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>
When it comes to transport election promises, we can always expect the usual suspects: more trains, new trains, extended lines and extra levels on the dumb ways to die app. And whilst the headlines have been dominated by the Melbourne Metro and an airport link, and more recently, cheaper fares, this impending Victorian election has thrown up a new poster child - the grade separation (or to the non-gunzels out there, level crossing removals).
Both sides of politics have fallen over themselves to make promises containing the new buzzword, bandying it about with gay abandon like it was created by Miley Cyrus whilst twerking on yet another clichéd music video awards night show.
So this begs the question - are they worth the hype? Do they really make that much difference?
There are over 1,800 level crossings in Victoria, with about 200 of those in Melbourne. Sydney has 5. That's not a typo - you can honestly count them on one hand. New South Wales decided to get rid of theirs in the 50s and 60s; we decided to build the Gas and Fuel towers and the Total Car Park. Score!
Several accidents, derailments and sadly, deaths later, we are finally seeing the light and following suit, albeit half a century too late. Given the rapidly inflating cost of building infrastructure, let alone retrofitting it, its an expensive mistake indeed.
This is not a new idea in Victoria. Back in 2008, the state government ranked every level crossing in the state, based on how dangerous they are, as well as traffic levels. Of the Top 10 in that priority list, 7 remain unchanged. This includes the notorious pair of Furlong Rd and Main Road, the site of several deaths over the years.
On the flipside, Louise Asher managed to get cash for the constituents of her safe Liberal seat to upgrade New St in Hampton, despite it being a lowly 223 on the list! So what was the point of this list if the real priority is just going to be determined by pork barreling and marginal seat sweeteners?
Grade separations are expensive - most coming in at over $100 million. Aside from the high cost of infrastructure, this is largely dictated by the method now most commonly used to do them. In the past this was achieved by building overpasses and underpasses. Not only are they visually ungainly, they often result in the removal of many houses/shops due to the length required of the structure.
Therefore the majority of today's urban level crossing removals are achieved by lowering a short section of the track below the level of the road. Not only is this expensive in itself, level crossings are often located adjacent to a station, thus requiring a total rebuild of said station to boot.
<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/mitchamlevelcrossing.jpg" rel="gallery-all"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="326" src="/sites/urbanmelbourne.info/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/mitchamlevelcrossing.jpg?itok=GhI_ccQA" width="580"></a>
This expense has obviously made governments reluctant to cough up the cash. However with public transport coming more and more to the fore this upcoming election, and with our train system plagued by speed and capacity problems, our politicians are finally coming to the party.
Aside from providing something tangible to sell to voters, grade separations offer 3 main benefits:
<ol>
<li>
		They save lives. Whilst on the surface they are essentially a transport issue, the fact that they will prevent deaths far outweighs any other benefits. Unfortunately, no amount of education, no amount of warnings, will prevent people from occasionally getting careless, or quite recklessly rolling the dice. The flow on effects are enormous; aside from the death of the victims, their families, witnesses to the accident and train drivers all can suffer enormous emotional damage. This alone should be enough justification to make it a priority.</li>
	<li>
		They make our train/tram/bus network more efficient. Trams and especially trains need to slow down considerably whilst travelling through level crossings. And heaven forbid if there is an accident - the whole line is closed for hours, if not days, whilst repairs are undertaken. Thanks to the current tightly coupled state of our train lines, network wide chaos usually ensures. Buses suffer terribly too. Already slaves to the surrounding traffic level, travel times are further blown out whilst they patiently wait for the red and white sticks of gloom to rise, thus metaphorically parting the red sea and leading to the promised land of the intended bus interchange terminus.</li>
	<li>
		They potentially reduce traffic congestion. Notice this sits last in the list of benefits, and more importantly, note the use of the word 'potentially'. Make no mistake, the net benefit from the previous point far outweighs any benefit to motorists in terms of the sheer number of people involved. Any benefit motorists gain should be treated as a bonus, and a temporary one at that. Just like the building of a new freeway, or the upgrade of an existing road, induced traffic will ensure that the traffic levels will soon return to their original levels.</li>
</ol>
<a href="http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victoria/traintruck-smash-causes-transport-chaos-in-melbourne8217s-southeast/story-fni0fit3-1226707223905" target="_blank">This Herald Sun article</a> (dated August 30th 2013) illustrates and reports quite succinctly on what happens when things go wrong at level crossings.
Whilst the Greens mention level crossings under "improved safety and fuel efficiency" in their <a href="http://vic.greens.org.au/sites/vic.greens.org.au/files/policydownloads/Transport%20and%20Freight%20Policy%20as%20at%202013-12-07.pdf" target="_blank">transport policy document</a>, we're yet to see anything like the policy announcements that both the Coalition and ALP have rolled recently. But one thing is quite clear regardless of the specific party positions: there's been a great deal of policy sharpening in this area, and that's a good thing.
The mind boggles at the level of improvement such a number of removals could provide. “Imagine a Melbourne without level crossings” sounds like an overly optimistic line from the John Lennon classic 'Imagine', but it is actually a reality we can achieve in the current political generation.
</body></html>

TheHeadOnTheDoor

Separation Anxiety - Why don't we remove more level crossings?

<html><body>
$1 billion of direct investment, thousands of jobs translating into $5 billion worth of economic stimulus over the next 3-5 years - they're the numbers being spruiked by the State Government with the announcement of the Station Precinct Engagement Program at Jewell Station yesterday.

For a video summary of the project, you can view the 7 Network's news piece <a href="http://au.news.yahoo.com/vic/video/watch/22042921/1b-plan-to-upgrade-railway-stations/" target="_blank">here</a>.

<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/station_redevelopment_map.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="The 10 stations included in the Station Precinct Engagement Program - image © VicTrack"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="424" src="/sites/urbanmelbourne.info/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/station_redevelopment_map.jpg?itok=mIzWN3Mk" title="The 10 stations included in the Station Precinct Engagement Program - image © VicTrack" width="580"></a>

A map of the station locations complete with the as-yet funded Melbourne Metro line also drawn for good measure.

Like the East-West and Dandenong corridor projects, the detail with regards to the expected return on investment has not been forthcoming. In isolation the numbers look quite impressive but cynics may suggest this is the State Government seemingly attempting to divert attention away from their extremely unpopular East-West Link project so early into the election campaign. Fundamentally we consider this announcement to be a step in the right direction.

Focusing on Jewell station for a moment, the brochure on VicTrack's <a href="https://www.victrack.com.au/~/media/c17d6a3c9e004862a9e8d02676750fa2.pdf" target="_blank">site</a> depicts quite a handsome station precinct should it be developed as outlined.

This is what Jewell currently looks like from the Sydney Road side of the station.

<iframe frameborder="0" height="350" marginheight="0" marginwidth="0" scrolling="no" src="https://www.google.com.au/maps?cbll=-37.775011,144.959162&amp;layer=c&amp;panoid=SHqsandPm91rAz8Dl0tHZA&amp;cbp=12,307.9,,0,6.44&amp;ie=UTF8&amp;ll=-37.807614,145.000305&amp;spn=0.482284,1.056747&amp;t=m&amp;z=11&amp;source=embed&amp;output=svembed" width="100%"></iframe> <a href="https://www.google.com.au/maps?cbll=-37.775011,144.959162&amp;layer=c&amp;panoid=SHqsandPm91rAz8Dl0tHZA&amp;cbp=12,307.9,,0,6.44&amp;ie=UTF8&amp;ll=-37.807614,145.000305&amp;spn=0.482284,1.056747&amp;t=m&amp;z=11&amp;source=embed" style="color:#0000FF;text-align:left">View Larger Map</a>

The mid-rises to the north and south of the heritage station building will not only bring more welcome apartments to this part of the Sydney Road precinct but will also provide passive security over the station.

Gone will be the current car park, replaced with an improved Upfield shared path and the retention of some of the greenery which current exists around the station. Reactivation of the heritage building gains a tick of approval as well.

The challenge, perhaps more for Moreland City Council, is to capitalise on this investment and drive development into Wilson Avenue bringing Sydney Road closer to Jewell station.

<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/jewell_3.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="Looking South along the new shared Upfield path past the existing Jewell Station - image © VicTrack"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="290" src="/sites/urbanmelbourne.info/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/jewell_3.jpg?itok=MI0BOudv" title="Looking South along the new shared Upfield path past the existing Jewell Station - image © VicTrack" width="580"></a>

One question which remains is what could happen should at some point in the future the Government decide to grade separate the litany of level crossings along this stretch of the Upfield line?

To the immediate south of the station lie Park Street and Brunswick Road whilst Union Street frames the northern end of Jewell's platforms. Any grade separation project in this part of Brunswick would need to include those three roads plus the relocation or rebuild of the Jewell Station itself.

The Upfield line sees the worst frequencies of any rail line in Melbourne and according to the PTV's heavy rail plan released last year it would only see upgrades in frequency once the Metro Tunnel has created extra capacity on the existing Northern Loop for Craigieburn and Upfield. So that's a long way away but the requirement of the precinct changing once more should at least be placed in the moderate column of any risk assessment for developers and potential buyers.

Furthermore, factoring in future grade separations is likely to be an overarching theme for many of the 10 stations which are joining this State Government program.

Alphington, Essendon and Hampton stations feature nearby level crossings - will the State Government attempt to capture some of the value unleashed from the station precinct development to help pay for grade separations?

Here's hoping.
</body></html>

Alastair Taylor

Jewell and the Station Precinct Engagement Program

<html><body>
The latest incarnation of Footscray station is starting to take shape as the Regional Rail Link upgrade works steam along towards an early 2015 completion date. It looks amazing - proof that rail infrastructure can look stylish as well as be functional. Traditionally dark and dingy and a hangout for gangs and junkies, it's now a modern, stylish beacon that the residents of Footscray can be proud of.

This is technically the second upgrade in the last four years.

In 2009 the shops on the station side of Irving St were removed, and a new bridge erected, the bulk of which remains today. Almost as soon as the upgrade was complete, the Regional Rail Link was announced requiring two extra platforms to be added to the existing four. As a consequence, the bridge was lengthened, whilst all the stairs leading to the platforms were removed and replaced with a combination of escalators, ramps and new stairs.

The leaking bridge tunnel roof was patched up, and a new concourse and ticket office has been built at the Irving St entrance. The new platform 1 building's colour scheme and form looks bold and modern whilst remaining respectful of the original buildings on platforms 2/3 and 4/5. A major bus interchange will run the length of Irving St, whilst an already upgraded tram terminus is located across the road on the corner of Leeds St.

Complimenting the new station development is the construction of Footscray's first real skyscraper. An office tower built on the adjoining McNab Avenue precinct, it will house the government departments of State Trustees and City West Water bringing many welcome jobs to Footscray.

Two future residential towers are also planned for the precinct with some cafes/basic retail adding some street level activation. The State Trustees tower is close to completion and makes for a stunning backdrop giving commuters approaching the area an impression of a fast rejuvenating Footscray.

Whilst the removal of the shops was controversial, it added some much needed light and open feel to the area. However one trader has survived - the ubiquitous and world famous Olympic Doughnuts. South East Asia may have fried crickets, New York may have cronuts, but Footscray has jam doughnuts to die for, an institution in the West for over 30 years.

So when it faced the prospect of eviction during the station works, the Regional Rail Link project team moved swiftly to accommodate them, thus saving themselves from the prospect of a riot on their hands. Given the roaring trade the little doughnut van does every day, it was a smart move indeed.

So when the station upgrade is complete, and Regional Rail Link trains start flowing through, I highly recommend you come down and check it out. Projects like this can transform the face of a suburb, and go a long way to changing the negative perceptions it may have.

Come to admire the station design, but stay for the doughnuts!

Martin Mankowski is a local resident and Apartments.com.au's honourary Footscray correspondent.

Photos captured by Mark Baljak.
</body></html>

Footscray Station update - Where's the doughnuts?

<html><body>
When the Wall came down, thousands cheered as the bulldozers moved in. Millions more tuned in on their televisions to watch this once in a lifetime event. The Wall had divided the city in two for years, leaving it to develop almost completely different cultures.

People would stop and try to peer through the cracks, trying to remember what a unified city was like. Finally, that time was coming to an end. The population would finally remember how the other half lived; long lost relatives would be reunited with much emotion.

It was the pressure of these long awaited scenarios that made the leader sweat profusely as he stepped forward towards the podium to make an announcement that everyone was so desperately wanting to hear.

"The Melbourne Metro is complete! The Great Wall of Swanston St can come down!"

Mass hysteria ensures, as the crowd cheer as loudly as they've never cheered before. Crying true tears of joy, they have their street back.

<img alt="" height="332" src="/sites/urbanmelbourne.info/files/pictures/article-images/berlin-wall-coming-down.jpeg?itok=EgmTqJAw" width="405">

Denis Napthine's comparison of the Metro tunnel's planned Swanston St works to the Berlin Wall are nothing short of absurd, and ranks amongst the worst excuses to not upgrade public transport this state has seen. Hardly surprising, given he has only ever given tacit support of the project, through clenched teeth like a kid telling his mum how much he loves Brussels sprouts.

The Premier even tried telling us that Tony Abbott had softened his stance on funding the Metro, only to be immediately rebuffed and told he had no such intentions of funding any urban rail project, anywhere. "Roads are a sign of progress" Abbott reiterated, a view talked about in great detail in his conservative manifesto, Battlelines.

The 1950s rang, they want their infrastructure policy back.

Of course, this most backwards of philosophies has helped Napthine push his favourite barrow, the East West Link. Thinking that people would jump for joy at the announcement of another freeway, he wrongly assumed that the Melbourne Metro project would have disappeared into the background never to be spoken of again, just like the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multifunction_Polis">Multifunction Polis</a> and the <a href="/news/grollo-tower-one-mans-vision-unrealised">Grollo Tower</a> before it.

But, shock horror, it turns out Abbott isn't the messiah, and his philosophy is completely outdated. Those pesky voters want a functional public transport system after all! With internal polling showing the current Spring Street Government in real trouble in November, an ever increasingly desperate Napthine resorted to relentlessly beating the Metro with a stick, in the hope that if he could scare enough people away from it.

It sounds like a plot from a bad stalker movie.

And so here we are: Swanston St will be the new Berlin Wall. The Metro was first mooted back in 2005, with the previous Labor Federal government setting aside funding for it in last year's May budget. So despite years of research and planning, Denis Napthine has suddenly come to the realisation that the route is all wrong, and that we need to start all over again. Six months out from an election, no less! Phew, lucky we have Denis to save us from impending disaster.

So is there method to this madness? Let's analyse the three options:

<h2>The Russell St Option</h2>

Basically the same as the original route, except rather go from Melbourne Central, under Swanston St to Flinders St Station and then under the Yarra to Domain, it runs under Russell St instead, with new stations on the corner of Russell and Latrobe, and Russell and Flinders.

This would still require mass disruption along Russell St, but admittedly it doesn't have the same foot or tram traffic of Swanston St. While this would be a positive, there is one major drawback. The Metro is meant to achieve three major outcomes: greater frequency of trains, greater reliability through decoupling of lines, and greater connectivity between lines.

A Russell Street route would inevitably require passengers to walk a whole city block to catch a connecting train. Not only is this a huge inconvenience (especially for the disabled and elderly) it would pose a further challenge in having to build an underground walkway to connect them.

In a day and age where we are bending over backwards to make using public transport easier, this is a definite no-no.

<h2>The Fishermans Bend Option</h2>

This is the option thrown up by Napthine as the preferred alternative - moving it west. Given the Premier has released little information about the actual path I assume the route would utilise existing track to Southern Cross, then run under the river with stops at Fishermans Bend and Port Melbourne before joining the original route at Domain.

Given the government had previously failed to promise to build a station in Fishermans Bend until after most of the housing was built, this would be a step forward. However the main benefit of this option is meant to be a much reduced cost owing to avoiding the CBD, which logic would dictate the opposite would be true given the potentially longer tunneling required. The tunnel would still need to go under the Yarra, at quite a considerable depth.

Secondly, as no part of this route runs directly under the path of a road, it would almost certainly mean that none of it could be built cut and cover. So how exactly would this route be cheaper? That's not even taking into account the cost of all the planning which would have to start again from scratch.

To top it off, it doesn't even run through the part of the city which would likely attract the most passengers. A conceivable by-product of the project would be to help alleviate tram overcrowding along St Kilda Rd/Swantston St, not add to it!

<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/Metro-Port-Melb-route.jpg" rel="gallery-all"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="369" src="/sites/urbanmelbourne.info/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/Metro-Port-Melb-route.jpg?itok=P-m2Cs1h" width="580"></a>

<h2>The Swanston St Option</h2>

And that brings us back to the original plan. First officially announced in 2008 as a result of the Eddington report, the tunnel was originally meant to run from Footscray to South Yarra, before being respectfully pruned to a South Kensington to Domain route. Its proposed stations were strategically placed:

<ol>
<li>Arden - The site of future urban renewal.</li>
	<li>Parkville - Situated right at the junction of the hospital precinct and Melbourne University, this would conceivably become one of the busiest stations in the network.</li>
	<li>CBD North/CBD South. Critical interchange points with the two busiest stations in Melbourne, allowing passengers to change onto every other line. Note to the station naming gods - please let common sense prevail and make these stations additional platforms of Melbourne Central and Flinders St, rather than calling them something else so that no one makes the connection that they are actually on top of each other!</li>
	<li>Domain - Major tram interchange and gateway to the St Kilda Rd business and residential precinct.</li>
</ol>
<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/Melb-Metro-route.jpg" rel="gallery-all"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="390" src="/sites/urbanmelbourne.info/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/Melb-Metro-route.jpg?itok=uANOy5yT" width="580"></a>

And this is only the first part of the PTV heavy rail plan. The second proposed tunnel, running Clifton Hill-Parkville-Flagstaff-Southern Cross-Fishermans Bend, will add some much needed extra capacity to the South Morang Line, a line which currently terminates in one of the largest growth areas in Australia.

In turn, this would free up capacity on the Clifton Hill-Flinders St section, allowing the possible future addition of a line to Doncaster. At the other end of the line, the whole of Fishermans Bend could be serviced, rather than just the northern precincts as proposed by Napthine, which misses the section with the highest planned density: Wirraway.

The route has undergone much rigorous analysing. First proposed in an independent report, it's backed by PTV, Infrastructure Australia and many transport experts and advocates. Almost all of the planning has been done, with IA labeling it 'Ready to proceed'. Napthine is well aware of this, and up until now has been one of those supporters, at least in theory.

Yet, despite 3 years of government, it has taken him until now to realise the route is all wrong, and needs to be thrown out with the garbage. Rather spending his energy on sourcing some funding, he has shown it petty regard, foolishly implementing deliberate time wasting strategies like a new name (Metro Rail Capacity Project) and proposing alternative routes that are painfully inferior. All in a naive attempt to garner support for the real apple of his eye - The East West Tunnel.

Reality check Mr Napthine - you can't make people buy a Ford by teaching them to hate Holden!

Much has been made of ripping up Swanston St, but does it even need to be built cut and cover? More importantly, can it be? Given Melbourne Central station was built cut and cover itself, wont the metro have to go underneath it anyway? The same at the Flinders St end - won't it have to go fairly deep to tunnel under the Yarra? This argument seems to be yet another red herring in a long list of excuses not to build it.

Political agendas aside, Victoria will be poorer for not building the Melbourne Metro in its current form. Public transport patronage has increased dramatically over the last 15 years, and we face decades of crush capacity if we don't address it correctly now. We only get one chance at this - it's not like we can rip up a tunnel if we get it wrong.

To loosely quote Pink Floyd, every delay, every loony alternative, every excuse, is just another brick in the political wall.
</body></html>

Go West - Should We Move The Melbourne Metro Tunnel?

<html><body>
Summer. The very word conjures up a sense of joy. A sense of well being. A sense of being alive again. Beaches, beer festivals, and picnics at the park. Enjoyment at last after the long hard slog of winter is nothing but a distant memory. Of course its not all good - it also means bushfires, 40 degree days, and no football (at least the real thing, not the Mickey Mouse pre season competition that's just started) for a few months yet.
And just when you thought that Nanna's pair of Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtle socks were the worst present you got this Christmas, the incumbent State government came up with this doozy - The summer public transport timetable.
Don't get me wrong, summer timetables can be warranted for most things; your local library may be closed over the Christmas/New year break, Joe from the Fish &amp; Chips shop round the corner may decide to take the family to Bonnie Doon for a few weeks forcing you to eat healthy for a while or more likely, live off Aunty Sue's Christmas pasta bake leftovers for a bit. The point is, none of these things are really going to massively disrupt your every day life activities.
So reducing a few train services in peak hour for a few days over Christmas, whilst the lack of people in the CBD resembles a nuclear Holocaust, shouldn't really be an issue. Except - some bright spark decided it would be a good idea to cancel every second peak hour service - FOR A WHOLE MONTH!
This wouldn't necessarily bother many people between Christmas and New Year. After the family arguments on Christmas and Boxing Day, most people spend the next few days watching Mitchell Johnson break people's arms. Thanks to the PTUA's campaign, we now have 24 hour transport on New Years, before everyone spends the following day recovering from one too many bottles of $8 Champagne.
Then, on the 2nd of Jan, we all crawl back to our jobs, everything as it was, like Christmas/New Years never happened. Everything, that is, except our public transport system.
<h2>
	"Dumb ways to <strike>die</strike> run Metro trains"</h2>
<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/Valentines-Day_HeroBanner_1200x439px_v24.jpg" rel="gallery-all"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="212" src="/sites/urbanmelbourne.info/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/Valentines-Day_HeroBanner_1200x439px_v24.jpg?itok=qD3UoUMq" width="580"></a>
The State Government couldn't have picked a worse time - its like they extended PTV's 'Dumb ways to die' ads and created 'Dumb ways to run our train system'! January is traditionally our hottest month, and after a relative mild December, Melbourne sweltered through a roasting January this year. As is now par for the course, Metro responded by cancelling even more services. Even worse, the cancelled services were done in advance, meaning when temperatures didn't reach their predicted highs of 40+ degrees, services were still cancelled!
This resulted in horribly over crowded waits on the platforms, and even more horrible rides on the trains themselves. Predictably, the air conditioning struggled to keep up, causing even more services to be cancelled. To try to address this snowballing problem, Metro advised everyone to leave the city early if possible, causing a rush akin to a petrol buying panic during a shortage. Worse still, the Australian Open was on - major events usually result in extra services, not less.
It was a complete debacle which for the most could have been avoided. The sad part is it was all avoidable; this had nothing to do with 'scheduled maintenance' and everything to do with saving a few bucks
When unavoidable occurrences such as heat waves arise, or even self inflicted ones such as summer timetables, we have one ace up our sleeve that we never play - our V/Line trains.
How many people have standing idle at the station when the announcer quite rudely says that 'this train is not taking passengers'? But its going where I'm going! So why can't I get on? Allowing suburban passengers to travel on regional trains already happens in London, helping spread the load at peak times,as well as helping frequency at night.
As our regional network now utilizes an extension of the metropolitan zone system (as well as Myki), it would be a seamless transition.
<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/Vline-Network-Map-updated2-November-2012.gif" rel="gallery-all"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="553" src="/sites/urbanmelbourne.info/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/Vline-Network-Map-updated2-November-2012.gif?itok=nVdyvGjP" width="580"></a>
The best part about this solution is that it would be free to implement. Sure some argue that peak hour V/Line services are already crowded too, but as suburban passengers would only be traveling for a short part of the journey, regional passengers would still have the vast majority, if not all, of the seating capacity.
<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/vlocity-420x0.jpg" rel="gallery-all"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="420" src="/sites/urbanmelbourne.info/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/vlocity-420x0.jpg?itok=9bRSKqaf" width="580"></a>
So whilst this solution would not cure ridiculous decisions like the summer timetable, it could at least alleviate the symptoms. So lets hope the next time those in charge mull over timetable decisions, they employ a little more common sense. Not taking a holiday whilst said summer timetable was running would be a good start!
</body></html>

Stand And (Not) Deliver - Are Summer Train Timetables Really Necessary?

<html><body>
With the federal election now done and dusted, its almost hard to remember a time when Tony Abbott wasn't PM. For those of us who actually miss the spin, gaffes and broken promises of an impending election (aside from the ones our esteemed PM still provides), never fear - the state election is only 12 months away - even less if Geoff Shaw manages to alienate yet another subsection of the Victorian population before then.  For those of you who would rather stick pins in your eyes than endure another campaign, there is a light at the end of the tunnel (and not the East-West kind) - the next election has promised to be fought with a strong focus on everyone's most cherished everyday experience - public transport!
Whilst public transport was an issue at the last state election (remember Ted Ballieu's war cry to 'fix the problems'?), that will pale into insignificance compared to the role it will play in the 2014 poll, thanks to everyone's favourite boondoggle - the East-West tunnel. Having won the last election promising a raft of rail projects, they quite inexplicitly back flipped and decided to build a road tunnel instead.  Whilst the common perception is that it will do nothing to ease congestion, and with no business case to even justify its existence, the government's motive to pump $8 billion into it is the biggest mystery since the 1980s asked 'Who shot JR?'.  Whilst it has provided opposition leader Daniel Andrews a much needed bat to whack Premier Napthine around the head with, the tunnel's location has also provided plenty of ammunition for one of the Greens' and PTUA's favourite obsessions - the Doncaster Rail Line.
The PTUA's and Greens' obsession with Doncaster is the stuff of legend.  In fact, if Doncaster Rail was a person, they'd both be charged with stalking.  Whilst the benefits of the Melbourne Metro and high capacity signaling are obvious, they continue to bang the Doncaster drum with monotonous regularity.  The romance of it makes for a great sob story - 'The people of Doncaster have been waiting 90 years for this' we're constantly told.  Anyone would think that Doncaster is a remote village that has to wait for a twice a week horse and cart service to visit the big smoke in Melbourne.  The much improved DART bus service is all but forgotten when it comes to talking about existing alternatives. So is a Doncaster rail link really needed? Or even viable for that matter?
<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/art-doncaster_rail-620x349_1.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="Image courtesy www.theage.com.au"><img alt="" class="image-article-half-width-351px" src="http://urbanmelbourne.info/sites/urbanmelbourne.info/files/styles/article_half_width_351px/public/pictures/article-images/art-doncaster_rail-620x349_1.jpg?itok=PzN2NmdH" title="Image courtesy www.theage.com.au" typeof="Image"></a>
Doncaster should be, in theory, the perfect rail project.  With a ready made reservation down the middle of a freeway, there are no debates about underground or overground, route or compulsory acquisitions; important factors when retro fitting rail through brownfield sites; but the list of negatives are just as striking.  Whilst a freeway makes for an obvious route, no one actually lives on a freeway. The distance to housing is even more pronounced in the case of the Eastern Freeway, as much of it runs through parkland. This means walk up patronage is already reduced, removing one of the major draw cards of catching public transport in the first place.  To address this, large park and rides would be be required at EVERY station (5 are planned), not just at the terminus at Doncaster Rd or Doncaster Hill.  Not only would parkland be consumed to build them, patronage is also restricted by the size of the car parks.  This in turn removes motivation to catch the train - 'Why bother driving to the nearest available car park? I may as well drive all the way in...'.
The 2nd major problem is cost where some ridiculous figures have been bandied about to build it.  A report by Curtin University, RMIT and engineering firm Arup claims it could be done for the bargain basement price of $840 million, whilst the PTUA claim they could build stage 1 to Bulleen for a paltry $100 million.  Melbourne's most recent completed rail project, the South Morang extension, cost $498 million, for a 3.5km extension with 1 new station and no tunnels (though there was a grade separation at Cooper St).  Doncaster is a 12km line with 5 new stations and major tunneling involved at both ends; the Doncaster Hill tunnel being especially tricky as it requires an uphill tunnel that would be the deepest in Melbourne.
This makes those quoted figures look absurd.  Hardly surprising given the $840 million figure was based on Perth's Mandurah rail line - a project built almost 10 years ago and through predominantly greenfield sites. The PTUA figures are just downright irresponsible - in the current environment of high infrastructure costs, it's most unlikely they couldn't even build the incredibly complex interchange at Collingwood for $0.1 billion, let alone the track, wires and station.  I'll run the length of the entire rail line naked if they could build it for under double that figure!  More sensible quotes seem to start at $3 billion (Collingwood to Doncaster Park &amp; Ride) and go up to about $11 billion for the whole shebang (to Doncaster Hill + tunnel from Clifton Hill to Southern Cross).
Complicating matters further is the issue of patronage.  Some outlandish claims have been made here too; one study even claiming that the Doncaster line could carry about 100,000 passengers a day equating to 20,000 per station, somewhat unlikely numbers for a predominantly suburban line with no interchanges.  As a reference point, the network's busiest non loop station is Footscray, carrying about 15,000 a day and it's a major metro rail/vline/tram/bus interchange.  Furthermore the recently completed Doncaster rail study showed a train would actually take few cars off the road, with the majority of passengers coming from the previously mentioned DART bus.  Regardless of the numbers, just running trains to Doncaster would put extra strain on the Clifton Hill - Flinders St section.
The South Morang Line is already bursting at the seams, and with South Morang now the fastest growing suburb in the country, its thirst for capacity is only going to get bigger.  Compromising this with a new line that will carry a questionable number of passengers is simply a case of robbing Peter to pay Paul.  The only way to avoid this is to build the Clifton Hill to Southern Cross tunnel, which will probably be needed to de-couple the South Morang Line regardless.  But of course, this tunnel can't be built until the Melbourne Metro tunnel is built first.
<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/731929-train-line1.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="Image courtesy www.ycat.org.au"><img alt="" class="image-article-half-width-351px" src="http://urbanmelbourne.info/sites/urbanmelbourne.info/files/styles/article_half_width_351px/public/pictures/article-images/731929-train-line1.jpg?itok=_ig8teJX" title="Image courtesy www.ycat.org.au" typeof="Image"></a>
Whilst the Doncaster rail line is hardly on my Christmas wish list for 2013, I'm not saying we should throw it on the eternal scrap heap.  It may very well be viable, even necessary down the track with the current number of apartment developments being proposed for Doncaster itself, demand could eventually outstrip the capacity the DART buses can deliver.  The Clifton Hill - Southern Cross tunnel will already be built, ensuring the Doncaster wont take capacity away from the South Morang line (or Mernda line by then, or hopefully Whittlesea line), allowing money to be used for the necessarily large park and rides.  And as was recently suggested, maybe the Eastern Freeway will be tolled, providing the bulk of the required funds for the project, as well as an extra incentive for people to use the train instead.
Doncaster, Rowville, Melton electrification, Mernda Extension are all great future projects, but to use some of Paul Keating's terminology, the Melbourne Metro Tunnel is the 'Black Caviar' of transport projects.  It is the only project that benefits the whole network, whilst transforming it into a true rapid transport network.  It could be argued that high capacity signaling would also be universally beneficial, however we wont see its full potential if we don't remove the bottlenecks that only de-coupling will provide.  In a day and age where high infrastructure costs reduce us to picking winners, the Melbourne Metro tunnel must be our first priority - not a disproportionately expensive suburban line with dubious benefits.
Whilst the Greens &amp; PTUA's hearts may be in the right place with its unconditional support of public transport, choosing to back populist projects over more necessary ones is hardly helping the cause.  The only way we can stop misconceptions like the East West tunnel is to be united on its opposition.  The public has spoken loudly in its support of public transport over roads - its time the PTUA took one for the team and supported all those voices, not just a select few.  Bring on the State election!
 
Further reading
<a href="http://www.doncasterrailstudy.com/">http://www.doncasterrailstudy.com/</a>
</body></html>

Is DONcaster rail, is good?

<html><body>
It's that time again; other media outlets are reporting on Melbourne Airport's most up-to-date figures regarding its ever expanding car parking revenues.  And cue the inevitable uproar on the lack of perceived non-car access methods to the airport. 

As we've seen, even on Apartments.com.au, there's a lot of debate on how to provide alternative access methods to Tullamarine.  Martin Mankowski dished up a thought provoking piece during June on <a href="/news/melbourne-a-city-of-two-tales-skybus-vs-the-airport-train" target="_blank">Skybus versus Airport Rail</a> while back in March I wrote that <a href="/news/half-of-the-melbourne-airport-rail-link-is-currently-under-construction" target="_blank">half of the Melbourne Airport Rail Link is already under construction</a> in the form of the Regional Rail Link.

This regular cycle of mainstream reporting and subsequent commentary doesn't appear to be going away and unless norms (read: PTV Melbourne Metro dependencies, notions that the Regional Rail Link should be treated as a sacred cow for regional passengers) are challenged the same cycle will be repeating itself a decade from now.   The East-West freeway tunnel is likely to soak up many years worth of capital which could be redirected into Public Transport projects so the not-so-new question is: how best to get non-road transport out to Tullamarine?

I still form the view V/Line would be the best operator to run trains to and from the Airport mainly because the Regional Rail Link will be injecting additional capacity into and out of the inner city: an asset that could get a higher return - for more Victorians - if it were at least initially used for Airport rail services.  Conjointly the rolling stock V/Line utilise is presently better suited for passengers with bags compared to a standard metro train configuration whilst little thought is given to the fact that auxiliary trains required to operate these services would be built in Dandenong - adding more local jobs to the equation.  

<img alt="" class="image-article_full_width_702px" height="318" src="/sites/urbanmelbourne.info/files/styles/article_full_width_702px/public/pictures/article-images/VLocitySet36.jpg?itok=dPALl6mU" title="Vlocity at Southern Cross - Image credit: Wikipedia: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:VLocitySet36.jpg" width="702">

Image credit: <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VLocity_160" style="font-size: 10px;" target="_blank">Wikipedia</a>

In light of the amount of capital that will be sucked out of Spring Street's budget to facilitate the East-West freeway project, further measures to deliver an Airport Rail service need to be looked at.  Australia Pacific Airports (Melbourne) Pty Ltd - the owner of Melbourne Airport - favours an underground station in the Terminal precinct (refer to <a href="http://melbourneairport.com.au/docs/MasterPlan_2013_PreliminaryDraft_s9_Ground_Transport.pdf" target="_blank">Ground Transportation Plan, Page 129</a>) - however is this the best option?  

Given the airport is set to receive a large elevated road structure to better interface with the new Terminal development to the South of the existing T3 (Virgin), is an elevated rail line completely out of the question?  An underground station will mean passengers using the trains will need to ascend multiple floors to get to the departures level of the terminals and not to mention underground stations are invariable the most costly to build.

An elevated solution, like that of Brisbane's Airtrain Station seen below, has the advantage of easily traversing the horrific amount of car parks that currently surround the airport.  The station itself isn't overly fancy (we should remove the thought from our minds of building a grand terminal like the proposals we saw recently for Flinders Street), it's pleasant enough and gets the job done - just what  a train station should be.  Not to mention it would have been a darn site less expensive to build than a tunnel and two platforms underground.

<img alt="" class="image-article_full_width_702px" height="468" src="/sites/urbanmelbourne.info/files/styles/article_full_width_702px/public/pictures/article-images/Brisbane_Airport_domestic_terminal_Vabre.jpg?itok=UL_ttNVa" title="Brisbane Airport Domestic Station - Image credit: Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domestic_Terminal_railway_station,_Brisbane" width="702">

Image credit: <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domestic_Terminal_railway_station,_Brisbane" target="_blank">Wikipedia</a>

Attempts to ask APAM about whether an elevated structure could well be looked at the next iteration of the Airport's master plan were met with an automated message on the phone number listed on Melbourne Airport's site for the Master Plan.  Suffice it to say not much effort thereafter was employed to pursue the matter.

Reflecting on deleting Footscray as a V/Line stop, as mentioned in the March piece, the recent release of Plan Melbourne seems to work with this idea quite well.  Sunshine is highlighted as an emerging employment cluster and having a major transport interchange located within it - especially with traffic going to and from the airport - would go a long way to ensuring this planning initiative is successful.  Should Sunshine be the primary western suburban stop for regional services, the emerging area will be the first port-of-call for all Geelong, Ballarat and Bendigo V/Line services; having a regular CBD-Airport rail service stop via a potential Sunshine V/Line hub allows seamless connectivity for regional passengers, removing the need to travel into an already congested city station.

Once the Regional Rail Link is complete, effectively the start of works to build an airport rail link will be in Sunshine.  A structure to remove potential conflict between Airport bound trains and the Sydenham line would need to be built around Albion and at least initially, a single bi-directional track could be laid alongside the existing Albion corridor (therefore reducing capital expenditure).  Factor in an elevated station at Tullamarine and the comparisons to a dual electrified track with metro services terminating at an underground station are stark, particularly in construction costs.  The newly formed Metropolitan Planning Authority will have two clear choices upon which to advise Government no doubt.

Leap forward 10 years after an airport link is complete, the Melbourne Metro tunnel is operational and the pressure on Regional Rail Link capacity increases; maybe then could the 'norm' be implemented.  

In saying that however, I dare say the faster  V/Line service would be sorely missed if an airport rail link switched to a stopping all stations slower metro service as outlined in the PTV Heavy Rail plan.
</body></html>

Reflecting on the Melbourne Airport Rail Link

<html><body>
<a href="http://www.docklandsnews.com.au/editions/article/yarras-edge-tram-bridge-outrage_9122/" target="_blank">Docklands News</a> reported (01/10/13) Yarra's Edge residents were growing increasingly worried about the proposed tram bridge as outlined in the Fishermans Bend draft vision.  Under the headline "Yarra's Edge tram bridge outrage", Docklands News quoted boat owners as saying they would oppose any low-level bridge that would restrict access to the Marina.

The article similarly quotes the Planning Minister as saying "the bridge was more than 20 years off from being built" and then quotes a Places Victoria representative as saying "a tram link between Collins Street and Yarra's Edge would be in place within 10 years".  Confused?  You're not alone.

Whilst a tunnel might keep the boat owners of Yarra's Edge happy, we need to look at the overall benefits of building the cheaper option: a low-level bridge:

<ul>
<li>cheaper to construct than a tunnel</li>
	<li>more likely to provide pedestrian &amp; cycle links adjacent to tram tracks</li>
	<li>ability to place a tram stop right on the southern bank of the river - injecting people into an otherwise inactive urban environment</li>
	<li>no unsightly ramp in the middle of Collins Street in Victoria Harbour.</li>
</ul>
One potential idea is to slowly move the berths to the west of the proposed bridge alignment as leases in their current position expire therefore allowing a fixed bridge to be built maximising the public's return on investment in the bridge.  

If you're to believe the Places Victoria representative's timeframe of 10 years then an opening bridge could be built with a view to lock it in position over a longer timeframe once the berths have moved away from their current position.   In 10 years, Fishermans Bend (in particular the Lorimer precinct) isn't likely required to have super-high frequency services traversing the river (therefore periods each hour for opening could be catered for), but in 20 years time (the Planning Minister's quoted timeframe) demand for high frequency access to and from Fishermans Bend is likely to be much greater with the entire redevelopment zone underway in some shape or form.

On the loss of open / green space, it is well within the realms of possibility to acquire the site on the opposite side of Lorimer street (pan the street view below around 180 degrees) to even increase the amount of open space available to existing Yarra's Edge residents, mitigating the obvious loss of existing green space should a low-level bridge be the preferred option.

<iframe frameborder="0" height="400" marginheight="0" marginwidth="0" scrolling="no" src="https://www.google.com.au/maps?t=h&amp;ie=UTF8&amp;layer=c&amp;cbll=-37.824158,144.942455&amp;panoid=ZWn0RAEWSz6zODMx3I5zag&amp;cbp=13,34.19,,0,4.79&amp;source=embed&amp;ll=-37.824793,144.942777&amp;spn=0.001331,0.003015&amp;z=18&amp;output=svembed" width="100%"></iframe> <a href="https://www.google.com.au/maps?t=h&amp;ie=UTF8&amp;layer=c&amp;cbll=-37.824158,144.942455&amp;panoid=ZWn0RAEWSz6zODMx3I5zag&amp;cbp=13,34.19,,0,4.79&amp;source=embed&amp;ll=-37.824793,144.942777&amp;spn=0.001331,0.003015&amp;z=18" style="color:#0000FF;text-align:left">View Larger Map</a>

As I <a href="/news/an-overview-of-fishermans-bends-transport-vision" target="_blank">wrote</a> two weeks ago, the most interesting part of the Fishermans Bend draft vision was the eventual form this new link would take.  I just didnt think it would be this quick for the locals to fire up.

 
</body></html>

Rumble in Yarra's Edge

<html><body>
<h1>
	By <a href="http://theconversation.com/profiles/peter-newman-1858" style="font-size: 12px;">Peter Newman</a>, Curtin University
</h1>
Sydney’s West Connex Motorway, one of Australia’s biggest infrastructure projects, is <a href="https://theconversation.com/abbotts-transport-priorities-drive-australia-into-the-past-17988">not without its downsides</a> but may provide a potential model on how future urban public transport projects can be financed.
The first phase of the $11 billion project has been funded by the NSW government with <a href="https://theconversation.com/are-we-selling-off-the-family-silver-by-privatising-australias-ports-13824">the sale of Port Botany</a>. The failure to properly predict vehicle patronage in the past decade has resulted in a series of <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-09-14/cross-city-tunnel-owners-blame-government-for-debt-woes/4958084">tollway business failures</a>. So by opting to build the first phase itself, the government can accurately assess patronage estimates and hence toll income, then sell it off to private owners and operators, using the resulting funds to begin the next stage of the system.
Across Australia there is a backlog of urban rail projects that are now not in the <a href="https://theconversation.com/its-not-in-the-knitting-urban-rails-growing-significance-13754">Federal knitting</a>. Perhaps the West Connex model provides a way forward on urban public transport – with some advantages over motorways.
I’ve argued before about the <a href="https://theconversation.com/its-not-in-the-knitting-urban-rails-growing-significance-13754">dramatic shift</a> in urban rail patronage, with rail transit in particular becoming more market-based due to its ability to by-pass traffic. Economically it has an important role in making urban centres viable and attractive to global capital in the knowledge economy.
We know the arguments around it: reducing carbon and sprawl, improving air quality and health; but the new factor is its importance in improving urban productivity. <a href="http://glossary.econguru.com/economic-term/agglomeration+economies">Agglomeration economies</a> occur around urban rail stations due to the extra synergies between different parts of the workforce; international examples such as <a href="http://www.crossrail.co.uk/route/">London’s Cross Rail</a> have delivered a cost-benefit ratio of between 1.5 and 3.0.
While European and Asian cities traditionally show a strong market case for urban rail, now the car-dependent cities of America and Australia are demonstrating through patronage demand that there is a market for urban rail.
Figure 1 shows the recent growth in urban public transport in in Australian cities. The major growth has been driven by new infrastructure, so new rail projects in Adelaide and Sydney are likely to affect their trajectories to resemble the remarkable growth in Perth, Melbourne and SE Queensland.
<figure class="align-centre zoomable"><a href="https://c479107.ssl.cf2.rackcdn.com/files/31827/area14mp/rz78sff7-1379989372.jpg"><img src="https://c479107.ssl.cf2.rackcdn.com/files/31827/width668/rz78sff7-1379989372.jpg"></a>
	<figcaption> Author's own.</figcaption></figure>The data indicates substantial growth in public transport; patronage averaged out at 65% higher than was being attracted just over a decade ago – nearly 100% growth in Perth. All Australian cities now have large scale plans to complete their urban public transport systems.
Perhaps the West Connex model could be adapted to help cash-strapped states fund and construct this type of rail infrastructure, in the following way:
<ul>
<li>
		Build the first phase of urban rail projects based on private sector consortia bids that include the development of land around stations.
	</li>
	<li>
		Prove up the patronage income from fares and alternative funding sources like parking levies and especially <a href="http://www.committeeforperth.com.au/images/stories/NewsMedia/Publications/16-Discussion%20Paper-%20Alternative%20Funding%20Mechanisms%20for%20Public%20Transport%20in%20Perth,%202011.pdf">land value capture</a>. Put this in a special Transit Fund.
	</li>
	<li>
		Place the newly operating first phase urban rail project onto the market as a privately owned and operated rail service. Use the capital raised as the basis for the next stage of the urban rail project and repeat the process until the full network is created.
	</li>
</ul>
The key advantage in this process over the West Connex and other road projects is that rail can produce land value capture revenue. Motorways do change the value of land but it is highly dispersed and residents are not keen to live near them due to traffic and noise.
However modern electric rail focuses land value increases near to rail stations due to their market attractions. There is a willingness to pay for accessibility that translates into higher real estate values. Perth’s new Southern Rail has <a href="http://www.scirp.org/journal/PaperInformation.aspx?PaperID=31822">attracted 78,000 users a day</a> due to its significant speed advantages over traffic; as a result there has been a 42% growth in land values near stations over five years.
This translates into higher land-based tax revenues such as council rates, state land taxes and stamp duty, Federal capital gains and GST on land sales. These can be hypothecated into a fund along with fares and relevant other funds like parking levies.
Across the world, a range of cities have used this Tax Increment Financing method for urban rail; Delhi is looking at more than half of the potential income for their new regional rail from this source.
Australian state governments are looking at this possibility but the West Connex model suggests that instead of leaping into private rail they could test the real size of the revenue that could potentially be created by the new rail project.
Apart from lobbies that do not want to see urban public transport at any cost, there are <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/lifematters/our-22infrastructure22-prime-minister3a-the-future-of-transp/4946194">some prevailing views</a> that transit is not a 21st century economic instrument. This is because it is not seen to have a true market that could stand on its own without government.
Like toll-ways.
Peter Newman does not work for, consult to, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has no relevant affiliations.
<img alt="The Conversation" height="1" src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/18506/count.gif" width="1">
This article was originally published at <a href="http://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a>. Read the <a href="http://theconversation.com/a-road-less-travelled-funding-australias-urban-rail-18506">original article</a>.
Lead image credit: <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Metro_Trains_Melbourne_Hitachi.jpg" target="_blank">Wikipedia</a>
</body></html>

theconversation

A road less travelled - funding Australia's urban rail

<html><body>
Late last year media reports surfaced of a unique office project to be built at 48 Easey Street, <a href="/new-apartments/collingwood-vic-3066">Collingwood</a> after receiving Yarra City Council approval. Christened <a href="http://end-to-end.yolasite.com/">End To End</a>, the five level office complex would be crowned with three Hitachi motor carriages in a design drawing inspiration from Melbourne's train graffiti culture. The result of an <a href="/architects/itn-architects">ITN Architects</a> brainstorming session, the design is in stark contrast to the immediate areas heritage-rich surrounds, yet has been recognised as a novel method of preserving a slice of Melbourne's transport heritage.

Another in the architect's series of projects that sit outside the comfort zone, End To End will consist of six separate office spaces, two fetching prices around the $1.5 million dollar mark while the project website shows two remaining spaces left for sale. ITN Architects' Zvi Belling at the time suggested that some of the available space within the carriages may be dedicated toward and art gallery or public bar, hopefully allowing the wider community the chance to experience this distinctive piece of architecture.

<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/EASEY%20-%20HERO%20with%202%20available.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="Hero image of End To End office complex. Image © ITN Architects"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="387" src="/sites/urban.melbourne/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/EASEY%20-%20HERO%20with%202%20available.jpg?itok=NZfyo2O4" title="Hero image of End To End office complex. Image © ITN Architects" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>Hero image of End To End office complex. Image © ITN Architects</figcaption></figure>And so finally many months later and with the precision of a military operation the weekend passed saw the lift of the three Hitachi's into place atop End To End. The massive engineering exercise involved crews and specialised equipment from <a href="http://www.membreys.com.au/">Membrey's Transport</a>, <a href="http://www.membreys.com.au/">Skylift Cranes</a> and <a href="http://metcalfcranes.com.au/">Metcalf Cranes</a>, the latter employing their <a href="http://metcalfcranes.com.au/equipment/demag-ac350-350t-all-terrain">Terex Demag AC 350</a> (350T lift capacity) for the major lifting. Under the auspices of head contractor <a href="http://www.kalitek.com.au/">Kalitek Construction</a> the lead carriage or 'Platform 1' was placed atop the structure late Saturday afternoon to the amazement of the sizeable crowd present.

ITN Architects <a href="https://www.facebook.com/itnarchitects">Facebook page</a> now carries a variety of images of the lift.

<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/Image25_2.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="Saturday evening's events as captured by ITN Architects and published on their Facebook page"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="244" src="/sites/urban.melbourne/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/Image25_2.jpg?itok=y-MyQsLF" title="Saturday evening's events as captured by ITN Architects and published on their Facebook page" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>Saturday evening's events as captured by ITN Architects and published on their Facebook page</figcaption></figure>With all bogeys fixed in place at roof level prior to the lift, Sunday saw the two remaining carriages craned into position although strong winds delayed the installation of the last carriage for some time. Each carriage weighs approximately 30 tonnes minus bogeys (according to those onsite) and with millimetres to play with as the carriages were lowered into position, full marks to all involved that this complex feat of engineering went precisely as planned.

Also full marks to the architect for conceiving such a design and not shirking the issue at any stage of the development. Involved buildings such as End To End would inherently carry higher costs through design and construction, particularly considering the loading the concrete structure must now carry for the life of the development. That the more difficult and expensive option was pursued is a massive thumbs up! Something the average passerby mightn't consider; but at least they have something interesting, distinctive and engaging to view as they walk on by Easey Street.

A variety of site images taken during yesterday's lift can be seen below.
</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