Infrastructure Australia</a> or by setting up joint State-Federal branches of Infrastructure Australia in each state capital ensuring public sector manpower is better deployed working with the largest service provider - the States and Territories - and the largest purse - the Federal Government.  </div>
<div>
	 </div>
<div>
	I'd like to see a distinction made between the current level of GST and any future increases - such as the current Horizontal Fiscal Equilisation regime remains as is on the 10% portion of the GST - I think most people would understand the need for wealthier states to in part help out other states and territories in providing services there.  However the wealth-generating states also need to fund their own infrastructure pipelines to ensure they can achieve consistent growth and keep on supporting the "have-not" States/Territories.  To cut out the inevitable quarrel amongst State Premiers / Territory Chief Ministers which revolve around "we're not getting our fair share" then let's keep it simple: the 2.5% increase above the existing 10% would go back to the State/Territory where the GST is levied. </div>
<div>
	 </div>
<div>
	<strong>How it could work and impacts on entities paying GST</strong>
</div>
<div>
	 </div>
<div>
	Small, medium and large businesses are the entities, generally, which pay the GST to the ATO.  This is captured through a BAS Statement where the business tallies the amount of GST it has received from its goods and services sales, offsets the GST it has paid itself and produces a total figure which is the $ amount the ATO receives with each quarterly BAS lodgement.</div>
<div>
	 </div>
<div>
	In order to capture the amount of GST a business or organisation levies on customers in each state, every entity collecting GST would need to know their customers, more specifically they would need to know where they are located.  </div>
<div>
	 </div>
<div>
	This is simple for a small retail outlet/corner shop: all their sales are in the one state therefore the added paperwork would be minimal.  It would be relatively simple to ascertain for an online business - billing addresses which accompany credit card or paypal transactions (which already must be captured) can be used to capture the jurisdictional data.  For large multi-state businesses (think Woolworths, Coles, Telstra, Origin Energy) POS terminals and internal accounting systems would need to be altered to produce sales figures per jurisdiction breaking down their state-by-state sales &amp; associated GST component (if they don't already).</div>
<div>
	 </div>
<div>
	Essentially 8 new boxes would appear on the BAS Statement - one for each state and territory plus the existing total figure businesses currently used to inform the ATO of their GST obligations.  Small, medium and large, online or bricks and mortar business would then simply provide their state-by-state breakdown - providing the grand total and then the GST paying entity would provide a figure for GST levied in Victoria, New South Wales, Queensland, South Australia and so on.  </div>
<div>
	 </div>
<div>
	The business/organisation would pay the GST in one single payment to the ATO, as is the case now, but the extra information would then be used by the ATO to strip out the extra 2.5% and redirect the cash straight to State/Territory Government funds on a quarterly basis with the existing 10% component running through the existing HFE process.</div>
<div>
	 </div>
<div>
	Key to aiding the transition to the new GST regime will be the ATO/Federal Government devising and publishing the guidelines for accounting system integration touchpoints in order for software packages provided by MYOB, Xero, Oracle and SAP to automatically generate GST breakdowns based on customer and sales ledger data. </div>
<div>
	 </div>
<div>
	<strong>Show us the money</strong>
</div>
<div>
	 </div>
<div>
	What does the extra 2.5% look like in real numbers?  According to the <a href="http://www.cgc.gov.au/attachments/article/43/2012_Update_report.pdf" target="_blank">Commonwealth Grants Commission's</a> State Relatives 2012 Update report, Victoria was forecast to receive $11,782,000,000 in GST revenue for the 2012-2013 financial year.  HFE/relative changes aside (in case you were wondering Victoria was forecast to receive $0.92 for every $1 paid in GST in 2012-2013) let's assume the $11.7billion figure is a straight 10% and if a model such as the one I've outlined were to be implemented, Victoria's new Infrastructure Fund would have been filled with $2.5-$3billion in 2012-2013.</div>
<div>
	 </div>
<div>
	<img alt="" class="image-article_full_width_702px" height="661" src="/sites/urbanmelbourne.info/files/styles/article_full_width_702px/public/pictures/article-images/gst_breakdown.jpg?itok=j25ic6qV" title="Commonwealth GRants Commission State Relatives report 2013" width="702">
</div>
<div>
	 </div>
<div>
	Let your mind run wild, $2.5 to $3billion a year, could:</div>
<ul>
<li>
		Remove 25 level crossing removals a year, assuming an average cost of $100 million per crossing (we have well over 100 to remove in Melbourne alone).</li>
	<li>
		Commence major bus lane construction right across the metro and regional cities coupled with countless bus route improvements state-wide.</li>
	<li>
		Assuming an 8-10 year construction timeframe, Melbourne Metro Tunnel could be paid for directly with this fund and thereafter all the other subsequent heavy rail links as outlined by the PTV plan.</li>
	<li>
		Build the missing link in the ring road from Metropolitan Ring Road at Greensborough bypass to the Eastern Freeway at Thompson's road - offering an alternative to the Monash-West Gate corridor.</li>
	<li>
		Increase the amount of regional highway duplication projects: Princes HWY West from Winchlesea to Colac and beyond, Western Highway from Ararat to Horsham, accelerate plans to remove the last remaining at-grade intersections on the Hume and Princes "Freeways" between Craigieburn &amp; Wodonga and Pakenham &amp; Traralgon.</li>
</ul>
<div>
	 </div>
<div>
	Let's not kid ourselves - this is not about creating a new tax to only have it funded by a "saving" elsewhere - this is about reversing the trend of the past couple of decades and flushing cash into an area that business, unions and community all agree needs a lot more attention.  Regardless of your socio-economic profile, we must all contribute and doing it through adapting existing system and increasing the rate by an amount inside the Reserve Bank's inflation range will hit everyone's hip pocket, but it has a very specific and important purpose.</div>
<div>
	 </div>
<div>
	Big or small ticket transport infrastructure projects have flow-on productivity, social and environmental benefits for everyone and key to the success is rational discussion around tying the tax increase it to specific outcomes - projects and programmes selected on merit with greater community engagement outside the electoral cycle.</div>
<div>
	 </div>
<div>
	Would you accept a 2.5% increase in the GST if you knew every dollar raised was for the sole purpose of expanding transport infrastructure in our cities and regional areas? </div>
<div>
	 </div>
</body></html>

Here's why a GST rate increase should be on the table

<html><body>
<p>Forum member Fedsquared recently created a <a href="https://www.urban.com.au/forum/access-docklands-docklands-transport-network" target="_blank">thread in the UM forum</a> linking directly to the "'Access Docklands' - A Strategy for the Docklands Transport Network" document - it warrants much more exposure and discussion.  The strategy was devised by Places Victoria and the City of Melbourne in collaboration with <a href="http://www.urbantrans-anz.com/" target="_blank">UrbanTrans ANZ</a> and the original document can be viewed <a href="http://www.docklands.com/cs/Satellite?blobcol=urldata&amp;blobheader=application%2Fpdf&amp;blobkey=id&amp;blobtable=MungoBlobs&amp;blobwhere=1366958913911&amp;ssbinary=true&amp;blobheadername1=Content-Type&amp;blobheadervalue1=application/pdf&amp;blobheadername2=Content-Dispostion&amp;blobheadervalue2=attachment%3B+filename%3DAccess_Docklands_Final_April2013,0.pdf" target="_blank">here</a>.</p>

<p>Cutting right to the chase, the strategy provides a long-term view of the individual projects required to position Docklands as another corridor for north-south movement through Central Melbourne.  Key projects which tie in with the long-term E-Gate redevelopment area include a new road and tram line connecting North Melbourne station with Footscray Road and several bridges across the Yarra and a new bridge at the opening to Victoria Harbour immediately East of the Bolte Bridge.</p>

<p>Context of the strategy: 2012-2040 growth predictions for both residents and workers  (Page 27).</p>

<p><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/docklands_surrounds_growth_context.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title='Docklands &amp; environs growth context - map from Page 27 of "Access Docklands"'><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-702px" src="http://urbanmelbourne.info/sites/urbanmelbourne.info/files/styles/article_full_width_702px/public/pictures/article-images/docklands_surrounds_growth_context.jpg?itok=eP24WgNJ" title='Docklands &amp; environs growth context - map from Page 27 of "Access Docklands"' typeof="foaf:Image"></a></p>

<p>Although a major focus for redevelopment for this decade, over time Docklands will look noticeably small once Fishermans Bend, E-Gate and the Arden-Macaulay precincts start turning the first sod of soil. In saying that however, Docklands, like the CBD, is at the centre of the entire region which will be redeveloped over the next 3-4 decades and the report is very strong on developing the transport infrastructure - walking, cycling, public and private transport - in Docklands to support north-south movements across the river and Victoria Harbour.</p>

<p>We get a glimpse of what's to come with regards to bridges across the Yarra in the walking and cycling transport infrastructure concept plans (Page 47)</p>

<p><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/docklands_walk_cycle_transport.png" rel="gallery-all" title='Docklands walking &amp; cycling infrastructure - map from Page 27 of "Access Docklands"'><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-702px" src="http://urbanmelbourne.info/sites/urbanmelbourne.info/files/styles/article_full_width_702px/public/pictures/article-images/docklands_walk_cycle_transport.png?itok=ERjEsMvt" title='Docklands walking &amp; cycling infrastructure - map from Page 27 of "Access Docklands"' typeof="foaf:Image"></a></p>

<p>The new bridges across the Yarra - Collins Street extension starting immediately west of the ANZ HQ, the extension of Bourke Street and at the end of the Victoria Harbour peninsula immediately east of the Bolte Bridge - all have one thing in common: they must cater for marina and large vessel traffic using the waterway.  The report states that Docklands residents, businesses and developers were consulted as part of the Access Docklands process, however there is little detail on how these bridges will work and one would assume boat owners and the developers building the marinas would have stated their access must remain.</p>

<p>The new Collins Street extension bridge is mooted to carry trams from Collins Street and into Fishermans Bend, and I'm looking forward to seeing a more detailed concept design.  As mentioned, the design will need to include an opening mechanism so maritime traffic can make their way up / down river and interesting questions will need to be answered with the regards to the level of service a tram or bus route on the bridge.  Sure, the bridge opening could be timetabled just like a tram can be, however this reduces the flexibility to run as many trams as possible through to Fishermans Bend.</p>

<p>I like out of the box thinking, and there's a great snippet on Page 48 about the procurement and operation of dedicated bus services, potentially utilising existing tram rights of way, to start operating Docklands - CBD connections.  For instance, Access Docklands provides scope for greater utilisation of Flagstaff as an interchange with Docklands - dedicated short route and high frequency bus routes could run down La Trobe Street with a terminus at the curb on the William &amp; La Trobe street intersection.</p>

<p>Indulging for a moment, the La Trobe Street and William Street intersection could be reconfigured to allow shorter buses to perform a U-bolt from the northern curb of La Trobe Street to the southern curb of La Trobe street utilising the space in the middle of the intersection.  Perhaps a 2 minute timer where all traffic - tram and car - is stopped and buses waiting at the northern curb are given the highest priority to turn 180 degrees to go back West along La Trobe Street.  From the southern curb outside Flagstaff station's entry, buses can move onto the westbound tram track and run on the tram lines all the way down La Trobe street and turn left to go south down Harbour Esplanade to Collins Street and then use the new tram/bus bridge through to Yarra's Edge and Fishermans Bend.  No need to widen roads for bus lanes in this case.</p>

<p><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/docklands_public_transport.png" rel="gallery-all" title='Docklands public transport infrastructure - map from Page 49 of "Access Docklands"'><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-702px" src="http://urbanmelbourne.info/sites/urbanmelbourne.info/files/styles/article_full_width_702px/public/pictures/article-images/docklands_public_transport.png?itok=pZcXcgo5" title='Docklands public transport infrastructure - map from Page 49 of "Access Docklands"' typeof="foaf:Image"></a></p>

<p>In the above map we get a clear picture of Places Victoria &amp; City of Melbourne's thinking with regards to new public transport infrastructure in the area.  One concept that ties directly into the redevelopment of E-Gate and eventually the Arden-Macaulay area is the new tram route utilising the current track on Harbour Esplanade and Footscray route and building a new road and tram extension across the current Melbourne yard.  Access Docklands lists this as a medium term goal and given any road connecting to North Melbourne station will be need to be elevated to connect with Abbotsford or Dryburgh Street (the rail lines are below street level), the structure to connect Footscray Road and North Melbourne station would need to be elevated for near on its entire length to traverse the still used Melbourne yard.</p>

<p>The objective is to make yet another interchange for Docklands in the short-medium term - North Melbourne Station.  The current Melbourne yard is a barrier and the lack of any link, when rectified, might go a long way to stimulate the northern end of MAB's Newquay and drive visitors back into the Waterfront City precinct.</p>

<p>So it's over to you, what are the positives and negatives that stand out from the strategy?  What do you think of the short-term goal of implementing more bus routes before larger more capital intensive tram projects come along?  What's missing?</p>

<p>Let the discussion begin.</p>
</body></html>

The Access Docklands transport strategy

<html><body>
<p>The Ballieu government when it assumed office in 2010, came to power promising to study various metropolitan rail extensions around Melbourne: Rowville, Doncaster, Avalon airport and Tullamarine airport. In the middle of 2012 public submissions were called for by the study team comprising SKM, Hassell, Mott MacDonald and Phoenix Facilitation and just last week, the final report was released by the government. You can see all the documents released <a href="http://www.rowvillerailstudy.com.au/publications/" target="_blank">here</a> on the <a href="http://www.rowvillerailstudy.com.au/" target="_blank">Rowville Rail Study</a> website.</p>

<h2>To summarise</h2>

<p>The findings of the report, it has been recommended and found:</p>

<ul>
<li>a rail line down the North &amp; Wellington road median is viable with a few caveats, namely relating to rail capacity further up the line and the project being dependent on the Melbourne Metro tunnel project and Dandenong corridor expansion.</li>
	<li>by 2046, 68,000 people will use the line on 4 stations (Monash University, Mulgrave, Waverley Park and Rowville), 16,000 of which will use the service in the morning peak (7-9am). However the study teams report states that a further patronage study should be conducted when/if the project proceeds as per <a href="http://www.rowvillerailstudy.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Rowville-Rail-Study-Final-Stage-1-Report_Executive-Summary-FINAL.pdf" target="_blank">page 4 Executive Summary</a>.</li>
	<li>the overwhelming majority of community sentiment wants a one-seat direct train journey to the CBD, refer to: <a href="http://www.rowvillerailstudy.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Rowville-Rail-Study-Final-Stage-1-Report-FINAL.pdf" target="_blank">Table 8, Page 34 Final stage 1 report</a>.</li>
	<li>the line would run at a peak frequency of 6 trains an hour in a shuttle or full Dandenong corridor expansion scenario and limited to 3 trains an hour without the Dandenong corridor expansion scenario - refer: <a href="http://www.rowvillerailstudy.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Rowville-Rail-Study-Final-Stage-1-Report-FINAL.pdf" target="_blank">Table 7, Page 35 Final stage 1 report</a>.</li>
	<li>the line east of Huntingdale, as a best case, would be a mix of tunnel, open cutting and elevated structures, refer to: <a href="http://www.rowvillerailstudy.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Rowville-Rail-Study-Final-Stage-1-Report-FINAL.pdf" target="_blank">Figure 17, Page 40 Final stage 1 report.</a>
</li>
	<li>station platforms would be able to take 9-car trains that are mooted as part of the Dandenong corridor expansion.</li>
	<li>and perhaps most importantly: "Although this first stage of the study is focused on a rail link specifically between Huntingdale and Rowville along the Wellington Road corridor, previous studies and the many comments we have received from the community and stakeholders over recent months have raised other ideas and possibilities, which we summarise diagrammatically in Figure 14.</li>
</ul>
<p><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/rowville_alternatives.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="Rowville Alternatives - taken from Final stage 1 report www.rowvillerailstudy.com.au"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-702px" src="/sites/urbanmelbourne.info/files/styles/article_full_width_702px/public/pictures/article-images/rowville_alternatives.jpg?itok=X5qybzRn" title="Rowville Alternatives - taken from Final stage 1 report www.rowvillerailstudy.com.au" typeof="foaf:Image"></a></p>

<p>The final paragraph, to my mind, is the most important point: this study was done purely in isolation for a very specific corridor with vague representation of how this can fit amongst a metropolitan-wide strategy for improved public transport (this is not the study team's fault: rather the state government's). By focusing just on the needs of commuters who work in the CBD or people travelling to Monash, the study has shot itself in the foot by dooming it to the "too hard basket" (as I argued in my <a href="https://www.urban.com.au/news/submission-to-the-rowville-rail-study" target="_blank">Rowville Rail Study</a> submission).</p>

<p>Providing increased rail access to suburban areas which have a lack of them is, absolutely, an admirable goal: one I support. But I do not support entrenching the notion that train lines are arterial routes just for people who work in the CBD - despite the well documented benefits for Monash University - this is precisely what a branch line of the Dandenong corridor will do.</p>

<h2>The elephant in the room</h2>

<p>The elephant in the room is actually referred to in the graphic above - that involved re-opening parts of the old outer circle rail line corridor from Alamein crossing the Gardiner's Creek Valley, Monash Freeway, Glen Waverley line at East Malvern station and then sending the line in a tunnel under Chadstone - the suburb - with a station at the shopping centre itself and then continuing on to Oakleigh and Huntingdale.</p>

<p>The overarching caveat the Rowville Rail study has thrown up is that the line is dependent on the Dandenong corridor expansion + Metro Tunnel.</p>

<p>Although I will continue to argue for a regime change in the way we plan, build and operate our new rail corridors in the future (refer to the proposal section in my <a href="https://www.urban.com.au/news/submission-to-the-rowville-rail-study" target="_blank">Rowville Rail Study</a> submission) when it comes to new rail lines in Melbourne, if the government of the day is adamant that we must continue to use the rail technology that is deployed across Melbourne now - they must consider dropping the one-seat journey notion to the city for Rowville and widen the scope of the now needed (as the study team suggest) 2nd study into this area.</p>

<p>Despite the study team fulfilling its brief - which was narrow in its terms - we need to widen the scope for the 2nd study by looking directly at an Oakleigh-Chadstone-East Malvern-Alamein link. Creating the Rowville line as an extension of the Alamein line has a milder dependency on Dandenong corridor expansion (there will still be a requirement for more services on the Dandenong corridor to take the transfers from the Huntingdale-Rowville section, but there won't be a direct <em>need</em> for the Dandenong corridor to be expanded to take the extra 6 trains an hour from Rowville as well): it could be done earlier and benefit a much larger section of our community.</p>

<h2>Re-opening (parts of) <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outer_Circle_railway_line" target="_blank">the outer circle line</a>
</h2>

<p><em>As a first stage</em>: Rowville-Huntingdale-Oakleigh-Chadston-East Malvern-Alamein-Ashburton could be built as one project. With a 4th platform to the south side of Camberwell the Rowville line can start operating as a Rowville-Camberwell line on 10 minute off-peak and 6-7 minute peak frequencies with 6-car train configurations.</p>

<p>Instantly, Wellington Road corridor residents, students and employees obtain rail access with the option to change trains for citybound (or vice versa) services at Huntingdale, Oakleigh, East Malvern or Camberwell.</p>

<p>Notionally auto traffic around Chadstone would reduce given that it is only a one train change (at Camberwell, East Malvern, Oakleigh or Huntingdale) from suburbs like Berwick, Cranbourne, Mount Waverley, Mitcham, Croydon, Ferntree Gully, Richmond or Hawthorn and with the opening of the Melbourne Metro tunnel, it would only be a one-train change (at Oakleigh) for people living in Footscray, Sunshine or Sunbury - this has the potential to add passengers to multiple rail lines outside of peaks and on weekends when many people visit Chadstone: the state government would be squeezing more revenue out of existing lines to help pay for any debt / interest it accrued to build the Alamein-Rowville line.</p>

<p>There's an opportunity to reduce the cost of constructing the four new Wellington Road stations and the extra platforms at interchange stations as the Burnley-Camberwell-Alamein corridor would continue to operate standard 6-car train configurations, not 9, as mooted with Dandenong corridor expansion.</p>

<p>There's also an opportunity to further reduce the delivery costs of one new station - by endeavouring to initiate a PPP with Gandel Group/CFS Retail Trust (owners of Chadstone SC) through highlighting the direct and valuable benefit of increased centre patronage by way of a rail link.</p>

<p><em>In a second stage</em>: Laying a 4th track from Burnley to Camberwell (much of the groundwork was done when this section was originally triplicated) and a reconfiguration of the Richmond - Flinders Street section for the Burnley group lines would allow the Rowville line to run through to the terminus at Flinders Street, therefore becoming a truly multi-functional mass transit line. It would become the stopping-all-stations link between Richmond and Camberwell (with all Belgrave and Lilydale trains only stopping at Glenferrie). The missing link between Alamein, East Malvern, Chadstone and Oakleigh would provide a cross-town, non-road path to connect activity centres such as the educational and employment hub at Swinburne University, the services and retail sector-focused Camberwell &amp; Chadstone SC, services and retail sector-focused Oakleigh, educational, R&amp;D and employment hub at and surrounding Monash University, the high-tech Mulgrave industrial area and of course the predominantly residential areas in Waverley Park and Rowville.</p>

<p>In studying this kind of link, the impact on the Monash FWY, Warrigal Road and Dandenong Road in and outside of peaks should be measured. Swinburne University - another large patronage generator - would move from a two train change (at Phase 1 completion) to a one-train change for people who live in the greater South East quadrant of the metro area.</p>

<p>The LGAs of Boroondara, Stonnington, Glen Eira, Monash and Knox City will have a greater opportunity to focus increased residential and commercial densities in the immediate areas surrounding all existing and new rail stations, with the likely outcome being evenly distributed population growth over a wider area of the metropolitan Melbourne area.</p>
</body></html>

Transport Planning

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News

Transport Planning

Editor's Picks

Receive the latest news stories to your inbox

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News