The residential transformation of St Kilda Road is set to continue into with more new apartment plans for the sought-after boulevard.

Wing Tai Asia has lodged plans for a major residential tower at 464-466 St Kilda Road, replacing the former VACC House with an 18-storey mixed-use development designed around a retained heritage podium and a sculpted contemporary tower.

The proposal, prepared under Victoria’s Significant Residential Development with Affordable Housing pathway, would deliver 325 apartments and ground-floor retail across the prominent 4,653 sqm boulevard site in Melbourne’s St Kilda Road North Precinct.

The project centres on the adaptive reuse of the site’s heritage-listed VACC Building, an eight-storey office designed by Bernard Evans that has occupied the address for decades. Planning documents state the development would involve “carefully dismantling and conserving off-site the original metal fabric of the podium visible from St Kilda Road,” before reinstating it as the defining frontage of the new scheme.

Above the restored podium, Wing Tai is proposing a curvilinear residential tower. The scheme includes 172 one-bedroom apartments, 63 two-bedroom apartments, 66 three-bedroom apartments, and 24 four-bedroom apartments, alongside two ground-floor food and beverage tenancies fronting St Kilda Road.

The tower has been designed with substantial articulation and variable setbacks to minimise perceived bulk and maintain view corridors along the boulevard. Urbis, which prepared the planning report, said the design “has been significantly articulated through a curvilinear design” with “an interplay with materials, façade expression and depth” to create visual separation and visual interest.

The proposal also includes 254 basement car spaces, landscaped pedestrian links connecting St Kilda Road and Queens Lane, and a biophilic landscape strategy featuring canopy trees, raised planters, cascading greenery and a glass oculus pool overlooking the eastern frontage.

Planning documents confirm the $270.1 million development will contribute 3 per cent of project costs to the Social Housing Growth Fund as part of the application process.

Wing Tai acquired the St Kilda Road property in 2018 alongside Abacus Property Group for $95.38 million, before later consolidating ownership of the site. The property previously served as the Victorian Automobile Chamber of Commerce headquarters for around 60 years.

The transformation of the St Kilda Rd boulevard is already beginning to materialise, with a number of high-profile projects recently completed, launched, or approaching launch as developers continue to back the long-term appeal of the precinct.

Among the most notable recent completions is Louise by Samuel Property Group, just off the strip on Queens Lane, the same pocket Hirsch &amp; Faigen recently launched The Queensbury. Mirvac is too on the same street with The Albertine, which is approaching completion.

Dexus recently secured approval for its slice of St Kilda Road, while Gurner also has approved plans for the precinct.

Joel Robinson

Wing Tai unveils 325-apartment St Kilda Road tower on former VACC House site

Malaysian developer <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developers/s-p-setia">SP Setia</a> is the latest to jump into St Leonards booming Transport Oriented Development precinct.

The developer, which has previously delivered Sapphire by the Gardens apartment development in Melbourne, identified the Atchison Street site in 2023. It filed a Scoping Report around 12 months ago, and now has revealed the designs for the new&nbsp;40-storey mixed-use tower.

The State Significant Development Application covers <a href="https://next-portal.urban.com.au/projects/14650/summary">20-22 Atchison Street</a>, a 1,374 sqm site positioned between St Leonards Station and the new Crows Nest Metro station.

Designed by <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/architects/cox-architecture">COX Architecture</a>, the project would deliver 181 apartments, above a four-storey commercial podium, five basement levels, and new public domain works along Mitchell Street. The apartment mix comprises 35 one-bedroom apartments, 39 one-bedroom-plus-study apartments, 85 two-bedroom apartments, and 22 three-bedroom residences.

The proposal has been lodged as a shop-top housing development under the NSW Government’s TOD planning pathway, which allows increased density around key transport infrastructure. The site sits within the recently rezoned Crows Nest Accelerated TOD Precinct.

<img alt="First look: SP Setia targets St Leonards skyline with 40-storey TOD tower" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="b799673d-48e2-46b0-801a-0e33a9330100" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/atchinson%20site.png?VersionId=dPh0UfwfaHpbFL1R7H1cbZNbIW0CHbCC" />

SP Setia acquired the Atchison Street site as part of its continued expansion into the Australian apartment market. In comments made to City &amp; Country (The Edge Malaysia) in 2023, SP Setia President and CEO Datuk Choong Kai Wai described the acquisition as “a strategic move” aligned with the group’s post-pandemic market recovery strategy.

“Our target for this exceptional development is local and overseas buyers, including first-home buyers, downsizers and investors,” Choong said.

The tower has been designed as a slender vertical form rising from a mixed-use podium, with COX Architecture positioning the development as a response to the evolving St Leonards and Crows Nest skyline.

“The purpose of the project is to facilitate the delivery of high-quality housing at a strategically located site and deliver a built tower outcome that is consistent with the desired future character of St Leonards and aligns with the TOD controls,” the design report stated.

<img alt="First look: SP Setia targets St Leonards skyline with 40-storey TOD tower" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="b1a85eee-76f7-436c-a6da-73ba827b9b13" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/atchinson%20entry.png?VersionId=dA9jHGPMcm.dDbwk4QfxqWiY5bfh3UVt" />

The podium would incorporate retail uses fronting Atchison Street, commercial tenancies, landscaped communal areas, and pedestrian improvements along Mitchell Street. Vehicle access and loading would be consolidated via Atchison Lane.

Residents would have access to more than 665 sqm of communal indoor and outdoor spaces, while the development proposes 96 parking spaces across five basement levels.

The proposal also includes a commitment for 10 per cent of residential floor space to be allocated toward affordable housing through a monetary contribution.

COX said the tower form responds directly to the emerging high-density character of the precinct while seeking to maximise solar access, cross ventilation, and outlook from apartments.

<img alt="First look: SP Setia targets St Leonards skyline with 40-storey TOD tower" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="2163f85c-f63b-4be3-aafa-f8763976cec5" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Article%20Feature%20Image%20%28Grid%29_5.png?VersionId=WiAmtIKJ6.ZQ41EtYEQ1fol7AeorKBlL" />

“The building is orientated towards north,” the Apartment Design Guide compliance report noted, adding that the tower’s slim form was driven by the constrained inner-urban site dimensions.

The design also incorporates landscaped setbacks and communal open space at podium level, intended to soften the interface with surrounding streets and improve pedestrian amenity.

The project adds to a growing wave of redevelopment proposals reshaping St Leonards and Crows Nest following the opening of the Sydney Metro City line and the NSW Government’s push for higher-density housing around major transport nodes.

Last week Stockland filed plans just down the road. They want to build a <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/601-pacific-highway-st-leonards-nsw-2065">52-storey tower on Pacific Highway</a>.

Read more:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/news/nsw/first-look-stockland-plans-52-storey-538-apartment-st-leonards-tower">First look: Stockland plans 52-storey, 538-apartment St Leonards tower&nbsp;</a>

First look: SP Setia targets St Leonards skyline with 40-storey TOD tower

<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developers/urban-property-group">Urban Property Group</a> has revealed plans for a new mixed-use tower at 10 Dangar Street, Wickham, advancing a proposal that would reshape the southern gateway to Newcastle’s city centre with one of the city’s tallest residential buildings.

The State Significant Development proposal, now on exhibition, seeks approval for a <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/bowline-10-dangar-street-wickham-nsw-2293">43-storey tower</a> immediately adjacent to the Newcastle Interchange. The project would deliver around 200 apartments, including 42 affordable housing dwellings, alongside 99 co-living units, a 171-room hotel, retail space, and new public domain integrated through the site.

The scheme marks a significant escalation of plans previously approved for the site. Urban Property Group took over the prominent 2,904 sqm parcel, where excavation and demolition had already commenced under an earlier consent for a 14-storey mixed-use development.

<img alt="First look: Urban Property Group unveils Newcastle’s next supertower at Wickham interchange" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="58a96dd9-407f-4d20-86b4-94e4bfeef74b" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/wickham%20podium.png?VersionId=LGlf08pdFGAZDzvx_CXC4XakHNZRuEE0" />

Designed by <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/architects/sjb-architects">SJB</a>, the tower has been conceived as a landmark transit-oriented development anchored to the Newcastle Interchange precinct. The proposal includes 245 build-to-sell apartments across a mix of one, two, and three-bedroom residences, as well as two penthouses. Fifteen apartments and one operational unit are earmarked for NDIS housing. The co-living component would add a further 99 units, while the podium would accommodate retail uses and hotel facilities.

SJB said the site presents “a valuable opportunity to anchor the precinct by setting the standard for design, active ground planes and character at the key southern gateway.”

The architecture responds directly to the site’s position beside major transport infrastructure and within one of Newcastle’s fastest-evolving urban renewal precincts. The tower form sits above a sculpted podium designed to frame new public spaces, including a through-site pedestrian link connecting Station Street to Hannell Street, landscaped plazas, and activated retail edges.

<img alt="First look: Urban Property Group unveils Newcastle’s next supertower at Wickham interchange" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="a7bd6ff0-f7db-4ce8-a6dc-ea56e72c6149" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/wickham%20lanne.png?VersionId=xzf39VADyhj7zBQY2I9fx9vI62u2tuSb" />

The design report describes the project as part of the broader transition of Wickham into “a vibrant, high-quality mixed-use urban precinct” that leverages proximity to the station, open space, and regional connectivity.

A detailed public art strategy has also been prepared for the development. The strategy positions the project as “a transit-oriented development of state significance at the gateway to Newcastle’s city centre” and outlines a series of integrated artworks responding to Newcastle’s industrial and transport heritage.

Creative Road’s curatorial framework for the project, titled Unveil, draws on “stratified surfaces, carved volumes, and light-filled apertures” while referencing Newcastle’s transformation from an industrial city into a contemporary education and technology hub.

<img alt="First look: Urban Property Group unveils Newcastle’s next supertower at Wickham interchange" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="77a882bb-14b1-4d28-99ff-9438e39508c0" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/wickham%20site.png?VersionId=cevgo_vN0eKPK78P8YcEu3mKPLkpFqE7" />

The proposal is being advanced through the NSW Housing Delivery Authority pathway after being declared State Significant Development in June 2025. The accompanying scoping report states the development aims to “maximise the site’s proximity to the Newcastle Interchange by delivering transit-oriented development” while increasing housing supply and affordable housing provision within the Newcastle LGA.

Urban Property Group’s plans align with the long-term strategic vision established under the Wickham Master Plan, which identified the interchange precinct as suitable for substantial uplift in height and density. The current proposal would significantly intensify that vision, positioning the tower among the tallest developments proposed for Newcastle.

The site sits immediately north of the Newcastle Interchange, bounded by Dangar Street, Hannell Street, and Charles Street. It is surrounded by a rapidly growing cluster of residential towers and mixed-use projects that have emerged following the completion of the light rail and transport interchange.

First look: Urban Property Group unveils Newcastle’s latest tower at Wickham interchange

Bottega House has completed settlement of a landmark riverfront site in Macquarie Street, St Lucia, representing its first major Brisbane development.&nbsp;

Positioned on the banks of the Brisbane River, the <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/180-macquarie-street-st-lucia-qld-4067">premium site at 180 Macquarie Street</a> features uninterrupted river frontage in one of Brisbane’s most tightly held residential precincts.&nbsp;

The proposed development, currently under assessment with Brisbane City Council, has been designed by <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/architects/plus-studio">Plus Studio</a> with interiors by <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/interior-designers/mim-design">Mim Design</a> and will deliver a boutique collection of premium residences positioned specifically for owner occupiers and downsizers.&nbsp;

The residences are set to redefine luxury apartment living in the area, with a focus on architectural quality, refined finishes, landscape integration and elevated amenities including curated wellness facilities, resort-style pools and recreation spaces rarely seen in the local market.&nbsp;

Exclusive sales for the project will be led by Keenan &amp; Byrne, ahead of an anticipated launch later this year.&nbsp;

Bottega House Managing Director Nick Malloch said the project reflects the group’s ambition to deliver a highly curated residential offering within one of Brisbane’s most tightly held precincts.&nbsp;

“This is an incredibly rare riverfront opportunity and one we have approached with a long-term perspective,” Malloch said.&nbsp;

“Our vision from the outset was to create a boutique collection of residences that feel more like private homes than traditional apartments, with generous proportions, refined finishes and exceptional amenity throughout."

Malloch says there is a&nbsp;lack of premium owner-occupier stock of this quality in the market, particularly for downsizers wanting space, privacy and a true lifestyle offering without compromise.&nbsp;

"Demand is expected to be strong given the scarcity of premium riverfront opportunities of this nature within Brisbane’s inner-west."&nbsp;

Bottega House secures landmark riverfront site in St Lucia 

<section data-scroll-anchor="false" data-testid="conversation-turn-6" data-turn="assistant" data-turn-id="request-WEB:84a2af5e-d7cf-4ddf-922a-f4d44d6c6caa-2" data-turn-id-container="request-WEB:84a2af5e-d7cf-4ddf-922a-f4d44d6c6caa-2" dir="auto">
<section data-scroll-anchor="false" data-testid="conversation-turn-2" data-turn="assistant" data-turn-id="request-WEB:5a5ab36c-8dd3-454c-b456-c501f22f0eb4-0" data-turn-id-container="request-WEB:5a5ab36c-8dd3-454c-b456-c501f22f0eb4-0" dir="auto">
The arrival of the first piling rig officially marks the commencement of construction at SIERA’s new beachside apartment development, Exhale, in Northcliffe.

<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/exhale-surfers-paradise-8-enderley-avenue-surfers-paradise-qld-4217">Exhale</a>, a glass-encased tower featuring 54 large-scale apartments at 8 Enderley Avenue, is SIERA’s third Gold Coast development. It follows the recently completed PIPIS Bilinga beachfront project, which achieved suburb-record prices, and the soon-to-be-completed Chevron Island development, Tapestry.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=112661 project_image_fid=359603]

<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developers/siera">SIERA</a> Founder and Managing Director Brent Thompson said the arrival of the piling rig represented a significant milestone for the development, which is scheduled for completion in late 2028.

Over the next month, around 260 piles are expected to be installed as work progresses on the basement structure. The building is anticipated to rise above ground level early next year, before unveiling its sculptural glass curtain wall, developed in collaboration with specialist façade engineers.

“The façade was designed to maximise panoramic coastal views while creating a distinctive architectural identity,” Thompson said.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=112661 project_image_fid=355935]

Designed by BDA Architecture, Exhale will comprise just 54 two- and three-bedroom residences across 26 levels, a level of low-density living rarely delivered in this beachside pocket between Surfers Paradise and Broadbeach.

The project has been conceived as a resident-only building, with no short-stay accommodation permitted. SIERA says the model is intended to appeal to long-term owner-occupiers rather than transient holiday demand.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=112661 project_image_fid=361052]

Residences have been designed with large-format layouts and expansive glazing, with most apartments featuring more than 30 metres of glass frontage to maximise natural light and ocean views.

The amenity offering spans two levels and centres on wellness and lifestyle, including a heated magnesium pool, sauna, yoga and Pilates studio, gymnasium, private dining facilities, cinema lounge, and dedicated surfcraft storage.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=112661 project_image_fid=359607]

More than half of the apartments have already sold. SIERA has also opened a sales gallery for Exhale at its Chevron Island commercial premises, near its Tapestry tower and the site of its second Chevron Island apartment development, which is slated to launch in early 2027.
</section>
</section>

[smartcode_project_cta:default project_id=112661]

SIERA kicks off construction at Northcliffe tower Exhale

Melbourne Airport

<html><body>
<h2>Comment</h2>

At first, there was $10 million on the table in the Victorian Budget.  And when it was time for Canberra to hand down its budget, that figure swelled to $30 million.  In short, whatever the final figure will be, a sizeable chunk of dough is to be spent executing a proper feasibility study on a Melbourne Airport Rail Link.

The study will look a number of aspects, most notably what form a high-capacity rail link would take (its corridor, its technology, its transit time etc) and how building and operating it will be funded (via a PPP, government debt, the Federal Government's new National Rail building fund).  This funding aspect seems to be key, not least because the Victorian State Government to date has been reluctant to commit to any airport link project, except during this year's budget time.

Firstly, let's look back at what's already been studied.

In 2013 the <a href="https://static.ptv.vic.gov.au/siteassets/PTV/PTV%20docs/Feasibility-Studies/Melbourne-Airport-Rail-Link-Study-Overview-brochure.pdf">Melbourne Airport Rail Link (MARL) Study</a> was completed.  Its findings primarily focus on corridors - working on the assumption a MARL would be an extension of the existing network (or utilise network-compatible rail equipment).

Here are the corridors that were looked at in the study.

<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/melair_corridors.png" rel="gallery-all" title="MARL Study (2013) - corridors"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="650" src="/sites/urban.melbourne/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/melair_corridors.png?itok=l2jbrN3a" title="MARL Study (2013) - corridors" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>MARL Study (2013) - corridors</figcaption></figure>And here's the assessment of each corridor.

<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/melair_corridors_assessment.png" rel="gallery-all" title="MARL Study (2013) - corridor assessment"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="303" src="/sites/urban.melbourne/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/melair_corridors_assessment.png?itok=YgV11hLG" title="MARL Study (2013) - corridor assessment" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>MARL Study (2013) - corridor assessment</figcaption></figure>The conclusion from this study is that the Albion East corridor best meets the various criteria each corridor was assessed against.  It is a very safe assumption to make that should a standard heavy-rail / existing rail network compatible solution be chosen, the Albion East corridor will remain top dog.

On Wednesday 31st of May, RMIT's Centre for Urban Research held the latest in its series of Talking Transport seminars which focused on the Melbourne Airport Rail Link.  One of the panellists was John Hearsch from the Rail Futures Institute and he spoke about <a href="http://www.railfutures.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/170409-Airport-brochure-v6.pdf">RFI's proposal</a>. 

RFI's Airtrain proposal &amp; documentation is a subset of its larger InterCity study which aims to completely separate all regional and metropolitan rail traffic over the longer term and while at the conceptual level, it's no doubt going to be a reference point for the new study.

At the seminar John Hearsch also provided greater context for the RFI proposal in that it would likely be a 3 phase implementation, done under a public-private partnership with the first phase being the most capital intensive: building the three tunnels, airport train shuttle maintenance and storage facility over a 4 year planning and 4 year build timeframe.

The transit time of 15 minutes would be made possible through the combination of tunnels and at-grade sections having a track speed (and operational service) in the same realm as the regional lines outside Melbourne: 160kph.

It takes inspiration from the 2013 MARL Study and John Hearsch made particular mention of the connectivity benefits in that from either Melbourne Airport, Sunshine or Southern Cross stations, the RFI proposal railway would be a 1 train change from any rail destination in Victoria.

The other public-domain proposal that the new feasibility study should look at is the <a href="http://www.airshuttleaust.com.au/">Airshuttle Australia express train project</a>.  This is a proposal to use different rail technology on more direct corridors - in the Citylink median or a combination of above the existing Craigieburn rail corridor and the Tullamarine Freeway median north of Essendon.

As it is technology independent and wouldn't directly interface with the existing network, the Metro Tunnel dependency that has been used as an excuse to not talk about the Airport link in any great detail by the State Government - up until this year's budget - is irrelevant.  In fact, both public domain concepts propose operationally separate railways with no dependency on the existing network; in both cases thne real sticking point is narrowing down the costs, potential benefits and how to fund them.

Of course, we shouldn't discount another well-rounded solution to the long-term needs of passengers at the airport and the employees who work within the vicinity of it to come out of this process either.

<h2>The road public transport network should also be a study priority</h2>

As PTUA's president Tony Morton mentioned at the Talking Transport seminar, the rail link should be ambitious and aim to do most of the heavy lifting; it should aspire to carry a high proportion of trips to and from the airport but we musn't also exclude other modes of public transport.

More than one panellist made mention of the 903 Smartbus that connects the airport with the Craigieburn line and going forward this is likely to remain the primary public transport connection for those who live in this area. But what other opportunities are there for a large airport-focused high-frequency bus network to the east of the airport?

Should money be invested in expanding 24-hour bus lanes &amp; bus priority on Broadmeadows Road, Mahoneys Road, Pascoe Vale and Cooper Street? How much would it cost to operate a 15-minute frequency service from places like South Morang, cross-town, through outer north to Broadmeadows and onto the airport? What would patronage be like?

And a shout out for the tram network, the #59 tram terminates at Airport West, just short of the southern airport employment precinct and terminals.  How much would it cost to extend this tram route out to the airport to compliment the bus network to the airport's east and the heavy lifting rail line?

Servicing the areas directly to the east and south-east of the airport should be within the scope of the new study.

<h2>Strategic land-use context</h2>

<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="350" scrolling="no" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/ZBdK2sX3DFo" width="100%"></iframe>

It's also worth reminding ourselves that there is a significant body of strategic planning work underway in the region, most notably the <a href="https://vpa.vic.gov.au/project/sunshine-employment-cluster/">Sunshine National Employment and Innovation Cluster</a> shown in the video above.  

'All rails lead to Sunshine' when it comes to the metropolitan and regional network in this part of Melbourne - the Ballarat Line has budgeted work coming online soon where the line will be duplicated to Melton in preparation for electrification and the Sunbury line is directly benefiting from the Metro Tunnel project.

It's a combination of this already budgeted for or investment that's underway, minimal property acquisition/re-use of existing surplus land in existing rail corridors, coupled with the Victorian Planning Authority's planning work that makes Sunshine such a potent inclusion to a rail link to the airport.

In short, the promised cash should not be limited to just studying how to get an airport rail link up and running sooner, it should be a holistic airport ground transport plan for the next 50 years.
</body></html>

Alastair Taylor

Setting the scope for the upcoming $30 million Melbourne Airport Rail Link study

<html><body>
On Wednesday next week, <a href="http://cur.org.au/">RMIT's Centre for Urban Research</a> is holding its third monthly Talking Transport event: The Melbourne Airport Rail Link, are we there yet?

It is a free, <a href="https://www.eventbrite.com.au/e/the-melbourne-airport-rail-link-are-we-there-yet-tickets-34843527930">ticketed event</a>, to be held at RMIT's Building 80 - located at 445 Swanston Street - level 11, room 10 from 6:00 pm.

<blockquote>
<h3>Description</h3>

Recently, the Australian Government pledged $30 million in addition to the Victorian Government's $10 million for the development of a business case for a rail link between Melbourne's Tullamarine Airport and city, much to the delight of many Victorians.

A train between the airport and city may seem like a no-brainer for Melbourne, but are there details that may derail our expectations?

Join us for the third instalment of RMIT Centre for Urban Research’s Talking Transport series where we bring together leading experts from government, academia, industry and the community sector, to explore and identify real solutions for our city’s future mobility.

The panelists will be seeking to address:

<ul>
<li>Should the link be privately or publicly owned?</li>
	<li>How will that affect ticket pricing?</li>
	<li>What route should the link take?</li>
	<li>Should it be part of the Melbourne Metro?</li>
	<li>Should it be built before or after the Metro?</li>
	<li>What mistakes have other cities similar to Melbourne made and how can we avoid it?</li>
	<li>Should the airport rail should be our #1 priority or are there other public transport projects or issues more deserving of immediate attention?</li>
</ul>
Speakers:

<ul>
<li>
<a href="https://www.ptua.org.au/team/tonymorton/" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow" target="_blank">Anthony Morton</a>, President PTUA</li>
	<li>
<a href="http://www.impa.org.au/peoplek/" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow" target="_blank">Marianne Richards</a>, Vice-President Inner Melbourne Planning Alliance</li>
	<li>
<a href="http://www.railfutures.org.au/about-rail-futures/" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow" target="_blank">John Hearsch</a>, President, Rail Futures Institute</li>
	<li>
<a href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/edward-smelt-327b3242/?ppe=1" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow" target="_blank">Edward Smelt</a>, Principal Engineer Infrastructure Victoria</li>
</ul>
* More speakers to be announced

Moderator:

<ul>
<li>
<a href="http://cur.org.au/people/professor-michael-buxton/" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow" target="_blank">Michael Buxton</a>, Professor of Environment and Planning RMIT University</li>
</ul>
Date/Time:

Wednesday 31st May, 6:00pm-7:15pm.
</blockquote>

To book a free seat, please see this link on <a href="https://www.eventbrite.com.au/e/the-melbourne-airport-rail-link-are-we-there-yet-tickets-34843527930">Eventbrite</a>.

The Centre for Urban Research also streams its events on <a href="https://www.facebook.com/RMITCUR/">Facebook live</a>. Shown below are the first two seminars.

April 26th:

<iframe allowfullscreen="true" allowtransparency="true" frameborder="0" height="350" scrolling="no" src="https://www.facebook.com/plugins/video.php?href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2FRMITCUR%2Fvideos%2F1259704960794910%2F&amp;show_text=0&amp;width=560" style="border:none;overflow:hidden" width="100%"></iframe>

March 22nd:

<iframe allowfullscreen="true" allowtransparency="true" frameborder="0" height="350" scrolling="no" src="https://www.facebook.com/plugins/video.php?href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2FRMITCUR%2Fvideos%2F1221957964569610%2F&amp;show_text=0&amp;width=560" style="border:none;overflow:hidden" width="100%"></iframe>
</body></html>

Event: The Melbourne Airport Rail Link, are we there yet?

<html><body>
On Sunday, the Minister for Public Transport and the Premier were in Warrigal to announce the Victorian Government's regional rail revival program. Soon after, the Victorian Government announced their intention to spend $10 million on figuring out how to deliver the Melbourne Airport rail link sooner than the timeframe specified in infrastructure Victoria's 30-year strategy.

This $10 million comes with strings attached, however: it - along with the Regional Rail Revival program - will be financed out of the money that Victoria is entitled to under the Federal Government's asset recycling scheme.

This announcement marks a distinctive shift in Victorian Government rhetoric when it comes to the Melbourne Airport rail link. To date, the Victorian Government has frequently attempted to shift the focus to its current portfolio of infrastructure projects and likewise, they have repeatedly said that the Melbourne Metro project must be built before the Melbourne Airport rail link.

Various news reports have circulated widely in the past of proposals by private organisations to link the airport and city via monorail or other rail-based technologies and the Victorian Government's response has often been reported that the project proponents should approach the government through the unsolicited proposals process.

In receiving briefings from the proponents, the Victorian Government appears to have made the judgement that there is a large amount of interest in linking the airport and Melbourne's CBD with the rail-based transit solution via a privately funded solution.

What a privately funded rail solution looks like is hard to picture at present but it could involve utilising a completely different rail technology and corridor or it could also involve a Melbourne Metro-style private-public partnership extension to our current rail network out to the airport.

In any case, dialing everything back to effectively starting from scratch might frustrate some but on the other hand it also provides far more freedom to develop solutions in relieving pressure on the road network in accessing Melbourne Airport.

At a fundamental level this new business case and study round should revisit all previous Melbourne Airport rail link studies and update the data contained within them. This would include projected rail passenger statistics, updated aviation passenger projections, and taking a more forensic look at how land is used around the airport and how many people are, and how many people will be employment in non-aviation related jobs in future.

One of the themes from Infrastructure Victoria's 30-year strategy found that, when modeled, if a rail link is much more than just a 'City to Airport' service, it has the tendency to have positive impacts dispersed over a greater area. In the 30-year strategy's case, having Melbourne Airport Rail Link as a branch of the new high capacity metro line would take cars off the Monash because airport services would run through the city and out to the south-east.

There is a good body of commentary and evidence elsewhere around the world which points to airport rail solutions should try to serve more than two destinations and the fares should be realistic. Jarrett Walker's article on <a href="http://humantransit.org/2016/03/keys-to-great-airport-transit">Keys to Great Airport Transit</a> is an excellent starting point.

<blockquote>
Toronto’s new <a href="https://www.upexpress.com/">high-fare, elite train</a> between downtown and the airport is a <a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/toronto/union-pearson-express-ridership-slumps-to-all-time-low/article28634074/">failure in ridership terms</a>, so it’s a good moment to talk about transit to the airport in general.

This <a href="http://www.ryerson.ca/citybuilding/blog/up_express_and_down/?mc_cid=7f336ff24e&amp;mc_eid=9acc982aad">critique by Cherise Burda of Ryerson University, one of the Toronto line’s few regular riders</a>, pretty much sums up why the Toronto Union Pearson Express is doing so poorly: Fares too high (CAD $27.50 one way) for a line that just doesn’t connect the airport to enough places.
<cite>Jarrett Walker, <a href="http://humantransit.org/2016/03/keys-to-great-airport-transit">Keys to Great Airport Transit</a></cite>
</blockquote>

Interestingly, since that article was published (and the linked blog post was published), Toronto has dramatically reduced the Union-Pearson Express fares and <a href="https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/transportation/2016/03/17/union-pearson-express-ridership-spikes-after-fare-reduction">patronage has subsequently blossomed</a>.

While we should welcome any action on getting rail into Melbourne Airport (the faster, the better), if we're going down the path where there is a greater private sector role in developing the Melbourne Airport Rail solution, we mustn't ignore the experience other cities have had.
</body></html>

$10M Melbourne Airport Rail link study: don't ignore lessons from other cities

<html><body>
In December 2016, Melbourne airport almost nudged 1,000,000 international passengers through its terminals - on top of the 2,100,000 people who flew through the domestic terminals.

The January 25th media release title says it all: "<a href="http://melbourneairport.com.au/news-events/listing/overview/melbourne-airport-passenger-records-smashed-in-2016-2136">Melbourne Airport passenger records smashed in 2016</a>".

In December 2015, 864,477 international passengers used Tullamarine, in December 2016: 953,855 passengers embarked on their journey to or from Australia through our airport, representing 10.2% growth.

Domestic growth was a little more tempered, where 2,188,317 people used the domestic terminals (compared to the December 2015 numbers of 2,142,748) representing 2.1% growth.

Overall, the calendar year saw 34.6 million passengers fly through Melbourne Airport - 4.6% growth compared to the 2015 calendar year.  4.6% growth is <a href="/news/tick-tock-melbourne-airport-records-5-1-fy16-passenger-growth">bang-on the 10 year average growth rate</a> at the airport.  

Tick tock, tick tock.

<h2>Monorail proposal pops up again</h2>

Despite the curious, generalised and overwhelmingly simplistic put-down of old steel-wheel on steel-rail technology in the first 15 seconds of its corporate video, <a href="http://www.airshuttleaust.com.au/">Airshuttle Australia</a> as it is now known, popped up again in October last year with a promise to build a cheap monorail down a freeway median with a ticket price similar to the current skybus.

On the whole we should encourage solutions that propose to use a different technology to fulfil a solution to a major problem. Yet, I question whether it should be a sky-high fares, private-sector type solution.

There's a now a decent amount of literature on Toronto's dalliance with dedicated "downtown to Airport" rail which began services with sky-high fares only to have them more-than-halved soon after launch.  4-5 months after fares were chopped in half, ridership had tripled according to <a href="http://torontoist.com/2016/10/ridership-is-up-on-torontos-airport-rail-link/">Torontoist</a>.  

I recommend reading Human Transit's "<a href="http://humantransit.org/2016/03/keys-to-great-airport-transit">Keys to Great Airport Transit</a>"; discerning readers will note this one major warning: don't limit the airport rail service to just make it serve one destination, having more is better.  

Consider this: Toronto Pearson saw 40 million passengers in 2016, Melbourne Tullamarine saw 34.6 million.  Toronto Pearson is - measured by rail distance 23 km from the centre of the city, Melbourne Tullamarine would be a similar distance via Sunshine &amp; Albion.  The Union-Pearson Express has two intermediate stops, an airport rail line to Tullamarine would likely stop at Footscray and Sunshine (including Metro tunnel stations).

In fact the only dramatic difference between Toronto and Melbourne airport is that Toronto sees a much higher amount of aircraft movements (~440k versus ~250k), best explained owing to the nature of North American aviation: short and medium distance city pairs are generally served by regional jets (~50-100 passengers) on high frequencies; the bulk of Melbourne's aircraft movements are undertaken in Boeing 737/Airbus 320 or larger sized aircraft (~150-180+ passengers).

It's not uncommon to hear/read people use the early experience of Sydney and Brisbane when discussing (or debating) Melbourne's possible solution for better public transport to the airport. 

Sydney, if you go by Human Transit's guidance, got it right on making trains go "somewhere else" other than the city and airport (trains head all the way out to the south western suburbs) but got it wrong on fares.  <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/train-passengers-to-sydney-airport-line-governments-coffers-to-tune-of-100m-20160301-gn7c3y">Calls are still to this day being made</a> to eliminate the high access fee which bumps up the Sydney airport rail fares.

The lessons of Toronto are possibly the most relevant to Melbourne and here's hoping the state government take heed of them when assessing an unsolicited proposal, should one actually end up on Spring Street.
</body></html>

Tick tock: Melbourne airport achieves 10% year-on-year international passenger growth in 2016

<html><body>
<h2>Comment</h2>

The clock keeps ticking. And it's not going away anytime soon. I'm of course talking about land transport to and from Melbourne Airport, or more to the point our over-reliance on the road network to transport both passengers and employees to and from the airport terminals and the many businesses located nearby.

In either reporting or an op-ed form, there's a vast array of published public advocacy for a Melbourne rail link both here on UM and elsewhere, and when Spring Street is asked to comment, this article in <a href="http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/melbourne-aiport-begs-for-rail-link-warns-tullamarine-freeway-faces-gridlock-20161205-gt4hnr">The Age</a> from December 2016 illustrates the government's consistent response: yes, but not now.

<blockquote>
Public Transport Minister Jacinta Allan said an airport rail link could not be build without the Metro Rail Tunnel first being completed.

"In less than two years we've fully funded and started building the Metro Tunnel, and we're getting on with the other major projects our network needs – 50 level crossing removals, bigger trains, high-capacity signalling and major line upgrades in Melbourne and regional Victoria," Ms Allan said.
<cite>Public Transport Minister Jacinta Allan as quoted in <a href="http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/melbourne-aiport-begs-for-rail-link-warns-tullamarine-freeway-faces-gridlock-20161205-gt4hnr">The Age</a></cite>
</blockquote>

Whether the government doesn't want to commit to expanding the scope of works required in an already incredibly large-scale project - the 'High Capacity Metro Line' (HCML - the Melbourne Metro Tunnel + Level Crossing removals + new trains + new signalling system on the Sunbury-Pakenham/Cranbourne corridor) - or some other reason, we may never know.

However, the 'line' pushed out by the government is consistent: the government is placing a de facto Metro tunnel dependency on the Melbourne Airport Rail link.

If we take this on face value, then why isn't the government positioning itself to kick off the project so that its construction and opening coincides with the completion of the metro tunnel in 2025-2026? Day 1 of metro tunnel operations would be day 1 of Airport rail services as well as Melton.

The <a href="http://www.infrastructurevictoria.com.au/sites/default/files/files/Draft%20strategy%20-%20tech%20reports/AECOMPwC%20Options%20Assessment%203%20Technical%20Report%20%E2%80%93%20Supplement%20C.PDF">Aecom-PWC report</a> conducted for Infrastructure Victoria to inform the authority on the costs of well-known big-ticket transport projects produced a 'lower bound cost' of $2.1 billion and an 'upper bound cost' of $3.1 billion to build the Melbourne Airport Heavy rail line - project coded as MAH (refer to <a href="http://www.infrastructurevictoria.com.au/sites/default/files/files/Draft%20strategy%20-%20tech%20reports/AECOMPwC%20Options%20Assessment%203%20Technical%20Report%20%E2%80%93%20Supplement%20C.PDF">pages 25 through 30</a>).

The line as assessed in the report would include rebuilding Albion Station (and presumably a proper grade separated rail junction that didn't force airport trains to pass the Albion station platforms), a new rail bridge over the Maribyrnong (presumably to run alongside the <a href="https://goo.gl/maps/63W8YFSSzxo">existing bridge</a> which carries the interstate network across the river), an elevated track section in the airport precinct and a station at the airport near the transport hub near terminals 3 &amp; 4.

The draft options book, which the Aecom-PWC report findings were fed into, found that the benefit-cost ratio without wider economic benefits ranged from 1.0 and 1.2 and with wider economic benefits, the ratio would be 1.2 to 1.6. In other words, the project makes economic sense in that the project would produce an 'even' return (1.0) or more likely a positive return.

<blockquote>
While the existing plans for an Airport Rail Link have provided the basis for our assessment, we have not proposed a particular technical solution for this option, but note that existing plans for the rail link along the Albion East alignment and connecting to the south-east via the Melbourne Metro tunnel are projected to face capacity challenges over the long term, due to growth on the Melton and Sunbury lines which would share tracks with the airport line.

A more enduring solution could require a different network configuration, potentially leveraging further capacity upgrades to the Sunshine and Werribee corridors (ref. 10.10.2), or by identifying a different corridor for the airport rail link – whether connected to the existing rail corridor or a separate dedicated link. Consideration could even be given to linking to regional rail corridors.

However, caution is warranted in pursuing any options which would be materially higher cost than the current plans.
<cite><a href="http://www.infrastructurevictoria.com.au/sites/default/files/files/Draft%20Options%20Book%20Version%20Two%20-%20FINAL.PDF">Infrastructure Victoria Draft Options Book version two</a>, page 460</cite>
</blockquote>

Furthermore:

<blockquote>
With the large supply of car parking areas at Melbourne Airport, there is a risk that the structure of the pricing and number of services may not attract people to leave their cars at home.

This could lower the benefits from this option that involves a significant capital investment. This option presents the opportunity to re-use a proportion of the existing airport car parking for more productive land uses such as hotels and other development plans to increase the ability to realise Melbourne Airport as a national employment centre.
<cite><a href="http://www.infrastructurevictoria.com.au/sites/default/files/files/Draft%20Options%20Book%20Version%20Two%20-%20FINAL.PDF">Infrastructure Victoria Draft Options Book version two</a>, page 460</cite>
</blockquote>

<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_3_0.png" rel="gallery-all" title="The Melton &amp; Airport lines in the context of the 2012 PTV Network Development Plan"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="490" src="/sites/urban.melbourne/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/schematic_stage_3_0.png?itok=75YHa7P0" title="The Melton &amp; Airport lines in the context of the 2012 PTV Network Development Plan" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>The Melton &amp; Airport lines in the context of the 2012 PTV Network Development Plan</figcaption></figure>In 2016's budget, nearly half a billion dollars was committed to upgrading the Ballarat line - including duplicating the track between Deer Park and Melton as the precursor to electrification and bringing Melton onto the Metro network, another western branch of the new HCML.

And most recently comments from the Prime Minister about Melbourne's lack of a rail link point to, perhaps, an increasing willingness for the Federal Government to finally invest in a proper city shaping project (and not a project for the road freight lobby) in Melbourne.

Despite efforts at the state level to remove the politics out of infrastructure planning - the true test for Spring Street will be once they release their 5-year plan at the end of the year - populism is going to reign supreme at the Federal level.

Daniel Andrews, Jacinta Allan and Tim Pallas should be grabbing this opportunity to kick off the planning and design for the second round of Melton line works (the electrification) and the planning and design for the Airport Link at the same time.

The existing non-electrified regional track from Sunshine to Deer Park will need to be duplicated (to become a 4 track corridor) to maintain separation of Vline and Metro services where the regional trains are at their most frequent (Geelong trains turn off the corridor beyond Deer Park) and that will inevitably result in augmentation of Sunshine station, specifically its track layout.

Given the likelihood of building airport rail link will require minimal interaction with existing services - it would be built adjacent to existing track or in new corridors - and that catenary can be installed with only minor interference with existing services, the major disruptive works will likely be where the two branches connect with the mainline and Sunshine and Albion respectively. Upgrading Melton and building the Airport branches at the same time would present an opportunity to minimise disruption by building both new junctions at the same time.

The overwhelming majority of track for the airport line in the Albion corridor can be built in isolation, therefore it begs the question what's stopping the planning for the airport link and Melton electrification kicking off soon with the aim of opening these two new branches at or around the same time as the HCML?

If the High Capacity Metro Line is to begin operations in 2025-2026 when the new tunnel opens, that's plenty of lead time for both governments to invest in the detailed business case for both branches within the next 12 months and then pending the results, kick off an 18-24 month planning and design period thereafter.

Another 36-month build-test-commission period after the planning and design phase would bring us very close to the estimated High Capacity Metro Line opening date.

Spring Street might want Melburnians to focus on the huge infrastructure programme it has unleashed on the city already, however what's next?

The 5 year plan to be released at the end of the year might answer this question but will the Federal Government be on side with it? Unlikely - it's far more likely to be infrastructure politics as usual when it comes to dealing with Canberra.

Spring Street should be getting the Federal Government to put their money where the Prime Minister's mouth is and get them to lock in the $2-$3 billion extra needed to add the airport branch to the new cross-city metro line.

Lead image: Daniel Bowen
</body></html>

Tick tock: let's get Melton upgraded and the Airport rail link built at the same time

<html><body>
It's been an eventful week or so at Melbourne Airport.

Another new international carrier has inaugurated a service linking regional China with Melbourne, <a href="http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/missing-link-toll-road-on-infrastructure-victoria-agenda-for-melbourne-20161003-gru0g8">the rail link is back in the news</a> and last week the annual <a href="http://melbourneairport.com.au/about-melbourne-airport/corporate-information/stakeholder-event-2016">Stakeholder Report for 2016</a> was held. Largely an event held to inform investors, key details on the airport's upcoming landside and airside projects were outlined, as well as its strategic vision for the future.

Missing completely from the hour long presentation was any mention of Australia Pacific Airports Corporation (APAC) Limited's intentions to overhaul the international terminal, as was outlined during the <a href="/news/melbourne-airports-stakeholder-presentation-reveals-a-new-international-terminal">equivalent 2014 presentation</a>.

Dating back to the airport's inception during 1970, Terminal 2 was slated for a regeneration project which was at the time dubbed 'Market Place'. The cavernous new international terminal space looks to have been placed on the back-burner, even though Melbourne is witnessing unprecedented levels of international travel demand.

<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/image15map_1.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="Artist's impression of the overhauled T2. Image: APAC Limited"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="240" src="/sites/urban.melbourne/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/image15map_1.jpg?itok=YuNrh31G" title="Artist's impression of the overhauled T2. Image: APAC Limited" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>2014 artist's impression of the overhauled T2. Image: APAC Limited</figcaption></figure>On the back of strong Chinese tourist growth, Melbourne Airport witnessed an international capacity jump of 7% over the last year, with actual international passenger numbers increasing 9.5% to roughly 9 million. The figures will further balloon in coming weeks and months, with an average of 5-6 new international flights per day already announced by a variety of operators during the coming summer schedule.

Those out there who regularly use Terminal 2 will understand how difficult the arrivals process can be during the morning international peak period, and will be somewhat relieved to know that more subdued works are still planned within Terminal 2.

Alleviating the stresses within the international arrivals hall will see both pre and post customs areas taking on a new look, as seen below.

<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/image29_7.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="A new Arrivals experience. Image: APAC Limited"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="292" src="/sites/urban.melbourne/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/image29_7.jpg?itok=Vf2DWag1" title="A new Arrivals experience. Image: APAC Limited" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>A new Arrivals experience. Image: APAC Limited</figcaption></figure>The presentation also shed further light upon APAC Limited's intentions to expand Melbourne Airport's runway capacity, beginning with an extension of the existing east–west runway, and followed by a new parallel east–west runway which will in time become one of the largest projects delivered since the airport's inception.

APAC Limited are also ramping up their diversification of uses across the wider Melbourne Airport precinct. A new surf park on the facility's perimiter will draw non-aviation patrons to the precinct and is expected to be operational during 2018.

Strong passenger numbers have also seen APAC Limited increase their rhetoric regarding a new airport hotel, while imagery during the presentation depicts a new mid-rise commercial precinct surrounding Gowrie Park Drive, east of the current Holiday Inn. This area has been vacant and underutilised for well over a decade.

According to the presentation, Melbourne Airport expects to handle 40 million passengers by 2023.

<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/image26_4.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="A diversified new commercial precinct within Melbourne Airport. Image: APAC Limited"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="278" src="/sites/urban.melbourne/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/image26_4.jpg?itok=aGc3Zubo" title="A diversified new commercial precinct within Melbourne Airport. Image: APAC Limited" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>A diversified new commercial precinct within Melbourne Airport. Image: APAC Limited</figcaption></figure>
</body></html>

silvermb

Melbourne Airport gears up for expansion, but no international terminal upgrade in sight

<html><body>
Refreshed stations delivered as part of the ongoing level crossing removal project, the new Melbourne Metro tunnel, ballsy private sector-lead high-speed rail proposals like CLARA and now the Rail Futures 'InterCity' paper. It's a good mix of shovels in the ground and an eye on the future of rail in the state.

The Consolidated Land and Rail Australia (CLARA) high-speed rail and InterCity paper by Rail Futures have a true statewide focus through the creation of brand new cities serviced by a high-speed rail line (CLARA) and InterCity's advocacy for population decentralisation outside of Melbourne.

While it is tempting to launch straight into an analysis of the hard infrastructure proposals in the InterCity report, we need to talk about the notion of a "State of Cities".

It's quite easy to throw phrases like "building sustainable cities" around, and 9 times out of 10, the message will likely be interpreted as building green cities, which is fine, but what about a growing city sustaining its own residents through increased local employment opportunities?

I must echo the comments made by Alan Davies <a href="https://blogs.crikey.com.au/theurbanist/2016/09/07/are-regional-dormitories-the-way-to-grow-our-cities/">earlier this week</a>: the overriding vision in the InterCity report seems to focus largely on enhanced regional rail line infrastructure and services as the new high-speed commuter conduits from the regional cities into central Melbourne.

Talk about throwing the baby out with the bathwater when it comes to the '20 minute city' concept (regardless of how pithy that aspiration is). Inter-city commuting, on the scale of Ballarat/Geelong/Bendigo to central Melbourne, would be the domain with those with high levels of income.

The regional cities may currently have, and potentially build new, affordable housing, but it won't be cheap to commute, nor should it. We should be focusing our efforts on creating jobs in the regional cities so that locals can work local.

It would be wrong to narrow the affordable housing debate into one of grand-scale long-distance commuting to Melbourne from the regional cities and this specific debate needs further study, not just from the planning and transport realm, but also the health, economic and small, medium and large business realms.

Moreover in InterCity, there's an assumption that regional rail services will remain diesel-powered.

In light of the Victorian Government's recent posturing to kick-start renewable energy investment as well as the <a href="http://reneweconomy.com.au/2016/new-hope-for-solar-towers-as-south-aust-seeks-energy-competitors-94366">recent news</a> that the SA Government 'announced a new tender designed to introduce new competition in the [generation] market': to build solar-based power plants and storage, capable of dispatching electricity into the grid 24 hours a day. I'd argue that on top of assessing the individual proposals, a switch to greater electrification throughout the regional rail network should also receive a look in.

Overall however, InterCity is an elegant and informative document and will likely be a report that's referenced a lot in future (the proposals contained within it now need to run the gauntlet of cost-benefit analyses to ascertain whether any of its multiple proposals stack up).

<h2>CLARA and InterCity: a crossover?</h2>

The proposals outlined in the <a href="http://www.railfutures.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/160804-Regional-Rail-paper-v14.1.11-final-for-printing.pdf">InterCity report</a> are spread over two phases:

Phase 1 would see an investment program which deals with incremental change over a few election cycles: line speed upgrades (trackwork, signaling, level crossing protection), duplicating single track sections and quadruplicating metro area track to allow greater separation of regional and metro trains as well as increase regional service frequencies. The start of the cross-country network on the newly converted standard gauge track between Geelong, Ballarat and Maryborough/Horsham would also begin in this phase.

<blockquote>
Phase 1 also includes a fundamental shift in transport govenance, to actively integrate planning across transport modes and to deliver on the objectives of the Transport Integration Act 2010.

<cite>InterCity: How regional rail can re-balance population growth and create a 'state of cities' in Victoria (page 44)</cite>
</blockquote>

Phase 2 is the more meaty part of the infrastructure proposal, made possible by changes in phase 1: further line speed upgrades to enable 200kph operations where achievable, a dedicated fast line that would extend from Southern Cross to Melbourne Airport and then act as a new main line for Bendigo/Echuca/Swan Hill and Seymour/Shepparton/Wodonga regional services.

This new route would also double as the future path for future inter-state high-speed rail services to enter Melbourne.

The second phase also calls for a new fast line to Geelong that would connect to the cross-country network and that same network would then be extended from Maryborough into Bendigo. Overarching everything would see more and more lines converted from broad gauge track to standard gauge, presumably made simpler by installing dual gauge sleepers from the get-go so that a gauge switch can eventually be carried out with minimal disruption.

<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/intercity_phase2_map.png" rel="gallery-all" title="InterCity: infrastructure investment in phase 2 (page 45)"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="457" src="/sites/urban.melbourne/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/intercity_phase2_map.png?itok=IWhWXT_5" title="InterCity: infrastructure investment in phase 2 (page 45)" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>InterCity: infrastructure investment in phase 2 (page 45)</figcaption></figure>The <a href="http://www.clara.com.au/">CLARA</a> high-speed rail and city-building proposal came to light in mid-July with ex-Premiers of Victoria and New South Wales fronting a media conference. The organisation's website is vague and much of the media reporting at the time was also vague: there's still a lot of cards being held close to the chest of the CLARA directors.

One might expect a proposal such as this to tout a particular rail technology, alas, it didn't. Instead, visitors to CLARA's website are presented with images and a video which depicts conventional high-speed rail (metal wheels on metal tracks) and maglev technology.

No doubt there are commercial reasons behind not revealing the type of high-speed rail CLARA will run with eventually, however if any tests that might prove any of InterCity's proposals to be worthy of adding to the long-term infrastructure for the state come back positive, this would likely force the hand of CLARA or any other future high-speed rail proposal linking the state capitals.

Inherent in InterCity's proposal is that the airport will function as a major hub: regional services would run to and from Bendigo and Seymour, City-Airport rail shuttle services and high-speed rail would use this corridor over the longer term. If this proposal is studied at any great length and it is found to have merit, the tracks initially built for the regional and shuttle services will not be able to handle maglev trains.

The sooner a clearer picture of the entire CLARA proposition is made public, the better.

<h2>InterCity's airport hub focus: multiple birds with one stone?</h2>

Based on media reporting at the time of CLARA's unveiling, it has become apparent that the Melbourne end of the route to Sydney is likely to kick off first. And fundamental to this will be the decision on how to access the terminus in central Melbourne.

If I were a betting man, I'd offer good odds that the Rudd and Gillard-era high-speed rail study for the east coast from 2012 has informed a part of CLARA's proposal. Thanks to the documents that are now in the public domain we know <a href="https://infrastructure.gov.au/rail/trains/high_speed/files/HSR_Phase_2_Appendix_Group_3D_Melbourne.pdf">the indicative route</a> and the estimated capital costs involved in the 2012 study.

<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/ec_hsr_costs.png" rel="gallery-all" title="Estimated costs on the East Coast High Speed Rail network (Appendix 4B)"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="427" src="/sites/urban.melbourne/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/ec_hsr_costs.png?itok=MeqT6wY4" title="Estimated costs on the East Coast High Speed Rail network (Appendix 4B)" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>Estimated costs on the East Coast High-Speed Rail network (<a href="https://infrastructure.gov.au/rail/trains/high_speed/files/HSR_Phase_2_Appendix_Group_4_Cost_and_program.pdf">Appendix 4B</a>)</figcaption></figure>The 2012-era study foresaw the east coast high-speed rail network as a conventional line (minimum 300kph operations) which require their own corridor but do have the ability operate over the conventional networks. This is how the TGV system works in France: all high-speed lines lead to Paris and they connect with the mainline network on the outskirts of the city, and then travel to the various terminii on the lower-speed network.

Regardless, due to the century's old Australian anachronism of differing rail gauges, a new track pair would need to be built in Melbourne (or the really cheap solution would be to go really slow over the existing standard gauge line, fighting for access with freight trains).

The 2012 study found that the most effective solution to access Southern Cross is to build an approximately 12-13 kilometre tunnel from Gowrie station, near the Western Ring Road and Hume HWY, all the way to Southern Cross underneath the existing Upfield line; the orange line in the map below is an approximation of this route.

<iframe frameborder="0" height="480" scrolling="no" src="https://www.google.com/maps/d/embed?mid=1D-QCvXH91ehwoHgPkWlO70JxkeA&amp;hl=en" width="100%"></iframe>

The estimated cost of this tunnel in 2012 was $2.2 billion. If you're trying to get your head around that figure by trying to compare it to the $6 billion figure for the 9km Melbourne Metro Rail tunnel, just don't. In short, a basic explanation is: the high-speed rail tunnel would just be that: a tunnel. No stations en route, just a path for trains to move in and out of Southern Cross and the Melbourne metropolitan area.

The 2012 study also has a "Northern Melbourne" station located just outside the tunnel in Campbellfield. The <a href="https://infrastructure.gov.au/rail/trains/high_speed/files/HSR_Phase_2_Chapter_3.pdf">indicative service plan</a> as part of the study foresaw this station effectively working in peak flow directions on the flagship inter-city express services: morning peak all Sydney-bound trains would stop en route, and in afternoon peaks all Melbourne-bound trains would stop here.

The rest of the 'pretty' lines on that map are my attempt to adapt the InterCity Melbourne Airport hub and the 2012 east-coast high-speed rail study. The blue line is a tunnel, measuring 14km - approximately 1 kilometre longer than the 2012 study tunnel - and the pink line is an elevated track leading to an elevated station 'bolted on' to the Terminal 1 expansion (which is depicted in Tullamarine's master plan); zoom in on the airport for more detail.

The Green and Yellow lines beyond the airport are my approximation of the new regional (and eventual high-speed) lines from the InterCity report.

Essentially the 2012 study route and station has been moved westward in that map: a tunnel leading all the way to Southern Cross is still the backbone, there's a "Northern Melbourne" station at the airport and the connections beyond the airport run outside the urban growth boundary for the most part (the 2012 study would have seen a new line built in the existing Upfield and Craigieburn-Wallan rail corridors, right through the middle of the growth areas).

Taking the known estimates for the 2012 study, I assume the cost to build the proposal as shown in the map would be similar to the study's cost breakdown; perhaps with a higher station, bridge and earthworks cost.

Like many others I don't hold high hopes for a high-speed rail line anytime soon. That's said, I'll be watching the CLARA proposal with interest and here's hoping the ducks fall into line across the various governments.

Furthermore I acknowledge the <a href="http://metrotunnel.vic.gov.au/resources/business-case">Melbourne Metro Rail business case</a> makes it pretty clear that airport rail services will eventually run through it; however it's always good to take a fresh look at things, especially now that the InterCity report is out in the open.

To close, I'll leave you with this thought: a 19km journey from Southern Cross through the tunnel and over the elevated sections into the airport station with a maximum speed of 200kph could be done in 8-10 minutes. How do you like them apples, Skybus and Transurban?
</body></html>

CLARA & Rail Future's InterCity: a crossover?

<html><body>
Melbourne's Tullamarine airport <a href="http://melbourneairport.com.au/news-events/listing/overview/melbourne-airports-2015-16-passenger-traffic-results">published its latest passenger numbers</a> on July 20th and announced it had achieved 5.1% passenger growth in the financial year ending June 30. This comprised 9.5% in international passenger growth compared to the same time last year and 3.7% passenger growth in the higher volume domestic segment.

At June 30th 2015, 32,192,000 passengers either originated or terminated a trip at Tullamarine's terminals and a further 122,000 transited at Melbourne to weigh in with a financial year 2015 total of 32,314,000 passengers.

Contrast this with the financial year just finished: 33,876,000 origin/destination passengers - made up of 9,165,000 international and 24,711,000 domestic trips - and coupled with a further 91,000 transiting passengers, the financial year to June 30 2016 total 33,967,000 passengers.

That's 1,684,000 more passengers that will have needed to travel to or from the airport terminals, compared to last year. All of those transfers/last mile trips will have taken placed on roads: on SkyBus, smart buses, private cars, taxis, Uber, town car services or shuttle buses. And that's only the passengers, never mind the legions of people who work at or near the airport precinct.

Aviation passenger statistics have peaks and troughs - at different times of the year and at different times of the week - for simplicity's sake by dividing the year-on-year growth number by 365 days in the year, we come up with an average of 4,613 new passenger trips along the Tullamarine Freeway, Airport Drive or Bulla Road.

But what is it going to be like in 10 years if similar growth continues?

According to the Bureau of Infrastructure, Transport &amp; Regional Economic's <a href="http://bitre.gov.au/statistics/aviation/index.aspx">aviation statistics</a>, in the past decade Melbourne airport has no recorded a negative calendar year of passenger growth. We've had two years of slow growth (1.3% in 2009 and 1% in 2011), however we have had on average 4.73% passenger growth each year since 2006. (See the data <a href="http://bitre.gov.au/publications/ongoing/files/WebAirport_CY_1985-2015.xls">here</a>).

<table border="1" cellpadding="1" cellspacing="1" style="width:100%;">
<thead><tr>
<th scope="col">Calendar Year</th>
			<th scope="col">Projected passenger growth 4% p.a.</th>
			<th scope="col">Projected passenger growth 2% p.a.</th>
		</tr></thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td>2016</td>
			<td>34,101,000</td>
			<td>33,446,000</td>
		</tr>
<tr>
<td>2017</td>
			<td>35,465,000</td>
			<td>34,114,000</td>
		</tr>
<tr>
<td>2018</td>
			<td>36,884,000</td>
			<td>34,797,000</td>
		</tr>
<tr>
<td>2019</td>
			<td>38,359,000</td>
			<td>35,493,000</td>
		</tr>
<tr>
<td>2020</td>
			<td>39,894,000</td>
			<td>36,203,000</td>
		</tr>
<tr>
<td>2021</td>
			<td>41,490,000</td>
			<td>36,927,000</td>
		</tr>
<tr>
<td>2022</td>
			<td>43,149,000</td>
			<td>37,665,000</td>
		</tr>
<tr>
<td>2023</td>
			<td>44,875,000</td>
			<td>38,418,000</td>
		</tr>
<tr>
<td>2024</td>
			<td>46,670,000</td>
			<td>39,187,000</td>
		</tr>
<tr>
<td>2025</td>
			<td>48,537,000</td>
			<td>39,981,000</td>
		</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
* The above passenger projections are based on BITRE's 2015 Calendar year figure of 32,790,000 (rounded to nearest thousand) with 4% and 2% per annum growth scenarios accordingly.

Both growth scenarios above - the high growth scenario representing less than the average which has occurred over the past decade - paint a picture of Melbourne airport seeing between 40 and 49 million passengers either originating or terminating their trip at Tullamarine.

And all of these passenger trips through the airport terminals are going to be dependent on the road network.

The <a href="http://citylinktullawidening.vic.gov.au/about">Citylink-Tulla widening project</a> that is set to add an extra freeway lane from the West Gate Freeway all the way out to the airport is set to be complete and the short-term road capacity unlocked in 2018.

The <a href="http://melbournemetro.vic.gov.au/resources/business-case">Melbourne Metro Rail project</a>, which according to its <a href="/news"> business case documents</a> is a dependent project for the Melbourne Airport Rail Link, is not set to be complete until 2024.

Assuming a best case scenario where the planning, approvals, tendering and financing of the Melbourne Airport Rail Link were to occur in the latter stages of the Melbourne Metro Rail project's construction phase, so that construction can start in earnest soon after the Melbourne Metro Rail project is complete, we'd be looking at a rail link to Melbourne opening sometime in or after 2027 assuming a quick three year turnaround for construction of the Airport Rail Link.

10+ years from the time the new freeway capacity is unlocked (I give it, maximum, five years before we're back to the same congested status quo, just with higher volumes of traffic) to when a potential rail link would open is enormous. And risky from a congestion point of view; not just at the airport, but on many other segments of the Tullamarine Freeway.

The roar of engines on their take-off roll is only going to increase in frequency, yet this relentless passenger growth, both current and projected, is met with silence on providing real structural change in the way we interface with the airport.

Tick, tock.

Tick.

Tock.

Lead image credit: <a href="https://railgallery.wongm.com/skybus/E114_2168.jpg">wongm's rail gallery</a>
</body></html>

Tick tock: Melbourne airport records 5.1% FY16 passenger growth

<html><body>
<h2>Comment</h2>

In case you missed it, Melbourne's Tullamarine airport has been a story of growth, growth and even more growth for the past decade. A story of growth in passenger numbers using the terminals and a story of projected growth in employment within the entire aviation precinct.

One of the FAQs on the airport's <a href="http://melbourneairport.com.au/about-melbourne-airport/melbourne-airport-partners/faqs-1389">community &amp; partners web page</a> states "the airport's operations directly support 14,300 jobs, which is forecast to grow to 23,000 by 2033". Furthermore the FAQ goes on to state "more than two-thirds of these jobs are held by people living in communities around the airport".

According to official numbers published by the Federal Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development, in 2006 Tullamarine airport saw <a href="http://bitre.gov.au/publications/ongoing/airport_traffic_data.aspx">21,567,868 passengers</a> through its terminals. In 2015 it was <a href="http://melbourneairport.com.au/about-melbourne-airport/media/media-releases/melbourne-airports-2015-passenger-traffic-results-1868">32,989,094 passengers</a> according to an airport media release published in January; or better represented as 53% growth over a decade.

As they say in the financial world, past performance is not necessarily an indicator of future return, however if the next decade's growth is even remotely similar to that of the past then there will be upwards of 45,000,000-50,000,000 passengers using Melbourne airport by the time the Melbourne Metro Rail tunnel is open for business. The airport expects there to be 60,000,000 passengers to be <a href="http://melbourneairport.com.au/about-melbourne-airport/current-projects/road-improvement-projects">using the airport by 2030</a>.

<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/mel_air_precinct_plans.png" rel="gallery-all" title="The airport isn't just about travel: precinct breakdown from Melbourne Airport's master plan"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="407" src="/sites/urban.melbourne/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/mel_air_precinct_plans.png?itok=2fP6dIGM" title="The airport isn't just about travel: precinct breakdown from Melbourne Airport's master plan" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>The airport isn't just about travel: precinct breakdown from Melbourne Airport's master plan</figcaption></figure>Last year the $1.3 billion Citylink / Tullamarine Freeway widening project was announced which is set to add an extra traffic lane in each direction between the West Gate Freeway / Bolte Bridge interchange and Melbourne Airport.

Judging by the 6-7 year gap between widening projects on the Monash Freeway, it's likely the inducement effect of increased freeway capacity on the Tullamarine Freeway will have the road lobby squealing for another widening project in another decade, especially if the passenger and employment growth numbers projected at Melbourne airport actually come to fruition.

The centre of Melbourne - from a population and economic sense - is shifting westward and all the dry economic and planning commentary asking if a rail link to Melbourne Airport is worth it is moot as sometimes I think participants completely disregard the growth story at the airport and its surrounding employment precincts.

The Airport Drive extension was opened last year and thanks to a recent Google satellite map update over the entire metropolitan area, we can now clearly see the rapid change that's occurring in the 'landside business precinct' on the airport's land.

<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="450" scrolling="no" src="https://www.google.com/maps/embed?pb=!1m13!1m11!1m3!1d12212.711209546773!2d144.86063659064953!3d-37.69717590063364!2m2!1f0!2f0!3m2!1i1024!2i768!4f13.1!5e1!3m2!1sen!2sau!4v1458782613102" style="border:0" width="100%"></iframe>

Of course, we are going to need a rail line to the airport. The relentless growth reported monthly by the Melbourne airport owner continually counters here-and-now static arguments about public transport mode shift and whether or not the skybus service can continue to cope (and current road works are likely to play havoc with reliability, ditto for the next future widening project).

The questions we should be asking:

<ul>
<li>How many stations should the airport rail link have? A station near Sharps Road and Airport Drive? A station near Keilor Park Drive / Avondale Heights?</li>
	<li>How can we extend the route 59 tram to the airport to provide a high quality public transport service to the areas in the north west which are bypassed by the heavy rail line?</li>
	<li>Which roads and freeways require widening to cater for bus lanes carrying high frequency smart bus-like routes servicing areas to the west (Watergardens, Hillside, Melton, Caroline Springs) and east (Broadmeadows, Greenvale, Somerton, Epping, Campbellfield) of the airport?</li>
</ul>
Tullamarine Airport may have been built on the city fringe in the 60s/70s and thanks to the forward planning that has limited suburban growth to the west and north of the region, the airport enjoys a curfew-free status that is a distinct advantage over many other Australian cities. Like the centre of the city, the Tullamarine area is undergoing rapid growth.

The airport rail line has appeared on PTV heavy rail network development maps as a branch line of the larger Sunbury-Pakenham/Cranbourne line that will be created once the Melbourne Metro Rail project comes online since 2012, however beyond it being present on a map, no timeline for its construction has been published and you can be forgiven for thinking we're looking at a typical waterfall scenario of development.

The Melbourne Metro Rail tunnel is penciled in for a 2026 completion date and can we really wait another 4-5 years beyond that date for a heavy rail line to finally service the airport given the huge growth passenger and employment projections for the area?

No, we can't. Infrastructure Victoria needs to treat the Melbourne airport region like another CBD.

The authority needs to give Melbourne airport priority in assessing the ground transport needs so that the Victorian government can start allocating budget money for holistic transport planning and money for kicking off the smaller-scale projects - like bus and tram extensions - that can make a dent in the nauseating car dependency in and around Melbourne airport before a heavy rail line comes online.

Lead image credit: <a href="https://www.google.com.au/maps/@-37.6971759,144.8606366,2805m/data=!3m1!1e3">Google Maps</a>.
</body></html>

Should Melbourne Airport get special treatment in Infrastructure Victoria's 30 year strategy?

<html><body>
This morning marks a new beginning for Tullamarine with the phased opening of the new Terminal 4 starting today.

According to a <a href="http://www.t4you.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/FINAL-Mel-Air-Fact-Sh-T4-low-res.pdf">fact sheet</a> posted on T4's dedicated website - www.t4you.com.au - the terminal is "the first terminal in the Asia Pacific region to open as a complete self-service operation", referring to the self-service check-in kiosks and automated bag-drop facilities.

There has also been a departure from the norm in terms of accessing the terminals as well: check-in / bag-drop and arrivals baggage claim are all on the ground floor rather than being split between ground and upper floors as is common in the three other terminals at Tullamarine and other airports around Australia. As shown in the video below, after check-in passengers are required to head to the upper floor for the security check and departure lounges.

<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" scrolling="no" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/ubM-uU44lhc" width="100%"></iframe>

According to a Melbourne Airport spokesperson, the existing Tiger terminal check in and baggage claim (the infamous tin shed) areas are now being refurbished and Tiger Airways will be moved back into its original home after the refurbishment has been completed. This new work on the existing Tiger terminals will see the original facilities seamlessly connected to the new T4 building.

Jetstar and Rex will be operating from T4 in the "coming months" according to the fact sheet.

The terminal has a capacity for 10,000,000 passengers per year (or roughly one third of the passengers that currently fly in and out of Tullamarine annually at present) and over 30 retail and dining outlets will be located in the terminal when it's fully occupied. The new car parking facility that was under construction at the same time as T4 will open in coming months as well.

<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/150817-terminal-4_mprebeg_low-res_10-1500x1000.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="The check-in area of T4, image from www.t4you.com.au"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="387" src="/sites/urban.melbourne/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/150817-terminal-4_mprebeg_low-res_10-1500x1000.jpg?itok=IAVhpqfW" title="The check-in area of T4, image from www.t4you.com.au" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>The check-in area of T4, image from www.t4you.com.au</figcaption></figure>It's not hard to see why Tullamarine Airport has felt like a perpetual construction site for the past decade - with T2 (International) expansion and now the brand new T4 low-cost terminal - one need only look at the data available for passengers movements at the airport.

<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/mel_air_1985_2014.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="Melbourne's Tullamarine Airport passenger movements 1985-2014"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="299" src="/sites/urban.melbourne/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/mel_air_1985_2014.jpg?itok=tWD1AhDe" title="Melbourne's Tullamarine Airport passenger movements 1985-2014" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>Melbourne's Tullamarine Airport passenger movements 1985-2014</figcaption></figure>In 1985 when the data series available on <a href="https://bitre.gov.au/publications/ongoing/airport_traffic_data.aspx">BITRE's website</a> begins, there were 5.1 million domestic passengers, 1.2 million international passengers rounding up to a total of 6.3 million passengers. Interestingly international passengers at Tullamarine in 1985 represented 23% of all passengers passing through the airport.

Fast forward to 2014 and there were 23.3 million domestic passengers and 8 million international passengers totalling 31.4 million. In 2014 international passengers represented 34% of all passengers flying in and out of Tullamarine.

It took Tullamarine 12 years to move from 10 million passengers to the 20 million mark and it took nine years for Tullamarine to go from 20 million passengers to 30 million.
</body></html>

Melbourne Airport

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News

Melbourne Airport

Editor's Picks

Receive the latest news stories to your inbox

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News