[VIS] Gifford Hill City ($7.5bn)

[A-Town]

Who the hell wants to live in Murray Bridge?

I really can't see this taking off at all. White elephant.

This may have been the case 5-10 years ago, but as the population continues to increase with our already limited housing supply, people will move to locations where housing is affordable. Adelaide's houses hit another record in July, with prices up nearly 75% since March 2020. Adelaide is not an affordable city for many to live in now, especially for young people and those wanting to start families.

https://www.indaily.com.au/business/pro ... 1ExdZJirPA

[VinyTapestry849]

Surely you don’t mean the proposed airport is to fly people between Murray Bridge and Adelaide?? If anything, development of a second airport in this location would increase the need for a rail link, not remove the need entirely. I imagine any second airport would be freight based, but as a lot of manufactured goods come out of Adelaide, the road link alone will not suffice, let alone workers commuting from Adelaide to new distribution centres.

Rex can probably provide a double-daily service from Gifford Hill to Adelaide. (Yes I know about what's going on with Rex, their regional services seem fine)

The cost of rail is humongous. Inconceivable price. Victoria has gone broke with rail. A small airport is much more viable and cheaper if we can secure rex to service it daily with human traffic.

Any cargo can just go to Adelaide airport by truck. Its not like Gifford Hill will be a factory/industrial area pumping out goods. Its just residential.

The Princes Highway is more then sufficient to service that new area.

There's a reason why planes are not used for short, high capacity routes. To provide a meaningful commuter option for tens of thousands of passengers per day, you would need to be shuttling multiple 747s back and forth. A couple of Rex turboprops isn't going to cut it for connecting what will essentially be a satellite city/exurb of Adelaide to the main urban area.

The advantage of rail is that it can carry large volumes of people efficiently, which is what is required for satellite city/exurb of this scale. You can hope that they are all going to work locally as much as you like, but at the end of the day, a development like this is inevitably going to massively increase the need for transport - not only from Murray Bridge to Adelaide, but also from Adelaide to Murray Bridge, and between Murray Bridge and Mount Barker. People travel for all kinds of reasons, and work is only one of them. Murray Bridge is, and will increasingly be, part of an interconnected metropolitan region.

At the very least, the freeway is going to need another lane. This is a seriously big development we are talking about, and it will most likely catalase a lot of other development elsewhere in Murray Bridge. If this all gets built, it wouldn't be unreasonable to think that Murray Bridge as a whole might be home to close to a hundred thousand people in the second half of this century. That's a Ballarat or Bendigo sized city, so to say that rail wouldn't be a sensible idea is just silly.

Anyone with the mindset that rail is some kind of impossible pipe-dream on this route needs to get out and see what's been done elsewhere in the world. Yes, the route has its challenges, but it is relatively small fry compared to the engineering feats which have been accomplished elsewhere. Of course it would be expensive, but not inconceivably so. The government's own report costed a new rail alignment via tunnel from Mitcham to Stirling and then following the freeway at 5.8 billion. Expensive, but in the scheme of things these days, not absurdly so. A lot less than the South Road tunnels.

You could add a couple of billion at least to extend the corridor to Murray Bridge, but once you do so, the benefits of the line as a whole start multiplying. Not only would it directly double the commuter pool, but it would make relatively rapid service of other large markets like Melbourne and south-east SA viable for the first time.

https://www.infrastructure.sa.gov.au/ou ... rected.pdf

Nah, it really is inconceivably expensive

Asked whether the new Gifford Hill development would necessitate a rail link to Murray Bridge, Mayor Thorley said: “I don’t think anyone’s going to build a new railway line anywhere.”

“The cost of that is enormous. The only way something would happen like this is if an outside party did it,” he said.

“I think the current rail system is the one that’s there and that will be the only one for some time to come, but obviously public transport and use of the South Eastern Freeway will probably expand.”

[dbl96]

Nah, it really is inconceivably expensive

Asked whether the new Gifford Hill development would necessitate a rail link to Murray Bridge, Mayor Thorley said: “I don’t think anyone’s going to build a new railway line anywhere.”

“The cost of that is enormous. The only way something would happen like this is if an outside party did it,” he said.

“I think the current rail system is the one that’s there and that will be the only one for some time to come, but obviously public transport and use of the South Eastern Freeway will probably expand.”

What is your basis for saying this? The words of a small town mayor who has a vested interest in the development proceeding regardless? Does he have any expertise in civil engineering or infrastructure provision?

I've given you an actual costing for a new rail alignment through the Hills which was commissioned by the stage government recently. It is clearly technically feasible, and while it would be expensive, it would not be "inconceivably" so. At least, it would be a fair bit cheaper than South Road.

Further, once the scope of the project is expanded beyond just providing a commuter link to Mount Barker, it starts to become a project of national significance, by providing a bypass of one of the most problematic segments of the national network. It would massively reduce travel times on the Adelaide-Melbourne route, which would have all kinds of multiplier effects.

[VinyTapestry849]

Nah, it really is inconceivably expensive

Asked whether the new Gifford Hill development would necessitate a rail link to Murray Bridge, Mayor Thorley said: “I don’t think anyone’s going to build a new railway line anywhere.”

“The cost of that is enormous. The only way something would happen like this is if an outside party did it,” he said.

“I think the current rail system is the one that’s there and that will be the only one for some time to come, but obviously public transport and use of the South Eastern Freeway will probably expand.”

What is your basis for saying this? The words of a small town mayor who has a vested interest in the development proceeding regardless? Does he have any expertise in civil engineering or infrastructure provision?

I've given you an actual costing for a new rail alignment through the Hills which was commissioned by the stage government recently. It is clearly technically feasible, and while it would be expensive, it would not be "inconceivably" so. At least, it would be a fair bit cheaper than South Road.

Further, once the scope of the project is expanded beyond just providing a commuter link to Mount Barker, it starts to become a project of national significance, by providing a bypass of one of the most problematic segments of the national network. It would massively reduce travel times on the Adelaide-Melbourne route, which would have all kinds of multiplier effects.

$5.8bn minimum for the infrastructure needed (not including costs of extension to Murrary bridge, freight integration, or cost overruns. Would be well over $10bn). Good luck getting the government enthusiastic. Huge cost and at risk of blowout, but perhaps it can be our Torrens to Darlington 2.0 rail edition .

Report conclusion? "No clear solution". The most viable one is putting heavy rail alongside the South Eastern Freeway.

it starts to become a project of national significance, by providing a bypass of one of the most problematic segments of the national network. It would massively reduce travel times on the Adelaide-Melbourne route, which would have all kinds of multiplier effects

Very much agree something needs to be done though, the hills are both a blessing and a curse. They've bottlenecked Adelaide into "small city" status by standing in the way of expansion.

A rail corridor would be good so we can expand beyond them. I just can't see It materialising before like 2060, if happening at all.

[abc]

the other problem with the hills is they're a bushfire risk so cant really safely sustain any significant increase in population therefore any expansion in that direction needs to be on the other side of the range which so far has been Mt Barker, but Murray Bridge is just too far away

[dbl96]

$5.8bn minimum for the infrastructure needed (not including costs of extension to Murrary bridge, freight integration, or cost overruns. Would be well over $10bn). Good luck getting the government enthusiastic. Huge cost and at risk of blowout, but perhaps it can be our Torrens to Darlington 2.0 rail edition .
Picture .jpg

Yes, of course it will be expensive, but not inconceivably so. Obviously it has to compete with other projects, but the fact that it would be a connection of national importance rather than just a provincial link to Mount Barker as proposed previously. This would likely change the calculus for the Commonwealth when considering a contribution to funds.

By far the most expensive section of a new route from Adelaide to Murray Bridge would be the tunneling required to get the railway from the Mitcham area to the other side of the main range around Hahndorf. Extending from Mount Barker to Murray Bridge would require a bit of tunneling and bridges to get through the Mount Barker range itself, but once it gets to Callington the existing alignment is straight and flat enough to use. Overruns are difficult to predict, but if Adelaide-Mount Barker is costed at $5.8 billion, you would think that Adelaide-Murray Bridge should be possible without exceeding the $10 billion mark. Most of the cost would be in the Adelaide-Mount Barker segment.

it starts to become a project of national significance, by providing a bypass of one of the most problematic segments of the national network. It would massively reduce travel times on the Adelaide-Melbourne route, which would have all kinds of multiplier effects

Very much agree something needs to be done though, the hills are both a blessing and a curse. They've bottlenecked Adelaide into "small city" status by standing in the way of expansion.

A rail corridor would be good so we can expand beyond them. I just can't see It materialising before like 2060, if happening at all.

Agreed, but now is the time to start planning for it. If it ever does materialise, it will be because of projects like Gifford Hill and further population growth in the Murray Bridge area and the Hills which will provide the impetus.

the other problem with the hills is they're a bushfire risk so cant really safely sustain any significant increase in population therefore any expansion in that direction needs to be on the other side of the range which so far has been Mt Barker, but Murray Bridge is just too far away

They are also just too steep, mostly national park, and would look pretty ugly if covered in suburbia.

[Norman]

As much as I would like to see more investment in rail than road, comparing the Torrens to Darlington project to a hills rail link makes it not stack up. T2D will be used by 100,000 people per day, a hills rail link might see 1,000-2,000 people a day. The benefits don't outweigh the cost.

I'd rather like to see $10b spent on an underground city connection to make the existing network more attractive and efficient, especially those who want to travel to the East End.

[abc]

As much as I would like to see more investment in rail than road, comparing the Torrens to Darlington project to a hills rail link makes it not stack up. T2D will be used by 100,000 people per day, a hills rail link might see 1,000-2,000 people a day. The benefits don't outweigh the cost.

I'd rather like to see $10b spent on an underground city connection to make the existing network more attractive and efficient, especially those who want to travel to the East End.

lol you make it sound like it isn't walking distance

there's already a tram on North Tce

[VinyTapestry849]

As much as I would like to see more investment in rail than road, comparing the Torrens to Darlington project to a hills rail link makes it not stack up. T2D will be used by 100,000 people per day, a hills rail link might see 1,000-2,000 people a day. The benefits don't outweigh the cost.

I'd rather like to see $10b spent on an underground city connection to make the existing network more attractive and efficient, especially those who want to travel to the East End.

So in your view a mini-melbourne type rail-loop infrastructure is more beneficial?

[A-Town]

Infrastructure consultant Luigi Rossi believes rail is the only way to solve freeway traffic problems after massive residential development announcement

An infrastructure consultant has warned of traffic mayhem on the South Eastern Freeway if the new 44,000 person residential development near Murray Bridge goes ahead.

Principal consultant of Luigi Rossi and Associates, Luigi Rossi said the South Eastern Freeway was “virtually at capacity” and could not accommodate the bold $7.5bn plan to create a satellite city near Murray Bridge – comprising 17,100 new homes for an estimated 44,000 residents.

Mr Rossi, who helped design some of SA’s largest infrastructure projects – including the South Eastern Freeway and Heysen Tunnels – was a top-ranking bureaucrat for the Department for Infrastructure and Transport.

“We are overloaded and it will put additional pressure on it (the South Eastern Freeway), a road system that has already shown issues with capacity problems,” he said.

While road upgrades were possible, expanding lanes along the freeway between Murray Bridge and Mount Barker, Mr Rossi said there were constraints in sections between Hahndorf and the Old Toll House – such as the three lane Heysen Tunnels.

“An even bigger constraint is once you get down to the bottom of the hill and you hit Cross Rd, Glen Osmond Rd and Portrush Rd,” he said.

“They do not have the capacity for any more traffic to come down the freeway.”

The result, Mr Rossi said would not only be the need to invest in major upgrades to multiple sections of the freeway, but also the need to undertake significant upgrades to the three main roads at the freeway’s intersection.

“We’re talking about billions and billions of dollars,” Mr Rossi said.

Mr Rossi’s solution – presented to the Department for Infrastructure and Transport, along with multiple affected councils – is the controversial Adelaide to Mount Barker rail line, with an estimated price tag of $10bn.

“The capacity required on the road system and the cost to (upgrade the highway) is not only far more significant than rail, but the impact on the community is far greater,” Mr Rossi said.

“In the longer term, one needs to look at alternative modes of transport and we feel that rail would be an alternative mode that would complement the freeway and provide the capacity transport needs for the future.”

Like the $15.4bn Torrens to Darlington project, the rail upgrade would need to be co-funded by the state and federal governments.

“I strongly encourage the housing development and the opportunities it presents, we need the housing,” Mr Rossi said.

“But we cannot push people out into these outer metropolitan Adelaide areas without providing a public transport system.”

“We need to do the master plan for an upgraded railway corridor all the way to Murray Bridge now.”

The Minister for Infrastructure and Transport was contacted for comment.

https://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/sou ... 1722592504

[VinyTapestry849]

Overruns are difficult to predict, but if Adelaide-Mount Barker is costed at $5.8 billion, you would think that Adelaide-Murray Bridge should be possible without exceeding the $10 billion mark. Most of the cost would be in the Adelaide-Mount Barker segment.

Sorry dude, but its a fairytale to say Adelaide to Mount Barker would be under $5.8bn. Its the unfortunate truth. And that was just confirmed in the article A-Town has just posted below, from the South Eastern Freeway designer.

That developer is saying minium $10bn just to Mount Barker from Adelaide, excluding a large extension to Gifford Hill.

“We’re talking about billions and billions of dollars,” Mr Rossi said.

Mr Rossi’s solution – presented to the Department for Infrastructure and Transport, along with multiple affected councils – is the controversial Adelaide to Mount Barker rail line, with an estimated price tag of $10bn.

[rev]

Overruns are difficult to predict, but if Adelaide-Mount Barker is costed at $5.8 billion, you would think that Adelaide-Murray Bridge should be possible without exceeding the $10 billion mark. Most of the cost would be in the Adelaide-Mount Barker segment.

Sorry dude, but its a fairytale to say Adelaide to Mount Barker would be under $5.8bn. Its the unfortunate truth. And that was just confirmed in the article A-Town has just posted below, from the South Eastern Freeway designer.

That developer is saying minium $10bn just to Mount Barker from Adelaide, excluding a large extension to Gifford Hill.

“We’re talking about billions and billions of dollars,” Mr Rossi said.

Mr Rossi’s solution – presented to the Department for Infrastructure and Transport, along with multiple affected councils – is the controversial Adelaide to Mount Barker rail line, with an estimated price tag of $10bn.

Keep in mind a few things, it's a proposal based on whatever data that guy has available to him. His solution/idea/proposal/vision is just one of many multiple scenarios and possibilities.
The government hasn't put out a call for tenders/proposals from companies/consortiums for such a piece of infrastructure. If they did, it forces competing companies and consortiums to actually compete against each other.

These large infrastructure projects involve a lot of wastage and unnecessary spending, ie rorting the public purse.
Even large scale demolition jobs they are factoring in the cost of new machinery/equipment, and that even happens on the private side of things.
If governments wanted to they'd ensure these publicly funded infrastructure projects are not rorted or at least rorted as little as possible. But that's expecting people who think they deserve a $20k pay rises while their constituents struggle to survive, to give a shit.

[Algernon]

The most concerning aspect of this development is the mindset it exposes. That said, it's an obvious mindset that was never hiding anywhere.

South Australians just can't conceive their state in any other way than a one city state.

A 70,000 population second city wouldn't be a bad start to having a viable second independent city and SA would do very well to have some competetive tension within its own borders for once.

But people only consider this some sort of commuter town. The 75km distance of MB to Adelaide is more or less exactly the same distance of Geelong to Melbourne (centre to centre). Yes, many commute from Geelong, but it at least gets given a shot of being its own ciy as well with people living, working, recreating locally. In the case of Geelong to Melbourne, it's a flat freeway without the enromous chalenges the SA route has, btw.

If people want to frame this as a suburb, then it won't succeed. If it gets built, it'll flounder and the worst case scenario, often SA's favourite, is that suburbs will fill the game inbetween.

I quite like the idea of expanding Murray Bridge, but it needs to take itself a lot more seriously and be given a decent crack at being a city first. It doesn't need a rail link and public transport to Adelaide, it needs jobs.

[abc]

I don't see this changing for 100 years. South Australia being mostly desert doesn't have many suitable sites for a 'large' city. ie by Australian standards being more than 100k... and there needs to be a reason for the place to exist, you can't just plonk people in the middle of nowhere with no industry or commerce and say hey live here the land is cheap.

A place like Mt Gambier may edge towards 50k over the next 50 years but then that will follow the growth of towns in Western Victoria.

[VinyTapestry849]

Fundamentally the Gifford Hill developers need to figure out what Gifford Hill is going to be known for. Seems like they're just banking on the build-it-and-they-will-come attitude towards housing.

I agree with what Algernon said. All things considered, tf are new residents going to do? Do the developers have a community employment plan? They need something like manufacturing, finance, or industry to be "independent" and not reliant on Adelaide. Murray Bridge is not independent.

Where WILL these jobs come from?? If that isn't sorted out the current idea of Gifford Hill falls apart, and will definitely need that rail link. I don't think this rail link is ever going to happen, too expensive and would undermine the fundamental Idea of what Gifford Hill is; an "Independent, second city". Why build a high capacity rail link to a second city which is supposed to be self sustaining and have no reliance on Adelaide?

Gifford Hill MUST be independent to succeed, they must have a plan, or just cancel the project