Local developer Harridan is seeking to turn its Woolloongabba apartment project into the first stage of a broader transformation of Burke Street, using a new 16-storey mixed-use building to establish a greener pedestrian connection toward the rapidly evolving Boggo Road transport and knowledge precinct.

The South East Queensland developer has filed plans for 154 apartments on the <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/4-burke-street-woolloongabba-qld-4102">southern side of Burke Street</a>, where its proposal has been designed alongside a wider vision by LatStudios for the street.

That vision positions the southern side of Burke Street for buildings of 15 storeys and above, while envisaging lower-rise development of up to five storeys on the northern side to transition into Woolloongabba's existing character housing. It also proposes wider pedestrian verges, deep planting, new street trees and upgrades to the pedestrian approach to Boggo Road Station.

The Harridan development itself has been designed by Brisbane-based Arqus Design and will comprise 154 apartments across 16 storeys. The mix is weighted heavily toward two-bedroom apartments, with 121 proposed alongside 10 one-bedroom and 23 three-bedroom residences. There will typically be around 14 units per floor.

A lower-ground car park and three podium levels will accommodate 156 resident parking spaces, along with visitor and commercial parking. There will also be 154 resident bicycle spaces and 40 visitor bicycle parks.

&nbsp;

Harridan is a family-owned developer and part of the Holmwood Highgate Group, with more than three decades of development activity across South East Queensland. Its portfolio spans residential, commercial and industrial property, with current residential projects including Riverbank on Byron in Bulimba, Esperance Residences in Carina and The Precinct at Kinross Road in Thornlands.

Wooloongabba has been popular for apartment developers, particularly since the announcement of the 2032 Summer Olympics games in Brisbane.

While there have been a lot of development applications, it has failed to materialize into real supply.&nbsp;

Sarazin has been the major player in the area. They are under construction at Murcia Residences, on the fringe of East Brisbane and Woolloongabba. They have just launched <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/the-stanley-residences-woolloongabba-8-trafalgar-street-woolloongabba-qld-4102">The Stanley Residences</a>, in Woolloongabba on Trafalagar Street. They also have Nuage coming soon on the nearby <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/nuage-woolloongabba-14-wellington-road-woolloongabba-qld-4102">Wellington Road</a>.

Joel Robinson

First look: Harridan plans Burke Street transformation beside Boggo Road transport hub

IN BRIEF

<ul>
	<li>
	Just three double-storey Sky Homes sit at the top of The Waterline, each with its own private marina berth and rooftop terrace.
	</li>
	<li>
	Construction on The Waterline is complete, with the first residents expected to move in from mid-October.
	</li>
	<li>
	Sky Homes range from 282 sqm to 367 sqm and are priced from $3.65 million.
	</li>
</ul>

<hr />
Lewis Land has opened the first completed sky home for inspection at Harbour Shores, giving buyers their first opportunity to step inside one of just three double-storey residences crowning The Waterline.

Each sky home comes with its own private marina berth, rooftop terrace and Broadwater views, combining the scale of a larger home with direct access to the boating lifestyle that underpins the wider <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/harbour-shores-biggera-waters-564-oxley-drive-biggera-waters-qld-4216">Harbour Shores</a> masterplan.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=113271 project_image_fid=366708]

Lewis Land Head of Development Michael Long said the inclusion of a berth with every Sky Home had become increasingly valuable as marina access across the Gold Coast tightened.

“Marina berths are becoming increasingly difficult to secure across the Gold Coast, so including one with every Sky Home makes this a genuinely rare offering,” Long said.

“The private 70-berth marina will accommodate boats up to 12 metres in length and is positioned just 2.5 kilometres from the Broadwater, placing the open ocean only 15 minutes away.

“Being able to step out of your home onto your boat is a rare luxury, and it’s something residents here can look forward to when it opens later this year.”

[smartcode_project:default project_id=113271 project_image_fid=366709]

The display opening comes as construction completes on The Waterline, with the first residents expected to move in from mid-October.

The three Sky Homes range from 282 sqm to 367 sqm and each feature three bedrooms, three bathrooms, multiple living zones, expansive kitchens with butler's pantries and large balconies taking in the Broadwater outlook.

Each residence also has three secure basement car spaces and additional storage.

“This is the first opportunity the Gold Coast has had to step into Harbour Shores and see, touch and feel what we’re bringing to life here,” Long said.

“There are only three Sky Homes within The Waterline, ranging in size from 282sqm to 367sqm, with each residence featuring three large bedrooms, three bathrooms, multiple living zones, expansive custom-built kitchens with butler’s pantry, and large balconies capturing Broadwater views.”

<img alt="Harbour Shores" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="bab65e10-4fab-45e1-92d8-fc56e2ab98ff" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Screenshot%202026-08-25%20at%202.00.16%E2%80%AFPM.png?VersionId=XT8q76LsPkw3cYTsvN3JfFDaPLud90PN" />

Residents of The Waterline will have access to a private pool, along with Harbour Shores' wider collection of amenity including a lagoon pool, social clubhouse, tennis court, gym, yoga facilities and sauna.

Lewis Land partnered with Studio Collective to furnish the completed display, with the interiors designed to demonstrate how the residences could function as permanent homes rather than simply as show apartments.

Studio Collective Director Melissa Park said the surrounding waterways informed the interiors, but in a more restrained way than a traditional coastal scheme.

“We drew inspiration from the canals and coastal surrounds, but our approach was to interpret that subtly through layered materials and a grounded palette of earthy tones, rather than literal coastal references,” Park said.

“We introduced hero moments of green and teal to reference the surrounding waterways, while mirrored elements help reflect natural light.

“The result is a residence that feels elevated yet comfortable, somewhere buyers can genuinely imagine themselves living, entertaining and unwinding.”

Sky Homes are priced from $3.65 million.

Lewis Land is also offering private marina berths with The Residences, its limited collection of three and four-bedroom villas positioned directly along the Harbour Shores waterfront boardwalk.

Three-bedroom villas are priced from $2.99 million, while four-bedroom residences start from $3.19 million.

Harbour Shores is being marketed by Colliers International.

[smartcode_project_cta:default project_id=113271]

Lewis Land opens sky home display as The Waterline completes at Harbour Shores

St Vincent de Paul Society Housing Australia has filed plans for a major mixed-use housing precinct on the southern edge of the North Sydney CBD, adding another significant proposal to a pocket around North Sydn​ey Station that is quickly becoming one of the LGA's busiest development zones.

The State Significant Development Application covers a 5,990 sqm site at <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/1-19-mackenzie-street-lavender-bay-nsw-2060">1-19 MacKenzie Street and 211 Blues Point Road in Lavender Bay</a>, immediately south of Nor​th Sydney Station and between the commercial core and the lower-rise Lavender Bay Heritage Conservation Area.

Designed by Wardle, the proposal would deliver a new residential tower comprising 88 build-to-sell apartments and 19 affordable apartments, alongside a separate co-living building with 57 rooms and a building manager's studio.

It would also see the significant restoration and upgrade of St Francis Xavier Catholic Church, the adaptive reuse of the former school building, new parish facilities, retail, a new public square and around 1,000 sqm of publicly accessible open space.

<img alt="Vinnies North Sydney" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="d5dd7f87-a617-463e-b577-17541e01f0e9" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Screenshot%202026-08-26%20at%209.10.13%E2%80%AFAM.png?VersionId=4R8TsFN3P_LrrXO2HswTOIrx2blil8lh" />

The project is seeking a concurrent rezoning of the site to R4 High Density Residential and an increase in the maximum building height to allow a tower reaching RL120, or up to 20 storeys. The proposal was progressed through the NSW Government's Housing Delivery Authority pathway.

The build-to-sell component will be weighted toward larger apartments, with just six one-bedroom apartments compared with 31 two-beds, 43 three-beds and eight four-bedroom residences.

The 19 affordable apartments will comprise two studios, 15 one-bedroom apartments and two two-bedroom apartments, taking the total apartment component to 107 residences before the 58 co-living rooms are included.

<img alt="Vnnies" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="7d568ca5-cb90-4e18-96c6-d9795dba0c56" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Screenshot%202026-08-26%20at%209.10.05%E2%80%AFAM.png?VersionId=GY2R5M9VtQh0EKy1vajaea19PSLOPuRD" />

Wardle's design for the Vinnies site has sought to negotiate that emerging high-rise context while retaining the lower-scale character of MacKenzie Street and the adjoining heritage conservation area.

The main building adopts a three-storey podium and tower arrangement, with the podium aligned to the ridgeline and front setback of St Francis Xavier Church.&nbsp;Wardle has designed the podium with colonnades, seating, recessed entries and active ground-floor frontages, with sandstone-toned precast concrete and face brick referencing the materiality of the existing church.

The tower then steps back eight metres to the south and six metres to the north before rising in a sculpted form comprising four interlocking quadrants. Wardle has also introduced rounded forms and chamfered corners to reduce the tower's perceived bulk and improve view sharing with neighbouring development sites.

Resident facilities and outdoor areas are planned at the separation between the podium and tower at Level 3, oriented toward Sydney Harbour and the CBD skyline.

The tower itself will feature a glass reinforced concrete facade, with recessed balconies and deep reveals used both to provide shading and privacy and frame views toward the harbour and city. The lower levels take a different architectural approach, using brick and sandstone-toned finishes intended to establish a stronger relationship with St Francis Xavier Church. The Church itself will be conserved and upgraded for its continued use, while the former school building will be adaptively reused as part of the co-living component.

<img alt="Lavendar Bay" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="2d4418ad-90aa-4d49-af93-c80b140aea80" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Screenshot%202026-08-26%20at%209.09.47%E2%80%AFAM.png?VersionId=Kv4gzbsACaGvZSRuaqcfGC54jEJRXIDJ" />

&nbsp;

The proposal adds to an increasingly concentrated pipeline of residential development around Blue Street, MacKenzie Street and Lavender Bay.

Just west of the site, Central Element lodged plans earlier this year for one of the most significant residential developments proposed in Lavender Bay in recent years.

Central Element's SJB-designed scheme at 64-66 Lavender Street and 3-7 Middlemiss Street would deliver 163 apartments across two towers rising 23 and 32 storeys, replacing five existing apartment buildings containing 32 homes. The project also forms part of the Housing Delivery Authority pathway.

<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/news/nsw/first-look-central-element-reveals-lavender-bay-apartment-plans?utm_source=chatgpt.com" rel="noopener" target="_blank">First look: Central Element reveals Lavender Bay apartment plans</a>

Immediately around North Sy​dney Station, another two significant proposals have emerged at 5 and 15 Blue Street.

Zurich Australian Insurance Properties is seeking to adaptively reuse its longstanding commercial building at 5 Blue Street, directly above North Sydney Station, rather than demolishing the structure.

Its SSDA proposes converting the building into a 14-storey mixed-use development with 62 apartments and 86 co-living rooms, together with ground-floor retail and a major refurbishment of Blue Street Plaza. The application is currently at the Response to Submissions stage.

<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/news/nsw/first-look-zurich-targets-north-sydney-office-conversion-with-148-unit-proposal-above-metro-station">First look: Zurich targets North Sydney office conversion with 148-unit proposal above Metro station</a>

&nbsp;

First look: Vinnies files for 20-storey Lavender Bay apartment tower as North Sydney housing pocket heats up

When the opportunity arose for South Australian developer Palumbo to return to Kent Town, where it had previously delivered East Park Apartments and the East 
Rundle Apartments, it wasn't one the longstanding developer-builder was going to pass up.

The decision was quickly vindicated, with more than 30 apartments sold within the first month of launching <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/royal-apartments-kent-town-2-8-north-terrace-kent-town-sa-5067">Royal Apartments</a> to the market.

The 206-apartment development, which will bring significant new supply to Adelaide's tightly held eastern city fringe, also gives <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developers/palumbo">Palumbo</a> the opportunity to bring new life to one of Kent Town's most recognisable watering holes.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=6109 project_image_fid=376073]

Royal Apartments incorporates the historic Royal Hotel, a venue Palumbo Managing Director Daniel Palumbo said has a longstanding connection with the local community.

"Everyone in the area has history with the Royal Hotel," Palumbo told Apartments.com.au.

"It was quite an active pub and social gathering place for locals. We want to bring it back to its former glory."

[smartcode_project:default project_id=6109 project_image_fid=376072]

The wider development will comprise two residential towers alongside the restored hotel, sitting on North Terrace opposite the Adelaide Park Lands.

For Palumbo, the project also marks a return to familiar territory.

The developer completed East Park Apartments next door more than a decade ago and jumped at the opportunity to develop in Kent Town again when the Royal Hotel site became available.

"The opportunity emerged, and we moved to secure the site," Palumbo said.

"We were approached by the previous landowner, who said they had extensive commitments in Sydney and weren't in a position to deliver the project.

"We took over the site and within six months recut the design scheme to be more in keeping with the type of development we want to bring to Adelaide.

"Now we're on the market and those changes have really resonated with local buyers."

That has translated into a strong start to sales, with 33 apartments transacting in the project's first 35 days.

Palumbo said the early purchaser profile had been consistent with the group's traditional focus on owner-occupiers rather than investor-led apartment stock.

"Local owner-occupiers have always been our market," he said.

"There are always some investors, but we've never developed what would be called traditional development stock. Owner-occupiers are very much our market."

[smartcode_project:default project_id=6109 project_image_fid=376068]

The buyer mix has been diverse so far, with downsizers and younger professionals both accounting for a significant portion of early sales.

South Australia's current stamp duty settings, which allow&nbsp;eligible homeowners in South Australia aged 60 savings of up to $103,830 on stamp duty when they downsize to a new property valued at up to $2 million,&nbsp;have helped encourage downsizer activity, while younger buyers in their late 20s and early 30s have been attracted to the opportunity to live immediately outside the CBD while still being able to walk into the city.



Location has been a major part of the proposition for both buyer cohorts.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=6109 project_image_fid=376075]

Royal Apartments sits on North Terrace directly opposite the Adelaide Park Lands, with residents able to walk through the parklands toward the East End, Rundle Street and Rundle Mall.

Apartments have been positioned to capture views across the parklands, Adelaide skyline, Botanic Gardens and Adelaide Hills.

Palumbo believes the scarcity of developable land along this section of the Park Lands makes the site particularly difficult to replicate.

"There's very few allotments on that side that can be developed," he said.

"If this location was in New York and you were sitting on Central Park, you'd be talking about a $60 million apartments."

Royal Apartments will offer a broad mix of residences, ranging from one-bedroom apartments through to four-bedroom sub-penthouses and penthouses.

Current listings include one-bedroom apartments from $680,000, while larger three and four-bedroom residences are priced around $2.5 million.

Residents will have access to a swimming pool, gym, barbecue and recreation areas, residents' lounge and dining space, and a communal deck.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=6109 project_image_fid=376067]

The apartments will feature generous balconies, while secure parking, bicycle storage and storage cages will also be provided.

A porte-cochère-style arrival and drop-off area has also resonated with buyers, particularly those attracted to being able to walk into the CBD during the day while retaining secure vehicle access at home.

Palumbo is acting as developer, architect and builder on Royal Apartments, continuing the vertically integrated model it has used across its South Australian portfolio.

The group was also behind the $150 million Sofitel Adelaide, the 251-room five-star hotel and residential tower which opened in 2021.

Palumbo said Royal's launch had come at an interesting time for the broader Adelaide apartment market.

Buyer confidence had initially been impacted by uncertainty surrounding the Federal Budget and broader economic conditions, but Palumbo believes sentiment is beginning to improve against a backdrop of significant investment flowing into South Australia.

He pointed to increased activity across defence and resources, including Olympic Dam, as potential long-term drivers of the state's economy and housing market.

"Money is starting to flow into Adeliade, significant amounts as Adelaide bucks the trend of the rest of the country.," Palumbo said.

"There's a lot of activity in the economy over the next decade. I think more investment will come into this market."

Early works on Royal Apartments are expected to commence this year, with major construction activity and cranes anticipated on site from early next year.

[smartcode_project_cta:default project_id=6109]

Palumbo's return to Kent Town strikes early chord with buyers

Go-to builder-developer <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developers/graya">GRAYA</a> is continuing to bulk out its already impressive and diverse apartment portfolio across South East Queensland. Their latest milestone is securing development approval for Silk, its boutique riverfront apartment development in St Lucia.

The approval clears&nbsp;the way for the team to begin construction planning for the 22-residence project.

<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/silk-st-lucia-16-18-sandford-street-st-lucia-qld-4067">Silk</a> will rise 15 levels from an 810 sqm site at 16-18 Sandford Street, occupying a prominent bend of the Brisbane River with a prized northern aspect across Orleigh Park toward the Brisbane CBD.

The approved scheme will comprise 16 split-floor and six full-floor residences, continuing GRAYA's move into larger-format apartment developments targeting Brisbane's prestige owner-occupier market.

The project has been designed around the site's broad river frontage and dual-direction views, with GRAYA prioritising larger residences, privacy and outlook over apartment yield.

<img alt="Silk St Lucia" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="aa5c2349-f96c-4914-a812-1f2cd6827af8" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Screenshot%202026-08-26%20at%208.25.44%E2%80%AFAM.png?VersionId=WY0vEU_7vYjeRJKQHiCwFdMxu8PvFh52" />

GRAYA Co-founder and Chief Executive Officer Rob Gray said the project had been shaped around local homeowners wanting to remain in St Lucia without maintaining a traditional family home.

"St Lucia is one of those suburbs people do not want to leave," Gray said.

"They know the river, the trees, UQ, the golf course, Toowong and Indooroopilly, and that familiarity is hard to replace.

"True riverfront opportunities here are exceptionally scarce. What we have designed at Silk is a way to stay in the suburb people love, with the scale and privacy of a private home and far less to maintain.

"This is not typical apartment product. It is a proper home on the river, and that is exactly what this market has been missing."

The approval comes as new apartment development continues to increase across the St Lucia and neighbouring Toowong corridor, although direct riverfront sites remain considerably more tightly held.

GRAYA Co-founder and Managing Director Andrew Gray said securing the approval had removed a significant element of development risk from Silk.

"Genuine riverfront sites of this quality in St Lucia are not something that comes up regularly," Gray said.

"The approval removes a substantial layer of execution risk, and the location underwrites demand in a way very few inner-city sites can.

"The fundamentals here are as strong as anything we have assessed in Brisbane."

<img alt="Silk St Lucia" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="d0f3d734-65e1-48e8-8ed3-2e0715ffcdd9" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Screenshot%202026-08-26%20at%208.25.56%E2%80%AFAM.png?VersionId=sOLSs_jdHkXLWbBKzRyayf5BfTb2vPsD" />

Silk will see GRAYA return to a stretch of the Brisbane River where it already has recent construction experience. The vertically integrated group recently completed ARC in neighbouring Toowong as builder for developer Spyre, delivering the riverfront project on a constrained site.

GRAYA will take a different role at Silk, controlling the project from design and development through construction and aftercare under its vertically integrated model.

The development will include a gym and resident leisure areas at ground level, integrated with the river's edge.

Silk joins a growing pipeline for GRAYA across Brisbane and the Gold Coast, which includes Enclave, The Gallery, Coral and Ripple.

The developer-builder has also recently lodged plans for its largest project to date, <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/the-silo-19-chester-street-newstead-qld-4006">The Silo</a>, a proposed <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/news/qld/graya-buys-frasers-newstead-site-plans-the-silo-between-james-street-and-gasworks-precincts">$700 million mixed-use development</a> in Brisbane's James Street precinct.

Silk is expected to predominantly target local owner-occupiers and prestige buyers seeking a permanent riverfront home in Brisbane's inner west.

Registrations of interest are now open, with further details on the project and construction program to be released as it progresses.

<hr />
<h2>SILK PROJECT FACTS</h2>

Developer-builder: GRAYA

Project: Silk

Location: 16-18 Sandford Street, St Lucia

Apartments: 22

Built form: 15 levels

Site: 810 sqm riverfront holding

Mix: 16 split-floor and six full-floor residences

Status: Development approved

Next step: Construction planning underway

[smartcode_project_cta:default project_id=152168]

GRAYA greenlit for riverfront St Lucia apartment development, Silk

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