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

Joel Robinson

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

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

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

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

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

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

Bottega House secures landmark riverfront site in St Lucia 

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

SIERA kicks off construction at Northcliffe tower Exhale

Trains

<html><body>
Despite politics in general being on the nose of late, public transport is one policy area where the public remains engaged. Tell them Tony Abbott has offended yet another unsuspecting minority group and no one cares; but if the 8.12am Flinders Street train is five minutes late, all hell breaks loose.

While great that most people are passionate about public transport, it does result in some interesting proposals: High Speed Rail to Sydney (costing more than the GDP of a small African nation), a Simpsons style monorail to the airport, the mythical train to Doncaster (which may as well be pulled by Thomas the Tank Engine). Then we have the <a href="http://www.peninsularaillink.net">Peninsula Rail Link</a>: a train line to Rye.

On many levels it makes sense. After all, the Mornington Peninsula has gone alarmingly backwards over the years when it comes to rail infrastructure. Once boasting lines to Mornington, Red Hill and Stony Point, it now has none, with the latter <a href="http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/boom-gate-failures-force-indefinite-shutdown-of-stony-point-rail-line-20150401-1mcu0y">closing indefinitely last week</a> due to signaling problems. The bus service can be hit and miss: I once decided to use it to travel to Rye, and it's two hours and 30 minutes of my life that I'll never get back (it's about one hour, 15 minutes by car).

With Frankston and Dandenong earmarked as future major employment hubs, and Hastings proposed to become Melbourne's major port, a significant public transport upgrade is inevitably going to be on the cards. Enter the Peninsula Rail Link, the brainchild of dedicated public transport advocate Robert Whitehill. Starting as a spur line at Baxter, it winds its way mostly along the Mornington Peninsula Freeway, terminating at Jetty Road, Rye.

<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/ryerailmap.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="Peninsula Rail Link route. Image source peninsularaillink.net"><img alt="" class="image-article-half-width-290px" height="475" src="/sites/urban.melbourne/files/styles/article_half_width_290px/public/pictures/article-images/ryerailmap.jpg?itok=9h7ouhs_" title="Peninsula Rail Link route. Image source peninsularaillink.net" width="290"></a>

<figcaption>Peninsula Rail Link route. Image source: <a href="http://peninsularaillink.net/Project/RyeLine">peninsularaillink.net</a></figcaption></figure>And herein lies the first problem: the freeway currently terminates at Boneo Road. The idea of extending it has been around since the 1969 Transport Plan, however there has never really been any impetus to build it. Nor is there likely to be in the future: having the freeway stop at Boneo Road is bad enough, but at least it's a dual carriageway.

Terminating at Melbourne Road would be an unmitigated disaster. Not only is it currently single lane which would require an expensive duplication, this would require an extensive removal of trees to achieve it. In any case, a freeway extension would add considerable cost to this rail proposal. Of course VicRoads could just give up this reservation for the rail line…

<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/morning_peninsula_freeway_extension.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="Proposed Mornington Peninsula extension"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="199" src="/sites/urban.melbourne/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/morning_peninsula_freeway_extension.jpg?itok=UhFpVCdQ" title="Proposed Mornington Peninsula extension" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>Proposed Mornington Peninsula extension</figcaption></figure>Regardless of where it terminates, it won't be in the town centre. While this can be mitigated by buses, if other end-of-the-line stations in Melbourne are anything to go by (South Morang, Cranbourne, Pakenham), a high percentage of commuters will still drive, bringing all the car parking headaches this entails. And I always get nervous about stations situated away from other amenities (retail, etc.), meaning its usage will be limited outside of peak hour. In Rye's case, this would be a lost opportunity in trying to capture the beach going crowd in the summer.

The route from Frankston also draws many parallels to Doncaster Rail. While having a rail line down the middle of a freeway solves the problem of potentially having to create another route through brownfield areas, it unfortunately exposes it to the fact that not many people live on the Peninsula Freeway. Not having any walkup ridership is a huge disincentive, especially in an area which is fairly low density to start with. The exceptions here are Dromana and McRae. While the freeway goes right through these townships, they then suffer the opposite problem: there is no room for any parking to serve these stations at all. This is fine in inner Melbourne, but will never cut it in low density areas such as these.

Overall, this proposal is far from the craziest idea I've heard for the Peninsula; that accolade goes to the mooted bridge over the Rip, costed at $15 billion back in the 1990s. And the fact that we spent $759 million on Peninsula Link, a freeway with debatable merit, also puts it into perspective. In fact Whitehill should be applauded for showing the type of left-field thinking required by the transport debate to ensure it goes past the 'train to the city' mentality.

With the advent of projects such as <a href="/news/melbourne-metro-project-a-short-history">Melbourne Metro</a> (1 and 2), the <a href="/news/should-the-mernda-rail-extension-project-result-in-more-intensive-land-uses">Mernda extension</a>, Melton electrification and the ongoing <a href="/expert-insights/buying/is-doncaster-rail-is-good">Doncaster</a> and <a href="/news/the-ballieu-napthine-governments-rowville-rail-study-ignored-the-elephant-in-the-room">Rowville</a> debates, I just can't see the Peninsula Rail Link being a priority any time soon. Of course if the Frankston/Dandenong/Hastings job hubs become a reality, this could change quickly. It could even serve as a logical extension of a proposed Frankston-Dandenong rail link. However, the aforementioned issues with it would still need to be solved.
</body></html>

TheHeadOnTheDoor

Is a rail line to Rye really feasible?

<html><body>
Melbourne loves its radial train lines. For over a century they have shunted commuters in and out of the centre of the city and even throughout the automobile age they've continued to be the best way to access the centre of the city as well as some peripheral centres based around junctions like Richmond, South Yarra and North Melbourne.

In the <a href="/news/the-outer-circle-documentary-review">Outer Circle documentary</a>, released in December last year, we learned politicians from over a century ago were just as susceptible of making curious decisions as modern day politicians when it comes to large-scale transport infrastructure projects - think East-West Link.

The last remaining operating section of the Outer Circle is the Alamein line. According to a report in 2010 in the <a href="http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/metro-says-williamstown-and-alemein-lines-will-be-first-to-close-if-train-system-melst-down/story-e6frf7jo-1225818598652">Herald Sun</a>, the Alamein line only carries 1.5% of all passengers across the metropolitan rail network and in a <a href="http://www.ptua.org.au/2010/09/28/alamein-line-upgrade-call/">media release from PTUA</a> around the same time, the 1.5% figure reported in the Herald Sun translates into 1.8 million boardings per year.

Alamein is a short branch serving a stable population and timetable-roulette over the past 10 years seems to have conspired to relegate the Alamein line to low (if any) growth. Thanks to election promises in 2010, the Ballieu Government commissioned multiple rail line studies early on in its term one of which was the Rowville Rail Line.

Perhaps most annoyingly, the Rowville study's scope was ring-fenced and only encapsulated the North and Wellington road corridors - essentially just creating another branch line from the Dandenong corridor.

One of the findings from the Rowville Rail study was that it required extra capacity on the Dandenong corridor for trains to operate to and from the city and thus the new line would be dependent on Dandenong corridor upgrades and the Melbourne Metro Tunnel project from South Yarra to Kensington.

Rather than create another radial train service, wouldn't it be more prudent to start thinking outside the box by connecting existing lines and start serving major employment, education and high-potential residential growth zones in worthy suburban areas?

Don't all groan at once, but I think there's a legitimate case for another study to look into the impact, costs and benefits of cross-connecting the Alamein line with the Dandenong corridor and the points listed below are meant only as a conversation starter.

Furthermore it would also be interesting to see how a connection and services running between the Alamein and Dandenong corridors might improve the case for the Rowville line given the employment, retail and educational precincts it would connect: Swinburne University, Camberwell, Holmesglen Institute, Chadstone, Oakleigh, Monash University &amp; Mulgrave.

Is it time to give the Alamein line a greater purpose?

<iframe frameborder="0" height="600" scrolling="no" src="https://mapsengine.google.com/map/embed?mid=zZQXWc1VtNDo.kKnKWQL6NjGI" width="100%"></iframe>

The map above serves only as a reference point to begin the conversation. Click the individual components for more detail or click the full screen button in the top right corner of the map to view the detail in another window.

There are many ideas for connecting this region and I'm by no means saying the above is the absolute best, I've merely selected it as it's likely to be the more expensive option (other ideas prevalent right across the web include a tunnel along the old Outer Circle corridor and connecting with East Malvern Station and Chadstone to Oakleigh).

<h2>Phase 1</h2>

The flagship link. A tunnel (red line) from Ashburton running south-east to Holmesglen with a new set of interchange platforms alongside and underneath Warrigal Road to enable connectivity with the Glen Waverley line. The tunnel would then head south-west to run under Chadstone with a new station located on site and then the tunnel would run south-east once more to connect with two new underground platforms at Oakleigh.

Changes to the existing Alamein corridor (green line) would involve grade separations at Riversdale and Prospect Hill Roads resulting in a new station in a trench and interfaced directly with Riversdale road in turn making Willison Station redundant. A new fourth platform at Camberwell to act as a service terminus and a relocated Burwood station in order to better connect the line with the #75 trams and the Toorak Road precinct.

The existing track from Alamein to Ashburton from the south would be removed and re-instated as parkland with station buildings at Alamein, Willison and the old Burwood station re-purposed for community or commercial facilities and a new dedicated high-frequency bus would run between Ashburton and Darling stations through the catchment of the existing Alamein station (grey line).

Upon opening, services would shuttle between Oakleigh and Camberwell on 10 minute or better frequencies.

<h2>Phase 2</h2>

Project area 1: between Camberwell and Burnley there would be a fourth track laid in the existing reservation (orange line) and new platforms at Auburn, Glenferrie and Hawthorn. The map also attempts to depict the associated bridge widening works required between Hawthorn and the Glen Waverley line flyovers at Burnley.

Project area 2: in essence building the recommended route as outlined in the Rowville Rail Line study (light and dark blue lines - map ends in Mulgrave, but the assumption is to build the entire line to Rowville).

Upon opening of the second phase, the Camberwell-Oakleigh shuttle would morph into a much larger rail line running from Rowville direct to Flinders Street via Chadstone and Camberwell and all trains from the existing Ringwood corridor would only stop at Camberwell, Glenferrie and Richmond.

<h2>Some statistics on journeys to work</h2>

Some food for thought: the three main municipalities directly affected by this project are Boroondarra, Stonnington and Monash and the following journeys to work data has been pulled from population and demography consultancy <a href="http://home.id.com.au/">.id's</a> public site.

In 2011 <a href="http://profile.id.com.au/boroondara/workers">Boroondarra</a> had 61,000 employed persons, 31% of which lived in the municipality. 9% of people employed in Boroondarra travel from Glen Eira - Caulfield (1,293 or 2.1%), Stonnington - Malvern (1,363, 2.2%), Monash - South West (694, 1.0%), Monash - Waverley West (1,443, 2.3%), Monash - Waverley East (775, 1.3%).

<a href="http://profile.id.com.au/stonnington/workers">Stonnington</a>, which would gain one new station and an expanded interchange station, had 45,000 employed persons in 2011 and only 23% live in the same municipality. The breakdown of people who travel from outside the municipality is as follows: Glen Eira - Caulfield (2,910 or 6.4%), Monash - South West (1,313, 2.9%), Monash - Waverley West (1,367, 3.0%), Monash - Waverley East (847, 1.9%), Boroondarra - Camberwell South (1,505, 3.3%), Boroondarra - Hawthorn (1,006, 2.2%), Whitehorse - Box Hill (755, 1.7%).

<a href="http://profile.id.com.au/monash/workers">Monash</a> in 2011 had 89,000 employed persons, 23% living in the municipality. Much of workforce who travels to Monash lives to the south and east of the municipality however just under 7% travel from adjacent municipalities located near this project. Broken down that is: Boroondarra - Camberwell North &amp; South (2,237 or 2.5%), Stonnington - Malvern (1,486, 1.7%), Glen Eira - Caulfield (2,392, 2.7%).

Train travel, like car commuters on freeways, enables people to live greater distances from their workplace - and although policy should favour distances being reduced rather than increased - I think patronage forecasts would need to have catchment areas expanded, especially as Chadstone remains a key precinct in the region and attracts shoppers from right across the metropolitan area.

<h2>Future development options and value capture</h2>

This is Apartments.com.au and it just wouldn't be cricket if we didn't at least briefly look at redevelopment potential.

Beginning in Malvern East where Chadstone is located, Stonnington have liberally applied the new Residential Growth Zone to Dandenong Road and have continued to apply it along Warrigal Road from the intersection of Dandenong Road all the way up to Holmesglen Station. The Warrigal Road corridor is also interspersed with the mixed-use Commercial Zone 1 (C1Z) allowing for larger buildings.

The <a href="/buildings/holmes-hill-apartments-70-batesford-road-chadstone">Holmes Hill development at 70 Batesford Road</a> (C1Z), just off Warrigal Road approximately 200m from the existing Holmesglen station is a prime example of what is possible for increasing densities near the new or upgraded stations.

<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/holmes_hill_1.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="Holmes Hill - 70 Batesford Road, Chadstone. Image © holmeshill.com.au"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="348" src="/sites/urban.melbourne/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/holmes_hill_1.jpg?itok=s2l3b_wl" title="Holmes Hill - 70 Batesford Road, Chadstone. Image © holmeshill.com.au" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>Holmes Hill - 70 Batesford Road, Chadstone. Image © holmeshill.com.au</figcaption></figure>In terms of areas where the rail corridor and service already exists, the strip along Toorak Road where Burwood station could possibly be re-zoned on the Boroondarra Planning scheme as C1Z. And despite Boroondarra's lack of Residential Growth Zone, they do have a small, but not insignificant amount of land zoned General Residential Zone - Schedule 5 (allows up to 3 levels on site) near enough to the Alamein corridor. Oakleigh is already seeing its CBD fringes being redeveloped thanks to the area zoned as C1Z with a large amount of General Residential zone adjoining it.

I've not read or come across examples on how value capture systems work in their entirety so I would be interested to hear reader's thoughts on how a value capture system could be applied on a local/regional basis to help fund any project that may come to fruition.

<h2>What about the cost?</h2>

Cost of a study: the Rowville Rail Line study cost $2 million, and quite frankly it was money well-spent and a similar amount should be allocated to look at making the Alamein line more relevant in the 21st century.

Cost of the proposal as shown above: Well that's what the study would be for! Nevertheless, here's a not-so-scientific approach at having a stab at the cost.

Taking a broader look around the country, one project that springs to mind - in terms of getting a ballpark cost figure to potentially apply to the phase 1 proposal above - is Sydney's North West Rail Link. The NWRL is a 23 kilometre line, approximately 15km of which will be underground, stretching from Epping out to Sydney's outskirts.

The total cost of the NWRL is $8.3 billion according to its <a href="http://nwrail.transport.nsw.gov.au/The-Project/Project-Overview">website</a> - underground rail, elevated rail, stations and train procurement - or better represented as a $360 million per kilometre figure.

Using the per kilometre figure from the NWRL and applying it to the 5.5km tunnel depicted in the map, that would total a smidge under $2 billion. The 5-6 kilometres of upgrade work along the existing Alamein line - primarily grade separations, upgrades to Camberwell Station and the relocation of Burwood station - would, clearly, cost a lot less on a per kilometre basis than that of the tunnels.

Lead image credit: <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alamein_railway_station">Wikipedia</a>.
</body></html>

Alastair Taylor

The Alamein line: time for a new purpose?

<html><body>
The recently released pozible campaign-funded documentary - <a href="http://outercircleline.com.au/">The Outer Circle: Melbourne's forgotten railway</a> - tells the story of a late 19th century rail line that was built at a time when railway mania was rife across the colony of Victoria.

The Outer Circle was initially proposed as a way of connecting the Gippsland rail line, which terminated at present-day Oakleigh in 1872, to Melbourne. In 1878 the Victorian colonial government bought the private railway operator Melbourne &amp; Hobsons Bay United Railway company and decided build the line from Oakleigh to South Yarra as we currently know it.

Despite the new link created between Oakleigh and South Yarra, after a change of government in 1883 construction began on the Outer Cicle line in 1888. The first section and first services began operating between Oakleigh and Camberwell in 1890 with the completion of the line to Fairfield finalised in 1891.

After the economic depression of the early 1890's, the fall from grace for the Outer Circle line began with the first section to close - Riversdale to Fairfield - seeing its last service run just two years after they began.

<figure><iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="326" mozallowfullscreen="" src="//player.vimeo.com/video/114303366" webkitallowfullscreen="" width="580"></iframe>

<figcaption><a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/http://vimeo.com/114303366">Melbourne's Forgotten Railway - The Outer Circle - Trailer</a> from <a href="https://vimeo.com/outercircleline">Outer Circle</a> on <a href="https://vimeo.com">Vimeo</a>.</figcaption></figure>Gunzels will love the documentary for the enormous amount of time and detail put into profiling each type of train which used the various sections of the line during its on and off again see-saw of openings and closures; and the film is an important historical record in the way it documents how Eastern Melbourne developed, which is sure to pique the planning community's interest.

For anyone who has looked at a Melway map of inner Eastern Melbourne, it's quite easy to trace the route of the former Outer Circle line sections and the film makes use of a fantastic array of many historical images and modern-day aerial imagery to give a sense of how the line once operated.

<figure><img alt="" height="498" src="/sites/urbanmelbourne.info/files/pictures/article-images/outer_circle_wikipedia.png" title="Outer Circle line diagram from Wikipedia" width="487"><figcaption>Outer Circle line diagram from <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outer_Circle_railway_line">Wikipedia</a></figcaption></figure>One of the strongest themes across the one hour documentary is an intriguing tale of pre-federation colonial cronyism. In an interesting sign of the times the film documents how colonial government largesse - thanks to the buoyant land boom thinking of the time - saw the Outer Circle Line built to a very high standard with little economic rationale other than serving the pecuniary interests of some politicians who bought up land in 'villages' such as Camberwell then sold the land for an inflated price after the line was opened.

The different sections of the Outer Circle line had better success with the movement of goods throughout the region; wood to Brunswick and later coal to Fairfield were just some of the materials regularly transported to provide energy to homes and industries near the line in the early days. The "Build it and they will come" attitude which often gets talked about in modern times was clearly rife in the late 1800's.

Amongst the many things the viewer will learn, present day Willison station was originally built to serve the needs of golfers and it was assumed in the northern section between Riversdale and Fairfield, that the railway would light a fire cracker under residential sub-division and development through present day Kew. Ultimately economic depression and a rapidly expanding tram network - which was able to provide far more frequent and direct services to the city - put the nail in the coffin for passenger services.

Having dodged the East-West link bullet as shown by the dubious business case documents released this week, one can't help question that had the East-West Link been built and a similar documentary like the Outer Circle been produced a century after the opening of the freeway: would the same themes be present? I'd argue yes.

Melbourne and in particular Eastern Melbourne is a very different place to the orchards, paddocks and villages that characterised the region when the Outer Circle line was built. And given the decades of auto-centric development that has occurred and the need to pare back the monstrous share of trips that cars make it Melbourne, is it worth while studying the impacts of auto-centricity in the east by rebuilding the southern section of the Outer Circle line?

Camberwell is no longer a village, but a retail and employment centre in its own right. The Alamein line merely acts as a shuttle to connect residents in sleepy Ashburton with the centre of the city. The largest shopping centre in Australia has no rail access and new education and research hubs have been built in Holmesglen, Glenferrie and Clayton since the Outer Circle was first proposed.

The Baillieu Government's Rowville Rail line study made reference to public comments about a new Rowville line connecting up with the Alamein line but explicitly stated that this option was excluded from the study's scope. Perhaps a new study looking at the Alamein line and linking the new employment, education and research centres south of the Alamein line's terminus might once and for all provide a decent business case for the Outer Circle line.

You can buy a DVD and Blu-Ray set from <a href="http://outercircleline.com.au/">The Outer Circle's website</a> and you can also watch the documentary by renting it for 24 hours on <a href="https://vimeo.com/ondemand/outercircleline">Vimeo</a>.

Lead image credit: <a href="http://www.evolving.com.au/melbournes-outer-circle-railway-documentary/">Evolving Communications</a>.
</body></html>

The Outer Circle documentary - review

<html><body>
All three major political parties are now committed to extending the South Morang (née Epping) line to Mernda. With commitments from the <a href="http://www.heraldsun.com.au/leader/north/greg-barber-confirms-greens-will-build-mernda-rail-extension/story-fnglenug-1227040171681">Liberals</a>, the <a href="http://www.heraldsun.com.au/leader/north/labor-announces-mernda-rail-extension-if-elected-in-november/story-fnglenug-1227069982293">ALP</a> and the <a href="http://www.heraldsun.com.au/leader/north/greg-barber-confirms-greens-will-build-mernda-rail-extension/story-fnglenug-1227040171681">Greens</a>, focus will now shift to cost and whether or not a re-elected Napthine Government or new incoming Government actually gets on with the job.

While perusing the City of Whittlesea's website in the days after the final commitment was made by the Liberal party, I stumbled upon the <a href="https://www.whittlesea.vic.gov.au/building-planning-and-transport/planning-and-development/planning-for-the-future/mernda-doreen-plans/~/media/Files/Building%20Planning%20and%20Transport/Future/Mernda%20Town%20Centre%20Development%20Plan.pdf">master plan diagrams for the Mernda Town Centre</a>. Originally approved in 2009 with amendments made in 2012, one map which caught my interest was the indicative land use diagram as shown 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/mernda_town_centre.png" rel="gallery-all" title="Mernda Town Centre Comprehensive Development, page 48."><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="834" src="/sites/urbanmelbourne.info/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/mernda_town_centre.png?itok=MCLbAqEg" title="Mernda Town Centre Comprehensive Development, page 48." width="580"></a>

<figcaption>Mernda Town Centre Comprehensive Development, page 48.</figcaption></figure>As you can see from the map, high-density housing doesn't feature all that heavily except directly adjacent to the transport interchange, which one would assume is where the new Mernda station will be built. Lower densities dominate the comprehensive development plan with many typically suburban aspects featuring in the document.

But is it right to build infrastructure designed to carry mass amounts of people with a same-same attitude to how the area will be developed over time?

Granted there has been a long-fought community campaign to have the Epping Line extended to South Morang and then even further along the former Whittlesea rail line. The congestion in the area has had noteworthy media coverage, but perhaps that is more a fault of the improper road design and lack of the simplest and cheapest public transport mode (buses) being rolled out over the course of the region's development.

That said, something is happening, however given the rail extension will enter an area with relatively low land prices (as compared to Northcote, Collingwood or Clifton Hill on the same train line) isn't this the perfect opportunity to turn fringe design on its head?

Take St. Germain Village, a new development planned in the City of Casey. This greenfields site is turning suburban design on its head; a diverse range of housing densities (well much more than the strip of high-density marked in the Mernda Town Centre plan) with integrated health, commercial and retail precincts. As we reported on back in October, the <a href="/expert-insights/buying/turning-the-tide-in-the-badlands">tide looks to be turning</a> for suburban design.

St. Germain Village is going all-out with no new rail line being built into the precinct and the Mernda Town Centre plan appears to be quite "business-as-usual". I can't help but feel the wrong message is being sent in this instance.

Should rail line extensions come with increased land use intensity trade-offs?

Lead image credit: <a href="http://www.unipollwatch.org.au/mernda-rail-delay-costs-yan-yean/">unipollwatch.org.au</a>.
</body></html>

Should the Mernda rail extension project result in more intensive land uses?

<html><body>
Back in April of this year, a new map was drawn up and released for comment from Public Transport Victoria. <a href="http://www.danielbowen.com/2014/04/16/new-train-map-coming/">Daniel Bowen wrote</a> "PTV are trialling a new train network map. They’re seeking feedback on it, and you’ll see it at some stations now".

Since April a new revision was released and included some refinements as Daniel Bowen <a href="http://www.danielbowen.com/2014/10/12/ptv-rail-map-v3/">has documented</a>.

I broadly agree with the positive commentary that has been broadcast throughout the blogosphere and social media. The existing maps which adorn the insides of trains and on train platforms require a certain level of knowledge in how the train system operates and the new concept maps go a long way toward rectifying that situation.

For example the not-so-frequent user could be forgiven for thinking that trains ran direct from Upfield to <a href="/developments/sunbury-vic-3429">Sunbury</a> and that trains from <a href="/new-apartments/williamstown-vic-3016">Williamstown</a> terminated at <a href="/new-apartments/footscray-vic-3011">Footscray</a> (this potential for confusion is even more profound if you study the maps which are located on the side walls, opposite the platforms at any of the three underground stations).

<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/current_melb_rail_map.png" rel="gallery-all" title="Current Rail network maps in use on Melbourne's rail network"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="663" src="/sites/urbanmelbourne.info/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/current_melb_rail_map.png?itok=BQP3kkUO" title="Current Rail network maps in use on Melbourne's rail network" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>Current Rail network maps in use on Melbourne's rail network</figcaption></figure>Enter the new maps, as linked above. The routes are grouped and arranged in a more realistic way in how the rail lines actually operate; for instance the <a href="/new-apartments/frankston-vic-3199">Frankston</a> and <a href="/developments/werribee-vic-3030">Werribee</a> lines are joined and the dotted lines show how the Frankston line at times runs through the City Loop.

The rail lines are better aligned with their geography and the inclusion of V/Line services - and the all important Myki boundary for regional services - starts to provide a better sense of the service tiers available throughout not just the metropolitan area, but the whole state.

In my view it was pretty much a rubber stamp; yes, absolutely, roll it out! That was until I stumbled across the following map by SkyscraperCity user Planks &amp; Sticks who has, again in my view, added a little stroke of genius to the new concept map, by adding key Smartbus &amp; high frequency cross-town bus routes.

<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/ptvmap_02.gif" rel="gallery-all" title="New PTV concept map with bus additions by Skyscrapercity.com user Planks &amp; Sticks"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="606" src="/sites/urbanmelbourne.info/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/ptvmap_02.gif?itok=M-AdGBxj" title="New PTV concept map with bus additions by Skyscrapercity.com user Planks &amp; Sticks" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>New PTV concept map with bus additions by <a href="http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showpost.php?p=118156282&amp;postcount=7079">Skyscrapercity.com user Planks &amp; Sticks</a></figcaption></figure>Rather than emphasise our public transport network, we - and I say we because I too am guilty as charged - tend to talk about different modes in use for public transport rather than the sum of all its parts. It would be quite overwhelming to put a map in every train, tram and bus which visualises every different route in the entire Metropolitan area (although, I am a fan of Railmap's long-running and frequently updated <a href="http://www.railmaps.com.au/melbourn.htm">tram+train map</a>), however these simple additions of key routes ought to be considered.

First and foremost, the routes depicted are the primary cross-town and major links between the arterial rail network and key patronage generators, such as shopping centres which are also present on the map. Just glancing at this map tells anyone that they can get to Northland Shopping Centre by utilising an Upfield or South Morang train and then the bus direct to the door of the northern hub.

Secondly, although the bus routes are clearly marked as a different tier of service, the links which these bus routes create depict a far more comprehensive network than without them. Any Melburnian heralding from or who regularly visits the vast mass which is South East Melbourne knows there are large suburban spaces between the rail lines as depicted in both the existing and new concept PTV maps; the simple act of adding the key bus routes helps to portray the sense that public transport has the ability to bridge geographic reality.

Likewise, is it time to add a condensed version of the heavy rail network to tram maps to show interchange opportunities thus resulting in the same "big picture" effect as adding key bus routes to the rail maps?

Lead image credit: <a href="http://wongm.com/2011/07/melbourne-city-loop-next-train-displays/">Marcus Wong</a>.
</body></html>

Does Melbourne's rail map depict enough information?

<html><body>
The journey will take roughly 25 minutes calling at two intermediate points; the services will operate every 15 minutes for 19 hours a day; and the vehicles will run on - for the most part - existing rail corridors. Sound even remotely familiar?

I'm not referring to a Melbourne Airport Rail Link, I'm in fact referring to Toronto's <a href="http://upexpress.com/en/">Union Pearson Express</a> project that is well underway and scheduled to be operating next year.

Over the weekend Urban Toronto published a piece asking "<a href="http://www.urbantoronto.ca/news/2014/10/lanes-melbourne-could-something-similar-happen-here">The lanes of Melbourne: could something similar happen here?</a>" and in the spirit of mutual recognition our eerily similar, arguably long-lost Doppelganger located on the other side of the planet, I'd like to take a look at what Toronto's doing with its airport transportation.

The Union Pearson Express project in a nutshell:

<ul>
<li>New terminus platforms at Union Station (Toronto's central station) and Toronto Pearson International Airport.</li>
	<li>Upgrade and re-use of existing rail corridors between the centre of the city and near the airport.</li>
	<li>New branch line to allow trains to enter the airport precinct from the nearby existing rail corridor.</li>
	<li>Upgrade of two existing intermediate stations, one at Bloor which connects with Toronto's subway and one in Weston.</li>
	<li>Capital expenditure of $456 million CAD ($490million AUD in 2010 dollars), broken down in Canadian dollars: $355million for infrastructure works and approximately $100 million for service development.
	<ul>
<li>The Ontario Provincial Government-owned Metrolinx <a href="http://www.metrolinx.com/en/projectsandprograms/upexpress/upexpress.aspx">website</a> goes on to state they have awarded contracts worth $128 million for new airport station and branch line connection, $75 million for train procurement and $24 million for the development of the Union station terminus.</li>
	</ul>
</li>
</ul>
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" scrolling="no" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/6wOnNt3WdDA" width="100%"></iframe>

This is where comparing the UP Express project with the many ideas that have been floated for Melbourne Airport Rail Link gets really spooky.

Toronto's airport is located in the über-burb of Mississauga to the west of central Toronto with a road distance (as measured by <a href="https://www.google.com.au/maps/dir/Union+Station+Rail,+Toronto,+ON,+Canada/Toronto+Pearson+International+Airport,+6301+Silver+Dart+Dr,+Mississauga,+ON+L5P+1B2,+Canada/@43.6524001,-79.5750703,18092m/data=!3m2!1e3!4b1!4m13!4m12!1m5!1m1!1s0x89d4cb2cb8f8d3cb:0xc859da5affa61138!2m2!1d-79.379456!2d43.645218!1m5!1m1!1s0x882b394ac02dd491:0xb41d5de9c4030ec5!2m2!1d-79.62482!2d43.677718">Google Maps</a>) of approximately 25km. Tullamarine is uncannily similar when you <a href="https://www.google.com.au/maps/dir/Southern+Cross+Station,+Docklands,+Victoria/Melbourne+Airport,+Departure+Dr,+Melbourne+Airport+VIC+3045/@-37.7865809,144.9010968,19762m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m13!4m12!1m5!1m1!1s0x6ad65d4e2e5ae775:0xf6cc548ff3f8019c!2m2!1d144.953388!2d-37.81816!1m5!1m1!1s0x6ad659a9ebaa3917:0xf045676052ff090!2m2!1d144.841027!2d-37.669012">measure road distance</a> from Southern Cross: 22km.

The Albion freight and interstate standard gauge rail corridor, the preferred alignment of State governments of both persuasions, <a href="https://www.google.com.au/maps/place/Melbourne+Airport/@-37.7163219,144.8708364,2473m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m2!3m1!1s0x6ad659a9ebaa3917:0xf045676052ff090">passes to within 1km</a> of Tullamarine airport's southern boundary; the Kitchener GO Rail corridor which is to be used for Union Pearson express services, is <a href="https://www.google.com.au/maps/search/toronto+airport/@43.6975328,-79.6259714,2260m/data=!3m1!1e3">within spitting distance</a> of the northern corner of Pearson airport's boundary.

If you stick to limited-access roads, the road journey in Melbourne is more direct versus using Toronto's grid of inner city freeways. Conversely the rail journey in Toronto will almost be as direct as is possible versus, should a Melbourne Airport Rail Link use the Albion corridor, the rail journey to Tullamarine which will swing out west via Sunshine then turn north east towards the airport.

Perhaps most importantly in explaining how Toronto's UP Express project has come about so quickly as opposed to the stagnation confronted by the predicament we face in Melbourne, it's wise to look at how differently rail has developed in our respective regions.

Despite many similarities between Melbourne and Toronto - and perhaps Australian and Canadian cities in general - a stark difference lies in the way our respective rail networks have developed over time. Where many of Melbourne's current rail corridors began with private operators, nationalisation was all the rage from the 1870s onwards and it laid bare to the vast metropolitan rail network we now have reaching from the CBD to the suburban fringes in all directions.

With the colonial and post-Federation state government owned and operated rail networks acting as the backbone for suburban expansion throughout Australia well before anyone had even heard of an 'automobile, private companies pushed forward and continue to be a dominant owner and operator of rail corridors in Canadian cities. The Canadian National and Canadian Pacific Railway companies have played a part in suburban rail services in Toronto like private companies did in Melbourne a long time ago but it wasn't until (relatively) recently - in the 1960's - that the Ontario Government rolled out the 'GO Transit' services operating over private railways.

<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GO_Transit#Operations">According to Wikipedia</a>, GO Transit now owns 80% of the track in which it operates services over and given the relative lack of service frequency compared to most Melbourne Metro lines, Metrolinx (which owns and operates to the GO Transit brand for the Ontario Government) has a lot of flexibility to make projects like UP Express work.

<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/arl_spur_map-850x411.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="Alignment of new branch line to serve Toronto's Pearson airport"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="280" src="/sites/urbanmelbourne.info/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/arl_spur_map-850x411.jpg?itok=5wlNme77" title="Alignment of new branch line to serve Toronto's Pearson airport" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>Alignment of new branch line to serve Toronto's Pearson airport</figcaption></figure>As I wrote last year, <a href="/news/half-of-the-melbourne-airport-rail-link-is-currently-under-construction">half of Melbourne's Airport Rail Link is already under construction</a> through the Regional Rail Link project.

In that piece I argued that the capacity which will be unlocked as part of the RRL project should be used to run rail services utilising an operator and a separate train configuration we already have to and from Tullamarine after expansion of the Albion corridor and a Tullamarine branch has taken place. I'm still very much of this view.

If you watch the current Spring Street Government's pre-campaign advertising about the Melbourne Airport Rail Link, the Government appears fixated on the notion the airport should be serviced with standard metro trains by making the Pakenham/Cranbourne corridor through-route to the Sunbury and a new airport line. The ALP's policy, stretching back to when they were last in government, is similar in that they originally proposed to have Pakenham/Cranbourne services run through the Melbourne Metro tunnel rather than the current Liberal Government's proposal to run it through existing track between South Yarra, Flinders Street, Southern Cross and North Melbourne.

Like the East West Link, this position has not be explained well, if at all.

Passengers heading to or from Tullamarine are going to have different needs than those who use the rest of the Metro network. Even a business day-tripper traveling with hand luggage to Melbourne will take up more space than the average Metro commuter.

In short, the vehicles which operate an airport service must take into account the extra spatial and luggage storage needs of airport passengers.

Any Tullamarine Airport rail link project should be an opportunity to break the "one train size/technology caters for all" mentality we have in Melbourne that so often produces great ideas but ultimately, at best, is severely delayed owing to enormous capital requirements or at worst enters the never-never. We must recognise that an airport rail link will be a premium service and therefore we should plan accordingly, just like Toronto has with the Union Pearson Express.

Image credit: <a href="http://upexpress.com/">UPExpress.com</a>.
</body></html>

Is Toronto's airport rail link a model for Melbourne?

<html><body>
The Sydney Morning Herald <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/melbourne-train-operator-metro-to-run-sydneys-northwest-rail-link-20140624-zsjyr" target="_blank">reported yesterday</a> that the Baird Government in New South Wales has selected <a href="http://www.metrotrains.com.au/who-we-are/" target="_blank">Metro Trains Melbourne</a> - the consortium made up of MTR Corporation, John Holland and UGL which operates and maintains the entire Melbourne metropolitan network - to operate the <a href="http://nwrail.transport.nsw.gov.au/" target="_blank">North West Rail Link</a>.

The North West Rail Link project consists of twin 15 kilometre tunnels and four kilometres of elevated track from Epping on the city's main northern trainline to Sydney's North West outskirts at Rouse Hill. The project in a way winds back the clock for Sydney (albeit not necessarily in a bad way), as the new tunnels will only cater for single deck trains, and the Chatswood-Epping link will be retrofitted to allow North West Rail Link trains to run all the way from Rouse Hill to Chatswood.

Trains running on the new line and through the retrofitted Chatswood-Epping corridor will be fully automated being centrally controlled with no train drivers. This will be a first for Australia.

The New South Wales Government also outlined plans to <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/planned-new-rail-line-would-cut-direct-trains-from-inner-west-to-redfern-sydney-university-20140624-zsjnd" target="_blank">convert the existing Bankstown line</a> and build a <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/nsw-electricity-sale-to-pay-for-new-harbour-crossing-rail-roads-20140610-39uyu" target="_blank">second Sydney Harbour crossing</a> to allow the new North West Link to form a part of a complete rapid transit line.

The ultimate goal of having one long rapid transit line from Sydney's North West through the Central Business District and out to South West is very similar to the goal in Melbourne, of running Pakenham and Cranbourne trains in the South East through the Melbourne Rail Link to Sunbury (and when electrified) Melton. And as various documentation released by the Victorian Government and Public Transport Victoria has alluded to, the new high-capacity signalling system - to be rolled out as part of the <a href="http://www.transport.vic.gov.au/projects/cranbourne-pakenham-rail-corridor-project" target="_blank">Dandenong corridor project</a> - will be a precursor to allowing Melbourne trains to head down the automated path as well.

Given the same consortium will be building both the North West Rail Link and the Dandenong Corridor project in and around the same timeframes, it will be interesting to see how much of the same technology will be applied in both cities.

Lead image credit: <a href="http://nwrail.transport.nsw.gov.au/The-Project/Project-Overview" target="_blank">nwrail.transport.nsw.gov.au</a>
</body></html>

Metro Trains Melbourne to operate Sydney's North West Rail Link

<html><body>
All signs, signals and repositories of wisdom appear to be pointing west. That is, the Napthine government is actively looking to reshape the way we think about central Melbourne by focusing mobility to and from the CBD on the west end.
With the budget announcement on Tuesday headlining with a realigned "Melbourne Rail Link", the focus for public transport is undeniably shifting west from Melbourne's central Swanston/Elizabeth Street axis.
Rather than run underneath Swanston Street connecting Flinders Street and Melbourne Central, the new rail link will cross the Yarra further to the west with new underground platforms at Southern Cross, new stations at Montague (Fishermans Bend), Domain and new underground platforms at South Yarra.
The previous iteration of the Melbourne Metro project, and championed by the opposition, was set to supercharge development throughout Melbourne's inner north thanks to the location of the Parkville and Arden Stations. However what's lost in the north is now apparently gained in Fishermans Bend.
A follow-up <a href="http://www.premier.vic.gov.au/media-centre/media-releases/9903-providing-public-transport-to-the-largest-urban-renewal-project-in-our-country-s-history">media release</a> was distributed by the Planning Minister on Tuesday afternoon:
<blockquote>
	"The largest urban renewal project in Australia must have a railway station,
	"Providing this vital heavy rail service to Fishermans Bend is a priority of the Coalition government and will meet the needs not only of this new community but also the expanding Southbank area.
	"Fisherman’s Bend is 10 times the size of Sydney’s Barangaroo precinct.
	"The precinct’s 240 hectares compares to the Hoddle grid at 160 hectares, Southbank's 100 hectares, and 140 hectares in Docklands. Melbourne's CBD now extends from Spring Street to Williamstown Road, encompassing the historical Hoddle grid, Southbank, Docklands and now Fishermans Bend.
	"The precinct expands Melbourne's capital city zone by more than 50 per cent and is expected to eventually accommodate around 25,000 jobs and in excess of 40,000 residents.
	"There will also be significant productivity benefits from more people locating close to jobs and services in the CBD, Southbank and Docklands,"
</blockquote>
One of my major worries for Fishermans Bend was the lack of proper public transport access; 80,000 residents and 40,000 workers would swamp the existing light rail services in the area. With the budget announcement yesterday, this goes a long way, but not all the way, to mooting this issue.
Historically when state governments have kicked off large-scale inner-city redevelopment projects, they've been adjacent to the CBD and therefore heavy rail mass transit infrastructure is already in place: Cain/Kirner got Southbank (Southgate) rolling, right across the river from Flinders Street; Kennett got Docklands rolling, adjacent to the now renamed Spencer Street.
On one hand, placing a station in Fishermans Bend makes sense in terms of providing high-quality transport infrastructure for a region that's likely to rival Southbank and Docklands over time. But on the other hand, Parkville cannot be ignored over the longer term.
Casting our minds back to when Denis Napthine took over the premiership, the <a href="/news">PTV heavy rail plan was released</a> outlining the agency's thinking regarding staging infrastructure development.
Critically the second cross-town rail tunnel from Clifton Hill to "Fishermans Bend" was - as per the published plans last year - going to connect with the original Melbourne Metro project at Parkville, then connect at Flagstaff and Southern Cross and continue onto Fishermans Bend. Is this still on the cards?
If I could request one thing from the state government before the election campaign heads into overdrive, it would be to ask the DTPLI / PTV to republish updated heavy rail network plans. Denis Napthine did it after assuming the premiership, he ought to do it again.
The Melbourne Rail Link announcement has shifted focus away from City North. Notwithstanding interim plans to boost existing public transport services in the Parkville area, the community, institutions, businesses and City of Melbourne (who only just recently sent a specific <a href="https://www.melbourne.vic.gov.au/BuildingandPlanning/Planning/planningschemeamendments/Pages/AmendmentC196.aspx" target="_blank">City North structure plan</a> to the Minister for approval) deserve to know what else may have changed.
Lead image credit: <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://www.flickr.com/photos/dalegillard/2493633297" target="_blank">flickr</a>, CC BY-SA 2.0
</body></html>

The rise and fall of train stations

<html><body>
It was six years ago when Sir Rod Eddington first unveiled the vision for East-West connectivity across Melbourne with two signature projects: a freeway connecting the Eastern Freeway with the Western Ring Road and a new rail line to form an inner-city "Crossrail" connecting the Watergadens (now Sunbury) and Pakenham-Cranbourne lines.
Shortly after the Baillieu government came to power, the Melbourne Metro project, as it has been known up until yesterday, had its scope reduced from a two-phase project to a single phase project connecting South Yarra with South Kensington.
Yesterday the Victorian state government committed to funding the now rebranded "Melbourne Rail Link" with an even smaller scope encompassing a tunnel from South Yarra to Southern Cross via Domain and a new station in Montague (Fishermans Bend).
Eddington's original vision was grand in its scale with a tunnel running from South Kensington into what is now known as the Arden-Macaulay precinct with a new station in the vicinity of Queensberry Street's western end and then the tunnel was to link Parkville's Melbourne University and medical precinct providing a much needed Public Transport capacity boost for the area.
From Melbourne University the line would have run under Swanston Street with connecting stations at Melbourne Central and Flinders Street and terminating as part of phase 1 at a new train station under the existing tram interchange at Domain.
Phase two of the project would have seen the line run the length of St. Kilda Road to the junction and then turn east under Dandenong Road to eventually join the Caulfield Group of lines - Pakenham, Cranbourne and Frankston - at Caulfield station.
When coupled with the Regional Rail Link doubling capacity between Footscray and Sunshine and Dandenong corridor improvements (which at the time was looking like a proper quadruplication project between Caulfield and Dandenong), the original Melbourne Metro project would have provided dedicated track space for a true "cross-rail" line stretching from Pakenham in the South East right through the city to Sunbury in the North West. Throw in dizzyingly high frequencies of service thanks to not interacting with other lines and we'd have a new rail link that could rival any metropolitan freeway's capacity to move large numbers of people across town.
It was bold, grand and pricey.
Upon assuming power, the Baillieu government instituted a review which resulted in what we can now call the the second iteration of this project. That was to use the general route and station placement of phase one of the Eddington report's original vision however the second phase was struck out and Melbourne Metro tunnel would turn eastwards immediately after Domain under Toorak road to connect the new line to the Pakenham/Cranbourne/Frankston corridor at South Yarra.
The review was touted as cheaper and could be built faster and would still bring all the benefits to City North that the original vision outlined such as supercharging development in <a href="http://www.melbourne.vic.gov.au/BuildingandPlanning/FutureGrowth/StructurePlans/ArdenMacaulay/Pages/Information.aspx" target="_blank">Arden-Macaulay</a> and boosting Public Transport services to Melbourne University and the global biotech and medical cluster that is Parkville.
One large gaping hole in the second iteration of the project was the lack of connectivity between lines at South Yarra. We were left to assume trains would stop at Hawksburn and then proceed underground into the tunnels skipping South Yarra. Baffling.
With the Budget announcement yesterday, this all changes. The new proposal is to have a 7.5 kilometre tunnel running from South Yarra (in this case with connection to existing lines with new underground platforms) to Domain and then the tunnel continues westward to the eastern extremity of what we know as Fishermans Bend: Montague. From Fishermans Bend the tunnel will head north, under the Yarra, to two new underground platforms at Southern Cross.
In conjunction with the Budget Announcement, PTV released a video outlining the operational changes.
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/CQ2IGZYTTNw" width="560"></iframe>
The video provides a great deal more insight into how the operation of the new system will work than what we have seen of previous iterations. In the original vision and second iteration of the Melbourne Metro project it was always the Pakenham/Cranbourne lines which would run through the new tunnel.
The new regime sees the Frankston line be through-routed to the Belgrave/Lilydale/Alamein lines and Pakenham/Cranbourne lines will through-route to Sunbury via existing track through Richmond and Flinders Street.
</body></html>

Melbourne Metro project: a short history

<html><body>
Hindsight is always 20/20. It is easy to sit here today and debate the many urban planning mistakes made in Melbourne over the decades, but the fact is there have been many.
Building a "spider" train network, just about the whole 1969 transport plan (thanks to its heavy emphasis on freeways), and the rapid pace and reach of suburban sprawl are just a few we can name. It has not all been doom and gloom - keeping our tram network when the rest of the world were tearing theirs up was a stroke of genius that has saved us from probable inner-city transport chaos.
Most of these problems took decades to recognise let alone address, whilst many are just being looked at now.
One such problem is the total lack of heavy rail links to our four biggest regional shopping centres: Chadstone, Highpoint, Knox City and Southland. Highpoint at least has a tram link, although the route to the city is painfully indirect and plagued by shared traffic problems. Discussions of extending the tram to Knox City have been in the pipeline for years, the length of the route required making it impractical.
Similarly, talk of extending the Alamein line underneath Chadstone Shopping Centre continues to pop up on a regular basis, only to disappear again just as quickly, when the realities of the required complexity and cost sink in. Worse still, sub-regional shopping centres such as Werribee Plaza, Northland, Doncaster and Airport West all suffer the same fate. How did we get it so wrong? It is an unforgivable lack of foresight.
<img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="327" src="/sites/urbanmelbourne.info/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/southlandrail.jpg?itok=b5G2eW0t" width="580">
However just like the parents that have three kids in jail for trying to ram-raid the local ATM, and one at Melbourne University studying medicine, it is time to focus on the kid that's not a lost cause; in this case, Southland.
While also built without a rail station, it does sit smack bang on the Frankston Line, right in between Highett and Cheltenham stations. First opened in 1968 as a Myer plus a few other stores, it didn't really become a major shopping centre until major expansions in 1987 and 1990. Yet plans to build a station didn't bear any real fruit until 2010, when both major political parties promised to build it when transport became an election issue.
Labor said they would build it for around $45 million, its somewhat high price tag justified by the list of bells and whistles: elevators/escalators, toilets, a waiting room and shelter covering most of the platform all features befitting of a premium station, and then some.
And then came a gob smacking, jaw dropping moment usually reserved for stuff like the announcement of a new Star Wars film: the Liberals said they would build it, with all the inclusions, for the bargain basement price of $13 million! And just like when your slightly dim-witted uncle rings to excitedly tell you that he has won $50,000,000,000 as long as he pays some Nigerian prince a $5,000 'release fee', the old adage "If it sounds too good to be true, then ..." proved to apply here too.
Ted Ballieu of course won the election and duly realised he couldn't build it for that figure, even if he used a prison chain gang to do so. Never one to admit he was wrong, Ballieu, and his successor Denis Napthine, hit upon on the idea of trying to extort the money from Southland's owners instead.
Now don't get me wrong, given they are the primary beneficiaries from infrastructure that will bring more customers to their centre, it is perfectly valid to ask them to pay for some of it. However doing that before you budget to build it would have been a more reasonable approach. Given the Liberals already promised to build it with their own cash, Southland's owners quite unsurprisingly told the government to go jump off the nearest railway bridge. All this after Napthine assured us the delay in building the station was due to 'negotiating a better deal'.
Note to self: never get him to bargain for anything on my behalf. He'd probably walk into a $2 shop with a half-price voucher and end up paying $10 for a pack of chewing gum!
Partly due to the owners reluctance to contribute to the cost, and partly due to the Government's pre-election spending spree, Napthine was forced into an embarrassing backflip last week by announcing that the station would finally be built - without all the promised features - at a cost of $8 million above originally quoted, and at least two years after the original completion date of the end of the government's first term. The bare bones version will now contain the platform, some seats, facilities for PSOs and not much else. An appalling result and grossly inadequate for what is needed.
<img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="326" src="/sites/urbanmelbourne.info/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/southland_proposal.jpg?itok=7QB3wMvH" width="580"> Source: The Age
The station will service a major regional shopping centre and an estimated 4,400 passengers a day, making it the fourth busiest on the Frankston line. If we want to see true mode share shift and get shoppers out of their cars, the appropriate facilities are a must. Shoppers are not going to carry big bags of shopping down many stairs, and then stand in the rain whilst said purchases get soaking wet.
Disabled people who frequent the centre's services will struggle to access the platform, as will a demographic who make up a large percentage of the day foot traffic: mums with prams. Nor are any of these people going to run back to the shopping centre to use the toilets, if they forgot to go before they left after a long day shopping and running errands. A bit of common sense goes a long way.
Labor have yet to comment, though we can only hope their original proposal is still their position. Failure by either party to build anything other than the full monty is only going to result in an expensive retrofit/upgrade in the future. Governments may have committed many planning sins in the past, and despite much better results recently, we continue to build the odd blooper. Let's not make Southland Station one of them.
</body></html>

Trains

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News

Trains

Editor's Picks

Receive the latest news stories to your inbox

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News