SA Liberals propose new road, airport, rail bypass

Ideas and concepts of what Adelaide can be.
Message
Author
User avatar
[Shuz]
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 2484
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 5:26 pm
Has thanked: 821 times
Been thanked: 229 times

SA Liberals propose new road, airport, rail bypass

#1 Post by [Shuz] » Sat Jan 28, 2017 11:01 pm


Multibillion-dollar vision: South Australian Liberals plan new road, airport, rail bypass

Daniel Wills, State Political Editor, Sunday Mail (SA)
an hour ago
Subscriber only

Daniel Wills: Marshall offers a vision, not criticism
Steven Marshall stands by new Libs’ young gun David Speirs
Opposition Leader shakes up shadow cabinet
Liberal TV ads spruik Steven Marshall’s personality
Libs vow to subsidise to kids’ life saving course afloat
SOUTH Australia would get a new 24-hour export airport at Monarto, with heavy road and rail freight rerouted out of suburban Adelaide, in a multibillion-dollar plan backed by the state Liberals.

The Sunday Mail can reveal details of a bold infrastructure vision, which Opposition Leader Steven Marshall will make a key feature of his campaign to win next year’s state election.

The plan aims to replace the state’s major freight rail line, which links Port Adelaide to Murray Bridge via the city centre and Hills, with a new train track that loops up and around Gawler.

A new freeway would also be built alongside the train line for trucks and cars, with both routes funnelling into a new all-hours airport outside Murray Bridge.

Mr Marshall said the facility would turbocharge SA manufacturing and food exporters seeking to reach new global markets — but conceded it would require substantial federal and private sector investment.

The proposed “GlobeLink” railroad freight track would be much longer than the existing route, but the Opposition says making it non-stop removes the need to battle traffic and speeds up overall delivery time.


An artist’s impressions of proposed new rail and road corridor linking Port Adelaide to a planned 24-hour export airport near Monarto.
Mr Marshall has pledged $20 million to develop a business case if elected next year, which will examine how to obtain investment from the Commonwealth and private sector.

Similar projects are being pursued around the country, including at Toowoomba.

He said the project would take between five and 10 years to finish, but boost the state’s access to global markets while also cutting down on noise and traffic hazards for Adelaide residents.

“This is an ambitious project, but one that definitely needs to be delivered,” Mr Marshall said.

“Taking road and rail freight around Adelaide instead of through the city will improve amenity within our suburbs and reduce the bushfire risk.

“Currently, that line is heading towards reaching capacity. If we’re not careful, we will find ourselves with yet another economic constraint in SA.

“Labor’s approach to infrastructure has been pet projects around marginal seats and electoral cycles. We need more productive infrastructure to create long-term, sustainable jobs.

“The Liberal Party will deliver this project. It needs to be delivered. It won’t be delivered in five minutes, but the work needs to be done now so that we’re ready for it to take place.”


The proposed new rail and road corridor linking Port Adelaide to a planned 24-hour export airport near Monarto.
A Federal Government study published seven years ago examined several plans for shifting the freight rail line at prices between $700 million and $3.2 billion, and found the costs of all options outweighed benefits.

Mr Marshall said adding a freeway and airport, as well as plans to further boost state export activity in coming years, would strengthen the merits of a new business case.


State Liberal Party leader Steven Marshall
The pledge to shift heavy rail out of the Adelaide Hills, where residents fear sparks increase the bushfire risk, will also help the Liberals push back against a raid from the Nick Xenophon Team.

Mr Marshall said it made perfect sense to add a road corridor while upgrading the rail line.


It would improve safety in the city by shifting large trucks away from major thoroughfares like Portrush, Cross and Fullarton roads, Mr Marshall said.

He ruled out commuter tolls to fund the project but said industry may be willing to make payments upfront or be charged per use.

Mr Marshall said SA “needs to have a 24-7 airfreight hub” for exports, and could “steal” activity from Victoria by offering more a more cost-efficient service than going via Melbourne.

Discussions with SA industry indicated there would be strong demand for flights, he said.

The exact size of the airport would be determined as part of the business case, and Mr Marshall said he was confident of winning support from the Federal Government to fund construction.

“We’re certainly talking about billions of dollars, but that won’t be borne by the people of SA,” Mr Marshall said.

“That will be a shared cost and we will be accessing Federal Government funds, potentially local government funds and, most importantly, the private sector.

“It’s infrastructure which is going to improve the productive capacity of our state.”

In 2014, Hills councils called for urgent action to move the rail line away from populated areas after sparks from a freight train were blamed for starting a fire in Belair National Park.


The plan aims to replace the state’s major freight rail line, which links Port Adelaide to Murray Bridge via the city centre and Hills, with a new train track that loops up and around Gawler.
The operator of the rail line has since developed a new bushfire mitigation plan.

The 2010 Federal Government report into shifting just the rail line concluded: “Although all of the alignment options that were developed by the study team would be technically feasible, none were found to be economically justifiable at this point in time.”

“The economic evaluation indicates that the capital outlay required to improve the existing rail line or construct a new line is far greater than the benefits derived from such an outlay,” it stated.

“While there are benefits flowing to rail track managers, train operators and the communities that

surround the rail line, the size of these benefits is modest and the size of the capital outlay required to generate such benefits is large, particularly in the new alignment options.”

It said future studies should also include analysis of impacts on urban passenger networks as well as the difficulty of estimating the financial value of widespread community benefits.

The Liberals pledged several months of community consultation on the new plan.
This is exactly the kind of vision that South Australia doesn't need. :wallbash:
Any views and opinions expressed are of my own, and do not reflect the views or opinions of any organisation of which I have an affiliation with.

User avatar
Norman
Donating Member
Donating Member
Posts: 5473
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2007 1:06 pm
Has thanked: 707 times
Been thanked: 1165 times

Re: Adelaide Hills Freight Bypass

#2 Post by Norman » Sun Jan 29, 2017 3:46 am

Well, at last the Liberals are actually talking about anything related to infrastructure.

However, what is the point of this new export airport? I thought we barely get any international cargo flights into Adelaide as is, and most of the cargo is exported through existing passenger airliners such as Emirates, Singapore and Qatar.

If a business case does get released, it will certainly be an interesting read how this would stack up.

User avatar
[Shuz]
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 2484
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 5:26 pm
Has thanked: 821 times
Been thanked: 229 times

Re: Adelaide Hills Freight Bypass

#3 Post by [Shuz] » Sun Jan 29, 2017 7:55 am

It just amazes me that after 16 years of whinging about how expensive the desalination plant has been and how expensive the new RAH costs and how much debt we're in, that the Libs would come up with a crack pipe vision of a $3.2 billion dollar freight rail and freeway. With what money!

Absolute hypocrisy. A study has already been done into this - it found that this was not of economical benefit.

There's not enough traffic demand for a 4 lane freeway winding theough the countryside. Not to mention 150kms or so of land acquisition through agricultural lands and prime wine regions in the Barossa required for a 2x2 freeway and dual freight tracks.

There's not anywhere near enough demand for a freight only airport. There's no economic sense in building a freight terminal 70 kilometres away from the Adelaide CBD and a whole 80 kilometees from the Port Adelaide and surrounding industrial / freight areas.

This pie in the sky crap essentially renders the Goodwood Junction and Torrens Junction projects obsolete. Why would the Feds fund this project having just completed those two?

I hope that the people of SA can see through their waffle and call this out for what it is. Unrealistic, bullshit, fantasy, pointless.
Any views and opinions expressed are of my own, and do not reflect the views or opinions of any organisation of which I have an affiliation with.

User avatar
Norman
Donating Member
Donating Member
Posts: 5473
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2007 1:06 pm
Has thanked: 707 times
Been thanked: 1165 times

Re: Adelaide Hills Freight Bypass

#4 Post by Norman » Sun Jan 29, 2017 10:42 am

Since the story contains a lot of references to Toowoomba, I assume he is trying to imitate the success of the Wellcamp Airport.

Wellcamp Airport is a privately owned airport that currently receives a few Cathay Pacific 747 cargo flights per week. Toowoomba has a population of 115,000 people, and is near the highly productive Darling Downs agricultural region.

Trips to Brisbane Airport would take around 2 hours on average, so an airport nearby serving a few small passenger trips to Melbourne, Sydney and Darwin makes sense.

In comparison, Murray Bridge is also in productive agricultural land, but its population is only 18,000. Trips to Adelaide Airport would take less than an hour on average.

In short, the airport proposal makes no sense.

Aidan
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 1988
Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 3:10 am
Been thanked: 5 times

Re: Adelaide Hills Freight Bypass

#5 Post by Aidan » Sun Jan 29, 2017 12:09 pm

The case for a rail bypass is strong, despite an incredibly biased and surprisingly shoddy report reaching the opposite conclusion. It's a great shame that the government couldn't see this before wasting money grade and inconveniencing passengers by separating the Goodwood Junction, but we shouldn't let them use that as an excuse for inaction now.

The case for a new freeway is much weaker; upgrading the existing roads would be far better value.

I don't think there's any realistic case for a new airport at the moment, and in the distant future when there is, it may be better to put it beyond the Murray.
Just build it wrote:Bye Union Hall. I'll see you in another life, when we are both cats.

Goodsy
Legendary Member!
Posts: 853
Joined: Thu Jul 18, 2013 10:39 am
Has thanked: 10 times
Been thanked: 123 times

Re: Adelaide Hills Freight Bypass

#6 Post by Goodsy » Sun Jan 29, 2017 12:27 pm

Sounds kind of pointless, Adelaide airport is hardly overrun with freight.

Seems like it would make more sense to put it way out in the Riverland so it can service Broken Hill and Mildura as well

User avatar
Vee
Legendary Member!
Posts: 1105
Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2008 8:26 pm
Location: Eastern Suburbs
Has thanked: 144 times
Been thanked: 39 times

Re: Adelaide Hills Freight Bypass

#7 Post by Vee » Sun Jan 29, 2017 1:31 pm

ABC News highlights the response from the SA Freight Council (which had not been consulted) as "ill judged" and their position of support to upgrade existing infrastructure.
Looks like a rocky start to this Monarto hub, rail bypass and road corridor from Port Adelaide and 24 hour airport proposal?

SA Opposition plan to overhaul freight routes includes 24-hour airport at Monarto
South Australia's Opposition has unveiled plans for a multi-billion-dollar overhaul of Adelaide's freight network that includes a new 24-hour airport near Murray Bridge, and new rail and road routes for heavy vehicles.

Existing rail and road corridors either side of Adelaide's CBD would be replaced by alternative routes that would bypass the city to the north.

The new road thoroughfare would run alongside rail to allow freight to be transported between Port Adelaide and a new export park, including the airport at Monarto.
"The [new] corridor will be approximately 150 kilometres long and where possible will utilise existing or legacy railway corridors and roads," the Opposition said in a policy document.

One of the aims is to reduce the number of trucks on arterial city routes in residential areas, including Portrush and Grand Junction roads and the South Eastern Freeway.

The Opposition said an alternative rail route that avoided the steep climbs of the existing Adelaide Hills line would allow for "longer, double-stacked trains", boosting efficiency.

It also said an airport dedicated solely to freight would have "substantially cheaper operating costs" by allowing for the most cost-effective flight schedules.

The State Government dismissed the proposal as a "pipe dream", but Liberal leader Steven Marshall said the project, called GlobeLink, was key to boosting the state's exports.
"We would like to create an intermodal hub at Monarto... so that we can access markets as quickly as possible."

The project would need financial contributions from the Federal Government to go ahead.
"We would also be looking for private sector investment. That's what other states are doing," he said.
Freight industry condemns "ill-judged" plan
The Opposition said the proposal was one in a series of major policy announcements it would make ahead of the 2018 state election.
Mr Marshall conceded it could take more than 10 years for the project to be completed, but said a master plan would be created within his first 100 days as premier, should his party take office.

The South Australian Freight Council said it had not been consulted and had "serious concerns" about the plan, which it described as "ill-judged".

Executive officer Evan Knapp said money would be far better spent on upgrading existing infrastructure.
"We doubt the financial viability of the new airport, which may also harm the great work Adelaide Airport is doing in attracting new services," he said.

"The rail bypass has been studied numerous times and proved non-viable."
Mr Knapp said there was merit in looking into new road routes, but said heavy vehicles would continue to use the South Eastern Freeway and Portrush Road "to deliver freight into the eastern and southern suburbs".
Labor critical.
Transport Minister Stephen Mullighan also poured water on the idea, saying it had already been ruled out by "independent economic analysis".

"The investigation back in 2010 showed that the costs of the project by far outweighed any economic benefits," he said.
"This means that the project simply doesn't stack up and would be a net cost to the state economy."

Mr Mullighan said the bypass had only been proposed to "sandbag" safe Liberal seats against the electoral threat posed by the Nick Xenophon Team.
But he agreed there was a need for better infrastructure.

"There are certainly improvements which need to be made to the freight line which goes through the city and we've been making those improvements," he said.

"The Torrens Junction project starts construction within the coming weeks. This will deliver a more than 20 per cent increase in productivity for the freight line."
Image
ABC News:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-01-29/s ... es/8221030

Goodsy
Legendary Member!
Posts: 853
Joined: Thu Jul 18, 2013 10:39 am
Has thanked: 10 times
Been thanked: 123 times

Re: Adelaide Hills Freight Bypass

#8 Post by Goodsy » Sun Jan 29, 2017 1:42 pm

Vee wrote: "The rail bypass has been studied numerous times and proved non-viable."
And it's over before it even left the drawing board

Also I like how their graphic of Adelaide has Outer Harbor and the end of the Adelaide Hills in a straight line

User avatar
[Shuz]
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 2484
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 5:26 pm
Has thanked: 821 times
Been thanked: 229 times

Re: Adelaide Hills Freight Bypass

#9 Post by [Shuz] » Sun Jan 29, 2017 3:05 pm

I legitimately cannot believe there are so many uneducated, unintelligent people on the AdelaideNow comments who genuinely believe this is even a good idea.

While we're cooking up crazy hairbrained schemes - would it not be ever so slightly a little better to invest say, $1b or so of the $3.6b budget and save themselves a neat $2.6b (which don't really had any way - but lets just roll with it for arguments sake) into realigning some of the SE Freeway, Belair route and freight rail route through the Adelaide Hills by way of new tunnels / ironing out the steep slopes / duplication / etc. that would actually be utilised by everyone rather than just freight. A bit more politically palatable too I would have thought if they're so worried about NXT votes.
Any views and opinions expressed are of my own, and do not reflect the views or opinions of any organisation of which I have an affiliation with.

Aidan
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 1988
Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 3:10 am
Been thanked: 5 times

Re: Adelaide Hills Freight Bypass

#10 Post by Aidan » Sun Jan 29, 2017 3:20 pm

[Shuz] wrote:I legitimately cannot believe there are so many uneducated, unintelligent people on the AdelaideNow comments who genuinely believe this is even a good idea.

While we're cooking up crazy hairbrained schemes - would it not be ever so slightly a little better to invest say, $1b or so of the $3.6b budget and save themselves a neat $2.6b (which don't really had any way - but lets just roll with it for arguments sake) into realigning some of the SE Freeway, Belair route and freight rail route through the Adelaide Hills by way of new tunnels / ironing out the steep slopes / duplication / etc. that would actually be utilised by everyone rather than just freight. A bit more politically palatable too I would have thought if they're so worried about NXT votes.
No, Shuz, upgrading the existing freeway and railway to that standard would cost an order of magnitude more. The steep slopes are at ground level so couldn't be ironed out without a base tunnel!

We need a new route to enable trains to carry double stacked containers on the Melbourne route, enabling rail to gain a much higher market share. And now that our metropolitan roads have twice benefitted from Federal funding for freight, the state government wants to encourage trucks to go round the Hills instead of over them (by making that route suitable for B doubles). But they don't need a new freeway for that.
Just build it wrote:Bye Union Hall. I'll see you in another life, when we are both cats.

User avatar
PeFe
Legendary Member!
Posts: 774
Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 9:47 am
Has thanked: 25 times
Been thanked: 86 times

New Freight Airport

#11 Post by PeFe » Sun Jan 29, 2017 3:29 pm

Wow where has this come from..the South Australian Liberals releasing a transport policy months before an election !!
They want build a new freight only airport at Monarto with rail and roads links back to Port Adelaide (I presume some sort on new "freight road" that follows the new railway line, leaving the SE Freeway "freight free")

From The Advertiser
SA’s freight industry says has ‘serious concerns’ about Liberals’ plan for new airport, rail bypass

SOUTH Australia’s freight industry says it has “serious concerns” about a Liberal Party plan to spend billions of dollars helping them with a new freight airport and rail bypass.

The Sunday Mail today revealed Opposition Leader Steven Marshall’s plans for a new freight airport near Monarto, and dual rail-road lines linking it to Port Adelaide.

Mr Marshall said it would be a boon for the freight industry, and create jobs by helping exporters get produce to new international markets.

However, SA Freight Council Executive Officer Evan Knapp today raised serious concerns about the project’s viability.

“Airports are not sustainable purely on freight. The majority of air exports go in the belly of passenger aircraft – it is the combination of the two that makes such services viable,” Mr Knapp said.

“This may also harm the great work Adelaide Airport is doing to attract new air services to South Australia, like Qatar and China Southern.

“We support further investigation of the road route, but we have doubts as to its viability as a toll route due to volumes, and heavy freight access will still be required on the South Eastern Freeway and Portrush Rd to service the south and eastern suburbs.”

“We are disappointed that the freight industry was not consulted on this plan prior to a public announcement, however we stand ready to assist in the community consultation promised by the Liberals.”

Image

Full article : http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/sout ... f221ba7ce4

Patrick_27
Legendary Member!
Posts: 1498
Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2013 4:41 pm
Location: Adelaide CBD, SA
Been thanked: 172 times

Re: New Freight Airport

#12 Post by Patrick_27 » Sun Jan 29, 2017 3:53 pm

I've felt that if they moved the RAAF base to Monarto it'd open up Edinburgh for a more appropriately located Adelaide Airport. Don't expect anyone to agree with me on this point but perhaps there might be an option to create both a freight and RAAF airport at Monarto...

SBD
Legendary Member!
Posts: 725
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 3:49 pm
Location: Blakeview
Has thanked: 215 times
Been thanked: 62 times

Re: Adelaide Hills Freight Bypass

#13 Post by SBD » Sun Jan 29, 2017 4:45 pm

It is possible that the economic assessment in 2017/2018 could reach different conclusions than in 2010.
  • Port Adelaide already has (or will soon) 4-lane road access via Port River Expressway, Northern Connector, Northern Expressway and Sturt Highway as far as Nuriootpa
  • A bypass of Truro could be required anyway, with more grain from the Riverland due to closure of the Loxton railway branch
  • Rail corridor is reserved adjacent to Northern Connector so the new northern approach is available
There has also been increased road freight on the Sturt Highway due to closure of the railway to Loxton, so either that part of the road network needs more investment, or possibly the alternate rail route might make that railway viable again for grain transport (and maybe other RIverland product).

User avatar
rev
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 3550
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2006 12:14 pm
Has thanked: 167 times
Been thanked: 290 times

Re: New Freight Airport

#14 Post by rev » Sun Jan 29, 2017 5:40 pm

The freight council calls this a waste of money.
This isn't a serious proposal because if the Libs were serious about improving our freight and transport infrastructure they'd be consulting with industry bodies.
For the council to call it a waste of money says it all really.

Waewick
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 3330
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 1:39 pm
Has thanked: 53 times
Been thanked: 97 times

Re: New Freight Airport

#15 Post by Waewick » Sun Jan 29, 2017 6:03 pm

rev wrote:The freight council calls this a waste of money.
This isn't a serious proposal because if the Libs were serious about improving our freight and transport infrastructure they'd be consulting with industry bodies.
For the council to call it a waste of money says it all really.
Thanks Jay.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest