MEL AP-Car park that's as big as a suburb

[Hvr]

Melbourne Airport's massive car park should have its own suburb name and postcode, given ''it is so enormous'', says Planning Minister Matthew Guy.


The ever-expanding airport car park is one of the largest in the country, with 25,000 parking spaces for passengers and employees. Another 2850 spaces are planned. Chadstone Shopping Centre, by comparison, has about 10,000 spaces.

There was no doubt the airport needed a rail link to the city, the minister told a Property Council growth summit in Melbourne, but there was no ''definitive timeline'' on when that would happen.


The airport makes $114 million a year from parking charges and increased the hourly short term parking rate by 17 per cent this year.

Read more: Car park that's as big as a suburb
​

So nothing new here, but for a government elected on a public transport platform which has allocated its major expenditure for the next 20 years on an otiose road I doubt any currently serving politician will ever take a train to the airport.

This is basically proven with the following statement:

''There is always a debate in this city about what form a rail link might take - broad gauge, standard gauge, electrified, diesel, all of those things are still obviously being looked at - but there is no doubt the link to Melbourne Airport is going to be a necessity in the future,'' he said.

​

What the heck? It's a necessity now!!! A standard gauge electric train line will do the job and a quick spur line from Albion or Sunshine can be built very quickly. With the above gross over planning being used to delay the train line it will eventually join the Doncaster rail line as being 100 years overdue.

 

[whatmeworry]

Quite disgusting that the do nothing Liberal state government will not do anything but advocate for another private road.

To say it will take another 20 to 50 years to make a train line to Melbourne airport is absolutely bullsh1t!

 

[samh004]

Starting to see this from both sides. Perhaps a bus lane/bus corridor, which private cars can't get into, would ease the issue with the Skybus etc getting caught in traffic?

But, if you want the infrastructure other than the car park to be updated, new runways etc, the airport has to make it's money somewhere, and I'm guessing it doesn't do really well from landing fees alone. If you take away their car parks and they're under utilised, then new terminals and better landing systems will probably also not be on the agenda. In which case, you probably don't need a train as it wont get any bigger

 

[Programme]

What the heck? It's a necessity now!!! A standard gauge electric train line will do the job and a quick spur line from Albion or Sunshine can be built very quickly. With the above gross over planning being used to delay the train line it will eventually join the Doncaster rail line as being 100 years overdue.

From a (slightly lapsed) rail nut, a standard gauge electric railway to the airport would have some troubles - the only place in Australia where you find SG electrics is New South Wales. The rest of the Melbourne suburban network is 1.5kVDC Irish broad gauge, so such an airport railway (presumably modern 25kVAC as well) would suffer from lack of commonality with anything else, that is, unless it formed part of/the start of a high speed intercity railway.

...but that is really not the point. The railway was necessary years ago and plans were made - destination rolls from the 70s showed destinations such as Melbourne Airport and East Doncaster, but the trains never got there.

 

[markis10]

I cannot imagine it would cost much to extend the Airport West tram line, there seems to be an easement along most of Melrose Drive anyway to accommodate a wider road.

 

[serfty]

I had a close view of that from the 479 bus on Saturday.

 

[Austman]

I can't see that a train would ease the car park size much. I mean you can get a train today to Southern Cross and then it's a (usually) short Sky Bus ride to the airport. All for probably less cost than several days parking at the airport.

I know many people who drive to the airport yet live fairly close to train stations. They're driving because they don't want to catch public transport and not because public transport isn't available. They don't like public transport for many reasons including:

• it's not luggage friendly
• it can be slow
• it can have limited service at night
• it can be overcrowded
• it's not not door-to-door (or almost door-to-door)

The train would replace Sky Bus and make train-to-train connections easier. Those might be good reasons, but are they really going to change the behaviour of people who elect to drive today?

 

[whatmeworry]

Airport chief hits back at Planning Minister's quip

Melbourne Airport chief executive Chris Woodruff has his hit back at Planning Minister Matthew Guy's quip that the airport's car park was so large it should have its own postcode and suburb name.

​

​

 

[Dalescott]

There is NO political advantage for either party, in a rail link. Just look at the demonstrations over the east/west tunnel. Could you imagine the political problems for the Labor Party with this issue, they would need to run it thru their strongest seats, seats that are getting closer to the Greens every election. As to the Coalition (Liberals/Nationals), Skybus is owned by Driver bus lines. I could well imagine the back room tantrums from their Directors, to the local Coalition members. Job loss, lost income for the state etc etc etc!! Having been involved with one political party for a number of year, this is a issue that will receive press coverage, lip service and nothing else.
PS I have been told that the Chinese made Big Ted an offer in regards to the rail link and MagLev??

 

[lovestotravel]

I can't see that a train would ease the car park size much. I mean you can get a train today to Southern Cross and then it's a (usually) short Sky Bus ride to the airport. All for probably less cost than several days parking at the airport.

I know many people who drive to the airport yet live fairly close to train stations. They're driving because they don't want to catch public transport and not because public transport isn't available. They don't like public transport for many reasons including:

• it's not luggage friendly
• it can be slow
• it can have limited service at night
• it can be overcrowded
• it's not not door-to-door (or almost door-to-door)

The train would replace Sky Bus and make train-to-train connections easier. Those might be good reasons, but are they really going to change the behaviour of people who elect to drive today?

Agree totally 100000% in fact

The sky bus is pretty good (although expensive)

Melbourne's public transport is a joke, but that is because we are spread out so far

Singapore which is one of the best systems in the world IMO has a far smaller network (1/2 the size, 1/2 the stations) and 3-4 times as many yearly passengers

As nice as the train link to MEL airport would be to make the greenies feel happy it is simply not worth the massive cost

 

[anat0l]

The sky bus is pretty good (although expensive)

Distance from Tulla to the city is the main thing which will challenge any transport to and from the airport. The taxi fare is handily the largest in the country for the major centres for a fare from the city to the airport.

Any new transport option, I believe, will not be any cheaper than Skybus IMO - the only advantage and sell factor will be time and convenience.

Melbourne's public transport is a joke, but that is because we are spread out so far

Singapore which is one of the best systems in the world IMO has a far smaller network (1/2 the size, 1/2 the stations) and 3-4 times as many yearly passengers

So the challenge is how do you have a great transport system like that in Singapore but replicated on a massive scale. Plus, have enough people who will actually pay that kind of money to use it. I'm not firmly of the belief that if you give an Australian city a great transport system, it will be used willingly by the populace. They would need a stick which hits on the use of cars to actually be pushed onto public transport. However, public transport usually increases in price commensurate to the pressure imposed on operating a car in Australia. Ridiculous logic, yeah?

Operating a car in Singapore is notoriously expensive, and that is of course thanks to the government. Impose those kinds of restrictions on people in Australia and you will have a riot (plus transport and cartage costs go up etc. etc. blah blah blah interest groups, car industry etc.). Of course, if people of Singapore complain about it, they end up in jail, so they're pretty cool with the whole idea.

As nice as the train link to MEL airport would be to make the greenies feel happy it is simply not worth the massive cost

I wonder why it makes the greenies feel happy. Sure it is supposed to be a cleaner alternative (electric vs. fossil fuel burn, although one should consider that the electricity comes from fossil fuels as well, possibly brown coal), but the amenity cost and unavoidable environmental degradation in construction has got to be a challenge. Unless they inconspicuously use a spur line from an established rail line, which may result in less damage but there is still that cost. In the long term it will likely pay off, but we haven't even considered the economic argument, as you said.