Mildura Rail Feasibility Study - Public Transport Victoria

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Department of Transport
7 October 2010
Final Report

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
Final Report
Prepared for
Department of Transport
Prepared by
AECOM Australia Pty Ltd
Level 9, 8 Exhibition Street, Melbourne VIC 3000, Australia
T +61 3 9653 1234 F +61 3 9654 7117 www.aecom.com
ABN 20 093 846 925
7 October 2010
60140691
© AECOM Australia Pty Ltd 2010
The information contained in this document produced by AECOM Australia Pty Ltd is solely for the use of the Client identified on the cover sheet
for the purpose for which it has been prepared and AECOM Australia Pty Ltd undertakes no duty to or accepts any responsibility to any third party
who may rely upon this document.
All rights reserved. No section or element of this document may be removed from this document, reproduced, electronically stored or transmitted
in any form without the written permission of AECOM Australia Pty Ltd.
7 October 2010

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
Table of Contents
Executive Summary
i
1.0 Introduction 1
1.1 About the Mildura Rail Corridor 1
1.1.1 The railway 1
1.1.2 A brief history of passenger services 1
1.1.3 Freight services 1
1.1.4 Policy Context 2
1.2 About this Study 5
1.2.1 Scope and Study Area 5
1.2.2 Study Process 6
1.3 Structure of this report 7
2.0 Communities on the Mildura Rail Corridor 8
2.1 Demographics 8
2.1.1 Population and ageing trends 8
2.1.2 Disability 12
2.2 Socio-economic conditions 13
2.2.1 Education levels 13
2.2.2 Employment 14
2.2.3 Incomes 15
2.2.4 Socio-Economic Indexes for Areas (SEIFA) 16
2.3 Community Services Audit 18
2.4 Land Uses and Development 20
3.0 Overview of travel in the Mildura Corridor 21
3.1 Overview of modes 21
3.1.1 Road transport 21
3.2 Air services 22
3.3 Public Transport Supply 24
3.4 Public Transport Use 32
3.4.1 Overview of patronage trends 32
3.4.2 Patronage trends on Mildura corridor services 34
3.4.3 Swan Hill – Mildura services 36
3.4.4 Mildura – Bendigo Service 36
3.4.5 Swan Hill to Mildura extension of Bendigo – Swan Hill services 36
3.4.6 Melbourne – Mildura overnight service 36
3.4.7 Ouyen – Ballarat/Ararat service 37
3.4.8 Sea Lake – Bendigo service 37
3.4.9 Donald – Ballarat/Bendigo services 38
3.4.10 Daylink: Adelaide – Bendigo Service 38
3.4.11 Speedlink: Albury – Adelaide Service 38
3.4.12 Low patronage areas 39
3.4.13 Summary of patronage patterns 39
3.5 Changes in public transport markets 40
4.0 Community views on public transport in the Mildura Corridor 41
4.1 Overview of consultation sessions 41
4.2 Overview of Submissions 42
4.3 Other consultations in the area 44
5.0 Needs Assessment 45
5.1 Service Characteristic Gaps 45
5.2 Frequency and Scheduling Gaps 45
5.3 Needs Assessment 46
6.0 Service Options 47
6.1 Overview of Service Options 47
6.2 Background to rail options 47
6.2.1 Service planning for concept options 47
6.2.2 Rolling stock 51
7 October 2010

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
6.2.3 Track Quality 52
6.2.4 Managing risk on the railway 52
6.2.5 Heat speed restrictions 55
6.3 Background to Road-based Options 55
6.3.1 Community perspectives on current road coaches 55
6.3.2 Best practice on long haul coaches 56
6.3.3 Coach stop upgrades 57
6.4 Background to both mode options 57
6.4.1 Integration 57
6.4.2 Impact on existing services 59
6.4.3 Safety performance 59
6.4.4 Cost Estimates 60
6.5 Option 1: Overnight passenger rail service 61
6.6 Option 2: Daytime passenger rail service 63
6.7 Option 3: Fast passenger rail service 64
6.8 Option 4: Additional train and connecting coach on Swan Hill corridor 66
6.9 Option 5: Swan Hill – Mildura extension of passenger rail 68
6.10 Option 6: Extension of Maryborough train service to St Arnaud 72
6.11 Option 7: Melbourne – St Arnaud train service with connecting St Arnaud – Mildura coach 74
6.12 Option 8: Long Distance Coach Service Initiatives 78
6.12.1 Mildura – Ballarat corridor service 78
6.12.2 Northern Mallee service 80
6.12.3 Overnight service – Saturday night 82
6.12.4 Sea Lake – Bendigo (Calder Highway route) 82
6.13 Option 9: Short Distance Bus Service Initiatives 83
6.13.1 Donald - Bendigo 83
6.13.2 Remote Area Bus: Birchip 84
6.13.3 Donald – Horsham 86
6.13.4 Swan Hill – Tooleybuc 86
6.13.5 Small scale initiatives 86
7.0 Options Assessment 88
7.1 Social Impact Assessment 88
7.1.1 Introduction 88
7.1.2 Approach to options SIA 89
7.1.3 Social impact assessment criteria 89
7.1.4 Summary of social impact results 90
7.2 Environmental Appraisal 96
7.2.1 Green House Gas Assessment 96
7.2.2 Ecological Assessment 97
7.2.3 Application of precautionary principle 110
7.3 Economic Appraisal 110
7.3.1 Patronage Forecasting 110
7.3.2 Cost Benefit Analysis 114
7.3.3 Economic Analysis Results 115
7.3.4 Sensitivity testing 117
7.3.5 Cost Effectiveness Assessment 118
7.4 Findings 120
8.0 Conclusions and Recommendations 121
8.1 Conclusions 121
8.2 Recommended responses 122
References 123
Appendix A
Socio-Economic Index for Areas - maps
Appendix B
Current Services Schedules
Appendix C
Patronage Analysis
A
B
C
7 October 2010

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
Appendix D
Findings from Previous Consultations
Appendix E
ALCAM Level Crossing Assessments
Appendix F
Best practice review of long distance coach vehicles
Appendix G
Cost estimates
Appendix H
Concept alignment for fast rail
Appendix I
Concept alignments for Swan Hill - Mildura extension
Appendix J
Ecological Assessment
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
7 October 2010

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
Executive Summary
This study investigates the feasibility of passenger rail and other public transport services to address the transport
needs of the communities served by the Mildura rail corridor between Ballarat and Mildura. This feasibility study is
consistent with the Transport Integration Act framework.
Current conditions
Longstanding demographic trends in the study area have not changed substantially since the withdrawal of the
passenger rail service in 1993. Mildura is the principal centre experiencing urban expansion. The population of
other townships in the corridor are stable or declining, particularly in ageing populations experiencing socioeconomic
disadvantage in the shires of Yarriambiack, Buloke and Northern Grampians.
Car dominates regional and Melbourne – Mildura travel patterns, with an estimated 556,300 car trips per year
between Melbourne and Mildura. It takes approximately 7 hours to drive between Melbourne and Mildura. 55
flights per week operate in each direction with services available about every two hours on most days with a
journey time that varies from one hour to one hour 20 minutes. Mildura airport is expected to handle 215,000
persons in 2010.
A range of public transport services are available. Characteristics of the services include regular long-distance
coach services and less frequent short-distance bus services that provide day-return options to at least one
regional centre one day a week. Patronage averages 32 boardings per service on the long-distance routes.
Infrastructure at many coach stops is minimal, but some high-quality facilities are available at some locations. For
travel between Mildura and Melbourne, the primary services comprise coach from Mildura to Swan Hill and then
rail from Swan Hill to Melbourne. The average journey time is about 7 hours 15 minutes. These services are the
most popular option for long-distance travel from Mildura. The overnight service via Ballarat is little used in many
smaller communities, largely due to the departures being in the middle of the night. Under current market
conditions, approximately 22,220 people travel from Mildura each year on a V/Line long distance public transport
service.
The Mildura rail corridor is an area of Victoria with significant transport need. There is a lack of social services and
community assets in many of the towns in the study area, significant gaps in public transport supply and service
effectiveness for basic requirements such as day return travel to a major town, and the services that are provided
are not always appropriately scheduled, accessible or adequately comfortable. There is a limited ability to use
public transport for routine trips in the local area, or for occasional trips to Melbourne. There is a strong case on
social inclusion grounds to provide public transport services that address these issues.
Communities in the Mildura corridor would benefit from a marked uplift in public transport supply to enable access
to important health, education and entertainment services, and social networks such as friends and family, to help
overcome the transport isolation currently being experienced.
Community views
During the consultation process, participants indicated a strong preference for a passenger rail service over the
current road based travel options available both within their region and to larger centres such as Melbourne,
Bendigo and Ballarat. They said the current alternatives were too expensive, poorly scheduled, unsafe, slow,
uncomfortable and/or had limited accessibility, particularly for older people or those with disabilities. Residents
cited many reasons for travel, including family, medical, education, shopping, entertainment, sport and business
reasons that they believe are not adequately supported by current transport options.
The community consultation process clearly indicated that there are a number of gaps in the current service
provision to Mildura. Key issues include physical accessibility, schedule accessibility, luggage and customer
service and poor integration. The priorities for services are that they must be reasonably fast, accessible (to a
wide range of users), comfortable, conveniently scheduled, have adequate luggage and bicycle space
conveniently available, and be supported with customer assistance.
Service options
Nine service options have been evaluated in the feasibility study. They are summarised below.
1) A nightly (overnight) passenger train similar to the Vinelander.
2) A daily (daytime) passenger train with a journey time of around 9.5 hours.
7 October 2010 i

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
3) A fast passenger train with a journey time of around 4.5 hours following the Mildura rail corridor.
4) Additional train and connecting coach on the Swan Hill corridor.
5) A new passenger railway extension from Swan Hill, via Robinvale or Ouyen, to Mildura.
6) An extension of the planned Maryborough daily rail service to commence in St Arnaud in the morning and
terminate in St Arnaud in the evening.
7) A combined train/coach service comprising train from Melbourne to St Arnaud and return, and a daily coach
from Mildura to St Arnaud and return.
8) Additional long distance coach services in the Mildura rail corridor and other corridors, comprising two daily
Ballarat – Mildura services, a Horsham – Mildura service to provide day-return travel to Mildura in the
northern part of the rail corridor, and enhancements to the Sea Lake – Bendigo and Melbourne – Mildura
overnight service.
9) Additional short distance bus services on various routes, particularly linking small towns to regional centres,
including improved Donald – Bendigo, Donald – Horsham, Birchip, Swan Hill – Tooleybuc services and small
scale initiatives.
Important factors that influenced the development of the rail service options are community feedback, strategic
service planning, journey time, route choice, access to Melbourne, and major operational changes related to
railway risk management.
Road-based options have been included in the feasibility study, notwithstanding the strong community
perspectives on road-based public transport in the region, because of potential advantages they have in providing
better social inclusion, frequency and travel time. The current road coach solution does not address the issues
raised during community consultation and does not overcome the transport barriers faced in the Mallee region.
The introduction of higher quality coaches for the long-haul services in the corridor has been considered in the
context of world class vehicles and improved boarding location infrastructure. It is assumed that coach stops will
be upgraded in each coach option.
The options assessment has been undertaken consistent with the Transport Integration Act.
Social Impact Assessment
Three broad categories of potential social impact – access, equity and social amenity – were identified then
a range of ‘indicators’ developed as a means by which the potential performance of each option could be
tested.
The social impact assessment highlighted high scores for short-haul local bus services, fast passenger rail
services, and long-haul coach services.
All options have overall similar equity and social amenity results – passenger amenity and geographic
distribution of outcomes are the main sources of difference in these measures. However, the access
provided by the options varied significantly.
Table 1: Summary of social impact assessment
Option Number
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Subtotal on access criteria 28 29 36 31 31 30 25 34 38
Subtotal on equity criteria 25 25 23 22 24 24 24 24 25
Subtotal on social amenity 29 30 27 27 26 30 30 28 27
criteria
Overall Total (rank) 82 (6) 84 (5) 86 (=3) 80 (8) 81 (7) 84 (2) 79 (9) 86 (=3) 90
(1)
Environmental Impact Assessment
The greenhouse gas assessment suggests that none of the Options results in a net reduction in transport
related emissions. This is attributed to the relatively low modal shift achieved from cars.
Ecological assessment found that of the options requiring new construction, the Mildura – Ouyen – Swan Hill
route in Option 5 was the best performing, followed by the high-speed upgrade of the existing route. The
route via Robinvale was the worst performing of the three routes analysed.
7 October 2010 ii

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
Table 2: Summary of greenhouse gas assessment
Emissions
(Net t CO2-e p.a.) 1 2 3 4
5
(via
Robinvale)
5
(via
Ouyen) 6 7 8 9
Gross 2668 2668 3314 2058 1247 1348 1675 1415 947 349
Net 2148 2640 2887 1971 824 997 1637 227 902 349
Table 3: Summary of ecological impact assessment
Criteria Option 3 Option 5 (via
Robinvale)
Option 5 (via
Ouyen)
Impact on Flora and Fauna Meets objective well Meets objective
poorly
Impact on Native Vegetation Meets objective Meets objective
poorly
Meets objective
well
Meets objective
Impact on Threatened Species/Communities
Meets objective
poorly
Meets objective
Meets objective
Impact on Protected Areas Meets objective Meets objective Meets objective
well
Economic Impact Assessment
Economic assessment forecast patronage ranging from a low of 13,000 to a high estimate of 75,000 for
options involving services between Melbourne and Mildura.
None of the options was found to have a positive economic case.
The best performing rail option was Option 5, the extension of passenger rail from Swan Hill to Mildura via
Robinvale, with a Net Present Value (NPV) of $-573 million and a Benefit Cost Ratio (BCR) of 0.09.
Option 8, the long distance coach package, had an NPV of $-31 million and a BCR of 0.04.
Table 4: Summary of cost-benefit assessment of Melbourne - Mildura service options
Economic analysis
Present value of costs Present value of benefits NPV BCR
Option
Option 1 $736m $37m -$699m 0.05
Option 2 $736m $21m -$715m 0.03
Option 3 $1,464m $100m -$1,364m 0.07
Option 4 $62m $4m -$57.8m 0.07
Option 5a $627m $54m -$573m 0.09
Option 5b $738m $54m -$684m 0.07
Option 7 $113m $3m -$110m 0.03
Option 8 $32m $1m -$31m 0.04
A range of sensitivity tests and optimistic assumptions were made during the economic appraisal. Applying
sensitivity tests for a maximum patronage outcome of full trains daily, and a social inclusion benefit of $20
per passenger, on the daytime train via the existing railway, which has a low environmental impact and
addresses the communities of the rail corridor, achieved a BCR of 0.26 and an NPV of $-543 million.
On the basis of relative cost alone, coach services from Mildura to Ballarat are the most cost effective
option, driven mainly by the large capital costs associated with the rail options.
7 October 2010 iii

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
Findings
The feasibility study demonstrates that a rail-only solution to transport needs in the study area does not provide
the best outcome. None of the rail options provide adequate access to regional centres important to the Mildura
rail corridor communities, and none of the rail options meet the different needs of both the northern and southern
parts of the corridor. Similarly, a response that does not address the community requirement to travel to
Melbourne at a reasonable time will not adequately address the transport issues raised.
Accordingly, it is desirable to combine aspects of the Options assessed to develop a more effective package that
overcomes the weaknesses of a rail-only option. The packages proposed draw on the results of the social,
environmental and economic appraisal to identify the best performing options for a rail option in the corridor, a rail
option outside the Mildura Rail Corridor, and a non-rail option. The options are then combined to ensure that a
range of different transport needs can be addressed.
The following four packages are recommended for Government consideration.
Should Government decide to proceed with Mildura passenger rail on the Mildura Rail Corridor
Daytime passenger train, departing Melbourne at about 9:30 am and Mildura at approximately 6:20 am with
a journey time of around 9.5 hours (Option 2).
A coach service between Horsham and Mildura to provide local day-return access to Mildura for towns in the
northern part of the rail corridor (part of Option 8).
A range of short distance bus services, including improved Donald – Bendigo, Donald – Horsham, Birchip
and Swan Hill –Tooleybuc services and small scale initiatives (Option 9).
- The total capital cost of this option is estimated to be approximately $505 million and the recurrent cost
is estimated at $25.3 million per year.
Should Government decide to proceed with passenger rail to Mildura on an alternative corridor
Extension of passenger train from Swan Hill to Mildura via Ouyen (Option 5).
A coach service between Horsham and Mildura to provide local day-return access to Mildura for towns in the
northern part of the rail corridor (part of Option 8).
A range of short distance bus services, including improved Donald – Bendigo, Donald – Horsham, Birchip
and Swan Hill –Tooleybuc services and small scale initiatives (Option 9).
- The total capital cost of this option is estimated to be approximately $446 million and the recurrent cost
is estimated to be $20.46 million per year.
Should Government decide not to proceed with Mildura passenger rail
A range of long-distance coach services, including two daily Mildura – Ballarat coaches to provide regular
services through the corridor; a coach service between Horsham and Mildura to provide local day-return
access to Mildura for towns in the northern part of the rail corridor; and additional services to fill schedule
gaps in the overnight coach and Bendigo – Sea Lake services.
A range of short distance bus services, including improved Donald – Bendigo, Donald – Horsham, Birchip
and Swan Hill –Tooleybuc services and small scale initiatives (Option 9);
- The total capital cost of this option is estimated to be approximately $1.66 million and the recurrent cost
of this option is estimated to be $3.94 million per year.
To provide an equitable service level as provided on other regional corridors the Government should
consider:
Providing an additional daily train and coach on the Swan Hill corridor, to provide an equitable service level
on this route as provided on other regional corridors (Option 4);
- The recurrent cost of this option is estimated to be $5.4 million per year.
7 October 2010 iv

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
1.0 Introduction
1.1 About the Mildura Rail Corridor
1.1.1 The railway
The Mildura railway runs from Gheringhap near Geelong, via Ballarat, Maryborough, St Arnaud, Donald, Birchip,
Woomelang and Ouyen to Mildura. The total distance is some 526 kilometres; from Ballarat to Mildura some 454
kilometres.
Characteristics of the line include:
Single track operations.
Broad gauge.
Regularly spaced crossing loops to allow trains to pass.
The crossing loops are fitted with ‘trailable points’, self-resetting points which do not require remote control.
9 level crossings with boom barriers.
58 level crossings with flashing lights.
Over 155 passively protected crossings.
Numerous minor ‘occupational’ crossings.
It carries regular intermodal and grain freight trains.
1.1.2 A brief history of passenger services
Passenger services first operated on the line in 1903 and, during 90 years of operation, a wide range of services
were operated. Daylight and overnight services, various days of the week, different departure times, and via
Geelong and Bacchus Marsh, were all operated in response to changing patronage and business conditions.
Motorail services were introduced in 1968.
The Vinelander, the final form of passenger train services to Mildura, was first introduced in 1972. It ran overnight
six nights a week. Catering was added in 1977. A three day a week daylight service, the Sunraysia, was trialled
from 1987 but was withdrawn in 1990. At the same time the Vinelander was reduced to four nights a week with
two nights provided by coach. It was finally withdrawn in September 1993.
Elsewhere on the corridor a rail motor train service operated between Ballarat and Donald until March 1981, with
some short trips only between Ballarat and Maryborough. These services stopped at numerous smaller stations
on the rail corridor which closed when the service ceased.
V/Line coach services began operating to Mildura in 1984, with the initial service offered via Bendigo as Sunlink.
On the closure of the Vinelander in 1993, a connection was also added to the Swan Hill train in addition to the
replacement of the Vinelander by coaches. This service was supplemented in April 2006 when a second daily
Swan Hill train and connecting coach were introduced as part of early delivery of some elements of the new
statewide service plan introduced as part of the Regional Fast Rail project.
1.1.3 Freight services
Currently two types of freight services operate on the line – an intermodal container train and grain trains.
There is currently a three-times weekly freight train service on the Mildura line. As of September 2009, it operates
overnight from Mildura to Melbourne on Sunday, Tuesday and Thursday, during daylight from Melbourne on
Mondays and Wednesdays, and overnight from Melbourne on Fridays. Some services run via Geelong in order to
accommodate cement traffic. The regular freight train is currently substantially shorter than in the past. Its average
length is currently 430 metres. Historically, trains of 1200 metres were normal. The current freight train can use
any of the crossing loops on the line and is thus relatively easy to schedule other services around.
Grain trains are classed as ‘unscheduled trains’ for service planning and as a result they are managed to not
conflict with any passenger train operations. In recent years there has been a decline in the freight task on the
Mildura line related to the sustained drought reducing grain production and changes in the grain logistics chain.
7 October 2010 1

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
The Victorian Government recently completed a $73 million upgrade of the Mildura corridor to improve the
performance of freight services, and a range of other Government policies and stakeholder forums are developing
ongoing strategies for the development of the freight task.
In Ready for Tomorrow - A Blueprint for Regional and Rural Victoria released in June 2010, Government has
committed a further $12 million investment on the north-west rail corridor to Mildura to improve its freight carrying
efficiency. This investment includes the upgrading of 15 level crossings on the rail corridor to improve safety and
improve transit times.
1.1.4 Policy Context
Mildura Rail Corridor Specific Policies
The withdrawal of passenger services in 1993 was part of a wider rationalisation of regional passenger rail
services in Victoria at the time under the Kennett Government. The rationalisations included:
Sale – Bairnsdale
Ballarat – Dimboola
Shepparton – Cobram
Dandenong – Leongatha
Ballarat – Mildura
As part of its election commitments in 1999, the Labor Party undertook a study to assess the feasibility of
restoring the five closed passenger rail services.
In 2001 the Victorian Government announced its intention to restore a passenger service to Mildura, Ararat,
Leongatha and Bairnsdale. Dimboola was not feasible due to a change of gauge since the line’s closure to
passenger trains and the case for restoration to Cobram was not made.
The commitments were included in the Growing Victoria Together policy statement of 2001 (Department of
Premier and Cabinet, 2001, page 16).
Subsequently, passenger services were restored to Bairnsdale and Ararat in 2004 and the Government restated
that the other reopening remained part of its policy platform.
In May 2008 the Government announced that passenger services would not be restored to Leongatha; instead, a
comprehensive upgrade of coach services was introduced in two stages in July and November 2009.
Previous Government policy also included the option to convert the Mildura rail service to standard gauge. This
policy was subsequently influenced by the findings of the Victorian Rail Freight Network Review, which found that
there was no immediate case to convert parts of the network from broad to standard gauge.
Restoration of passenger train services to Mildura does not form part of the Victorian Transport Plan, the Victorian
Government’s current overarching transport strategy, but the restoration of services to Maryborough is included.
General Regional Public Transport Policies
The expansion of rail public transport services in Regional Victoria is consistent with the Victorian Government’s
overarching Growing Victoria Together policy statement, specifically “Regional rail services will be available to
more Victorians” (DPC, 2001, page 6). As an open-ended statement, this goal reflects a commitment to continue
to expand regional rail services, not necessarily just in terms of network coverage (i.e. more lines) but also in
terms of frequency, service span, accessibility, affordability and so on.
Other relevant goals may include “Greenhouse gas emissions from the production and use of energy will be
reduced” and “Disadvantage in health, education and housing among communities will be reduced”. The supply of
public transport contributes to achieving these goals by offering a modal choice alternative to the private car (and
in some circumstances, air travel), thus allowing a different emissions profile to be achieved from transport
services. Regional public transport is also recognised as a means of providing access to health and education
services in particular, where these are not available in the local area.
The Government’s A Fairer Victoria action plan launched in 2005 identifies “Providing fairer access to services”
and “Making services more affordable” as priority strategies under the objective “Reducing barriers to opportunity”
(DPCD, 2005, pages 29 and 32). Supply of public transport can contribute to achieving this as outlined above, but
is itself also a service that should be available equitably and affordably across the Victorian community. Fares
policy has already been adjusted in Victoria to provide highly affordable fares between Melbourne and Mildura rail
7 October 2010 2

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
corridor communities and concession fares are widely available to youth, seniors and health care card recipients.
For example, the concession return offpeak fare from Melbourne to Mildura is $37.00 (2010).
Towards Zero: A Strategy for Improved Level Crossing Safety In Victoria
In November 2009 the Victorian Government released Towards Zero: A Strategy for Improved Level Crossing
Safety in Victoria. (DOT, 2009). Initiatives included in the strategy that need to be considered in planning a
passenger service to Mildura are:
Future passenger rail extensions require a complete risk assessment. Grade separation will be sought at
VicRoads-classified A and B roads and boom barrier or flashing light controls at all C roads will be
mandatory. There are 13 A and B road level crossings between Maryborough and Mildura, and 9 C roads, of
which two are currently only passively protected.
Subject to confirmation of effectiveness, all regional level crossings used by passenger trains will have
advanced warning signs and rumble strips introduced.
All future level crossings upgraded will be provided with boom barriers.
80 kilometres per hour road speed limits will be introduced at all level crossings on sealed roads in regional
Victoria used by passenger rail.
A program of closure of minor crossings will be progressed.
Remote monitoring equipment will be progressively introduced at actively protected level crossings.
The Transport Integration Act
In 2010 the Victorian Parliament enacted the Transport Integration Act (State of Victoria, 2010) which outlines a
framework for assessing transport schemes (DOT, 2010). This feasibility study is being undertaken consistent
with the framework.
The key elements of the framework are:
Transport system objectives
Regard must be given to the following transport system objectives in the planning, provision, management and
use of the transport system:
Social and economic inclusion
The transport system should provide a means by which people can access social and economic opportunities to
support individual and community wellbeing by:
a) Minimising barriers to access so that, so far as possible, the transport system is available to as many people
as wish to use it.
b) Providing tailored infrastructure, services and support for people who find it difficult to use the transport
system.
Economic prosperity
The transport system should facilitate economic prosperity by:
a) Enabling efficient and effective access for persons and goods to employment, markets and services.
b) Increasing efficiency through reducing costs and improving timeliness.
c) Fostering competition by opening up markets.
d) Promoting investment in Victoria.
e) Supporting financial sustainability.
Environmental sustainability
The transport system should actively contribute to environmental sustainability by:
a) Protecting, conserving and improving the natural environment.
b) Avoiding, minimising and offsetting harm to the local and global environment – including through transport
related emissions and pollutants and the loss of biodiversity.
7 October 2010 3

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
c) Promoting forms of transport and the use of forms of energy and transport technologies which have the least
impact on the natural environment.
d) Improving the environmental performance of all forms of transport and the forms of energy used in transport.
Integration of transport and land use
The transport system should provide for the effective integration of transport and land use and facilitate access to
social and economic opportunities:
a) So as to improve accessibility and transport efficiency with a focus on:
i) maximising access to residences, employment, markets, services and recreation.
ii) more effective planning and development of the transport system.
iii) reducing the need for private motorised transport and the extent of any travel.
iv) supporting better access and mobility at the local area level.
b) Ensuring that the transport system and land use are aligned, complementary and supportive and ensure
that:
i) transport decisions are made having regard to the current and future impact on land use.
ii)
land use decisions are made having regard to the current and future development and operation of
the transport system.
iii) transport infrastructure and services are provided in a timely manner to support changing land use
and associated transport demand.
c) Improving the amenity of communities and minimising impacts of the transport system on adjacent land
uses.
Efficiency, coordination and reliability
The transport system should facilitate network-wide efficient, coordinated and reliable movements of people and
goods at all times including:
a) Balancing efficiency across the network to optimise the journey times and network capacity for all forms of
transport.
b) Maximising efficient use of resources including infrastructure, land, services and energy.
c) Facilitating integrated and seamless travel within and between different modes of transport.
d) Providing predictable and reliable services and journey times and minimise any inconvenience caused by
disruptions to the transport system.
Safety, health and wellbeing
The transport system should be safe and support health and wellbeing by:
a) Seeking to continually improve the safety performance of the system through:
i) safe transport infrastructure
ii)
iii)
safe forms of transport
safe transport system user behaviour
b) Avoiding and minimising the risk of harm to persons arising from the transport system.
c) Promoting forms of transport and the use of forms of energy which have the greatest benefit for, and least
negative impact on, health and wellbeing.
Decision-making principles
The following decision-making principles must be applied in the making of decisions relating to the planning,
provision, management and use of the transport system.
The principle of integrated decision-making
Regard is to be given to integrated decision-making including:
a) The achievement of wider government policy objectives
b) The need for coordination between all levels of government and government agencies, and with the private
sector.
7 October 2010 4

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
The principle of triple bottom line assessment
Regard is to be given to all the economic, social and environmental costs and benefits taking into account
externalities and value for money.
The principle of equity between people
Regard is to be given to equity:
a) Between persons irrespective of
i) personal attributes including age, physical ability, ethnicity, culture or gender, or their financial
situation.
ii) location including growth, urban, regional, rural or remote areas.
b) Between generations by not compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.
The principle of the transport system user perspective
Regard is to be given to the perspectives of transport system users so as to:
a) Understand their requirements, including their information needs.
b) Enhance the useability of the transport system and the quality of their experiences of the transport system.
The precautionary principle
Regard is to be given to the precautionary principle which is that:
a) If there are threats of serious or irreversible environmental damage, lack of full scientific certainty should not
be used as a reason for postponing measures to prevent environmental degradation.
b) Decision-making should be guided by:
i) a careful evaluation to avoid serious or irreversible damage to the environment wherever
practicable.
ii) an assessment of the risk-weighted consequences of various options.
The principle of stakeholder engagement and community participation
Regard is to be given to the views of stakeholders by:
a) Taking into account the interests of stakeholders, including transport system users and members of the local
community.
b) Adopting appropriate processes for stakeholder engagement.
The principle of transparency
Regard is to be given for transparent decision-making by giving members of the public access to reliable and
relevant information in appropriate forms to facilitate a good understanding of transport issues and the process by
which decisions in relation to the transport system are made.
1.2 About this Study
1.2.1 Scope and Study Area
The scope of this study is to investigate the feasibility of passenger rail services, and alternatives to passenger rail
services, as a means to address the public transport need identified in the Mildura Rail Corridor study area.
The study area has been defined as the communities likely to use a passenger transport service operated in the
Mildura Rail Corridor. It extends from Dunolly north to Mildura, west to the South Australian border and east to the
Murray River, as shown in Figure 1. Maryborough and communities south have been excluded from the study
area on the basis that the review of services associated with the Maryborough Rail Services project is reviewing
local transport needs in that part of the rail corridor.
This feasibility study focuses on the potential for passenger services. Freight services are not included in the
scope of the study, but are referred to where significant impacts on freight services may be incurred as a result of
changes to implement passenger services.
7 October 2010 5

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
Figure 1: Feasibility Study study area
1.2.2 Study Process
The study has been undertaken in three stages.
Stage 1 comprised a review of previous feasibility studies and other relevant documents on the capability of the
Mildura rail corridor. A background paper was prepared for this component of the study.
Stage 2 comprised a review of transport opportunities in the corridor and an assessment of works required to
implement passenger rail services.
Community consultation was then undertaken to assess the community’s travel needs and their perspective on
the current and future transport requirements in the corridor.
Stage 3 comprised the development of a range of options to respond to the community’s identified travel needs
and assess the feasibility of using passenger rail to address those needs.
This report draws on all three stages of the study to report findings.
7 October 2010 6

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
1.3 Structure of this report
The structure of this report is summarised in the table below.
Table 5: Summary of report structure
Chapter Summary of content
1 Background and introductory material
2 Demographic and community profiles, land uses
3 Overview of supply and demand for transport services
in the Mildura corridor
4 Summary of community perspectives on transport
issues in the Mildura corridor
5 Needs assessment
6 Options development
7 Social impact appraisal
8 Environmental appraisal
9 Economic appraisal
10 Findings
7 October 2010 7

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
2.0 Communities on the Mildura Rail Corridor
2.1 Demographics
2.1.1 Population and ageing trends
There are longstanding demographic trends that have not changed substantially since the withdrawal of the
passenger rail service in 1993 in the Mildura rail corridor.
The key features of the corridor’s demographics, drawn from State Government Victoria in Future forecasts 1 are:
The population experienced a small decline from 1999 to the 2006 census. This decline was largely in the
wheatbelt shires of Yarriambiack, Buloke and Northern Grampians (Table 6);
These trends are forecast to continue (Table 6 and Figure 2);
The population forecast is for minimal change in total population in the corridor; and
The population is forecast to age between 2006 and 2026 with a loss of persons in younger age brackets
and an increase in older age brackets, as shown in Figure 3 and Figure 4.
Figure 5 shows that the greatest proportion of aged persons is forecast in Central Goldfields, with the lowest
proportion of aged persons in Mildura. The local government areas with the lowest proportion of younger
people are forecast to be Buloke, Yarriambiack and Northern Grampians whereas Mildura and Central
Goldfields are forecast to have relatively higher younger populations.
Table 6: Population and forecasts for local government areas on the Maryborough - Mildura corridor
LGA 1999 2006 2008 forecast for 2026
Mildura 47,265 49,815 55,523
Yarriambiack 8,765 7,520 6,310
Buloke 7,784 6,853 6,008
Northern Grampians 13,317 11,912 10,980
Central Goldfields 13,028 12,323 13,441
ESTIMATED TOTAL 90,159 88,423 92,261
Total forecast
growth (2006-2026)
11.5%
-16.1%
-12.3%
-7.8%
9.1%
4.3%
1 Available online at: http://www.dse.vic.gov.au/DSE/dsenres.nsf/childdocs/-
4CA023FAC31D9D5CCA256D650016CB01-C70997566F01CABDCA256D6500039059-
775206E3E0281595CA256F0E0013C1FBopen
7 October 2010 8

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
Figure 2: Population and forecasts for local government areas on the Maryborough - Mildura corridor
Figure 3: 2006 age profile for Mildura rail corridor local government areas (Victoria in Future)
7 October 2010 9

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
Figure 4: 2026 forecast age profile for Mildura rail corridor local government areas (Victoria in Future)
Figure 5: Changes in younger and older age bracket cohorts, Mildura rail corridor local government areas
7 October 2010 10

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
These trends are reflected in the populations of towns along the rail corridor and within the corridor’s catchment
(see Table 7). The trend has been for smaller towns and settlements to experience depopulation whereas the
larger townships and cities have grown. There are exceptions: St Arnaud has declined where similar sized
settlements have grown and Beulah has grown where other comparable townships have declined. Nevertheless
the trend is for the corridor to have three distinctly different sections:
From Ballarat to Donald (inclusive) the corridor’s townships have small to medium populations that are
mostly stable or growing slightly;
From north of Donald to Ouyen (inclusive) the corridor’s townships are mostly small and declining; and
From Red Cliffs northwards the corridor is essentially the Greater Mildura area, which is mostly experiencing
high growth.
Table 7: Populations of townships in the rail corridor catchment
Town 2001 2006 Change
Avoca 956 951 -0.52%
Beulah 203 219 7.88%
Birchip 696 683 -1.87%
Buronga 923 807 -12.57%
Cabarita 271 280 3.32%
Carisbrook 723 713 -1.38%
Charlton 1022 1072 4.89%
Dareton 620 567 -8.55%
Donald 1321 1434 8.55%
Dunolly 659 607 -7.89%
Gol Gol 569 663 16.52%
Hopetoun 630 589 -6.51%
Maryborough 7471 7692 2.96%
Merbein 1820 1974 8.46%
Mildura 27931 30016 7.46%
Ouyen 1155 1061 -8.14%
Red Cliffs 2629 2736 4.07%
Sea Lake 635 634 -0.16%
St Arnaud 2398 2272 -5.25%
Warracknabeal 2478 2490 0.48%
Wentworth 1430 1303 -8.88%
Woomelang 210 195 -7.14%
Wycheproof 696 686 -1.44%
The transport implications of these demographic trends are complex. Possible outcomes include:
The forecast demographic trends are consistent with the notion that the northern and southern ends of the
corridor are experiencing, or will experience, some rejuvenation of population even when they are
experiencing growth in aged populations. Mildura and Central Goldfields are forecast to have the highest
proportion of younger people (over 30 percent and 25 percent respectively), at the same time that Central
Goldfields is forecast to have the highest proportion of older people (38 percent). By contrast the
communities of Buloke, Yarriambiack and Northern Grampians are forecast to have 30 percent of their
populations aged over 64 and less than 20 percent aged under 25. Communities with a higher proportion of
7 October 2010 11

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
younger and older people would be considered likely, under current conditions, to have a higher propensity
to use public transport services.
Areas with populations in absolute decline and experiencing ageing, such as Buloke, Yarriambiack and
Northern Grampians, are more affected by the ageing of the population in these communities. Increasing
cases of transport isolation may emerge as the informal transport networks that support ageing in these
communities break down due to a shortage of younger drivers. The ongoing decline in population may also
result in the withdrawal of commercial services in these communities (see Figure 6 for evidence of service
withdrawal in the Mildura corridor in 2010). These communities may then require improved access to longer
distance public transport.
Figure 6: Commercial services are being withdrawn in some communities - leading to higher transport need
Large centres such as Mildura are forecast to have large populations of older people. These populations are
more likely to be able to be supported with local services and may have reduced longer distance travel need
over time.
The Victorian Government rolled out a large number of regional public transport services as part of the Moving
Forward in Provincial Victoria and Meeting Our Transport Challenges programs. During the implementation of
these programs it was identified that ageing and declining regional communities may warrant increased public
transport provision to respond to changing social and personal needs, social isolation and a declining use of
private mobility. Many of the smaller communities of the Mildura corridor appear to have these characteristics.
2.1.2 Disability
The 2003 ABS Survey of Disability, Ageing and Carers found that approximately 992,300 people - 20 percent of
the Victorian population - reported themselves as having a disability.
Mobility aid users are a subgroup of people with a disability; the survey found that 123,000 Victorians reported
using a mobility aid when “moving around places away from home or establishment”, which includes when
attempting to use public transport.
Although a detailed breakdown of the residential location of mobility aid users is not available, at the time of the
last census the five local government areas in the Mildura rail corridor comprised 1.8 percent of Victoria’s total
population. Assuming an even distribution of mobility aid users across the State there would be approximately
2,200 mobility aid users in the Mildura Rail Corridor.
7 October 2010 12

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
2.2 Socio-economic conditions
The Mildura Rail corridor is characterised by diverse socio-economic conditions. In general, the socio-economic
data suggests that the northern and southern ends of the corridor have more advantaged socio-economic
conditions than the communities in the dryland farming areas of Buloke and Yarriambiack, although there is a
concentration of disadvantage in the Central Goldfields Shire.
2.2.1 Education levels
Figure 7 shows that Mildura and Northern Grampians Shires have higher proportions of residents who completed
Year 12. Compared to the other four LGAs, Central Goldfields has a high proportion of residents who completed
school to Year 10 or less.
Figure 7: Schooling in LGAs in the Mildura Rail Corridor (Source: Census 2006)
The five LGAs of the Mildura Rail Corridor show a similar profile for achievement of higher levels of education, as
shown in Figure 8.
7 October 2010 13

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
Figure 8: Completion of higher education by residents of LGAs on the Mildura Rail Corridor (Source: Census 2006)
2.2.2 Employment
Figure 9 shows that Mildura has marginally higher employment than other LGAs on the Mildura Rail Corridor, but
Buloke, Northern Grampians and Yarriambiack have similar levels just below that of Mildura. By contrast Central
Goldfields has a significantly higher proportion of residents who are not in the labour force than other LGAs.
Figure 10 shows that a relatively high proportion of Buloke and Yarriambiack residents identify their occupation as
‘managers’, possibly management of farms or agricultural businesses. Across other occupations there are small
differences between the local government areas.
Figure 9: Labour force status (Source: Census 2006)
7 October 2010 14

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
Figure 10: Occupations of employment (Source: Census 2006)
2.2.3 Incomes
Census 2006 data, summarised in Figure 11, shows that Mildura and Northern Grampians LGAs have a higher
proportion of residents on weekly incomes of $600 or more than Buloke, Yarriambiack and Central Goldfields
LGAs, where higher proportions of residents are on incomes of less than $600 per week.
Figure 11: Percentage of residents in Mildura Rail Corridor LGAs by individual weekly income bands (Source: Census 2006)
7 October 2010 15

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
2.2.4 Socio-Economic Indexes for Areas (SEIFA)
The ABS Socio-Economic Indexes for Areas (SEIFA) are a useful comparative measure for assessing the relative
advantage and disadvantage of areas.
There are four Indexes. Each index summarises a different aspect of the socio-economic conditions of people
living in an area. The indexes broadly compare areas and therefore areas ranked at the top and bottom are likely
to show similar levels of advantage or disadvantage.
The four indexes in SEIFA 2006 are:
The Index of Relative Socio-economic Advantage and Disadvantage: is a continuum of advantage (high
values) to disadvantage (low values), and is derived from Census variables related to both advantage and
disadvantage.
The Index of Relative Socio-economic Disadvantage: focuses primarily on disadvantage, and is derived
from Census variables like low income, low educational attainment, unemployment, and dwellings without
motor vehicles. Note: This index cannot be reversed to show advantaged areas.
The Index of Economic Resources: focuses on the financial aspects of advantage and disadvantage,
using Census variables relating to residents' incomes, housing expenditure and assets.
The Index of Education and Occupation: includes Census variables relating to educational attainment,
employment and vocational skills. (ABS 2010)
Table 8 summarises the results for the Mildura rail corridor local government areas. The average of the indexes is
set at 1000, so areas with scores less than 1000 are considered relatively disadvantaged compared to the
average. A low score and high rank indicates greater disadvantage.
Table 8: Summary of Socio-Economic Index for Areas
Local
Government
Area (LGA)
Index of Relative
Socio-economic
Advantage and
Disadvantage
Score Rank in
Victoria
Index of Relative
Socio-economic
Disadvantage
Score
Rank in
Victoria
Index of Economic
Resources
Score
Rank in
Victoria
Index of Education
and Occupation
Score
Buloke 917 8 th 971 21 st 957 12 th 975 44 th
Central 876 1 st 907 2 nd 912 1 st 895 1 st
Goldfields
Mildura 932 17 th 958 12 th 955 9 th 932 8 th
Northern 909 6 th 946 6 th 952 6 th 937 9 th
Grampians
Yarriambiack 909 5 th 953 9 th 954 8 th 966 38 th
Rank in
Victoria
As the rank in Victoria indicates, four of the five LGAs on the Mildura Rail Corridor rank as amongst the ten most
disadvantaged in Victoria. Other LGAs adjacent to the rail corridor, such as Hindmarsh, also experience relative
disadvantage.
Table 9: Summary of state rankings of LGAs for relative socio-economic disadvantages (Source: ABS 2010)
Rank in VIC Local Government Area (LGA)
1 Central Goldfields
2 Loddon
3 Pyrenees
4 Hindmarsh
5 Yarriambiack
6 Northern Grampians
7 Greater Dandenong
8 Buloke
9 Gannawarra
10 Ararat
7 October 2010 16

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
The ABS emphasises that:
The SEIFA scores should be interpreted broadly so that areas with similar SEIFA scores should be
considered to be similarly advantaged or disadvantaged, rather than placing a high weight on a small
difference in ranking;
There can be considerable variability within a large area such as a local government area.
Maps produced by the Department of Planning and Community Development, attached as Appendix A,
demonstrate this second point. They show that generally the townships and cities contain more areas of relative
disadvantage than the purely rural pastoral areas. Demonstrating this pattern, the map of Buloke Shire is shown
in Figure 12.
Figure 12: Buloke Shire SEIFA Index ranking (Source: DPCD 2010)
7 October 2010 17

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
2.3 Community Services Audit
A desktop audit of community service availability in townships on the Mildura rail corridor indicates that many
specialised medical, retail, social, recreational and government services are not available in the smaller
townships. The only service routinely available is the mobile library. This indicates a likely need to travel to access
other facilities.
7 October 2010 18

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
Table 10: Findings of community services audit
Health Services Council Services Government
Social and
Community Retail/Business Financial Education
Greater Mildura
(Mildura, Irymple, Red Cliffs)
GP
Bush Nursing Centre
Hospital
Dialysis location
Dentist
Disability Support Centre
Aged Care
Pharmacy
Library
Mobile Library
Swimming pool
Council Service Centre
Maternal and Child Health Centre
Community Centre/Neighbourhood House
Centrelink Office/Agency
Employment Support Centre
DHS office
Medicare Office/Agency
Hotel
Swan Hill
Hattah
Ouyen
Patchewollock
Tempy
Speed
Woomelang
Birchip
Watchem
Donald
St Arnaud
Bealiba
Dunolly
Underbool
Murrayville
Walpeup
Manangatang
Robinvale
Sources: council websites, community websites, Yellow Pages
Cinema
Sporting team, club or recreation centre
Church
General Store
Supermarket
Department Store
(e.g. Myer, Kmart, Target)
Specialty Retail
e.g. shoes, clothes, delicatessen, butcher, bakery
Post Office
NAB
Commonwealth
ANZ
Westpac
Bendigo Bank
Accountant
TAFE
University
7 October 2010 19

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
2.4 Land Uses and Development
Key land uses along the corridor include:
Dryland broad acre farming, including grain production and grazing;
National parks, forestry and conservation areas; and
Urban uses.
Mildura is the principal centre experiencing urban expansion and has an active program of planning for land use
changes. Key development areas include Etiwanda, Riverside, Nichols Point, Red Cliffs, where approximately 30
hectares of residential land is being released (Mildura Rural City Council, 2009), and Irymple, where the structure
plan for the township is being reviewed (Mildura Rural City Council, 2010).
A major development at Mildura is the Riverfront Development Project. This project impacts on the existing rail
corridor by removing a number of redundant tracks at the Mildura railway station precinct, although facilities were
retained to permit a range of passenger rail operations. The “Mildura Jewel” is a more ambitious proposal for the
same area and specifically envisages relocating both the station and the associated bus interchange eastwards.
The current site would be occupied by a convention and exhibition centre.
Ouyen’s development has also recently been reviewed with 9 hectares of land earmarked for residential
development and 155 hectares for industrial development. There has been some recent urban expansion on the
eastern edge of the township (Mildura Rural City Council, 2006).
The population of other townships in the corridor are stable or declining. No major urban expansion or
development, or other changes in land use with major passenger transport implications, are currently anticipated
in the corridor.
.
7 October 2010 20

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
3.0 Overview of travel in the Mildura Corridor
3.1 Overview of modes
This section provides an overview of transport options for travel between the Mildura region and Melbourne.
Existing conditions and demand for road and air services are summarised. Public transport, the focus of the
feasibility study, is described in greater detail.
3.1.1 Road transport
Highway Routes
There are three main road corridors linking Melbourne and Mildura.
Table 11: Summary of major highways
Highway Main towns served Distance to Melbourne
(kms)
Estimated Journey
Time
Calder Highway
Mildura, Ouyen, Sea Lake, 546 6 hours 49 minutes
Charlton, Bendigo,
Melbourne
Sturt Highway, Murray
Valley Highway, Calder
Highway
Mildura, Robinvale, Swan
Hill, Kerang, Bendigo,
Melbourne
557 7 hours 5 minutes
Calder Highway,
Sunraysia Highway,
Western Highway
Mildura, Ouyen, Birchip,
Donald, St Arnaud,
Ballarat, Melbourne
571 7 hours 20 minutes
Demand for road transport
The Melbourne – Mildura Corridor Strategy (2007) outlines the use of the road network.
Car dominates local and Melbourne – Mildura travel patterns, with an estimated 556,300 car trips per year
between Melbourne and Mildura.
The Calder Highway is a principal highway between Melbourne and Mildura. Usage figures indicate that in the
rural sections linking Bendigo and Mildura average annual daily traffic volume is approximately 700 vehicles per
day (two ways).
7 October 2010 21

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
Figure 13: Calder Freeway Average Yearly Daily Traffic Volumes (2 Ways) Source: Commonwealth of Australia 2007
The alternate route using the Murray Valley Highway via Robinvale also has approximately 700 daily users just
south of Robinvale (RTA 2002).
These figures suggest that the Melbourne – Mildura traffic is likely to be evenly distributed between the Calder
and Murray Valley routes.
3.2 Air services
Service levels
Virgin Blue, Rex and Qantas provide Melbourne – Mildura flights. Airline timetables change frequently, but the
services operating in early November 2009 between Melbourne and Mildura are summarised below. 55 flights per
week operate in each direction with services available about every two hours on most days. The small number of
flights on Saturday is indicative of historically lower demand for long-distance travel on Saturdays.
Table 12: Melbourne - Mildura flights (November 2009)
Departure Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday
Timeband
Before 6am
6am – 8am Rex Rex Rex Rex Rex
8am -10am Qantas Qantas Qantas Qantas Qantas Qantas
10am – 12pm Rex
Rex, Rex,
Rex,
Rex, Qantas
Qantas Qantas
Qantas
Rex, Qantas Rex
12pm – 2pm
Rex,
Qantas
Rex Rex Rex Rex Rex Qantas
2pm - 4pm Qantas Qantas Qantas Qantas
Virgin
Blue
4pm – 6pm
Virgin Virgin Virgin Blue, Virgin Blue, Virgin Blue, Virgin Blue,
Blue, Rex Blue, Rex Rex Rex Rex Rex
After 6pm Qantas Qantas Qantas Qantas Qantas Rex, Qantas
TOTAL
FLIGHTS
6 9 9 8 9 10 4
7 October 2010 22

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
Table 13: Mildura - Melbourne flights (November 2009)
Departure
Timeband
Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday
Before 6am
6am – 8am Qantas Qantas Qantas Qantas Qantas Qantas Qantas
8am -10am Rex Rex Rex Rex Rex Rex
10am – 12pm Rex
Rex, Rex,
Rex, Rex,
Rex, Qantas
Qantas Qantas
Qantas Qantas
Qantas
12pm – 2pm Qantas Qantas Qantas Qantas
2 pm - 4pm Rex Rex Rex Rex Rex Rex
Virgin
Blue
4 pm – 6 pm Qantas Qantas Qantas Qantas Qantas Qantas
After 6pm
Virgin Virgin Virgin Blue, Virgin Blue, Virgin Blue, Virgin
Blue, Rex Blue, Rex Rex Rex Rex Blue, Rex
Rex
TOTAL
FLIGHTS
6 9 9 8 9 9 5
Currently Qantas operates the Mildura – Melbourne flight using Bombardier Q400 aircraft with a seating capacity
of up to 78. Rex flies SAAB340 aircraft with a seating capacity of 34. Virgin Blue uses Embraer 170 (capacity 70-
80 seats) and Embraer 190 (capacity 98-114 seats) aircraft. Together the airlines provide around 3,300 seats a
week in each direction. On a typical Tuesday, about 550 seats are provided between Melbourne and Mildura.
In addition to the above services, Sharp Airlines provides Mildura – Adelaide services five days a week.
Fares
Quoted fares ranging from $117 to $300 one-way from Melbourne to Mildura were available in early November
2009, depending on the terms and conditions.
Journey time
Melbourne – Mildura flights are via Tullamarine airport. The journey time varies from one hour to one hour 20
minutes. Additional time is required for check-in and to travel between the airport and the city at each end.
Demand for air transport
The airport is estimated to handle 215,000 persons in 2010, with an annualised growth of 8 percent per year. It is
understood this traffic is still predominantly to and from Melbourne. Mildura Airport attributes the growth to the
entry of low cost carriers to the market, which has encouraged an increase in leisure and tourism travel relative to
business travel (Mildura Airport Master Plan, 2010).
7 October 2010 23

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
Figure 14: Total passengers through Mildura Airport (Source: adapted from Mildura Airport Master Plan 2010)
The Mildura – Melbourne corridor study (Commonwealth of Australia, 2007) found that air travel is increasing its
share of trips with passenger growth greater than 20 per cent a year over the period 2004-2007.
3.3 Public Transport Supply
Current services
A network of road coach and bus services is in place in the Mildura rail corridor. The various services are
summarised in the diagram below. Note that Transport Connections Program (TCP) trial services and some
smaller communities have been excluded for simplicity.
7 October 2010 24

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
Figure 15: Schematic map of corridor services
Most long-distance services run at least six days per week; short-distance intertown services are typically less
frequent, running one or two days per week. Service levels in settlements along the corridor are summarised in
the table below.
7 October 2010 25

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
Table 14: Summary of current public transport in the Mildura corridor
Locality Destination Via Weekly
departures on
this route
Mildura Melbourne Swan Hill 14 Yes
Melbourne Bendigo 8 No
Effective day
return service
Melbourne Ballarat 6 No Overnight
Albury Kerang 7 No
Ballarat Bendigo 2 to 7 No
Other comments
Adelaide 7 No Greyhound
Sydney 7 No Greyhound
Horsham 3 Friday only
Irymple Melbourne Ballarat 6 No Overnight
Mildura Regular buses Yes
Red Cliffs Melbourne Ballarat 6 No Overnight
Mildura Regular buses Yes
Horsham 3 Friday only
Hattah Melbourne Ballarat 6 No Overnight
Mildura 2 Yes Trial service.
Ouyen Melbourne Ballarat/Ararat 6 Friday only via Hopetoun
Melbourne Ballarat 6 No Overnight
Horsham 3 Friday only
Mildura 5 Two days Partly trial service.
Bendigo Sea Lake 2 Yes Trial service.
Sydney Albury 7 No Overnight
Adelaide 7 No
Woomelang Melbourne Ballarat 6 No Overnight
Bendigo Once monthly Yes Trial TCP charter service
Birchip Melbourne Bendigo 2 to 3 Yes
Melbourne Ballarat 6 No Overnight
Horsham 1 Yes
Watchem Melbourne Ballarat 6 No Overnight
Donald Melbourne Ballarat 6 No Overnight
Melbourne Ballarat 5 Yes Daytime
Melbourne Bendigo 1 Yes
Horsham 2 Yes
St Arnaud Melbourne Ballarat 6 No Overnight
Melbourne Ballarat 5 Yes Daytime
Melbourne Bendigo 8 Once weekly
Adelaide Horsham 7 No
Stawell 1 Yes Trial service.
Bealiba Melbourne Bendigo 1 Yes
Dunolly Melbourne Ballarat 6 No Overnight
Melbourne Ballarat 5 Yes
Melbourne Bendigo 8 Once weekly
Adelaide Horsham 7 No
Maryborough Melbourne Castlemaine 48 Yes (not Sunday)
Melbourne Ballarat 6 No Overnight
Melbourne Ballarat 5 Yes Additional 14 trains
committed from 2010.
Bendigo Castlemaine 43 Yes (not Sunday)
Ballarat 8 Two days per
week
Bendigo 1 Yes
7 October 2010 26

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
Details of the services are included in Appendix B.
Changes to service levels
Since the withdrawal of the passenger train, there have been a number of changed and new public transport
services added to or committed to the corridor served by the Mildura rail line. The changes can be characterised
as:
Mildura has been provided with new long-distance services to Melbourne via Swan Hill;
Maryborough has been provided with new short-haul services to Bendigo, Ballarat and Melbourne; and
There has been little change in long-haul service supply to the other smaller communities in the corridor, but
small-scale bus services to nearby regional centres have been introduced on a trial basis.
Service changes are summarised in Table 15. The major change has been the introduction of a second daily train
to Swan Hill with a connecting coach to Mildura. The daily service via Swan Hill is now:
An early morning service (0400) from Mildura arriving in Melbourne at lunchtime;
A mid morning service from Mildura arriving in Melbourne around 1700 most days (this runs about three
hours later on Sundays);
A morning service from Melbourne arriving in Mildura in mid-afternoon; and
An evening service from Melbourne arriving in Mildura shortly after midnight.
As part of this change, the main Mildura – Bendigo service was retained but rescheduled to provide a wider
choice of departure times from Mildura and Bendigo.
An upcoming change will be the reintroduction of passenger services to Maryborough in August 2010 by
extending services from Ballarat. The proposed service plan uses the ‘Echuca model’ service plan – arriving in
Ballarat at approximately 0830 and departing Ballarat at approximately 1715 on weekdays in order to target local
travel requirements.
Table 15: Summary of additional and committed services in the Mildura corridor
New Service Commencement Implications for Mildura Rail Corridor
communities
Additional daily Melbourne – Swan
Hill train and connecting Swan Hill –
Mildura coach
April 2006 A second daily service now operates via Swan Hill
providing a journey time of approximately 7 hours 15
minutes.
Revised Mildura – Bendigo coach
services
April 2006
Better spread of journey options via Bendigo;
shorter journey times on selected trips by eliminating
Balranald diversion
Murraylink services April 2006 Increased long-distance options from Mildura along
the Murray Valley (provided through connections at
Kerang).
Sea Lake – Birchip – Bendigo V/Line
coach service
September 2006 Additional once weekly service diverted via Birchip.
Maryborough – Castlemaine-
(Bendigo)
September 2006 Additional weekday trips between Maryborough –
Castlemaine, designed to connect to Bendigo with a
work-oriented schedule.
Robinvale – Mildura bus service January 2008 New local bus service; operates Tuesdays and
Thursdays
Ouyen – Mildura bus service 2009 Trial bus service addressing local travel requirement
Ouyen – Sea Lake bus service 2009 Trial bus service addressing local travel requirement
Birchip – Horsham bus service 2009 Trial bus service addressing local travel requirement
St Arnaud – Stawell bus service 2009 Trial bus service addressing local travel requirement
Ballarat – Maryborough train service August 2010 Introduction of day return rail service from
Maryborough to Melbourne; infrastructure upgrade.
7 October 2010 27

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
Service capabilities
Although many townships have a day-return travel option to at least one regional centre, these options are
typically only available one day a week (usually Fridays). A truer picture of regional centre access is shown in
Table 16, which summarises whether more than one weekly option is available to make day-return travel to
various destinations.
Table 16 Localities with more than one weekly day-return travel option
Locality
Day return available to:
Mildura Swan Hill Horsham Ballarat Bendigo Melbourne
Mildura n.a.
Hattah
Ouyen
(trial only)
(trial only)
Woomelang
Birchip
Watchem
Donald
St Arnaud
Bealiba
Dunolly
Important results from the table include:
Woomelang and Watchem have no convenient regular day-return service to a larger community. Excluding
an infrequent trial bus service to Bendigo from Woomelang, and a trial car-based service linking Watchem to
Birchip, the only regular services through these towns are scheduled in the early morning;
Most other settlements have day return access at least once per week to Horsham, Ballarat and/or Bendigo,
but there are not many day return services to Mildura from the corridor and only Mildura has day return
access to Swan Hill;
Day return options are generally limited to only one day per week;
Ouyen and St Arnaud, which are located at the junctions of major highways, have higher service levels
because of east-west cross country coach routes; and
Service levels are higher at each end of the corridor (i.e. Mildura and Ouyen, and from St Arnaud south) and
lower between Donald and Woomelang.
Journey times
There has been no significant change to public transport journey times between Melbourne and Mildura.
Improvements to train journey times attributed to Regional Fast Rail have been offset by increased time for
safeworking requirements and dwell time at stations due to the automated N-set doors, and increased coach
journey times due to changed speed limits, modifications to driver break requirements to account for safety
legislation, and increased dwell times to accommodate growing patronage.
The primary services, comprising coach from Mildura to Swan Hill and then rail from Swan Hill to Melbourne,
average slightly more than 7 hours 15 minutes. The fastest journey is slightly longer than seven hours.
Fares
The 2009 and 2010 single, adult fare to Mildura is $37.00 and the concession fare is $18.50. All weekday services
to Mildura are off-peak priced.
Infrastructure
Existing coach infrastructure is variable, but tends to be minimal at most stops. Figure 16 shows the main
Melbourne-bound stop in the main street of Donald, indicating the basic level of amenity provision.
7 October 2010 28

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
Facilities that could be reasonably expected but which are not present include:
shelter;
disability measures such as tactile pavement;
special lighting, noting that the services here include early morning departures and arrivals; and
kerb height to assist with boarding the coach.
Figure 16: Main Melbourne-bound coach stop, Donald
St Arnaud’s coach stop has the potential to be an important network interchange, as it is served by both east-west
and north-south routes. Its condition in April 2010 is shown in Figure 17. Despite security reinforcement the
shelter has been vandalised. The shelter is also too close to the kerb to allow its use by wheelchair users.
7 October 2010 29

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
Figure 17: St Arnaud coach interchange
Minor stops, such as Watchem (Figure 18) and Nyah (Figure 19), are not accessible and do not provide adequate
space for luggage loading and unloading.
Figure 18: Watchem coach stop
7 October 2010 30

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
Figure 19: Nyah coach stop
By contrast, there are some good quality facilities provided at some coach stop locations. For example, Birchip
provides a sheltered coach stop on the main street with nearby toilet and baby change facilities, as shown in
Figure 20.
Figure 20: Birchip coach stop
Manangatang (Figure 21) has also recently been upgraded with improved shelters, DDA compliant stop signage
with refreshed branding, footpath upgrades and DDA tactile paving.
7 October 2010 31

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
Figure 21: Manangatang coach stop
3.4 Public Transport Use
3.4.1 Overview of patronage trends
A key change since the withdrawal of passenger rail services has been the overall increase in patronage on the
regional public transport network, and particularly on the regional rail network. Patronage on the V/Line network
overall achieved record levels in 2008/09 with 13.17 million passenger trips recorded.
Since 2005/06, the two short-distance services that serve the study area through their connecting coach services
(Ballarat and Bendigo) have shown significant growth:
Ballarat and Bacchus Marsh train service patronage has grown 92 percent; and
Bendigo corridor rail patronage has grown 74 percent.
The Swan Hill long-distance train has shown patronage growth of 295 percent, from a low base. Figure 22 shows
that the Swan Hill service was the third busiest long-distance service in Victoria in 2008/09, after the
Bairnsdale/Sale services and the Warrnambool service.
These figures include boardings at regional centres such as Woodend, Kyneton, Castlemaine and Bendigo. A
breakdown of 2009 calendar year patronage by intercity station (i.e. those further from Melbourne than the major
regional centres with regular hourly services), summarised in Figure 23, shows that for long-distance travel the
Swan Hill line was fourth busiest, with the Shepparton service overtaking it in terms of long-distance patronage
demand.
7 October 2010 32

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
Figure 22: Patronage trends on long-distance corridor rail services
Figure 23: Patronage at intercity stations
7 October 2010 33

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
V/Line's 2008/2009 annual report states:
V/Line coach patronage grew faster than V/Line rail patronage in 2008/09
(16.7 percent compared to 9.5 percent); and V/Line coach patronage increased to 1.12 million trips
compared to 12.05 million by train.
V/Line’s most recent annual report states:
V/Line coach and rail patronage slowed in 2009/2010 (2.2 percent compared to 4.4 percent); and
V/Line coach patronage increased to 1.4 million trips compared to 12.6 million by train.
Short and long-distance V/Line services have enjoyed equal proportionate growth since 2005/2006. This is shown
in Figure 24. The recent dropping off of long-distance patronage growth is mostly due to the closure of the Albury
line at Seymour for gauge conversion works, which has both caused a patronage decline and seen the remaining
Albury passengers classified as short-distance Seymour customers.
Figure 24: Patronage trends on short and long distance V/Line services
The main contributors to this patronage trend are understood to be:
Improved service planning;
Reduced fares from 2007. V/Line fares have been cut in real terms, increased in value with the inclusion of
metropolitan public transport and regional bus connections, and all Mildura services have become off-peak;
and
Increased petrol prices.
3.4.2 Patronage trends on Mildura corridor services
Looking specifically at patronage on selected services to, from and in the Mildura corridor (shown in Table 17), the
following trends are evident:
The upgrading of Swan Hill services in 2006 has been successful with patronage more than doubling on this
route;
7 October 2010 34

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
The Mildura – Bendigo service has experienced a modest patronage decline, most likely due to being moved
from a desirable timeslot to a less attractive one;
The overnight coach has shown relatively little growth; and
Most services attract similar loadings of around 32 boardings per trip. They are considered to be well
patronised (see Figure 25).
Table 17: Patronage trends on selected Mildura corridor public transport services
Coach/Bus Service 1999/2000 2006 2008/09 Percentage growth since
1999/2000
Average boardings
per service
Melbourne – Mildura via 14,183 15,000 37,660 166% 31
Swan Hill
Melbourne – Mildura via 31,717 30,000 27,533 -13% 47
Bendigo
Melbourne – Mildura via 19,154 17,000 22,135 16% 34
Ballarat
Bendigo – Donald n.a. n.a. 3,152 n.a. 36
Ballarat – Donald n.a. n.a. 11,288 n.a. 26
Ballarat – Ouyen n.a. n.a. 16,458 n.a. 31
Figure 25: Summary of average patronage by service
On most long-distance coach services bus drivers record the number of passengers boarding and alighting at
each stop. These data can be used to develop a detailed use profile. Limitations of this data are that it is collected
manually and not cross-checked against other data sources. It is also not usually digitised, so is time consuming
to analyse. For this investigation a sample of data has been selected to capture peak periods and seasonal
variation.
The following discussion highlights key results. Detailed analysis is included in Appendix C.
7 October 2010 35

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
3.4.3 Swan Hill – Mildura services
There are two daily services in each direction on the Swan Hill – Mildura route, each of which connects with a
V/Line train at Swan Hill.
Key features of the patronage patterns are:
It is consistent all year round. Although some seasons and days are busier than others, patronage changes
proportionally at all stops on the route. The main exception is that the 12:30 pm Swan Hill to Mildura service
on Sundays is particularly popular with Robinvale customers;
Months with school holidays appear to be consistently busy across the services. February is consistently
quiet;
The services have higher loads on Fridays through to Mondays (inclusive). Tuesday, Wednesday and
Thursday are consistently less well loaded;
There is some evidence that the service is used for local travel between Mildura and Robinvale. An average
of around two people alight from the daytime southbound service in Robinvale, and two people join the
afternoon northbound service here;
There appears to be a significant difference in time-of-day preference between Robinvale and Mildura
customers;
- In Robinvale, more customers choose the early morning southbound and late evening northbound
services than the other two alternative services;
- In Mildura, more customers choose the daytime southbound and afternoon northbound service than the
two alternatives; and
Patronage at other settlements (Euston, Boundary Bend, Nyah) is low.
The patronage patterns appear to be consistent with a year-round demand for services, particularly on the
weekend, augmented with additional seasonal demand during school holidays. This pattern is consistent with
market research undertaken in 2005 as part of previous investigations into the role of passenger rail in the
corridor that found that principal reasons for public transport travel are for recreation, tourism and social
connectivity.
3.4.4 Mildura – Bendigo Service
Detailed data is not collected for this service. Anecdotal evidence indicates that this service is an important link
between Mallee communities and Swan Hill, for which it provides a conveniently scheduled day return option.
The service also provides an informal connection at Manangatang with services to and from Adelaide, enabling
Mildura-Adelaide travel under V/Line terms and conditions – see section 3.4.11.
3.4.5 Swan Hill to Mildura extension of Bendigo – Swan Hill services
On Thursdays and Fridays a local Bendigo – Swan Hill service is extended to Mildura via Robinvale.
The key finding of patronage analysis is:
The Thursday service is mainly required as a positioning trip for the Friday service;
- Average patronage is 8.2, mostly to Robinvale and Mildura;
The Friday (12:30 pm) service is more heavily used with an average load into Swan Hill of 12.7 passengers;
- This service operates through to Bendigo, but has almost a complete turnover of load at Swan Hill.
Only 17 through passengers were recorded in eight months of data;
- The service is well used south of Swan Hill; its total average patronage is 27.5; and
April appears to have a more volatile pattern of patronage than other months, although this could be due to
the smaller than usual sample size (Good Friday fell during April in Easter 2009 and the service was
altered).
3.4.6 Melbourne – Mildura overnight service
This service runs every night except for Saturday.
7 October 2010 36

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
The operation is shared between two bus companies who alternate days. A sample of one company’s 2008 data
was available for analysis.
Key findings of the analysis are:
There is minimal use of this service in centres located between Greater Mildura and Melbourne. Ballarat
generates regular intermediate travel and the two stops in Ouyen provide on average one passenger
between them. Other townships produce very little demand;
There is insufficient data to conclude whether this service is predominately used on weekends – northbound
and southbound services appear to have different patterns of demand; and
January was the busiest month, with strong northbound demand and a small increase in southbound
patronage.
The observed patronage supports the notion that boarding and alighting a service in remote Mallee townships in
the middle of the night is not considered an attractive option. The service is little used in these settlements.
3.4.7 Ouyen – Ballarat/Ararat service
This service runs every day except Saturday. On a Friday a day return to Melbourne is possible. On other days of
the week it is possible to spend at least two and a half hours in Ballarat.
A sample of 2005 data was available for this investigation. It is noted that 2005 data predates the wide-ranging
patronage growth that has occurred on the regional public transport system since the introduction of service
upgrades in 2006.
On the outer section of the route patronage was primarily recorded at Ouyen, Hopetoun, Beulah and
Warracknabeal. Further south patronage increased steadily enroute to Stawell. There it increased sharply through
to Ararat/Ballarat. The same pattern of alighting was recorded in the opposite direction.
July was the most popular month in 2005. Day of week patterns were complex:
Tuesday and Thursday were most popular between Ballarat/Ararat and Stawell;
Friday was most popular on the section on to Warracknabeal; and
From Warracknabeal to Ouyen, Friday appears marginally more popular but patronage was very low.
3.4.8 Sea Lake – Bendigo service
Three distinct service plans operate on this route:
The ‘Long Day’ service plan operates on Wednesdays and Fridays and provides for 7 hours in Melbourne
and 11 hours in Bendigo, returning the same day. The service runs via Birchip;
The ‘Short Day’ service plan operates on Mondays, Tuesdays and Thursdays. It provides for 4 hours in
Bendigo but not for same day return travel to Melbourne. The service runs via Culgoa and Nullawil instead of
Birchip; and
The Sunday service plan is an afternoon/evening service only. It allows for travel to or from Melbourne or
Bendigo, but no same-day return to either. It is via Birchip in one direction.
2009 data for this service shows a distinct spatial pattern of patronage.
From Sea Lake to Wycheproof there is a small amount of use, and then a distinct concentration of use at
Wycheproof;
Almost no traffic is recorded at the small wayside stops to Charlton but load increases consistently from
there to Bendigo; and
The same pattern is recorded in reverse as passengers alight.
The ‘Short Day’ plan is the more popular service between Charlton and Bendigo with four more passengers in
both directions, but not on Mondays when patronage is lower. Between Sea Lake and Charlton there is no
difference any day of the week.
Between Wedderburn and Bendigo the service interacts with the Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays service from
Swan Hill to Bendigo, which also offers a ‘Short Day’ service plan. The evidence suggests that the Swan Hill
service is more popular than the Sea Lake service, which would account for the lower patronage on Mondays
when both ‘Short Day’ service plans operate. Together they ensure that communities from Wedderburn south
have regular access to Bendigo.
7 October 2010 37

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
Sunday is the least popular day, and in particular on Sunday there appears to be little use of this service in the
townships between Charlton and Bendigo which provide much of the patronage the other five days a week.
October appears to be more popular that the other three months sampled, although there is no evidence of a
change in underlying patronage patterns by month.
At Birchip the service averages slightly more than one boarding passenger inbound to Bendigo and alighting
outbound.
3.4.9 Donald – Ballarat/Bendigo services
Analysis of a small sample of 2009 patronage figures has found that this service has a complex pattern of use.
The service is consistently used between Donald and Maryborough regardless of day of week. By contrast,
between Maryborough and Ballarat:
- The southbound service has three distinct patterns – high demand on Thursday and Friday, mid-range
demand on Monday and Tuesday, and low on Saturday;
- The northbound service has two patterns – high demand on Monday, Thursday and Friday and low on
Tuesday and Saturday.
The service is used to make local access trips to Maryborough from townships further north. On average
three passengers make these local trips on the Ballarat route;
July appears to be a busier month; the data on the Ballarat route is inconsistent but on the Bendigo service
July is markedly more popular;
The later departure on Friday from Ballarat has the same patronage patterns as the earlier Thursday
service, suggesting either an equally-sized alternative market or insensitivity to time of travel; and
The Wednesday Bendigo service is well patronised, particularly from St Arnaud and Tarnagulla to access
Bendigo; however, not many people use it from Donald. The evenly balanced demand on this service would
be consistent with its use by a regular core market of day-trippers to Bendigo.
3.4.10 Daylink: Adelaide – Bendigo Service
2006 data indicates that the main features of this service are:
There is a consistent but low level of use of this service in St Arnaud, mostly for travel to and from Bendigo.
St Arnaud accounts for about 7.5 percent of the total patronage of the service;
St Arnaud is the second most important intermediate township on this route after Horsham; and
Patronage in the other townships (including Dunolly, on the rail corridor) is low.
3.4.11 Speedlink: Albury – Adelaide Service
A sample of 2009 data indicates that the main features of this service are:
Manangatang is an important stop – disproportionately so given the small population here. Anecdotally
customers use the morning service from Mildura to Manangatang and change here for the Adelaide-bound
Figure 26: Passengers waiting for Speedlink at
Manangatang, 10 am, 16 March 2010
service, and vice-versa for Adelaide – Mildura trips. The
transfer on the to-Adelaide journey is just over two
hours; on the to-Mildura trip 1 hour 10 minutes. It
appears this trip is made by two or three people each
day in preference to taking the direct Robinvale -
Mildura – Adelaide Greyhound service;
Very few people join this service in Albury off the
XPT which is its notional train connection – it appears
that more people join the service at Manangatang from
the other V/Line coach than from the XPT;
The service is an important link between Northern
Victoria and Adelaide with most passengers on board at
Swan Hill travelling through to Adelaide;
Fridays and Mondays are the busiest days; and
March is the quietest month but other months have
similar patronage patterns.
7 October 2010 38

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
3.4.12 Low patronage areas
Analysis of the detailed patronage of services has identified areas where patronage is particularly low.
There is low patronage at a number of smaller settlements.
Table 18: Low patronage stops
Settlement Route Total patronage
(on and off)
recorded at the
stop
Total
patronage (on
and off)
recorded on
the route
Percentage of
total
patronage
recorded at
stop
Nullawil Bendigo - Sea Lake 18 5,526 0.33% 161
Culgoa Bendigo - Sea Lake 24 5,526 0.43% 161
Tempy Ballarat/Ararat - Ouyen 10 5,258 0.19% 213
Speed Ballarat/Ararat – Ouyen 27 5,258 0.51% 213
Turriff Ballarat/Ararat – Ouyen 7 5,258 0.13% 213
Lascelles Ballarat/Ararat - Ouyen 15 5,258 0.29% 213
Number of
services in
sample
The outer section of the Sea Lake service beyond Wycheproof has an average load of approximately two. The
Ouyen service beyond Warracknabeal has an average load of approximately three, dropping to one beyond
Hopetoun.
The population of the areas served by these stops and routes is small. Other possible contributing causes of
these results include:
Passengers travelling from the hinterland to catch services on the highways may be using the larger
townships for ‘kiss and ride’ rather than the nearest stop; and
The services are not meeting local community needs (e.g. journey time is too long, timetable is
inconvenient).
3.4.13 Summary of patronage patterns
Analysis of patronage patterns has found that:
Patronage on existing V/Line services in the study area averages around 32 boardings per service;
Where a choice of services is available, travel behaviour varies with individual services used differently in
different towns;
Services via Swan Hill are the most popular services for long-distance travel from Mildura;
The overnight service via Ballarat is little used in many smaller communities;
There is a small amount of local use of some long-distance services to make trips like St Arnaud –
Maryborough and Robinvale - Mildura;
There is evidence that informal connections, such as at Manangatang between Mildura and Adelaide
services, are used and generate steady low levels of patronage; and
Coach services are caught in the larger townships; small wayside stops receive very little use.
Table 19 summarises the patronage patterns by township, drawn from the detailed assessment outlined in
Appendix B. Average patronage has been weighted by service frequency to derive weekly results, and
subsequently divided to determine a daily estimate. It should be noted that these figures are likely to
underestimate current trip making because of the lack of detailed data for the Mildura – Bendigo route and the
age of some of the data sets. It indicates that under current market conditions, approximately 22,220 people
depart Mildura each year on a V/Line long distance public transport service, an unfavourable comparison with the
estimated market for driving and air travel.
7 October 2010 39

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
Table 19: Summary of long-distance public transport trip making from study area townships
Estimated average daily use of long distance public transport services
Settlement Boardings Alightings
Mildura 58.1 53.4
Ouyen 3.9 3.4
Robinvale 21.9 19.4
Birchip 0.4 0.3
Donald 3.2 3.6
St Arnaud 7.9 7.8
Dunolly 4.1 4.3
3.5 Changes in public transport markets
Although there has been no further specific market research commissioned for the Mildura rail corridor since the
previous feasibility study research in 2005, it is noted that generally overnight trains have been experiencing a
long term decline in demand. This is evident in:
Victoria, where “The Overland” has been converted from night to daytime operation;
elsewhere in Australia, where patronage on Queensland’s primarily night-time long distance services has
been declining significantly; and
internationally, where many overnight trains in Europe and Japan have been withdrawn.
Major improvements to the affordability of air travel have typically been cited as the main cause of this global
trend. Other contributing factors may include changes to the way people value their travel time in the context of
having broader options for travel choice (such as the increased availability of good quality roads and private
transport).
7 October 2010 40

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
4.0 Community views on public transport in the Mildura Corridor
Community consultation on public transport in the Mildura rail corridor and surrounding communities was
undertaken by Scaffidi Hugh-Jones (SHJ) on behalf of the Department of Transport, with some technical input
from AECOM.
This section of the report draws on SHJ’s reports to summarise key transport findings from the consultation.
4.1 Overview of consultation sessions
During the consultation process, participants indicated a strong preference for a passenger rail service over the
current travel options available both within their region and to larger centres such as Melbourne, Bendigo and
Ballarat. They said the current coach and private options were too expensive, poorly scheduled, unsafe, slow,
uncomfortable and had limited accessibility, particularly for older people or those with disabilities.
Residents cited many reasons for travel, including family, medical, education, shopping, entertainment, sport and
business reasons that they believe are not adequately supported by current coach and private transport options.
Participants have indicated specifically that they want the passenger rail service reinstated, and that it should
include:
A fast passenger rail service (in excess of 100 km/h)
A service that runs at least three times per week, incorporating:
- an overnight service, timed to allow people to arrive in Melbourne for the substantive part of the day
and then return that evening
- a day passenger rail service between Melbourne and Mildura
- refreshment facilities on the passenger rail
Better facilities (including toilets) for people with disabilities
While having a strong preference for the passenger rail service being reinstated, they did make some specific
requests outlining potential ways to improve the current transport options, including:
Improving access and comfort on public transport, particularly for older people and those with disabilities
Altering transport scheduling to make travel safer and more convenient
Offering a faster, more efficient transport service
Improving facilities at stops / stations, including lighting, signage and secure parking for private vehicles
Providing a greater focus on customer service, including assistance with luggage on-board and at stops /
stations
Enabling people to carry bicycles on public transport
Providing a more affordable fare structure
Providing better access to travel information and timetables and improving coordination and integration of
existing public transport services
Whether it is feasible to attach a passenger car to existing freight services.
The broad consensus from each centre on public transport improvements was:
Birchip: improvements to current coach service as first priority, but supported the reinstatement of a
passenger rail service between Melbourne and Mildura
St Arnaud: extension of Ballarat rail service to St Arnaud to provide a day return service to Melbourne but
not opposed to reinstatement of passenger rail service between Melbourne and Mildura
Swan Hill: maintenance of public transport services at least at current levels, with some improvements but
not opposed to reinstatement of passenger rail service between Melbourne and Mildura
Ouyen: reinstatement of passenger rail service between Melbourne and Mildura
Mildura: reinstatement of passenger rail service between Melbourne and Mildura.
7 October 2010 41

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
4.2 Overview of Submissions
In December 2009, the Minister for Transport issued a media release announcing a community consultation
process and called for written submissions as part of the Mildura Rail Feasibility Study.
Since that announcement the department has received 625 submissions. The closing date for written submissions
was 31 March 2010. The submissions strongly expressed the need to reinstate the passenger rail service
between Melbourne and Mildura. No submissions were received against reinstatement.
It is clear from the submissions that communities seek improvement in transport services. They want an
integrated public transport network that will drive a sustainable, liveable and viable future at a time of increased
pressure from climate change, growing demand for transport resources and increasing prices of fuel.
Submissions were received from both individuals and groups. While many of the issues raised were common to
both, submissions from larger bodies, such as the Mildura Rural City Council, tended to emphasise the social and
economic impacts of the current transport services. Impacts on individuals, particularly vulnerable groups such as
older people, economically disadvantaged and those with disabilities were common themes across many
submissions.
Reasons given for reinstating the passenger rail service included:
The ability of a passenger rail service to mitigate barriers to travel for vulnerable groups;
The economic benefits to the region;
The environmental benefits;
The potential increased convenience to travellers, taking into account current travel times and the need to
connect to different transport modes; and
Potential benefits for smaller towns in the region, as well as Mildura.
Submissions gave a broad range of arguments in favour of the passenger rail service and some were more
specific in expressing how the rail service should operate.
Arguments in support of reinstating the passenger rail service between Melbourne and Mildura
Social and economic inclusion
Mildura’s geographic isolation puts it in the top five localities in Victoria for economic disadvantage (in terms
of income and employment). Mildura has:
- the third largest Indigenous population in Victoria;
- a significant number of young people not engaged in education, training or employment;
- an ageing population with 14.8 per cent over 65 (compared with 12.8 per cent in Melbourne);
- 52 different cultures; and
- 28 per cent of the population classified as low income families (compared to a regional Victorian
average of 26.8 per cent and Melbourne with 20.1 per cent).
Perceived inadequacy of current services contributes to social isolation.
A passenger rail service would be more affordable than air or car travel.
The current combination of bus and train services poses accessibility barriers of people with disabilities,
older people, mobility impaired people, parents with children and young people.
A passenger rail service would cater for the needs of an ageing population and people with a disability who
need to access specialist health care services not available in the region. Compared with the current
offering, a passenger rail service offers more user-friendly amenities, additional space and the ability to
move around on-board, and no need to transfer luggage from bus to train.
Mildura has a growing skilled migrant and refugee population, who rely on public transport when they settle
in the region.
Economic prosperity
Mildura is now the biggest mainland population centre (60,281) in Australia without a rail link to a capital city
and is gaining a growing reputation for being a desirable place to live:
- the region has seen a population increase of 1.1 per cent per year over the last decade; and
7 October 2010 42

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
Safety
- demand projections suggest a patronage increase of 30 per cent (about 30,000 trips) would be
achievable in the Mildura corridor compared to the current bus / rail services.
Mildura is in the top four localities for population growth in Victoria, and has one of the highest per capita
building approvals in the state. Rail transportation would help drive population growth because it is
affordable, convenient and accessible, particularly for retirees and ‘tree changers’.
A passenger rail service would open up new tourism opportunities.
Rapid expansion of mining and manufacturing in the region, as well as truck movements for agricultural
products, is increasing heavy vehicle traffic on local roads.
Environmental sustainability
A passenger rail service would offer environmental benefits in terms of reduced reliance on road and air
transport, at a time when fuel costs are rising and there is an increased emphasis on reducing greenhouse
gas emissions.
Convenience and speed
A passenger rail service would reduce travel times between Melbourne and Mildura, particularly if “Sprinter /
V-locity” services were introduced and further upgrades of level crossings completed.
Commuters needing to access services in Melbourne during business hours would find a passenger rail
service more convenient, particularly if an overnight service were introduced.
Benefits for towns other than Mildura
Passengers from towns along the Mallee Highway, including Ouyen, Walpeup, Underbool, Cowangie and
Murrayville would benefit from a passenger train direct from Melbourne to Mildura for the following reasons:
- they would no longer have to navigate the current bus and train services through Melbourne that do not
connect; and
- they not need to travel by car to Swan Hill or Bendigo to catch a connecting train.
Specific desired outcomes for a passenger rail service between Melbourne and Mildura
1) Better integration of modes of transport
In conjunction with the reinstatement of a passenger rail service, a number of people expressed the need for
better integration of public transport in the region, including:
Coordination of timetables between different modes of transport
Better availability of public transport information across modes
Provision of bus timetables at all bus stops.
2) Standardisation of rail line
Rail gauge standardisation would simplify connectivity to the ports of Melbourne and Portland, and offer
long-term opportunity for extension of the Mildura to Melbourne rail corridor to the Sydney to Perth corridor.
3) Introduction of fast trains
Fast trains, such as Sprinter / Vlocity, would significantly reduce travel times.
4) Inclusion of an overnight service
An overnight (sleeper) service would encourage commuters to use the service.
5) Rail infrastructure improvements
Upgrades of tracks and signalling would be required if minimum train speeds of 80km/hour are to be
maintained.
Some submissions specified desirable attributes for the outfitting of trains, including seats facing both ways,
tables and footrests for work or sleeping, a dining car serving regional food and wine, conference facilities
and cinema facilities.
7 October 2010 43

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
4.3 Other consultations in the area
Other transport-related consultations focused on local and regional transport need have been held in many of the
townships on the rail corridor since 2005.
Key themes from other consultation processes have included:
Provision of inter-town bus services to provide access to regional centres
Localised demand responsive services to overcome transport isolation for older people no longer driving
Provision of weekend services.
Further details of these consultations, including the context in which they were undertaken, are provided in
Appendix D.
7 October 2010 44

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
5.0 Needs Assessment
5.1 Service Characteristic Gaps
The community consultation process clearly indicated that there are a number of gaps in the current service
provision to Mildura. Key issues include:
Physical accessibility: The public transport services are not in practice accessible to many users, with
inconvenient access to long distance coaches and on-board conditions that make them difficult to use,
including a lack of useable toilet facilities and cramped legroom.
Schedule accessibility: Services are inconveniently scheduled, with no attractively timetabled option for
travelling between Mildura and Melbourne. The overnight coach is the only option in some smaller towns,
which is inconvenient and in practice unusable.
Luggage and customer service: Existing coach services do not allow customers to bring items like
bicycles and luggage with them – items that are considered to be reasonable to expect to carry on public
transport services.
Poor integration: The current services are considered to be poorly integrated with one another with respect
to schedules and information.
5.2 Frequency and Scheduling Gaps
Table 20 provides a subjective evaluation of how the existing schedules of transport services address the
transport needs in the various settlements on the Mildura rail corridor. The evaluation is in the context of regional
services which are generally of lower frequency than metropolitan services – a choice of three or four services a
day is good in regional Australia, but would be regarded as very poor in urban areas. In that context ‘general
accessibility’ reflects the ease of purely discretionary travel to the corridor township, unconstrained by
appointments, unavoidable departure and arrival time requirements, and so on.
Table 20: Assessment of transport gaps
Travelling
to/from:
Ballarat Bendigo Swan
Hill
Horsham Mildura Melbourne LGA
centres
General
accessibility
Corridor town
Mildura A VG VG A N/A VG N/A G
Ouyen A P P A P A P P
Woomelang P P P P P P P P
Birchip P A P A P A P P
Donald A P P A P P P P
St Arnaud A A P A P P P A
Dunolly A A P A P P A A
Rank Example of measure – destination Example of measure – general accessibility
VG Very good Multiple choices of time every day
G
Good
Daily services; multiple services on some
days.
A Average A choice of day or time but not both.
P
Poor
Inconvenient or very restricted choice of
travel options
Able to be reached across the region with effective
integration.
A number of options from most towns, mostly direct.
Neither particularly easy nor particularly hard to
access. Likely need to transfer.
Low frequency, indirect services, long waits or at
inconvenient times.
N None No service Cannot be reached by public transport.
7 October 2010 45

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
Mildura is the best serviced corridor centre, but elsewhere the service is consistently average to poor. At smaller
settlements not shown in the table (e.g. Hattah), the service level is typically poor. Off the corridor itself there are
some settlements with no services at all.
5.3 Needs Assessment
Key gaps in public transport services to the region include:
No services at all to some smaller settlements located off the corridor, e.g. Patchewollock;
Limited service frequency or travel time options from all smaller communities to larger service centres;
A lack of information about services, particularly how to make more complex trips that involve interchanges;
Inadequate infrastructure, with a lack of shade and shelter at stops and boarding areas that do not meet
accessibility requirements;
Limited choice of travel times on major corridors linking regional centres such as Mildura, Swan Hill, Bendigo
and Ballarat to each other and Melbourne; and
At peak times, a lack of capacity on the most popular route(s).
The Mildura rail corridor communities strongly articulated a case for public transport services that address the
identified gaps. The priorities for services are that they must be:
Reasonably fast: there were a range of views about the appropriate speed of public transport services but
they should at least be competitive with driving;
Accessible (to a wide range of users): even though current coaches meet technical standards like the
Disability Standards for Accessible Public Transport, the quality of access to stops and vehicles is
considered to be a barrier to use for a broad section of the community (including mobility aid users and older
customers);
Comfort: the service must provide a high standard of on board comfort befitting the long journey time and, if
travelling overnight, be suitable for sleeping. At a minimum, good legroom and high quality comfortable
seating is needed;
Conveniently scheduled: the service is needed at a reasonable hour and the lack of departure options
during the day, particularly from the northern part of the corridor, makes the existing services unacceptable;
and
Have adequate luggage and bicycle space, conveniently available: people want to bring a reasonable
amount of day-to-day luggage and other items like bicycles, without needing to make special arrangements;
and
Supported with customer assistance: staff should be available to assist with loading and unloading
luggage and moving between services.
7 October 2010 46

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
6.0 Service Options
This section of the report outlines the background to nine options that have been investigated as part of the
feasibility study. Five of the options involve only rail services, two combine rail and road services, and two are
road service only options. Not all the options provide services to Mildura, but all are focused on communities in
the Mildura rail corridor study area.
6.1 Overview of Service Options
Nine service options have been evaluated in the feasibility study. They are summarised below in Table 21.
Table 21: Summary of options assessed
Option number Description Key features
One Overnight passenger rail service A nightly overnight passenger train similar to the
Vinelander.
Two Daytime passenger rail service A daily (daytime) passenger train with a journey time of
around 9.5 hours.
Three Fast passenger rail service A fast passenger train with a journey time of around 4.5
hours.
Four
Additional train and connecting coach
on Swan Hill corridor
A third daily train on the Swan Hill line with a connecting
coach Mildura – Robinvale – Swan Hill.
Five
Swan Hill – Mildura extension of
passenger rail
A new railway extension from Swan Hill, via Robinvale or
Ouyen, to Mildura.
Six
Seven
Eight
Extension of Maryborough train
service to St Arnaud
Melbourne – St Arnaud train service
with connecting St Arnaud – Mildura
coach
Long Distance Coach Service
Initiatives
An extension of the Maryborough daily rail service to
commence in St Arnaud in the morning and terminate in
St Arnaud in the evening.
A combined train/coach service. It comprises a daily train
from Melbourne to St Arnaud and return, and a daily
coach from Mildura to St Arnaud and return. The two
services meet at St Arnaud at lunchtime, with a combined
transfer and refreshment break.
Comprises two daily Mildura – Ballarat corridor services,
a daily Northern Mallee service, an additional overnight
coach (all with upgraded vehicles), and additional
services on the Sea Lake – Bendigo route
Nine Short Distance Bus Service Initiatives Comprises additional services on the Donald – Bendigo
route, an innovative flexible service based in Birchip,
upgraded Donald – Horsham links, a flexible Swan Hill –
Tooleybuc service and small scale services similar to
those developed by the Transport Connections Program
initiatives
6.2 Background to rail options
6.2.1 Service planning for concept options
A number of important factors have influenced the development of rail service options to examine in the feasibility
study. These factors are:
Community feedback;
Strategic service planning;
Journey time;
Route choice; and
Access to Melbourne.
7 October 2010 47

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
Community Feedback
Community consultation has indicated that the community perceives rail as the preferred transport solution to
overcome the transport issues identified in previous sections of this feasibility study report.
There was no single clearly preferred service plan arising from community consultation.
There was a range of views on appropriate service frequency but it should be at least three days a week;
In Mildura day and night services were approximately equally preferred; but
The further south on the corridor the higher the weight placed on daytime travel and day return travel to
Melbourne.
Service Planning Response:
The rail options have been developed consistent with the community feedback and a range of rail options that
reflect different community objectives have been developed.
Strategic service planning
V/Line’s rail services across the state are designed according to a series of principles. They include:
Consistent service planning: Trains now operate much more closely to a clockface hourly service plan on
short distance services. Long distance services also operate more consistently through the week, with at
least daily services;
Frequency: Established long distance services now operate at least twice daily; most corridors have at least
three daily train services and in some cases, there are also supplementary coaches. (The most recent
reinstated service, from Echuca, is an exception, as is the planned Maryborough service, but in these
corridors there are numerous coaches as well);
Regionally focused service planning: The typical service plan has a morning arrival in Melbourne around
0930, a pair of inbound and outbound lunchtime services, and an evening outbound service scheduled
shortly after the evening peak (about 1800). For day trippers from Melbourne there is also a morning
outbound and evening Melbourne-bound train to provide a whole day in the regions. This service mix allows
a choice of half-day and full-day trips to Melbourne or a regional city;
Day return travel: The service plan builds on the strategic advantage Victoria has over other regional rail
networks – it is the only State with regional passenger rail that is also compact enough to make scheduling
day return services to the capital city feasible on most rail corridors;
Off peak schedules: long-distance trains generally arrive after 0900 on weekdays and depart either before
4 pm or after 6pm. This provides off-peak fares on all long-distance services whilst also keeping the day
return service at relatively attractive arrival and departure times throughout; and
Targeting of regional centres: Long distance services are increasingly being scheduled with an awareness
of meeting intraregional travel needs. Service plans for Ararat, Maryborough and Echuca have been
designed to allow for rail travel from these centres to Ballarat and Bendigo respectively at times suitable for
work and study in the regional cities.
Applying these principles, as far as practical, on the Mildura rail corridor, indicates that:
Consistent service planning: It would be desirable for a Mildura – Melbourne service to operate daily to
provide consistency;
Frequency: The long journey time makes it unfeasible to offer multiple services without scheduling some at
inconvenient times. Instead, frequency to key centres should be provided by using a range of corridors;
Regionally focused service planning: A choice of departure times should be available to offer an
integrated overall service;
Day return travel: The long journey time makes day return services to Melbourne unfeasible without a
major capital investment;
Off peak schedules: Existing services are off-peak;
Targeting of regional centres: Ballarat is a little over one hour by rail from Melbourne and so cannot be
made a convenient access point from Mildura. Because of the low patronage potential, rail is not an
appropriate mode to provide for local travel to and from Mildura, and the other townships on the line do not
perform the service role of major regional centres. This objective can therefore only be achieved for part of
the corridor, with targeted services.
7 October 2010 48

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
Service Planning Response:
The rail options have been developed consistent with the strategic planning principles as far as possible:
Option 1, 2, 5 and 7 are daily services;
Option 3 provides day return service;
Option 4 boosts the Swan Hill line to three services per day; and
Option 6 provides targeting of the regional centre at Ballarat.
Journey Time
Community feedback indicated a wide range of views about acceptable journey times.
Overnight train services were favoured by some. These have a practical minimum journey time of around 8
hours; any shorter and the departure and arrival times become inconveniently late or early.
Daylight trains equivalent or faster than car travel were also suggested. These have the advantage of being
relatively appealing compared to a car, but from the social transport planning point of view they do not
enable any additional activities to be undertaken as they still require a day of travel to reach either
Melbourne or Mildura.
Some stakeholders seek a fast train service capable of offering a day return service between Melbourne and
Mildura. This represents a step change in service and thus forms the basis of a separate Option. This
aspiration was reflected in the petition organised in support of the restoration of a passenger train service.
Service Planning Response:
In Option 1 and 2, the estimated passenger train journey time between Mildura and Melbourne is approximately
9.5 hours. This reflects the capability of the existing infrastructure following rectification of outstanding safety
issues.
Option 3 reflects the community aspiration for a fast train service, capable of offering convenient day return travel
from Mildura to Melbourne.
A ‘mid-speed’ scenario has not been investigated in detail. These mid speed scenarios – 100 kph, 115 kph, 130
kph and 160 kph – all require increasing amounts of capital investment compared to the base scenario but would
not be markedly different functionally; e.g. none can offer a convenient day return trip to Melbourne or Ballarat or
compete with air travel.
For speeds up to 115 kph it would be possible to operate existing N-set trains. For 130 kph operation regeared N-
set trains are a possibility. 160 kph requires a new train similar to the existing Vlocity class. Incrementally higher
capital investment would be required and the capital cost would be between those identified for Option 1 and 2
and Option 3.
Route options
There are two options for routing a passenger train between Melbourne and Ballarat.
The direct route is via Bacchus Marsh; or
The route formerly used by the Vinelander via Geelong’s North Shore station.
There are a number of advantages to using the route via Bacchus Marsh:
There are regular passenger services on the route via Bacchus Marsh, but not via North Shore where the
Gheringhap to Ballarat section is a freight only railway;
The Bacchus Marsh route has recently been upgraded to 160 kph passenger standards over much of the
line whereas the route between Ballarat and North Shore has been upgraded for freight only;
The journey time is shorter via Bacchus Marsh than via North Shore;
There would be less interface with freight operations;
A service via North Shore may require an additional timetable pathway through suburban Melbourne, which
are increasingly scarce with more frequent suburban and Geelong line peak and off-peak services, whereas,
via Bacchus Marsh an existing train pathway could potentially be extended to Mildura, reducing costs and
resolving scheduling issues;
Alternatively, a service via North Shore could be a diversion of an existing service terminating at South
Geelong or Marshall, but then that service would no longer call at Geelong’s major stations;
7 October 2010 49

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
The station at North Shore is not particularly conveniently located for key destinations in Geelong; and
Regular coach services operate between Ballarat and Geelong providing an appropriate service connection.
Service Planning Response:
All rail options on the Mildura corridor assume the train will be operated via Bacchus Marsh.
In addition to the existing Mildura rail corridor, there is the option of extending the existing Swan Hill line to
Mildura. This corridor has a number of potential advantages:
It already has regular passenger trains in operation, so minimal work south of Swan Hill would be expected;
It would link Mildura to Bendigo, which as the regional centre for Loddon Mallee is an important destination
for government, business, education and health services. Community feedback identified that Bendigo is an
important destination for residents of the study area and has come to complement and possibly overtake the
historical connection of the area to Ballarat;
Bendigo is closer to the northern part of the corridor than Ballarat, and thus could potentially offer a dayreturn
option as the current Swan Hill train does to some extent;
The route via Bendigo is shorter;
Of the current public transport services, Mildura residents prefer to use services via Bendigo, so a rail
extension in the corridor would reflect the current preferences of Mildura residents; and
This route would also serve Swan Hill, and thus could potentially support access to Swan Hill from the
hinterland similar to the aims outlined for Bendigo.
Service Planning Response:
Option 5 investigates the feasibility of extending the Swan Hill line to Mildura.
Access to Melbourne
It is not currently possible to accommodate an additional train during peak periods between Ballarat and
Melbourne.
Regional Rail Link is a major investment in regional rail capacity in suburban Melbourne and will enable additional
peak period services to operate by separating metropolitan and regional train services. Although this investment
will enable more peak direction services, the single track configuration of the rest of the Ballarat line will continue
to be a constraint on providing counter-peak and off-peak services given the standard hourly service being
operated.
Trains on the Mildura corridor may be most easily incorporated into the service plan by extending existing Ballarat
paths, similar to the approach taken for Echuca and the planned Maryborough services, but this approach raises
a number of issues:
The Ballarat service is operated entirely by 160 kph capable Vlocity train units whereas a Mildura service
would be better suited to slower 115 kph N-sets (see below) which may pose some scheduling difficulties;
To maintain local services Mildura trains would need to call at intermediate stations such as Ballan and
Bacchus Marsh. This is not unusual in the service plan in force from 2006 – the Ararat long distance trains in
the corridor have this service pattern;
Different market segments would use a service incorporated into the Ballarat line service, and the needs of
short-haul and long-haul users may conflict. V/Line currently uses its reservations system to manage
competing demands for short and long-distance travel on other long-distance services. Reservations on
long-distance services are mandatory although a car for unreserved passengers is usually provided;
Patronage patterns are likely to mean the Melbourne – Ballarat section would be more heavily used than the
Ballarat – Mildura section. The length of the train would be influenced by the peak load section, but it would
not be practical to leave N-set carriages at Ballarat to reduce excess rollingstock kilometres; and
A service between Mildura and Melbourne would be less likely to be punctual when calling at intermediate
stations on the Ballarat to Melbourne section, simply because in the long journey before it arrives in this
section there are more chances for random delays. Over the long term this could detrimentally affect the
reputation of the overall Ballarat-Melbourne service.
7 October 2010 50

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
Service Planning Response:
Rail options have been developed to minimise anticipated impacts on peak period services and within the
constraints of existing service commitments.
6.2.2 Rolling stock
There are two basic classes of rolling stock available for consideration for a Mildura service. These are briefly
summarised below.
Table 22: Summary of possible short-term rolling stock options
Rolling Stock
Diesel Multiple
Unit (DMU)
Locomotive and
carriages
V/Line Advantages
example
Vlocity Flexible capacity including capability
to drop and attach enroute to form
new services
Lower cost than locomotive trains in
many circumstances
Short trains feasible, allowing a
higher frequency service and
inducement of demand
Contemporary design
Flexible layout, including potential for
refreshment facilities
Operates all
Ballarat/Ararat/Maryborough
services, providing operational
performance consistency on the
overall corridor
N-set N-set is accepted as mainstay of
long-haul services in Victoria.
Consists from 3 to 5 cars regularly;
able to operate very long trains under
some circumstances
Buffet provided on existing long-haul
rolling stock.
Available in both broad and standard
gauge.
Also able to haul freight services.
Disadvantages
Current fleet in Victoria
designed for medium
distance (

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
Option 3 is a ‘high speed’ option designed to offer a day return service from Melbourne to Mildura. The train would
need a top speed of 200 kph which is close to the upper limit of proven diesel train technology. For this report, the
Bombardier Voyager class of rolling stock as used in the United Kingdom has been used as a benchmark for high
speed diesel operation as this type of train has demonstrated performance at sustained 200kph operation.
Efficient rolling stock operations would be assisted if the train was also available for a V/Line peak service in the
Melbourne area. The train should be scheduled into Melbourne before the evening peak and from Melbourne after
the morning peak, in order to allow the rolling stock to be used in the peak period, in order to minimise the impact
on the peak period fleet requirement.
Service Planning Responses:
Option 1 and 2 have been developed with the aim of using an N-set or N-set equivalent.
Option 3, a high speed option, requires dedicated rolling stock capable of achieving the target journey time.
Option 6 and 7 both assume the use of a Vlocity railcar to provide St Arnaud services.
The option of a ‘mixed’ passenger and freight train was considered. Combined passenger and goods trains were
a mainstay of the railway historically but have fallen from favour because of the additional complexity they
introduce. Key issues include:
Addressing any occupational health and safety aspects from potential passenger exposure to the freight
commodities being hauled;
Operational difficulties caused by the variable demands of freight traffic;
Mismatch between passenger preferred travel times and freight dispatch times;
The current freight timetable varies by day of week and direction, whereas, the passenger’s requirement is
for simple and consistent schedules;
Shunting and detaching of freight/passenger cars to reach freight sidings or passenger terminals; and
Increased variability in both passenger and freight punctuality and performance.
It is also possible that, even on a train predominately comprised of freight cars, the presence of a passenger
carriage would be enough to warrant substantial capital investment to address the risk management issues (see
section 6.2.4 below).
6.2.3 Track Quality
The railway line between Ballarat and Mildura is currently in a ride quality condition similar to that when the
Vinelander operated.
The line is Class 3 from Ballarat to Mildura;
Between Ballarat and Mildura the line speed is 80 kph except for Donald – Birchip which is 70 kph; and
Long standing speed restrictions over trailable points remain in place (generally 40 kph).
6.2.4 Managing risk on the railway
Since the Vinelander operated, a number of major operational changes related to risk management have occurred
that required significant capital investment to address.
The reintroduction of passenger rail services significantly changes the risk profile of a railway line. Passenger
trains have a significantly higher risk profile because of the potential exposure of passengers on board to the
consequences of incidents. There is an obligation to seek to minimise risks as far as reasonably practical and, as
a professional rail operator, V/Line seeks to continuously improve the safety performance of the railway, both
‘above’ and ‘below’ rail for all rail operations. Level crossings, crossing loops and signalling require attention as
part of this risk management requirement.
Level Crossing Safety
The Mildura line has numerous ‘passively protected’ level crossings – that is, level crossings without flashing
lights or boom gates, like that shown in Figure 27.
7 October 2010 52

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
Figure 27: Passively protected level crossing north of Donald
Level crossings, particularly passively protected level crossings, are well recognised in the community as a road
and rail safety hazard. Recent incidents in Victoria have highlighted a number of issues:
The Trawalla accident involved a diesel multiple unit (DMU) Vlocity train and a truck. The incident
highlighted the risks of trucks at passively protected crossings and the performance of diesel multiple units in
level crossing accidents;
The Kerang accident involved a locomotive train and a truck. The incident highlighted risks of trucks at
highway crossings protected by flashing lights, and the performance of railway carriages when impacted
from the side.
Many of the crossings on the Mildura line are located close to the Sunraysia Highway where the railway line and
highway run adjacent and parallel. There is limited space (10 to 20 metres) between the railway and the highway
at these locations, posing a risk for vehicles stopping or queuing at a level crossing or the highway entrance that
they may overhang onto the highway or the railway respectively. These minor roads are mostly used to access
farms and for moving farm machinery. As a result they are likely to have a higher rate of use by heavy trucks,
tractors and similar vehicles that have been involved in recent destructive fatal level crossing accidents on the
Victorian regional railway network.
To manage these risks, Temporary Speed Restrictions (TSRs) have been placed over the approaches to some 69
level crossings between Ballarat and Mildura that were found to be non-conforming with Australian Standard (AS)
1742.7 with respect to sight distances, sight angles, short stacking and/or queuing issues. The TSRs are either 50
or 60 kph compared to a line speed of generally 80 kph. The TSRs typically affect some 1.1 kilometres each side
of a level crossing, but where crossings are located in close proximity the speed restriction becomes continuous;
the longest example is between Donald and Swanwater where 16.5 kilometres of TSRs are in place. These speed
restrictions affect the performance of the freight train service operating on the Mildura line and are considered an
appropriate risk management response given that the health and safety consequences of an incident involving a
freight train are likely to be limited to impacts on the train crew and the vehicle occupants.
7 October 2010 53

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
Risk assessments under the Australian Level Crossing Assessment Model (ALCAM) framework have been
recently undertaken by VicTrack. The crossing assessments are attached in Appendix E, and outline the
quantification of a range of risks at level crossings. The ALCAM model is currently being updated to reflect
increased awareness of the different consequences of incidents involving different types of trains, to recognise
that the potential consequences with passenger trains are higher than with freight trains.
The reintroduction of DMU-operated passenger rail services between Ballarat and Maryborough has progressed
on the basis that the passively protected level crossings will be eliminated over the next three years. Passively
protected crossings between Ballarat and Maryborough will be subject to significant speed restrictions of 50kph
until these upgrades are completed. Other sections of Victoria’s regional passenger railway network with DMU
operation and passively protected crossings have also been prioritised for upgrading or closure (see Pyrenees
Shire Council, 2010, for level crossing closures planned to enhance the Ararat service).
Accordingly, the restoration of passenger train services to Mildura requires a significant upgrade of level
crossings. Restoration of passenger rail services to Mildura has been assessed on the assumption that all public
level crossings will require introduction of boom barrier active protection. From a rail operations perspective, it is
always desirable to close as many level crossings as possible, even those provided with protection equipment, as
they represent a substantial ongoing cost to the rail operator without eliminating the risk posed by the crossing. A
major program of crossing closure would substantially reduce the capital cost of rail services to Mildura. However,
it is recognised that the community often has a different perspective. Adjacent landholders may identify minor
level crossings as important for stock and equipment movements, and some are seen to be important emergency
alternative evacuation routes, even if they have low levels of general day-to-day community use. The negotiations
for closure of level crossings on the Ballarat – Maryborough section of line as part of the Maryborough Rail Project
has demonstrated the strength of stakeholder views about maintaining access at level crossings (Ballarat City
Council, Hepburn Shire Council, Central Goldfields Shire, all 2010).
It is emphasised that provision of boom barriers at minor crossings is directly linked to minimising the risk that
potential passengers are exposed to, rather than the risk the train poses to motorists.
Crossing Loops
The Mildura line is mostly a single track railway. To allow trains travelling in opposing directions to pass, there are
regularly spaced short sections of double track, known as crossing loops. Each crossing loop has two sets of
points, one at each end, to allow trains to travel on the appropriate track in order to be able to pass a train
travelling in the opposite direction.
The Mildura line’s crossing loops are equipped with ‘trailable points’. These are a form of track switch designed for
low speed operations that automatically return to a set position but permit a train to pass through them in the
opposite direction. They are designed to remove the need to manually change points at crossing loops.
For example, a northbound train will be automatically diverged onto the crossing loop track whilst a southbound
train will be automatically guided onto the straight track. Both trains can then proceed at low speed through the
trailable points at each end of the loop, which then spring back into place before the next train.
In Victoria, the operation of regular passenger services over trailable points has been eliminated due to safety
reasons following a risk assessment process by V/Line. The lack of automation makes it possible to misjudge
settings as well as to interfere with the safe operation of the points, thereby posing a risk of derailment. Equally
the trailable points system does not include a safety measure to prevent a train that needs to wait in the crossing
loop from proceeding into the single track section. Automating and signalising the points mitigates this risk. The
loops need to be either signalised and motorised, or abolished, in order to reinstate regular passenger trains to
Mildura.
The reinstatement of passenger service to Maryborough has seen the elimination of three crossing loops fitted
with trailable points at Sulky, Tourello and Talbot. In order to maintain freight services on the line, it has been
assumed that all remaining crossing loops will need to be upgraded to reinstate passenger trains to Mildura.
A full review of the long-term requirement for crossing loop provision on the Mildura line, undertaken as part of a
rail freight study, may allow some of the crossing loops to be eliminated. This would reduce the capital cost of
restoring passenger trains over the section of line.
7 October 2010 54

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
Signalling
The current train control system between Ballarat and Mildura is Train Order Working, a manual system of train
control relying on written instructions. Some passenger services continue to operate in Victoria on regional lines
under this train control system.
A signalling upgrade is required as an element of removing the trailable points. A fully signalised system, to
mitigate the risk of human error in the manual train control system, has been assumed in estimating the cost for
passenger rail services to Mildura.
6.2.5 Heat speed restrictions
On hot days operators introduce heat speed restrictions on rail services in order to reduce the risk of tracks
buckling and the subsequent chance of an incident. With the current infrastructure on the Mildura line, these
would be introduced on days above 32 degrees. The effect of heat speed restrictions on the line is to reduce train
speeds to 40 kph between North Ballarat Junction and Mildura (V/Line 2009).
A passenger service at these speeds would be impossible to operate effectively due to the impact such slow
running would have on driver and conductor resource management. The service would most likely be routinely
cancelled during the summer months when temperatures in the region regularly exceed the 32 degree threshold.
The frequency and severity of heat speed restrictions can be reduced through an appropriate maintenance
regime. For example other lines in Victoria have both higher effective temperatures before heat speed restrictions
are imposed, and higher speed limits under heat speed restrictions (V/Line 2009).
6.3 Background to Road-based Options
A number of road-based options have been included in the feasibility study, notwithstanding the strong community
perspectives on road-based public transport in the region.
6.3.1 Community perspectives on current road coaches
The current road coaches used throughout the Mallee are standard long haul V/Line road coaches. They are
generally arranged with ‘two plus two’ seating (two seats each side of a central aisle) and typically seat between
57 and 61 customers.
Most services elsewhere on the Victorian regional public transport system are arranged to connect to trains at
outer regional centres so that the majority of a trip to Melbourne is undertaken on trains rather than coaches. On
most corridors the relatively short coach section is primarily a feeder connection to the train, and the maximum
journey time on the coach is typically around 1.5 hours (see Table 23). The Mildura – Swan Hill feeder service is
one of the longer services at over 2.5 hours.
Table 23: Summary of feeder coach service journey times
Feeder coach route
Echuca – Murchison East
Cobram – Shepparton
Horsham – Ararat (direct)
Hamilton – Ballarat
Hamilton – Terang
Mildura – Swan Hill (via Boundary Bend)
Typical Journey Time
1 hour 20 minutes
1 hour 10 minutes
1 hour 17 minutes
2 hours 20 minutes
1 hour 30 minutes
2 hours 40 minutes
By contrast, the Melbourne – Mildura overnight coach service is the longest continuous intrastate public transport
trip in Victoria.
Despite this difference, the coaches used on the feeder services are of a similar standard as the current long
distance road coaches to Mildura, the key difference being that the overnight coach has only 44 seats.
Nevertheless, the road coaches currently used are consistent with good practice elsewhere in Australia, including
the NSW regional public transport network (Countrylink) and national operators like Greyhound.
Community feedback was clear that the current coaches are not considered suitable for either the long trip to
Melbourne or the comparatively short link between Mildura and Swan Hill. The key customer perceptions reflected
were:
They were not comfortable for older people and those with disabilities because they were space restrictive;
7 October 2010 55

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
Wheelchair access is poor;
on-board facilities were limited;
they do not have appropriate luggage facilities, particularly for specialised luggage;
onboard comfort (seats and legroom) is poor; and
use of onboard facilities such as the toilet is difficult or unpleasant.
If the Victorian Government decides to continue using road coaches to provide some or all public transport
services in the study area, it is recommended that consideration be given to alternative vehicles that address
these customer perceptions. Best practice examples from international operations should be considered.
6.3.2 Best practice on long haul coaches
Internationally, intercity journeys that can be completed by ground travel in four hours or less are often highly
competitive with air, once airport waiting and access time is taken into account. For example, the Singapore –
Kuala Lumpur corridor in Singapore/Malaysia is under 400 kilometres, with a journey time of about five hours.
These corridors provide examples of best practice in intercity coach operations. They provide suitable conditions
for competitive, market-oriented coaches that target a range of market segments, including business travel.
Figure 28: Premium coaches can provide a high level of amenity, accessibility, and comfort
International practice demonstrates that significant improvements in on-board amenity, facilities, accessibility and
comfort are achievable. A best practice review of innovations in this field is provided in Appendix F.
Applying best practice to the Mildura corridor
It is clear that the current road coach solution does not address the issues raised during community consultation
and does not overcome the transport barriers faced in the Mallee. The Department of Transport should consider
the introduction of higher quality coaches for the long-haul services in the corridor.
Specific attributes for inclusion are:
Two plus one seating, which provides an appropriate balance between comfort and capacity. 37 seat
coaches would be adequate to handle the average load on most Mallee public transport services (see Figure
25), especially if implemented as part of a service expansion that made more route and time choices
available;
7 October 2010 56

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
Low-floor level boarding wheelchair and mobility aid accessibility, with nearby seating for carers. This would
overcome a major disadvantage of the current coaches which require hoists and seat removal to
accommodate wheelchairs, which in turn causes a loss of human dignity for the customer and
inconvenience for the operator;
Additional/specialised luggage space. A significant problem with the existing fleet is an inability to carry
bicycles. Notwithstanding that many trains have only limited luggage capacity, the lack of bicycle storage on
coaches is a significant barrier to some prospective users. VicRoads policy does not currently permit
external cycle racks on coaches, so a trailer would be necessary. Further investigation would be required to
determine what the optimal bicycle capacity would be if this option were pursued.
Service planning response:
The following coach sectors have been assumed to be provided with higher quality coaches in line with the above
attributes:
Mildura – St Arnaud coach (Option Seven)
Melbourne – Mildura overnight coach, Mildura – Ballarat coach (Option Eight)
Additional extras such as improved onboard entertainment, on board food service and fully reclining seating would
be dependent on the journey time, regulatory and food safety issues, and patronage trends following the
introduction of any new services.
6.3.3 Coach stop upgrades
As outlined previously in section 3.3, coach infrastructure in the corridor is deficient in some respects, particularly
the provision of shelters, DDA compliance, boarding areas, manoeuvring areas (particularly for luggage handling)
and information provision.
Service planning response:
Coach based options have assumed that stops are upgraded accordingly to address the above issues.
6.4 Background to both mode options
6.4.1 Integration
The Transport Integration Act framework identifies integration as an important element when planning a transport
project.
In the context of Mildura rail services two forms of integration are particularly important:
Integration of trains into the established train service plan. This has been discussed previously in section
6.2.1; and
Integration between trains, coaches and other public transport services.
V/Line coaches in regional Victoria are mostly co-ordinated with the established long-distance train services.
Using these trains where possible provides a number of benefits:
Consistent off-peak pricing;
Maximisation of journey opportunities across the network given the limited frequencies offered;
Consequently, maximisation of marginal revenue opportunities and social benefits generated by linking of
communities and individuals across long distances; and
Access to on-board amenities on the locomotive hauled services – in particular the buffet, which reduces the
need for refreshment stops in the coach services.
Many of the long-distance coaches are scheduled to operate as a pulse timetable around both inbound and
outbound long-distance trains. A pulse timetable aims to provide a full range of possible connections at an
interchange. For example, coach schedules out of Ballarat aim to provide connections to and from Ararat trains in
both directions, in order to enable trips like Geelong to Stawell and Warrnambool to Maryborough. This approach
seeks to maximise the ‘network effect’ on regional long-distance public transport given the generally low
frequency of services provided.
7 October 2010 57

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
A key coach route in the Mildura train corridor is the Adelaide – Bendigo ‘Daylink’ service. Access to Bendigo is
important for many of the communities in the Mildura corridor. The high patronage of the Donald – Bendigo coach,
despite its low frequency, provides evidence of the importance of the link (see section 3.4.9). Connections
between a Mildura train and a Bendigo coach at St Arnaud would be desirable. However, this coach is already
designed to connect with numerous other long distance services. At the Bendigo end the coach connects with
Echuca and Swan Hill services as well as the primary Melbourne-bound links and at Horsham it connects with
services in the western corridor both to and from Ararat and Ballarat on most days.
As a result of these design features, it may be difficult to reschedule coaches to co-ordinate with a train on the
Mildura line. Alterations to coach integration may eliminate more journey possibilities than co-ordination with the
train adds to the service plan.
An advantage of a daylight service is that the provision of connecting bus and coach services should be more
effective and economical than for a night service. It may be possible to use school buses operating outside school
peak hours to provide low-cost short-distance regular train connections such as Hopetoun to Woomelang. This
would help to maximise the patronage of the rail service.
A Mildura – Ballarat coach service would provide a high level of integration with established services at Ouyen, St
Arnaud and Ballarat in particular. This is based on the 100 kph cruising speed of the coach and the shorter road
route via Avoca to Ballarat. Although a rail service would not require the refreshment/driver fatigue stop at Ouyen
built into the coach concept, the longer rail route via Maryborough and constraints imposed by crossing trains
would make reproducing the coach integration difficult.
By contrast to the high level of integration with established services possible by using coaches, a passenger train
may need to be supported with its own network of feeder buses and coaches to boost access for communities
located in communities without direct access to the train. In some cases these services would need to closely
duplicate established services that are not flexible enough in scheduling to be retimed to meet a train.
Table 24 summarises identified integration opportunities for the long haul services.
Table 24: Integration - long-haul opportunities
Inbound Service Indicative Times Connecting Service Option Number
Arrival Location Departure
Services from Ararat corridor 0930 Ballarat 0955
1038
1038
Coach to Mildura
Train to Mildura
Train to St Arnaud
8
2
7
Services from Nhill, Warrnambool,
Hamilton, Geelong
0940 Ballarat 0955
1038
1038
Coach to Mildura
Train to Mildura
Train to St Arnaud
Coach from Mildura 1300 Ballarat 1315 Services to Geelong,
Ararat/Horsham,
Warrnambool
Daylink service from Bendigo 1220 St Arnaud 1335 Train to Mildura
1345 Coach to Mildura
2
7
Daylink service from Horsham 1532 St Arnaud 1620 Coach to Mildura 8
Coach from Mildura 1520 St Arnaud 1532 Daylink service to 8
Bendigo
Coach from Ballarat
Train from Mildura
1145
1135
St Arnaud 1220 Daylink service to
Horsham
8
2
Speedlink service from Swan Hill 1150 Ouyen 1230 Coach to Ballarat 8
Coach from Ballarat 1440 Ouyen (1430) Potential connection 8
to Speedlink service
to Swan Hill
Speedlink service from Adelaide 1430 Ouyen 1515 Coach to Mildura 8
Coach from Mildura 1200 Ouyen 1230 Speedlink service to 8
Adelaide
Speedlink from Adelaide 1640 Swan Hill 1745 Train to Melbourne 4
8
2
7
8
7 October 2010 58

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
6.4.2 Impact on existing services
During the community consultation process some stakeholders raised concerns that no existing services should
be withdrawn on the restoration of passenger rail services.
Depending on the time of departure, the Mildura – Swan Hill coach service obtains less than half its patronage
from Mildura.
Table 25: Summary of role of Mildura as source of Mildura - Swan Hill coach service patronage
Service Description
Percentage of boardings (to Swan Hill) and
alightings (from Swan Hill) recorded at Mildura
Early AM service to Swan Hill 48%
Mid AM service to Swan Hill (early PM on Sundays) 72%
Early PM service to Mildura 71%
Late PM service to Mildura 56%
Passengers heading for Melbourne may choose to switch to an alternative service, particularly a rail service, and
this expected behaviour is reflected in assumptions in the economic appraisal later in this report.
However, no detailed origin-destination data is available for this coach service. Given that this service also
provides access to the key regional centres of Swan Hill and Bendigo, and passengers bound for these
destinations would be less likely to switch to alternatives that primarily operate in the Mildura rail corridor, it is not
appropriate to assume that the service would lose so much patronage as to become unviable.
The service should be reviewed within an appropriate period (about 18 months) following the introduction of any
new long-distance services for the study area.
Generally, patronage data supports the retention of most current services. However, the northernmost section of
the Ouyen coach service is reported to have very low demand, although the data predates the patronage growth
that has occurred across regional public transport since 2006 (see section 3.4.7). Option 2, Option 3, Option 7
and Option 8 would be expected to directly impact demand for this service by providing a more attractive
alternative. If additional or alternative services are provided to the area, further community consultation on the role
of the existing service would be appropriate.
One existing service would be directly impacted under the Options described. The overnight coach service would
be directly replaced by an overnight train in Option One.
6.4.3 Safety performance
During the community consultation process, the community identified passenger rail services as having safety
advantages over road transport options.
Rail is regarded as a very safe mode of transport for passengers. This impression is generally supported by the
statistical evidence summarised in the table below. However, coach and bus transport is also a very safe mode
and is recognised as being one of the safest modes for road travel (RACV 2010).
Table 26: Safety statistics for rail and road (Source: BITRE 2009)
Fatality Rate per 100,000 population
(Victoria)
Fatality rate by mode
(deaths per billion
passenger kilometres
travelled) (Australia)
Injury rate by mode
(serious injury per billion
passenger kilometres
travelled) (Australia)
Rail 0.37 (2007) 2.80 (2007) 104.40 (2006)
Road 6.42 (2007) 5.36 (2007) 13.37 (2007)
Table 27: Fatalities and serious injuries on Victorian public transport services (Source: PTSV 2010 and BITRE 2010)
Total fatalities
Total serious injuries
2008 2009 2010 (to March) 2008 2009 2010 (to March)
Rail 17 10 2 93 55 3
Bus services 3 4 0 31 49 8
Road 303 290 27 Not available
7 October 2010 59

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
It is important to note that both rail and coach/bus services in Victoria operate under comprehensive legislated
safety regimes.
6.4.4 Cost Estimates
Rail costs have been drawn from a range of sources. The source of costs is summarised in the table below.
Details of costs are included in Appendix G.
Rolling stock costs have been included in rail options as applicable in Options 1, 2, 3 and 5. V/Line advises that
Option 4 does not require new rolling stock, and Options Six and Seven are based on the use of existing V/Locity
trains.
Table 28: Cost estimate sources
Option Source of cost estimate
1 V/Line
2 V/Line
3 AECOM
4 V/Line and DoT
5 AECOM
6 AECOM and DoT
7 AECOM and DoT
8 AECOM
9 AECOM
7 October 2010 60

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
6.5 Option 1: Overnight passenger rail service
Option 1 is to restore a train similar to the Vinelander in operations – an overnight passenger train between
Melbourne and Mildura calling at intermediate townships during the night. Figure 29 schematically shows the
route.
Figure 29: Schematic map of Mildura passenger train option (Options 1, 2 and 3)
7 October 2010 61

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
Indicative Service Plan
Table 29: Indicative service plan: Mildura train
Daily
TRAIN
Mildura 21:05
Red Cliffs 21:35
Ouyen 22:40
Woomelang 1:55
Birchip 0:35
Donald 1:30
St Arnaud 2:20
Dunolly 3:25
Maryborough 3:45
Ballarat 4:50
Melbourne 6:20
Daily
TRAIN
Melbourne 21:45
Ballarat 23:15
Maryborough 0:25
Dunolly 0:36
St Arnaud 1:30
Donald 2:00
Birchip 2:40
Woomelang 3:15
Ouyen 4:00
Red Cliffs 5:30
Mildura 6:00
Estimated Cost
$505 million, comprising $400 million of capital works and $105 million on rolling stock acquisition
$23.3 million recurrent (including offset from elimination of overnight coach service)
Specific scheduling issues
The Vinelander formerly ran on an overnight timetable departing Melbourne just before 10 pm and arriving in
Mildura at 7:30 am; the return service left Mildura just after 9 pm and arrived in Melbourne at 6:40 am.
Since the Vinelander ceased operation in 1993 there has been a significant increase in the number of peak and
counterpeak V/Line services as part of the Regional Fast Rail upgrade, as well as additional metropolitan train
services in the morning shoulder peak.
These new constraints reduce the ability to operate an overnight service into Melbourne at convenient times. An
overnight Mildura passenger train would need to operate into Melbourne in the pre-peak window.
Specific rolling stock issues
There is no longer any rolling stock tailored for an overnight service available.
V/Line does not have trains specifically designed for overnight operation. 2 No broad gauge overnight trains
operate in Australia and no rolling stock that is both suitable and may be easily converted to broad gauge (e.g.
possibly XPT sleeper cars) is known to be available.
Traditionally, overnight trains have provided sleeper cars with ‘roomette’ or ‘twinette’ accommodation – that is,
fully flat beds in a small cabin. Airlines and coaches provide a model of alternative technology where seats that
fully recline are increasingly common (see Figure 78 in Appendix F for an example on a road coach). As
expected, the flat seat takes up a significant amount of space. It may now be possible to provide comfortable
‘sleeping seats’ on railcars without the inflexibility of separate cabin layouts. However, dedicated rolling stock with
the sleeping seat fitout would still be required and the space required would make it impractical to use for other
purposes.
2 The Vinelander rolling stock had been retained pending future use until 2008. However, an assessment found that the cost of bringing the rolling
stock to an acceptable modern standard with respect to environmental performance and accessibility was excessive. The rolling stock has now
been released for disposal.
7 October 2010 62

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
6.6 Option 2: Daytime passenger rail service
Option 2 is to provide a daytime passenger rail service serving the same stations as the overnight service. Figure
29 on page 61 schematically shows the route.
Indicative Service Plan
Table 30: Indicative service plan - Mildura daylight train
Daily
TRAIN
Mildura 6:20
Red Cliffs 6:50
Ouyen 7:55
Woomelang 8:50
Birchip 9:50
Donald 10:45
St Arnaud 11:35
Dunolly 12:40
Maryborough 13:00
Ballarat 14:00
Melbourne 15:36
Daily
TRAIN
Melbourne 9:35
Ballarat 11:15
Maryborough 12:20
Dunolly 12:45
St Arnaud 13:35
Donald 14:25
Birchip 15:20
Woomelang 16:20
Ouyen 17:15
Red Cliffs 18:25
Mildura 18:55
Estimated Cost
$505 million, comprising $400 million of capital works and $105 million on rolling stock acquisition
$24 million recurrent
Scheduling Issues
In order to provide the service using N-set rolling stock, it is necessary for the train to depart Melbourne after the
morning peak period and return to Melbourne before the evening peak period, when these trains are needed for
other services.
7 October 2010 63

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
6.7 Option 3: Fast passenger rail service
Option 3 is to upgrade the Mildura rail corridor to permit a high-speed (200kph) rail service, enabling a Mildura –
Melbourne journey in approximately four to five hours. Figure 29 on page 61 schematically shows the route.
The option has been included based on the community petition that sought a high speed service, and community
feedback seeking a day return service. A single return service that achieves these objectives is proposed.
200 kph has been identified because:
It theoretically permits the 450 kilometre Mildura – Ballarat section to be traversed in approximately three
hours (average speed of 150 kph), making allowance for intermediate stops as per the previous two options;
It is at the upper limit of conventional line-side signalling technology as used in Victoria;
It is at the upper limit of conventional diesel train technology;
Trains with this capability are proven technology in Europe and elsewhere.
Indicative Service Plan
No times have been estimated for the intermediate stops as a concept design only has been undertaken in
developing this option.
Table 31: Indicative service plan: Mildura train
Daily
Mildura 8:30
Intermediate stops have
not been estimated
Ballarat 11:32
Melbourne 12:46
Daily
Melbourne 16:05
Ballarat 17:25
Intermediate stops have
not been estimated
Mildura 20:25
7 October 2010 64

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
Estimated cost
The total estimated cost of this option is $1.264 billion.
The estimated construction cost of this concept is approximately $1.2 billion. This cost has been developed from
unit costs from other projects and it is emphasised that there have been no directly comparable projects
undertaken in Australia. The cost also does not include any allowance for a range of ancillary costs such as land
acquisition, fencing, noise abatement, project management and development and so on.
Two sets of high-speed rolling stock would be needed – one in operation and one available for rotation for
maintenance. A five car set is estimated to cost $32 million so rolling stock would cost approximately $64 million.
Specific engineering issues
The high speed alignment raises a number of significant engineering issues, including:
Grade separation; and
Track deviations.
There is a requirement that high speed alignments are fully grade separated with no vehicular or pedestrian level
crossings when trains operate at high speeds. International consensus is that for speeds higher than 160 kph (the
current maximum permissible line speed in Australia), grade separation is mandatory. In preparing the above cost
estimate AECOM has assumed that:
In the vicinity of townships trains will be slowing to stop at stations and under these conditions a crossing
may be permissible;
A proportion of little-used level crossings would be closed and not replaced with a grade separated crossing.
Accordingly the cost estimate does not reflect a fully grade separated railway.
Superficially, the Mildura Rail Line appears to be largely straight with a few sharp curves at key locations such as
Litchfield. However, a detailed examination shows that in fact the line has numerous curves that limit speed. In
some locations, track deviations are required to allow for sustained high speed running. Key areas impacted in the
concept design are:
Donald to Birchip; and
Around Creswick.
Detailed plans of the concept alignment are provided in Appendix H.
At these locations, the curve easing required to provide for sustained high speed running cannot be provided
within the existing rail reserve. As a result, the railway needs to be relocated from the current alignment onto a
new alignment. This requires land acquisition from private landholders. Although the land occupied by the diverted
railway is no greater than the current line, the diversions result in the creation of some small pieces of land
isolated from the larger parcels by the relatively short diversions, so the impact of the new diversion may be
significant. The social impacts are further commented on in Section 7.1.4.
In addition, there are some sites where native vegetation would be impacted on by a deviation. These impacts are
outlined in section 7.2.2.
Specific service planning issues
Providing 200 kph services requires a new fleet of rolling stock as no current train in Victoria is designed for such
sustained high speeds. However, the fleet would not be able to be deployed elsewhere on the Victorian network
efficiently and would effectively be isolated to the Mildura service, making it vulnerable to disruption should any
issues arise with the rolling stock.
Tilt trains
It may be possible to reduce the need for track deviations by instead using tilt train technology to allow trains to
operate at higher speeds on curves. Queensland’s Tilt Train operates at a top speed of 160 kph on straight track
and up to 40 percent faster than other trains around curves. The Class 221 train in the United Kingdom is a
200kph-capable diesel tilt train and a similar vehicle would be needed for the Mildura line.
A similar train on the Mildura corridor would:
7 October 2010 65

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
Avoid the need for land acquisition in addition to the costs outlined above;
Result in a somewhat longer travel time compared to a sustained 200kph option, because the tilt train would
still need to slow at curves;
Not avoid the need for grade separation where speeds of greater than 160kph are operated;
Have the same rolling stock issues of compatibility and deployment as the non-tilting option.
It is likely that this option would have a similar capital and recurrent cost as the conventional train, but would avoid
the need for land acquisition.
6.8 Option 4: Additional train and connecting coach on Swan Hill corridor
During the community consultation a strongly articulated theme was that communities in Victoria’s north west
should be provided with an equivalent service to other parts of the state. Currently the Swan Hill train line has two
daily services whilst many other long-distance corridors have three on weekdays.
Table 32: Comparison of service levels by Victorian long-distance rail corridor
Corridor
Number of rail services to/from Melbourne available each:
Weekday Saturday Sunday
Albury/Wodonga 3 (5 from 2010) 3 (5 from 2010) 3 (5 from 2010)
Bairnsdale 3 3 3
Warrnambool 3 3 2
Ararat 3 2 2
Shepparton 3 2 2
Swan Hill 2 2 2
Echuca 1 2 2
Maryborough (from 2010) 1 1 1
Mildura (via Ballarat) 0 0 0
Note: additional coaches operate in some of these corridors to supplement the rail services.
Option 4 would increase service levels and travel time choice on the most popular route between Mildura and
Melbourne by providing a third daily service between Melbourne and Swan Hill, with associated timetable
adjustments to provide evenly spread services, and new coach services between Mildura and Swan Hill.
The additional service would enable day return travel to Swan Hill from Bendigo and Melbourne, although the
constraints of the service plan mean that it would be a long day excursion for tourists.
7 October 2010 66

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
Figure 30: Schematic map of additional Swan Hill train and coach (Option Four)
Indicative Service Plan
The new services would complement the existing daily services, operating directly between Mildura and Swan Hill
via Robinvale.
Table 33: Indicative northbound services
Location Existing Service New Service Existing Service
Melbourne 0720 1240 1815
Bendigo 0930 1450 2030
Swan Hill 1200 1720 2250
Mildura 1440 1940 0130
7 October 2010 67

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
Table 34: Indicative southbound services
Location Existing Service Existing Service New Service 3
Mildura 0400 0930 1445
Swan Hill 0715 1230 1745
Bendigo 0930 1445 2000
Melbourne 1130 1645 2200
Estimated Cost
This initiative has been estimated to cost approximately $5.4 million in its first year. This cost does not include
additional rolling stock as V/Line has indicated that the off-peak rolling stock can be made available under current
rolling stock planning.
Option specific scheduling issues
A third daily train can be accommodated on the line under current conditions but would require the trains to
punctually cross each other at or near Bendigo and then to be turned around promptly and punctually depart
Swan Hill. The service plan for three trains per day allows limited opportunities to recover from any delays. The
single track line requires trains to wait at Bendigo until the line from Swan Hill is clear, so any performance
problems may result in cascading delays that affect the overall Bendigo line service.
The service would be more robust if a longer turn-around at Swan Hill could be provided, as this would help to
ensure that late-arriving services during the day could depart on schedule.
Consideration could be given to:
Timetabling: designing more reliable services by providing more time in Swan Hill. In practice, this means
that services would need to depart Melbourne earlier, which may make the services less attractive;
Crossing Loops: adding crossing loops on the line to allow trains to pass in the section;
Track upgrades: improving the track to allow for faster train services, arriving in Swan Hill earlier and
departing later; and/or
Faster Rolling Stock: Using DMU trains that may be permitted (subject to safety considerations at level
crossings) to run faster on the existing track. This would require resolution of on-board amenity/refreshment
issues for customers and staff.
6.9 Option 5: Swan Hill – Mildura extension of passenger rail
Option 5 is to extend the Swan Hill passenger train service from Swan Hill to Mildura on a new alignment.
Because of the historical patterns of rail network development in Victoria there has never been a direct rail
connection between the Swan Hill line and the Mildura line in the Mallee area, so a new alignment would be
expected to have significant land acquisition, environmental and construction impacts.
Two concept alignments have been developed, designed for 160kph operation to future-proof for improved longdistance
rolling stock. They are shown schematically in Figure 31 and geographically in Figure 32.
3 On Sundays there is already an afternoon service from Mildura to Melbourne via Swan Hill in recognition of the peak in
regional travel that historically occurs on Sunday afternoons. On Sundays the additional service would be at 0930.
7 October 2010 68

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
Figure 31: Schematic map of Swan Hill extensions (Option Five)
The first uses the existing freight line from Swan Hill towards Piangil, diverging at Nyah West to run cross-country
(in a straight line broadly adjacent to the Cocamba – Leitpar and Cocamba – Miralie Roads to minimise the impact
of land acquisition) to just south of Ouyen, where it rejoins the existing Mildura line.
The second alignment uses the existing freight line from Swan Hill towards Piangil and then the closed Piangil –
Yungera line’s alignment. From Yungera the line runs to Robinvale and then adjacent to the Sturt Highway to
Monak (in New South Wales). From Monak the line is included in the Mildura City Council’s identified future river
crossing corridor to Karadoc, and it rejoins the existing Mildura Rail Line just south of Red Cliffs.
Details of the alignments are included in Appendix I.
7 October 2010 69

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
Figure 32: Alignment options for Swan Hill - Mildura extension
Alignment via
Robinvale
Alignment via
Ouyen
Current
alignment
7 October 2010 70

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
Indicative Service Plan
Table 35: Indicative service plan: Mildura train
Daily
Daily
TRAIN
TRAIN
Mildura 10:30 11:00
Via Ouyen Via Robinvale
Swan Hill 7:13 12:53
Melbourne 11:46 17:09
Daily
Daily
TRAIN
TRAIN
Melbourne 7:43 18:17
Swan Hill 12:06 22:41
Via Robinvale Via Ouyen
Mildura 13:30 14:30
This service plan assumes initial operation by a locomotive N-set as an extension of Swan Hill services. Note that
these times are strictly indicative and would need to be investigated in detail if this option was to be developed
further.
Estimated cost
The estimated construction cost for the alignment via Robinvale is approximately $498 million.
The estimated construction cost for the alignment via Ouyen is approximately $376 million.
Additional rolling stock is needed to operate this service, costed at $70 million.
This cost has been developed from unit costs from other projects. The cost also does not include any allowance
for a range of ancillary costs such as land acquisition, fencing, noise abatement, project management and
development and so on.
Developing an accurate recurrent cost without a detailed service plan or infrastructure is problematic. It is
assumed that the cost will be equivalent to the cost via Ballarat but offset by the saving of a Swan Hill service as
priced in Option 4 i.e. $19.17 million per year.
Specific engineering issues
Towards Zero specifies that no new level crossings will be established in Victoria, confirming the Victorian
Government’s long-held position. Accordingly, the new alignments (including the reinstatement of rail on formerly
closed alignments) would need to be fully grade separated throughout and no new level crossings would be
provided.
On sections of existing railways included in the alignments level crossings would need to be fully upgraded.
Specific service planning issues
The provision of high speed rail services on this model would normally be associated with a higher service
frequency. This would be likely to further increase the capital cost of the service, as high speed operations at
higher frequencies may require additional measures in signalling, safety and track duplication.
The cost of rolling stock may be avoidable if the service ran as an extension of the morning service from Swan Hill
and the evening service to Swan Hill. However, under these circumstances the arrival and departure time would
be unattractive and not meet the community’s social requirements.
Other issues
Development of a new rail corridor, particularly one that connects with freight-only lines in the region, may have
consequential positive or negative impacts on the long-term viability of other lines. These impacts would need to
be considered in detail if a new line is constructed.
7 October 2010 71

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
6.10 Option 6: Extension of Maryborough train service to St Arnaud
St Arnaud has been identified as having special characteristics from the public transport network planning
perspective. Community consultation and the options development process highlighted the junction, interchange
and potential destination role of St Arnaud:
it is located at the junction of a major east-west highway across the corridor;
the highway and rail corridors diverge here to travel by alternative routes to Ballarat, with the rail relatively
indirect through Maryborough;
St Arnaud is well placed as a hub for communities in Yarriambiack and Buloke Shires with good road
connections to Charlton, Wycheproof, Rupanyup, Murtoa and Warracknabeal;
St Arnaud is located almost halfway between Melbourne and Mildura via the rail corridor, which allows for
more efficient rail and coach operations, avoiding the need for large numbers of new trains and coaches and
driver fatigue management breaks; and
It is the largest centre on the rail corridor between Maryborough and Mildura.
These characteristics indicate that St Arnaud has a strategic role as a public transport hub. It is thus is the natural
location for an interchange if rail beyond Maryborough was to be contemplated but a rail service to Mildura was
not progressed.
During the community consultation the St Arnaud community identified a need to travel to Ballarat and that the
extension of the Maryborough passenger train could meet this need.
Option 6 is therefore to extend the Maryborough passenger train to commence at St Arnaud in the morning and
terminate there in the evening.
7 October 2010 72

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
Figure 33: Schematic map of Maryborough - St Arnaud passenger train extension (Option Six)
7 October 2010 73

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
Indicative Service Plan
Table 36: Indicative service plan: St Arnaud train
M-F Sa Su
TRAIN TRAIN TRAIN
St Arnaud 6:05 5:40 6:45
Dunolly 6:55 6:30 7:35
Maryborough 7:25 7:00 8:05
Creswick 8:08 7:43 8:48
Ballarat (arr) 8:25 8:00 9:05
Ballarat (dep) 8:38 8:13 9:17
Melbourne 9:49 9:23 10:45
M-F Sa Su
TRAIN TRAIN TRAIN
Melbourne 16:05 16:08 16:08
Ballarat (arr) 17:19 17:30 17:30
Ballarat (dep) 17:25 17:35 17:35
Creswick 17:40 17:50 17:50
Maryborough 18:30 18:40 18:40
Dunolly 18:55 19:05 19:05
St Arnaud 19:45 19:55 19:55
Specific engineering issues
The extension of passenger train services to St Arnaud requires the provision of facilities for trains to terminate
here, including driver facilities, stabling and train dewatering.
Specific service planning issues
This option does not include a connection to Mildura – it serves only the southern part of the rail corridor.
Estimated cost
This option is estimated to cost approximately $79 million in capital and $2.3 million recurrent per year.
The estimate of rail costs has been derived from data supplied by V/Line for the 2010 Maryborough re-opening.
There is no allowance for additional rolling stock as this service plan involves a straightforward extension of a
service.
6.11 Option 7: Melbourne – St Arnaud train service with connecting St
Arnaud – Mildura coach
Option 7 is to provide a new daily Mildura - Melbourne service via St Arnaud. A train and coach would leave
Melbourne and Mildura respectively in the morning, meeting at St Arnaud. The coach service would use the highquality
coaches with improved on-board amenity, accessibility and comfort described in section 6.3.2.
7 October 2010 74

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
Figure 34: Schematic map of Melbourne – St Arnaud train service with connecting St Arnaud – Mildura coach (Option Seven)
7 October 2010 75

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
Indicative Service Plan
Table 37: Indicative service plan – Melbourne – St Arnaud – Mildura combined train and coach service
MELBOURNE (Southern
Cross)
Daily
TRAIN
arr 09:08
Ballarat Station dep 10:38
Creswick Station 10:53
Maryborough Station dep 11:43
Dunolly . . 12:08
St Arnaud Station . . 12:58
COACH
St Arnaud Station 13:45
DONALD 14:20
Watchem 14:45
Birchip 15:05
Woomelang 15:40
Speed 16:10
Tempy 16:15
Ouyen 16:40
Hattah 17:10
Red Cliffs 17:43
Irymple 17:50
MILDURA arr 18:05
Daily
COACH
MILDURA dep 8:30
Irymple . . 8:45
Red Cliffs . . 8:50
Hattah . . 9:28
Ouyen . . 9:55
Tempy . . 10:20
Speed . . 10:25
Woomelang . . 10:55
Birchip . . 11:30
Watchem . . 11:45
DONALD dep 12:15
St Arnaud Station . . 12:45
TRAIN
St Arnaud Station 13:33
Dunolly . . 14:23
Maryborough Station dep 14:53
Creswick Station 15:36
Ballarat Stn dep 15:58
MELBOURNE (Southern
Cross)
arr 17:32
Estimated Cost
This option is estimated to cost approximately $72 million in capital ($71 million for rail and station upgrades and
$0.65 million for coach stop improvements), and $4.12 million recurrent per year (including an annual amount for
two new coaches), including contingency. 24 bus stops would be upgraded at $20,000 each plus 30%
contingency.
The capital cost is marginally less for rail upgrades in this option as no stabling and dewatering facilities are
required at St Arnaud.
The estimate of train costs has been derived from data supplied by DoT for the 2010 Maryborough re-opening.
No additional rolling stock is required due to the service being delivered during the daytime off-peak, allowing the
train to be used during Melbourne’s evening commuter peak period.
Table 38: Estimated capital cost
Component
Estimated cost
Rail $71,530,000
Coach stops $624,000
TOTAL $72,154,000.00
Table 39: Estimated recurrent cost
Component
Estimated cost
Train $3,320,000
Coach $819,000
TOTAL $4,139,000.00
Option specific service planning issues
Constraints on the provision of a day train to St Arnaud include:
7 October 2010 76

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
The 80 kph maximum speed limit from Ballarat to St Arnaud, which provides an estimated journey time of 2
hours 20 minutes each way;
It must leave Melbourne in the morning and return the same day;
The requirement to provide an AM peak service from Maryborough to Ballarat and PM peak service from
Ballarat to Maryborough on the single line section;
The preference to extend an existing train path;
The preference to use an existing ‘Intercity’ i.e. Ararat train to form the Maryborough train, making it easier to
manage reservations and reduce confusion for the customer;
The preference to operate the train at approximately the same time, each day of the week.
The service is subject to a number of specific limitations. The following table assesses feasibility of various
options.
Table 40: Rail service feasibility (based on concept weekday services)
To St Arnaud
From St Arnaud
Train number Melbourne Ballarat St Arnaud St Arnaud Ballarat Melbourne Traffic Light
Indicator
Comment
8101 0625 0804 1024 Early in morning for
departure from
Melbourne. No
equivalent weekend
service.
8105 0810 0935 1155 Current Ararat intercity
express train
potentially can be
divided at Ballarat.
Equivalent weekend
service.
8109 0908 1037 1258 Stopper. Equivalent
weekend services.
8111 1008 1136 1358 Express. Equivalent
weekend services.
8142 1245 1514 1647 Express. No
equivalent service on
weekends.
8144 1330 1558 1732 Stopper. Similar timed
train on weekends.
8146 1530 1757 1933 Line occupied by
Maryborough train.
8150 1650 1920 2048 Line occupied by
Maryborough train.
8152 1830 2055 2213 Arrival in Melbourne is
late in the day.
The trains selected for the concept timetable extending them to St Arnaud are the 0908 Melbourne – Ballarat
service and the 1558 Ballarat – Melbourne service. This pairing is preferred because:
It permits an attractively scheduled feeder coach on the St Arnaud - Mildura section (departing 0830 and
returning at 1830);
It provides for a transfer that can also provide a lunch refreshment break for passengers, thereby minimising
the inconvenience of having no buffet facility on the Vlocity train;
It would provide an arrival time in Melbourne similar to other long-distance corridors; and
A later departure from St Arnaud is not currently feasible due to the need to pass the committed
Maryborough train whilst it is enroute on a single track section.
7 October 2010 77

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
6.12 Option 8: Long Distance Coach Service Initiatives
Option 8 is a package of long distance coach services across the study area. It comprises enhanced services on
the Mildura rail corridor between Ballarat - Mildura and Horsham – Mildura, as well as services on the Bendigo –
Sea Lake corridor.
6.12.1 Mildura – Ballarat corridor service
This initiative would provide an end-to-end corridor service similar to that offered on other public transport
corridors in the State.
In particular this would offer daytime services that are more convenient and attractive than the current night
services.
The coach service would use the high-quality coaches with improved on-board amenity, accessibility and comfort
described in section 6.3.2.
7 October 2010 78

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
Figure 35: Schematic map of Mildura – Ballarat coach service (Option Eight)
Indicative Service Plan
The concept services have been developed in order to enable, where possible, small-scale Transport
Connections Program-style initiatives to dovetail with them. These could be through access to school buses for
non-students or the use of school buses in downtime (see section 6.13.4).
The concept services are also designed to complement existing services such as the Donald – Ballarat via
Maryborough service.
Rail connections at Ballarat are generally to and from Ararat train services, which are reserved services and have
numerous other connections available from them.
7 October 2010 79

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
Time has been provided at Ouyen for driver fatigue management and customer refreshments.
Table 41: Indicative service plan – Ballarat – Mildura service
MELBOURNE
(Southern Cross)
Daily
TRAIN
Daily
TRAIN
dep 08:10 12:08
BALLARAT Stn arr 09:35 13:34
COACH
COACH
Ballarat Stn dep 09:55 13:55
Learmonth 10:21 14:21
Waubra 10:28 14:28
Lexton 10:38 14:38
Avoca . . 10:55 14:55
Tanwood
(Moonambel T/o)
11:05 15:05
Redbank 11:15 15:15
Stuart Mill 11:25 15:25
St Arnaud . . 11:45 15:45
DONALD . . 12:20 16:20
Watchem . . 12:45 16:45
Birchip . . 13:05 17:05
Woomelang . . 13:40 17:40
Speed . . 14:10 18:10
Tempy . . 14:15 18:15
Ouyen Stn . . 14:40 18:40
Ouyen arr 14:45 18:45
Ouyen dep 15:15 19:15
Hattah . . 15:45 19:45
Red Cliffs Stn . . 16:18 20:18
Irymple . . 16:25 20:25
MILDURA Stn arr 16:40 20:40
Daily Daily
COACH COACH
MILDURA Stn dep 06:15 10:35
Irymple . . 06:30 10:50
Red Cliffs Stn . . 06:35 10:55
Hattah . . 07:10 11:30
Ouyen arr 07:40 12:00
Ouyen dep 08:10 12:30
Ouyen Stn . . 08:15 12:35
Tempy . . 08:40 13:00
Speed . . 08:45 13:05
Woomelang . . 09:15 13:35
Birchip . . 09:50 14:10
Watchem . . 10:05 14:25
DONALD dep 10:30 14:50
St Arnaud . . 11:00 15:20
Stuart Mill 11:20 15:40
Redbank 11:30 15:50
Tanwood
(Moonambel T/o)
11:40 16:00
Avoca . . 11:50 16:10
Lexton 12:10 16:30
Waubra 12:20 16:40
Learmonth 12:30 16:50
BALLARAT Stn arr 13:00 17:20
TRAIN TRAIN
Ballarat Stn dep 13:12 17:57
MELBOURNE
(Southern Cross)
arr 14:27 19:33
Specific Service Planning Issues
The proposed coach services operate directly from St Arnaud to Ballarat via Avoca, rather than via the rail
corridor to Maryborough. This has a number of advantages:
It introduces new services for small settlements in Pyrenees Shire, and improved services at Lexton,
Waubra and Learmonth;
Shorter journey time to Ballarat; and
As a result of the shorter journey times, there are better opportunities to connect with other coach services at
Ouyen and St Arnaud.
The additional services would be expected to further reduce demand for the existing low patronage Ouyen service
as they would offer a more direct service towards Ballarat.
6.12.2 Northern Mallee service
This opportunity provides local day return access to Mildura, the closest major city to the communities of the
northern part of the rail corridor.
Description
A daily service between Horsham and Mildura, timetabled to provide a day return to Mildura for smaller
communities on the northern part of the Mildura rail corridor.
7 October 2010 80

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
Figure 36: Schematic map of Northern Mallee service (Option 8)
7 October 2010 81

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
Indicative Service Plan
Table 42: Indicative service plan: Horsham - Mildura service
Daily
Coach
Horsham 06:45
Woomelang 08:40
Speed 09:10
Tempy 09:15
Ouyen 09:40
Hattah 10:40
Red Cliffs Stn 11:13
Irymple 11:20
MILDURA Stn 11:35
Daily
Coach
MILDURA Stn 16:10
Irymple 16:25
Red Cliffs Stn 16:30
Hattah 17:05
Ouyen Stn 17:35
Tempy 18:00
Speed 18:05
Woomelang 18:35
Horsham 20:30
6.12.3 Overnight service – Saturday night
This opportunity would simplify the overnight service by ensuring it runs every night. Weekend patronage on
services via Swan Hill is strong, suggesting that demand on Saturdays may not be as weak as in the past.
The coach service would use the high-quality coaches with improved on-board amenity, accessibility and comfort
described in section 6.3.2.
Description
Operate the overnight service on Saturday nights.
Indicative Service Plan
The current overnight service plan would apply.
6.12.4 Sea Lake – Bendigo (Calder Highway route)
The Sea Lake – Bendigo service currently does not have a Saturday service. Adding a Saturday service would fill
in this gap on a day when people travel to visit friends and family and attend events.
Total Estimated Cost
An estimated 26 stops on the Sea Lake route and 38 stops on the Ballarat – Mildura route (including four pairs of
new stops on the Sunraysia Highway) would need to be upgraded. The total estimated capital cost, at $20,000
per stop plus contingency, is $1.66 million.
The total estimated recurrent cost (including an annual cost for new coaches and contingency) for the above
initiatives is $2.65 million per year, as shown in Table 43.
Table 43: Estimated cost of Option 8
Cost Estimates Recurrent Cost
Horsham - Mildura $674,871.20
Mildura – Ballarat $1,809,276.71
Sea Lake - Bendigo $49,200.70
Mildura – Melbourne $113,952.10
Totals $2,647,300.71
Cost item
Capital Cost
Coach stop upgrades $1,664,000
7 October 2010 82

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
6.13 Option 9: Short Distance Bus Service Initiatives
This option comprises a number of smaller scale bus service initiatives. Similar to Option 8, it comprises a
package of individual services.
6.13.1 Donald - Bendigo
Bendigo is an important destination for communities along the southern half of the rail corridor.
It is proposed to upgrade the current Wednesday only Donald – Bendigo service with a new daily Donald –
Bendigo service.
Description
A daily Donald to Bendigo and return service.
Figure 37: Schematic map of Donald – Bendigo service (Option Nine)
7 October 2010 83

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
Indicative service plan
Table 44: Indicative service plan: Donald - Bendigo coach
Coach
Donald 8:00
St Arnaud 8:30
Emu 8:45
Bealiba 8:58
Dunolly 9:17
Tarnagulla 9:30
Newbridge 9:40
Bendigo 10:15
Coach
Bendigo 15:30
Newbridge 16:00
Tarnagulla 16:11
Dunolly 16:24
Bealiba 16:40
Emu 16:00
St Arnaud 17:10
Donald 17:40
6.13.2 Remote Area Bus: Birchip
Birchip is strategically located in the centre of the southern Mallee. From Birchip it is a similar distance to Swan
Hill and Horsham, and distant enough that regular access to these centres will always be problematic without a
dedicated public transport resource; they are too far to access in the down time of a school bus.
Birchip’s good road connections mean that smaller settlements in the wider region can also be served in a way
that utilises a vehicle efficiently.
An opportunity exists to consider packaging small-scale services in a way that would warrant a dedicated vehicle
that can then operate more flexibly than a school bus.
Description
The opportunity is to use a dedicated vehicle to provide a series of flexible and tailored services that link smaller
communities across the Southern Mallee to Horsham and Swan Hill.
Setting up a dedicated resource of this kind would allow more experimental approaches to service planning to be
considered. A more flexible approach to service delivery could include:
Flexible routes – e.g. diversions on request;
Flexible time of departure – e.g. based on bookings or requests; or
Flexible days of operation – e.g. selecting which route is served based on specific requests.
7 October 2010 84

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
Figure 38: Schematic map of area served by Remote Area Bus (Option Nine)
Indicative service plan
For example:
Three Birchip – Horsham services per week;
Two Birchip – Woomelang – Sea Lake – Swan Hill services per week, extending/replacing the current Sea
Lake – Swan Hill service;
7 October 2010 85

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
Two Birchip – Wycheproof – Lalbert – Swan Hill services per week, on a schedule that connects at
Wycheproof with the V/Line bus on the popular “Short Day” service plan (see section 3.4.7) 4 ;
6.13.3 Donald – Horsham
This service currently runs on Wednesdays and Thursdays. Provision of a Saturday service would provide access
to Horsham for residents of Donald, Minyip, Rupanyup and Murtoa.
Description
Provide a Saturday service on the route, primarily for access to social and recreational opportunities in Horsham.
Indicative service plan
Similar to the current Wednesday and Thursday service (see Appendix A).
6.13.4 Swan Hill – Tooleybuc
A regular bus service operates between Tooleybuc and Swan Hill. Option 4 proposes to provide a third daily
coach which would serve some of the intermediate communities such as Wood Wood and Nyah. This in turn may
permit a review of the local service to consider a more flexible route model.
Description
The opportunity is to use a different operational model in this particular region. The area between Nyah and Swan
Hill is relatively densely settled and many of the towns are not on the Murray Valley Highway. Introducing a more
flexible route structure, with diversion on booking, could broaden the appeal of the service.
Indicative service plan
There would be no change to the service plan.
6.13.5 Small scale initiatives
Under any of the public transport options identified elsewhere in the feasibility study, there are a number of
communities that would not be brought into the public transport network. Provision of a strengthened network of
principal services would permit the development of tailored services that can connect these smaller settlements to
the main network. For example, use of school buses could connect the Mallee Highway settlements to Milduraand
Melbourne-bound services at Ouyen.
In addition, there may also be specific and socially important needs that are not addressed by public transport
services even at greater frequencies.
Small scale and targeted services to meet local or specific needs are currently being developed under the banner
of the Transport Connections Program, and this element of Option Nine is intended to provide similar services.
Description
Settlements where a small scale initiative may be effective include:
The Mallee Highway towns of Murrayville, Underbool and Walpeup and associated localities;
The Millewa towns of Cullulleraine, Werrimull and Meringur;
Chinkapook, near Manangatang; and
Patchewollock (west of Speed).
These are some of the most isolated settlements in Victoria.
Indicative service plan
It is not possible to determine service plans for these kinds of services without detailed community engagement.
However, opportunities may include:
School bus access links between the Mallee Highway towns and Patchewollock to Ouyen for connections to
other services;
4 If adopted, this opportunity could permit the Sea Lake – Bendigo service to move to a consistent ‘Short Day’ timetable,
although further investigation and consultation would be desirable due to the loss of Melbourne access. Such a change is
beyond the scope of this investigation.
7 October 2010 86

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
School bus access between Chinkapook and Manangatang;
A new public transport TCP link to the Millewa on a demand-responsive model.
Total Estimated Cost
The total estimated cost for the above initiatives is $1.075 million per year, as shown in Table 45.
Table 45: Estimated cost of Option 9
Cost Estimates
TOTAL
Donald - Bendigo $304,749.46
Donald - Horsham $23,857.70
Birchip Flexible Bus $371,847.06
Transport Connections Projects $375,000.00
Totals $1,075,454.22
7 October 2010 87

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
7.0 Options Assessment
This chapter of the report outlines the findings of the social, environmental and economic appraisal of the nine
identified options for providing services to the study area. The appraisals have been undertaken consistent with
the framework outlined in the Transport Integration Act.
7.1 Social Impact Assessment
7.1.1 Introduction
A Social Impact Assessment (SIA) usually identifies the likely social impacts (both positive and negative) of a
proposal.
As defined by the International Association of Impact Assessment (IAIA),
Social impact assessment includes the processes of analysing, monitoring and managing the
intended and unintended social consequences, both positive and negative, of planned
interventions (policies, programs, plans, projects) and any social change processes invoked
by those interventions. Its primary purpose is to bring about a more sustainable and equitable
biophysical and human environment. (IAIA 2003)
The IAIA identified the following social impact variables, as a way to conceptualise social impacts.
The IAIA identified social impacts as changes to one or more of the following:
People’s way of life: that is, how they live, work, play and interact with one another on a day-to-day basis;
Their culture: that is, their shared beliefs, customs, values and language or dialect;
Their community: its cohesion, stability, character, services and facilities;
Their political systems: the extent to which people are able to participate in decisions that affect their lives,
the level of democratisation that is taking place, and the resources provided for this purpose;
Their environment: the quality of the air and water people use; the availability and quality of the food they
eat; the level of hazard or risk, dust and noise they are exposed to; the adequacy of sanitation, their physical
safety, and their access to and control over resources;
Their health and wellbeing: health is a state of complete physical, mental, social and spiritual wellbeing and
not merely the absence of disease or infirmity;
Their personal and property rights: particularly whether people are economically affected, or experience
personal disadvantage which may include a violation of their civil liberties; and
Their fears and aspirations: their perceptions about their safety, their fears about the future of their
community, and their aspirations for their future and the future of their children.
Transport infrastructure development or change can have a range of social impacts which can occur at both the
local and regional levels. Upgrading rail infrastructure can provide significant social benefits including improved
rail safety, accessibility and travel time savings. Negative social impacts may include reduced physical amenity
and access due to road closures or new rail reserves traversing areas not previously affected by transport
infrastructure. Psychological impacts may also result from rail upgrades, such as those associated with the effects
on valued places and loss of friendship networks. Changed rail access may also affect the sense of community
and place identity if the deeper social values and sentiments of residents are affected. This can lead to a long
term change in the community’s social capital and social networks.
Social impacts assessed usually include, but are not limited, to:
impacts on directly affected landowners where land acquisition would be required and adjacent landowners
where acquisition would not be required but where indirect effects may result such as reduction in amenity or
changes in local access;
the social benefits of the proposed project or program such as improvements in safety or accessibility;
identifying any community services and facilities that may be affected directly or by changes to access;
the long term benefits for existing and future local and regional communities.
7 October 2010 88

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
For each option, impacts would be identified along with measures that could be integrated into on-going planning,
design and delivery of the proposed projects to avoid or, if this is not possible, to reduce then mitigate any
residual adverse social impacts. In addition, suggestions to ensure that the positive social aspects of the
proposed options are communicated on an on-going basis would be identified.
7.1.2 Approach to options SIA
This SIA presents a comparative assessment of the options under consideration for the Mildura Rail Feasibility
Study relative to an agreed set of social and community criteria. The criteria have been derived from the principles
and objectives contained in the Transport Integration Act 2010 as well as from issues raised in the community
consultation and general principles related to community functioning and transport service delivery.
As this SIA is a ‘desk study’, it has been undertaken in a qualitative manner within a matrix-type format (see
below). Each of the options has been considered in relation to the criteria for the study area as a whole. The
implications of this approach are that options where social benefits are concentrated in only one community will
not score as well as an option that distributes the benefits more widely across the communities in the study area.
For example, Option 6 (extension of Maryborough train to St Arnaud) scores are affected by it benefiting only
Dunolly and St Arnaud.
7.1.3 Social impact assessment criteria
The following criteria were developed by AECOM based on general social considerations as well as knowledge of
the options and the study area. The draft criteria were reviewed and agreed by the Department of Transport.
Three broad categories of potential social impact – access, equity and social amenity – were identified then a
range of ‘indicators’ developed as a means by which the potential performance of each option could be tested.
The definition of each indicator is set out below.
Table 46: Definitions used for social impact assessment
Indicator
ACCESS
Same day access to major
regional centres
Same day access to
regional service centres
Access to Melbourne
Luggage (including
bicycles)
Flexibility
Performance
Capacity enhancement
Community links and
Networks
Ease of travel
Group travel
EQUITY
Reduced mobility
Definition
How well does the option allow for same day access at ‘reasonable hours’ 5 to either
Ballarat or Bendigo
How well does the option allow for same day access at ‘reasonable hours’ to one of
Horsham, Swan Hill or Mildura
How well does the option allow for access to Melbourne at ‘reasonable hours’
How well does the option allow for ease of handing/carriage of luggage and special
freight such as bicycles
How well is the option able to be scheduled and rescheduled to meet changing or
specific community needs
How well is the option able to be delivered punctually and reliably
How well can the option respond to increasing patronage in a manner that responds
to transport need
How well does the option link wider communities of interest and social and transport
networks across the study area
How well does the option avoid the need to transfer and interchange
How well does the option enable large groups (e.g. schools) to travel together
How accessible is the option to people with reduced mobility but who do not use
mobility aids
Mobility aid users How accessible is the option to people using a standard mobility aid 6
Special users
Other equity issues
Cost
Geographic
How accessible is the option to people using a non-standard mobility aid
Is the option accessible regardless of age, ethnicity, culture, or gender
How accessible is the option to persons of low income
How equitably is the option distributed in the study area How well does the option
serve all parts of the study area
5 Based on community consultation, ‘reasonable hours’ were considered to be a departure after 6 am and a return arrival before 9 pm.
6 http://www.metlinkmelbourne.com.au/accessible-transport/mobility-aid-specifications/
7 October 2010 89

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
Indicator
Intergenerational
SOCIAL AMENITY
Land acquisition
Landscape issues
Personal safety/security
Ride comfort
Information
Personal comfort
Community engagement
Definition
How well does the option maintain the ability of future generations to meet their
transport needs
To what extent does the option impact on private land or public land not currently
included in an existing road or rail reserve
How well does the option integrate into the existing urban, town and rural
landscape
How well does the option provide personal safety/security on board and at stops
How well does the option provide space to move around onboard
How well can the option be supported with static and real-time information
How well does the option provide access to toilets and refreshments
How well does the option allow community engagement, operation or participation
in delivery or management
Most indicators are assessed in a qualitative sense on a five-point scale (very well, well, moderate, poorly, very
poorly) to assist in the comparative assessment of options. In some cases, the assessment is ‘yes or no’ (for
absolute measures). In Table 46 below, the five point scale is shown using squares to provide an immediate
visual summary of scores.
Some measures are included to demonstrate that some aspects of social impact are not mode or option-specific
and, to be comprehensive, all modes will be noted as being compliant with access requirements for suitable
mobility aids.
7.1.4 Summary of social impact results
Table 47 summarises the evaluation of the social impact assessment, with detailed assessment provided in Table
48.
Highlighted results include:
The short-haul (local) bus services received the highest score, chiefly because of their ability to enable day
return travel to major regional centres and regional service centres;
The fast passenger rail service has the highest score of the rail options, but was only two points higher
overall than a slow daytime service (note that substituting a tilt train for the defined option would improve the
social impact by reducing the land acquisition impact).
The long-haul coach package scored equally well as the fast passenger service but in different areas.
Although it had slightly lower access scores than fast rail, it scored slightly higher in both equity and social
amenity areas;
The long-haul coach package scored higher than the daytime and overnight train. It was assessed as
providing better access but with marginally lower equity and social amenity outcomes.
The worst performing option overall was considered to be the day train to St Arnaud with connecting coach.
This was largely due to being scored the lowest on the access criteria. Its disadvantages compared to other
options were that it combined the lack of day return travel options to a major regional centre, the
inconvenience of transfers to access larger centres like Ballarat, and the lack of flexibility of a rail-based
option.
Access scores ranged from 26 to 38 points, equity scores ranged from 22 to 25 points, and social amenity
scores ranged from 27 to 30 points. This spread indicates that all options have overall similar equity and
social amenity results – the differences between the options are mainly in passenger amenity and
geographic distribution of outcomes. However, the access provided by the options varied significantly.
It should be noted that the long-haul coach package scores well because of the assumption that high quality
coaches, as described in section 6.3.2, are provided. If these coaches were not provided, the service would score
lower on scores related to reduced mobility, mobility aid users, ride comfort and personal comfort.
7 October 2010 90

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
Table 47: Summary of social impact appraisal
Indicator
Options
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Overnight
passenger rail
service
Daytime
passenger rail
service
Fast passenger
rail service
Swan Hill – Mildura
extension of
passenger rail
Long Distance Coach
Service Initiatives
Additional train and
connecting coach
on Swan Hill
corridor
Extension of
Maryborough
train service to
St Arnaud
Melbourne – St
Arnaud train
service with
connecting St
Arnaud – Mildura
coach
Short Distance Bus Service
Initiatives
ACCESS
Same day access to major regional
centres
Same day access to regional
service centres
Access to Melbourne
Luggage (including bicycles)
Flexibility
Performance
Capacity enhancement
Community links and networks
Ease of travel
Group travel
Subtotal on access criteria 28 29 36 31 31 30 25 34 38
EQUITY
Reduced mobility
Mobility aid users
Special users
Other equity issues
Cost (low income accessibility)
Geographic spread
Intergenerational - - - - - - - - -
Subtotal on equity criteria 25 25 23 22 24 24 24 24 25
SOCIAL AMENITY
Land acquisition
Landscape issues
Personal safety/security
Ride comfort
Information
Personal comfort
Community engagement
Subtotal on social amenity
29 30 27 27 26 30 30 28 27
criteria
Overall Total (rank) 82 (6) 84 (=4) 86 (=2) 80 (8) 81 (7) 84 (=4) 79 (9) 86 (=2) 90 (1)
7 October 2010 91

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
Table 48: Detailed qualitative assessment of social impact
Indicator Definition Options
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Overnight
passenger rail
service
Daytime passenger
rail service
Fast passenger rail
service
Swan Hill – Mildura
extension of
passenger rail
Extension of
Maryborough train
service to St Arnaud
Long Distance
Coach Service
Initiatives
Additional train and
connecting coach
on Swan Hill
corridor
Melbourne – St
Arnaud train service
with connecting St
Arnaud – Mildura
coach
Short Distance Bus
Service Initiatives
ACCESS
Same day
access to
major regional
centres
Same day
access to
regional
service centres
Access to
Melbourne
Luggage (inc.
bicycles)
Flexibility
Performance
How well does the
option allow for
same day access
at ‘reasonable
hours’ to either
Ballarat or Bendigo
for the community
in the rail corridor
How well does the
option allow for
same day access
at ‘reasonable
hours’ to one of
Horsham, Swan
Hill or Mildura for
the community in
the rail corridor
How well does the
option allow for
access to
Melbourne at
‘reasonable hours’
How well does the
option allow for
ease of
handing/carriage of
luggage and
special freight such
as bicycles
How well is the
option able to be
scheduled and
rescheduled to
meet changing or
specific community
needs
How well is the
option able to be
delivered
punctually and
reliably
Poorly – train would
arrive in Ballarat early
in the morning and
depart late at night.
Poorly – departs
Mildura late at night
and arrives Mildura in
early morning
Poorly – departs
Melbourne late at
night (2105) and
arrives Melbourne in
early morning (0620)
Well -depending on
rolling stock used
Very poorly – see
Scheduling issues
Moderate – see
Scheduling issues.
Also depends on
rolling stock used
Poorly – train would
arrive in Ballarat in
the afternoon and
depart in the morning
so same day trip
to/from Mildura could
not be made.
Poorly – service
would arrive in
Mildura in the evening
and departs in
morning.
Moderate – arrives
Melbourne mid
afternoon (1536) and
departs mid morning
(0935)
Well -depending on
rolling stock used
Very poorly – see
Scheduling issues
Moderate – see
Scheduling issues.
Also depends on
rolling stock used
Very well – train
would arrive in
Ballarat late morning
and depart late
afternoon
Poorly – service
would be fast but
would arrive in
Mildura in evening
and departs in
morning.
Very well – arrives
Melbourne early
afternoon (1246) and
departs late afternoon
(1605).
Offers day return.
Well - depending on
rolling stock used
Moderate-well
depending on rail
track alignment and
operational
independence
Moderate-well – see
above
Very well – would add
an additional daily
service to provide
three services daily to
Bendigo
Very well – would add
an additional daily
service to provide
three services daily to
Swan Hill and Mildura
Very well – would add
an additional daily
service to provide
three services daily to
and from Melbourne.
Moderate – requires
mode transfer at
Swan Hill
Well – three services
daily provides
reasonable flexibility
Moderate – see
Scheduling issues
Poorly– would not
serve communities in
rail corridor
Poorly - see above
Moderate – departs
mid morning to arrive
early evening.
Well - depending on
rolling stock used
Moderate/poorly –
see Service planning
Issues
Poorly – only
improves accessibility
for residents of St
Arnaud
Poorly – does not link
to any of the defined
regional service
centres
Moderate – very
suitable for St Arnaud
and Dunolly but does
not serve other
communities on
corridor
Well - depending on
rolling stock used
Moderate/poorly –
see Service planning
Issues
Poorly – service
would arrive from
Mildura in Ballarat
mid afternoon but
depart mid morning
Poorly – Mildura
connection arrives in
Mildura in evening
and departs in
morning.
Moderate – service
departs in morning
and arrives early
evening.
Moderate – requires
coach transfer at St
Arnaud station
Moderate/poorly –
see Service planning
Issues
See above See above Moderate – see
Scheduling issues.
Also depends on
rolling stock used
Poorly– does not
allow for a day return
in Ballarat
Moderate – provides
access to Mildura to
northern Mallee
communities.
Well – arrives
Melbourne early
afternoon (1427) and
departs early morning
(0810). Choice of
services.
Well - assumes
coaches as described
in this report.
Well – train
connections can be
reviewed as required
Very well – not
dependent on paths
through rail network in
metro Melbourne
Well – offers local
daytime services
Well – offers local
daytime services
Not applicable – not
intended to provide
services to
Melbourne.
Well – local service
not intended to
handle a lot of
luggage.
Very Well – potential
to operate flexibly to
meet community
needs
Very well – not
dependent on paths
through rail network in
metro Melbourne
7 October 2010 92

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
Indicator Definition Options
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Overnight
passenger rail
service
Daytime passenger
rail service
Fast passenger rail
service
Swan Hill – Mildura
extension of
passenger rail
Extension of
Maryborough train
service to St Arnaud
Long Distance
Coach Service
Initiatives
Additional train and
connecting coach
on Swan Hill
corridor
Melbourne – St
Arnaud train service
with connecting St
Arnaud – Mildura
coach
Short Distance Bus
Service Initiatives
Capacity
enhancement
Community
links and
networks
Ease of travel
Group travel
EQUITY
Reduced
mobility
Mobility aid
users
Special users
Other equity
issues
How well can the
option respond to
increasing
patronage in a
manner that
responds to
transport need
How well does the
option link wider
communities of
interest and social
and transport
networks across
the study area
How well does the
option avoid the
need to transfer
and interchange
How well does the
option enable large
groups (e.g.
schools) to travel
together
How accessible is
the option to
people with
reduced mobility
but who do not use
mobility aids
How accessible is
the option to
people using a
standard mobility
aid 7
How accessible is
the option to
people using a
non-standard
mobility aid
Is the option
accessible
regardless of age,
ethnicity, culture, or
gender
Moderate – initially
longer trains, subject
to rolling stock
availability.
Moderate - beyond
rail corridor.
Well along rail
corridor.
Very well depending
on booking
arrangement and cost
structure
Moderate – initially
longer trains, subject
to rolling stock
availability.
Moderate - beyond
rail corridor.
Well along rail
corridor.
Very well depending
on booking
arrangement and cost
structure
Moderate – initially
longer trains, subject
to rolling stock
availability.
Moderate - beyond
rail corridor.
Well along rail
corridor.
Very well depending
on booking
arrangement and cost
structure
Good Good Very good –assumes
state of the art access
provision on newly
designed rolling stock
compared to existing
stock equivalents on
other rail options
Moderate. Some
capability but not
designed to
accommodate nonstandard
aids.
Yes.
Moderate. Some
capability but not
designed to
accommodate nonstandard
aids.
Moderate. Some
capability but not
designed to
accommodate nonstandard
aids.
Moderate – initially
longer trains, subject
to rolling stock
availability.
Moderate - beyond
rail corridor.
Moderate – mode
change required at
Swan Hill
Well depending on
booking arrangement
and cost structure
Moderate –
depending on access
to and from coaches
Moderate – initially
longer trains, subject
to rolling stock
availability.
Moderate - beyond
rail corridor.
Well along rail
corridor.
Very well depending
on booking
arrangement and cost
structure
Moderate – initially
longer trains, subject
to rolling stock
availability.
Moderate - beyond
rail corridor.
Well along rail
corridor.
Very well depending
on booking
arrangement and cost
structure
Moderate – initially
longer trains, subject
to rolling stock
availability.
Moderate - beyond
rail corridor.
Moderate – mode
change required at St
Arnaud
Very well depending
on booking
arrangement and cost
structure
Good Good Moderate –
depending on access
to and from coaches
All modes will comply with Disability Standards for Accessible Public Transport
Poor – coaches
unlikely to
accommodate nonstandard
aids.
Moderate. Some
capability but not
designed to
accommodate nonstandard
aids.
Moderate. Some
capability but not
designed to
accommodate nonstandard
aids.
Poor – coaches
unlikely to
accommodate nonstandard
aids.
Well – additional
capacity can be
provided as additional
service, providing
more choice
Well – choice of travel
options enables better
intertown links
Very well – no mode
change required
Well depending on
booking arrangement
and cost structure
Moderate –
depending on access
to and from coaches
Poor – coaches
unlikely to
accommodate nonstandard
aids.
Well – additional
capacity can be
provided as additional
service, providing
more choice
Very well – includes
links between
corridors
Very well – no mode
change required
Well depending on
booking arrangement
and cost structure
Moderate –
depending on access
to and from buses
Poor – coaches
unlikely to
accommodate nonstandard
aids.
7 http://www.metlinkmelbourne.com.au/accessible-transport/mobility-aid-specifications/
7 October 2010 93

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
Indicator Definition Options
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Overnight
passenger rail
service
Daytime passenger
rail service
Fast passenger rail
service
Swan Hill – Mildura
extension of
passenger rail
Extension of
Maryborough train
service to St Arnaud
Long Distance
Coach Service
Initiatives
Additional train and
connecting coach
on Swan Hill
corridor
Melbourne – St
Arnaud train service
with connecting St
Arnaud – Mildura
coach
Short Distance Bus
Service Initiatives
Cost
Geographic
Intergeneration
al
How accessible is
the option to
persons of low
income
How equitably is
the option
distributed in the
study area How
well does the
option serve all
parts of the study
area
How well does the
option maintain the
ability of future
generations to
meet their transport
needs
SOCIAL AMENITY
Land
To what extent
acquisition does the option
avoid impact on
private land or
public land not
currently included
in an existing road
or rail reserve
Landscape
issues
How well does the
option integrate
into the existing
urban, town and
rural landscape
Good, assuming current fare policy equivalent
across modes applies
Moderate – serves
corridor townships
with stations only.
Moderate – serves
corridor townships
with stations only.
Poor. High speed
service may warrant
higher market-based
fares
Moderate – serves
corridor townships
with stations only.
Good, assuming current fare policy equivalent across modes applies
Poor – serves only a
small part of the study
area
(Not assessed - will be largely addressed through economic and environmental assessment)
Very well – would be
largely contained
within existing rail
corridor
Moderate to well as
existing corridor
currently used for rail
freight services
Very well – would be
largely contained
within existing rail
corridor
Well - existing
corridor currently
used for rail freight
services.
Poorly - High impact
in sections where new
alignment required
Well – assuming
purpose-designed
corridor
Very well – would be
largely contained
within existing rail and
road corridor
Well as existing rail
corridor currently
used for rail freight
and passenger
services and road
service uses Murray
Valley Highway
Poor – serves only a
small part of the study
area
Poorly - High impact
in sections where new
alignment required
Well/very well where
new alignment can be
planned to integrate
with landscape setting
and potentially
bypass smaller
settlements
Poor – serves only a
small part of the study
area
Very well – would be
largely contained
within existing rail
corridor
Moderate to well as
existing corridor
currently used for rail
freight services
Well – serves
communities along
corridor including
many of those without
stations
Very well – would be
largely contained
within existing rail and
road corridor
Well as existing rail
corridor currently
used for rail freight
and passenger
services and road
service uses Calder
Highway
Well – serves wider
Mallee communities
including those not on
rail corridor.
Very well - would be
contained in existing
road
corridor/carriageway
Very Well as existing
road service uses
Calder Highway
Very well – includes
flexible links that can
provide extensive
coverage
Very well - would be
contained in existing
road
corridor/carriageway
Very Well as existing
road service uses
Calder Highway
Personal
safety/
security
How well does the
option provide
personal
safety/security on
board and at
stops
Well – may depend
on staffing. Night-time
service has added
safety issues
Very well – may
depend on staffing
Very well – may
depend on staffing
Very well – may
depend on staffing
Very well – may
depend on staffing
Very well – may
depend on staffing
Very well – may
depend on staffing
Very well – may
depend on staffing
Very well – may
depend on staffing
7 October 2010 94

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
Indicator Definition Options
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Overnight
passenger rail
service
Daytime passenger
rail service
Fast passenger rail
service
Swan Hill – Mildura
extension of
passenger rail
Extension of
Maryborough train
service to St Arnaud
Long Distance
Coach Service
Initiatives
Additional train and
connecting coach
on Swan Hill
corridor
Melbourne – St
Arnaud train service
with connecting St
Arnaud – Mildura
coach
Short Distance Bus
Service Initiatives
Ride comfort
Information
Personal
Comfort
Community
engagement
How well does the
option provide
space to move
around onboard
How well can the
option be
supported with
static and real-time
information
How well does the
option provide
access to toilets
and refreshments
How well does the
option allow
community
engagement,
operation or
participation in
delivery or
management
Very well Very well Very well Very well on train.
Moderate/well on
coach depending on
vehicle type
Well – existing
technology available
Very well re toilets.
Potentially very well
re refreshments
depending on how
serviced
Poor – provided by
central agency.
Well – existing
technology available
Very well re toilets.
Potentially very well
re refreshments
depending on how
serviced
Poor – provided by
central agency.
Very well – assumes
state of the art rolling
stock
Very well re toilets.
Potentially very well
re refreshments
depending on how
serviced
Poor – provided by
central agency.
Moderately –
technology exists but
not currently deployed
on coaches
Very well on trains for
both facilities. Well on
coaches for both
facilities
Poor – provided by
central agency.
Very well Very well Well (based on
assumed coach type)
Well – depending on
age and other
aspects of rolling
stock
Very well re toilets.
Potentially very well
re refreshments
depending on how
serviced
Poor – provided by
central agency.
Well – existing
technology available
Very well re toilets.
Potentially very well
re refreshments
depending on how
serviced
Poor – provided by
central agency.
Moderate to Well –
existing technology
available
Very well re toilets.
Potentially very well
re refreshments
depending on how
serviced
Poor – provided by
central agency.
Well (based on
assumed coach type)
Moderately –
technology exists but
not currently deployed
on coaches
Well re toilets.
Potentially very well
re refreshments
depending on how
serviced
Poor – provided by
central agency.
Well (based on
assumed coach type)
Moderately –
technology exists but
not currently deployed
on these types of
services
Very poorly – limited
potential for these
facilities on local
buses
Well – opportunities
for community
operation or
management and
demand -
responsiveness
7 October 2010 95

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
7.2 Environmental Appraisal
The Options being investigated give rise to two major possible environmental impacts:
Greenhouse gas emissions will change because of the introduction of additional public transport services.
The new services have gross emissions associated with them. Where the new services attract customers
from other modes or replace existing public transport trips, then there is a net impact that may be a reduction
in total emissions.
Regional or long-distance public transport in Australia is generally provided to address transport need that
otherwise goes unaddressed. Accordingly, a significant proportion of patronage on regional public transport
services is likely to be new travel rather than mode shift.
New rail alignments are likely to impact on remnant native vegetation. The Option 5 alignment proposed
through Robinvale in particular may impact on the red gum forests of the Murray Valley that have recently
been reserved as national parks, as well as on other native vegetation; the Option 5 alignment via Ouyen
and the high speed line would be most likely to impact on mallee vegetation.
These impacts are described in this section.
7.2.1 Green House Gas Assessment
Scope of emissions
This assessment identifies the direct emissions associated with the combustion of fuel which occurs during the
operation of the transport modes being considered. This is a function of the frequency at which different modes of
transport operate, the distance being travelled by each transport type, and their particular rates of fuel
consumption. Scope 1 emissions (i.e. direct emissions) are greenhouse gases emitted from sources within the
boundary of a facility and as a result of that facility’s activities (National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting
Regulations 2008). Scope 1 emissions considered in this study are generated from the combustion of liquid
transport fuels. They are calculated based on an average rate of fuel combustion on a given route (i.e. will not
account for stops and starts or variations in vehicle speed).
It is recognised that there would be construction activities associated with a number of the proposed options;
however, these will not be considered as part of this study, as these works are not sufficiently defined in a
feasibility study to be able to accurately evaluate them.
Changes in indirect emissions will not be considered as part of this assessment. Indirect emissions include Scope
2 emissions (from the production of electricity, heating, cooling or steam that a facility consumes, but do not form
part of the facility) and Scope 3 emissions (generated in the wider economy as a consequence of a facility’s
activities, which are physically produced by another facility). It is acknowledged that aspects of a transport
service, such as station lighting, are a source of these emissions; however, as a simplifying assumption it has
been assumed that the total impacts of station-related emissions and coach stop related emissions are equivalent
and thus do not distinguish between the options.
In addition to calculating the operational emissions associated with the different transport options, the changes in
emissions expected to occur as a result of shifts in behaviour following the implementation of t different transport
options will be estimated.
Methodology
The methodology includes the following key stages:
Determination of emission factors or energy content associated with the different types of transport fuel;
changes in the volume of fuel which is expected to occur as a result of different transport options being
implemented (based on changes in expected patronage or scheduled services); and changes in behaviour
(e.g. mode shift) which may occur.
Apply the methodology for calculating GHG emissions under the National Greenhouse and Energy
Reporting (NGER) Act 2007, specifically the NGER (Measurement) Determination 2008. Although the
NGER Act relates to greenhouse and energy reporting obligations, the methodology used to calculate GHG
emissions under the NGER Act is a useful and appropriate tool for calculating GHG emissions for a study of
this kind.
7 October 2010 96

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
Calculate the greenhouse gas emissions using a spreadsheet based on data such as the volume of fuel
combusted, kilometres travelled due to increased patronage or additional services being scheduled, or the
expected impacts of modal shifts.
Greenhouse gases are assessed in units of tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (t CO2-e), which includes the
following six greenhouse gases:
Results
Carbon Dioxide
Methane
Nitrous Oxide
Perfluorocarbons
Hydrofluorocarbons
Sulphur Hexafluoride.
The greenhouse gas assessment suggests that none of the Options result in a net reduction in transport related
emissions. This is attributed to the relatively low modal shift achieved from cars. It should be noted that cars are
operating in uncongested conditions where their fuel efficiency is good.
On the basis of these results, greenhouse emissions are minimised by adopting option 7. Option 5 and Option 8
are the next best options for minimising greenhouse emissions.
Table 49: Summary of greenhouse gas emissions
Option 1
Option 2
Option 3
Option 4
Option 5 via
Robinvale
Option 5 via Ouyen
Option 6
Option 7
Option 8
Option 9
Gross emissions (Net t CO2-e p.a.) Net emissions
2668 2148
2668 2640
3314 2887
2058 1971
1247 824
1348 997
1675 1637
1415 227
947 902
349 349
It has been assumed that the Option 9 services (short-distance buses) do not attract any car users; other mode
shift estimates are based on generalised cost modelling (see 7.3.1).
7.2.2 Ecological Assessment
Option 3 (fast rail via Ballarat) and the two routes in Option 5 (extension of rail from Swan Hill to Mildura) may
have significant ecological impacts due to the amount of new construction required. The ecological impact of
these options has been assessed.
7.2.2.1 Methods
The ecological assessment was conducted at a strategic level rather than at a detailed scale. A desktop
assessment was conducted to ascertain the significant ecological characteristics of each of the Mildura Rail
alignment options.
7 October 2010 97

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
The aim of the desktop assessment was to identify key ecological issues for assessment regarding the feasibility
of the alignment options, including:
The likelihood of occurrence and potential impacts on Commonwealth matters of National Environmental
Significance (NES) within the vicinity of the alignments, as listed under the Commonwealth Environment
Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act)
The likelihood of occurrence of threatened terrestrial and aquatic flora and fauna of State significance
(Victoria and NSW)
The extent and quality of native vegetation within the vicinity of the alignments that may require removal and
compliance with National and State legislative and policy instruments, such as the Commonwealth EPBC Act,
the NSW Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 (TSC Act), the NSW Native Vegetation Act 2003 (NV
Act) and the Victorian Native Vegetation Framework policy (the Framework)
The presence of Sites of Biological Significance (biosites)
The occurrence of relevant Local Government Planning Scheme Environmental Overlays, such as Vegetation
Protection Overlays, Environmental Significance Overlays and Significant Landscape Overlays.
In order to understand potential ecological values within the alignments an appraisal of Commonwealth, Victorian
and NSW biodiversity resources was conducted.
Resources examined include:
The Department of Environment, Water Heritage and Arts (DEWHA) EPBC Act Map Search Tool was used to
identify the potential occurrence of matters of NES. As relevant to this ecological assessment these matters
include threatened species and ecological communities, migratory species and Ramsar wetlands of
international importance
The Victorian Department of Sustainability and Environment (DSE) biodiversity database, including data
from:
- State significant flora species recorded in the Flora Information System (FIS
- State significant fauna species recorded in the Atlas of Victorian Wildlife (AVW)
- Modelled mapping of Ecological Vegetation Classes (EVCs)
- The Biosites register
NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service Atlas of NSW Wildlife (administered by DECCW).
The NSW Biometric Tool
The NSW Vegetation Classification and Assessment (NSWVCA) (Benson, Allen, Togher and Lemmon,
2008).
Aerial imagery available from Google Earth
Overlap exists between Commonwealth and State, and within State conservation legislation. Therefore some
communities and species are listed under multiple legislative instruments. All relevant legislative limitations and
requirements have been considered in assessing the feasibility of the Mildura Rail alignment options.
Limitations
The following limitations to these methods have been identified:
This assessment is not based on any field assessment or field verified data.
7 October 2010 98

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
7.2.2.2 Results
This section describes the results of the preliminary ecology assessment.
Ecosystem types are generally dictated by landscape elements, such as soils, topography and climate, which can
lead to significant variation on a bioregional scale. This ecosystem variation directs vegetation community types
and hence fauna habitats throughout the broader regional landscape. The Mildura Rail Feasibility Study spans
approximately 400 km, from Mildura in the north to Ballarat and Bendigo in the south, and interacts with the
various ecosystems along its path.
7.2.2.2.1 Option 3 (Fast rail via Ballarat)
Commonwealth
A search of the EPBC Act Protected Matters Search Tool has indicated a suite of Matters of National
Environmental Significance (NES) have the potential to occur within 5 km of the Option 3 alignment. These
matters are listed in Table 50.
Table 50: Commonwealth Matters of National Environmental Significance
Matter of NES
Number of Occurrences
World Heritage Properties -
National Heritage Places 1
Wetlands of International Significance (Ramsar Sites) 11
Commonwealth Marine Areas -
Threatened Ecological Communities 4
Threatened Species 47
Migratory Species 22
The Eureka Stockade Gardens is listed as a National Heritage Place and occurs within the vicinity of the Option 3
alignment option but is not planned to be affected by any of the Mildura Rail Options and is not discussed further.
Threatened Ecological Communities identified as potentially occurring within 5 km of the Option 3 alignment
option are listed in Table 51. These communities are recognised on a national basis to be threatened by extinction
and survival-dependent on active conservation.
Table 51: Commonwealth listed Threatened Ecological Communities associated with the Option 3 alignment
Threatened Ecological Community
Buloke Woodlands of the Riverina and Murray-Darling Depression Bioregions
Grassy Eucalypt Woodland of the Victorian Volcanic Plain
Grey Box (Eucalyptus microcarpa) Grassy Woodlands and Derived Native
Grasslands of South-eastern Australia
Natural Temperate Grassland of the Victorian Volcanic Plain
Conservation Status
Endangered
Critically Endangered
Endangered
Critically Endangered
Nationally listed threatened flora and fauna species identified within 5 km of the Option 3 alignment are provided
in summary in Table 52. These results are detailed in Appendix J.
Potential habitat for these species exists within the study area. Where further consideration is afforded to the
Option 3 alignment, further investigations would be required to determine the potential impacts to these species
and their potential habitats.
7 October 2010 99

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
Table 52: Nationally Listed Threatened Species
Threatened Species (total species) Conservation Status and Number
Critically Endangered Endangered Vulnerable
Birds (7) - 3 4
Frogs (1) - - 1
Mammals (2) - 1 1
Ray-finned Fishes (0) - - -
Reptiles (1) - 1 -
Invertebrates (1) 1 - -
Plants (14) - 7 7
Potential habitat for 19 nationally listed Migratory species (protected under the EPBC Act and JAMBA, CAMBA
and/or ROKAMBA) also occurs in the study area and would also warrant further investigations.
Victoria
Plant Communities
Searches indicate the potential occurrence of 94 plant communities recognised as Ecological Vegetation Classes
(EVCs) across seven Bioregions within 5 km of the Option 3 alignment. Of these EVCs, forty-seven are listed as
Endangered, seventeen are listed as Vulnerable, sixteen as Depleted and thirteen listed as Least Concern.
Within the Victorian Volcanic Plain Bioregion, twenty EVCs have been found to potentially occur within 5 km of the
rail alignment. Three of these have a Bioregional Conservation Significance of Vulnerable, two are listed as
Depleted and fifteen are listed as Endangered:
Swamp Scrub
Plains Grassy Woodland
Floodplain Riparian Woodland
Creekline Grassy Woodland
Wetland Formation
Grassy Woodland/Alluvial Terraces Herb-rich Woodland Mosaic
Swampy Riparian Woodland
Plains Grassy Wetland
Creekline Herb-rich Woodland
Grassy Woodland
Riparian Woodland
Plains Sedgy Wetland
Plains Woodland
Stream Bank Shrubland
Scoria Cone Woodland
Within the Central Victorian Uplands Bioregion, eleven EVCs were detected as occurring within 5 km of the
option. Two Vulnerable and three Depleted EVCs were found to be within 5 km of the alignment, as well as six
Endangered EVCs:
Plains Grassy Woodland
Creekline Grassy Woodland
Grassy Woodland/Alluvial Terraces Herb-rich Woodland Mosaic
Swampy Riparian Woodland
Grassy Woodland
Riparian Woodland
Within the Goldfields Bioregion, eighteen EVCs were found to potentially occur within 5 km of the alignment.
These include eight communities listed as Endangered:
Plains Grassy Woodland
Floodplain Riparian Woodland
7 October 2010 100

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
Creekline Grassy Woodland
Grassy Woodland/Alluvial Terraces Herb-rich Woodland Mosaic
Grassy Woodland
Plains Woodland
Scoria Cone Woodland
There were also two Vulnerable, five Depleted and two Least Concern-rated communities found to be within 5 km
of the alignment in this Bioregion.
The alignment passes through the Lowan Mallee Bioregion, with nine EVCs identified as potentially occurring
within 5 km of the alignment. The Parilla Mallee EVC is listed as Endangered, and there are also two Depleted
and six Least Concern EVCs within this area.
A large section of the alignment is located within the Murray Mallee Bioregion, with seventeen EVCs potentially
occurring within 5 km of the alignment. Four of these EVCs are listed as Endangered:
Low Rises Woodland
Ridged Plains Mallee
Chenopod Grassland
Parilla Mallee
There are also five Vulnerable, three Depleted and five Least Concern EVCs potentially occurring within 5km of
the alignment in the Murray Mallee Bioregion.
As the alignment passes near Swan Hill, it enters into the Victorian Riverina Bioregion. Three Endangered EVCs
were found to potentially occur within 5km of the alignment:
Creekline Grassy Woodland
Grassy Woodland
Plains Woodland
Within the Wimmera Bioregion, seventeen EVCs have been found to potentially occur within 5 km of the rail
alignment (including one water body). Of these, five are listed as Vulnerable, one as Depleted and eleven as
Endangered:
Floodplain Riparian Woodland
Low Rises Woodland
Wetland Formation
Grassy Woodland/Alluvial Terraces Herb-rich Woodland Mosaic
Ridged Plains Mallee
Lignum Swamp
Plains Grassland
Grassy Woodland
Cane Grass Wetland
Riverine Chenopod Woodland/Lignum Swamp Mosaic
Plains Woodland
Threatened Flora Species and Habitat
A query of the DSE threatened flora database returned 118 species with potential to occur within 5 km of the rail
alignment. This species list includes 24 ‘Listed’ under the FFG Act. 114 of the species were listed as Very Rare or
Threatened Species (VROTS), including 15 Endangered, 34 Vulnerable, 43 Rare, 21 Poorly Known and 1 Extinct
species. Seven of the species were listed as Endangered and another seven as Vulnerable under the EPBC Act.
These species are listed in Appendix J, Table 94. Potential habitat for these threatened flora species may occur
within the vicinity of the Option 3 alignment. Should this alignment option be further explored, investigations to
determine the potential impacts of the rail corridor to these species will be required.
7 October 2010 101

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
Threatened Fauna Species and Habitat
A query of the DSE threatened fauna database returned 85 species that may potentially occur within 5km of the
alignment. Of these species, 50 are listed under the FFG Act. 83 of the species were listed as Very Rare or
Threatened Species (VROTS). Of these species four are listed as Critically Endangered, 19 Endangered, 29
Vulnerable, 29 Near Threatened and one Data Deficient. One of the species, the Golden Sun Moth, was listed as
Critically Endangered, another four as Endangered and seven as Vulnerable under the EPBC Act. There were
also six species listed under the CAMBA treaty and five under the JAMBA treaty. All of the significant species
found are listed in Appendix J, Table 95.
Potential habitat for these threatened fauna species may occur within the vicinity of the Option 3 alignment.
Should this alignment option be further explored, investigations to determine the potential impacts of the rail
corridor to these species will be required.
Biosites
No Biosites were found to be within 5km of the alignment.
7.2.2.2.2 Option 5 via Robinvale
The Option 5 via Robinvale (the ‘Robinvale alignment’) alignment option spans across three bioregions, including
the Murray Fans, Murray Mallee and the Robinvale Plains.
The Murray Fans bioregion is generally flat and gently undulating with unconsolidated sediments of former
waterways and broad floodplains associated with major river systems and prior steams. Soils include Alluvium
deposits with red brown earths and texture contrast soils (DSE, 2004).
The Murray Mallee generally features calcareous materials of broad undulating sandy plains that are often
associated with linear, west-east aligned, low sand dunes with intervening heavier textured swales of alluvial,
Aeolian and swampy deposits. The vegetation is dominated by East/West-Dune Mallee with some Chenopod
Mallee and Shallow-Sand Mallee (DSE, 2004).
The Robinvale Plains bioregion is a narrow gorge confined by the cliffs along the Murray River, which is
entrenched within older up-faulted Cainozoic sedimentary rocks. Alluvium deposits from the Cainozoic period
gave rise to the red brown earths, cracking clays and texture contrast soils this supports Riverine Grassy Forest
and Riverine Grassy Chenopod Woodland ecosystems (DSE, 2004).
Commonwealth
A search of the EPBC Act Protected Matters Search Tool has indicated a suite of Matters of National
Environmental Significance (NES) have the potential to occur within 5 km of the Robinvale alignment option.
These matters are listed in Table 53.
Table 53: Commonwealth Matters of National Environmental Significance
Matter of NES
Number of Occurrences
World Heritage Properties -
National Heritage Places -
Wetlands of International Significance (Ramsar Sites) 11
Commonwealth Marine Areas -
Threatened Ecological Communities 4
Threatened Species 22
Migratory Species 22
The Robinvale alignment option occurs within the same catchment as the 11 Ramsar sites detected. The Hattah-
Kulkyne Lakes are located approximately 20 km to the south-west of Robinvale. The NSW Central Murray State
Forests consist of scattered forest patches that line the eastern side of the Murray River and occur further to the
east approximately 140 km from the Robinvale alignment option. The Kerang Wetlands is a similarly disparate
assemblage of wetlands that occur approximately 25 km south of Swan Hill. Where the Robinvale alignment
option drains to waterways that collect at these Ramsar sites further assessment of these interactions would be
required to establish the potential for ecological impacts to be incurred to this Ramsar site.
7 October 2010 102

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
The remaining Ramsar sites detected are not expected to be affected due to their location and/or distance from
the Robinvale alignment option. The Fivebough and Tuckerbil Swamps are located approximately 280 km to the
east of the alignment on the other side of the catchment. Barmah Forest is located approximately 190 km to the
east. Although it lines the Murray River, which the Robinvale alignment environs would drain to, the distance from
the alignment option to this Ramsar site would be too great to experience any significant related effects. The
Coorong and Lakes Alexandrina and Albert, Banrock Station Wetland Complex and Riverland Ramsar sites will
not be affected by the current Mildura rail alignment options as they are located at least 130 km downstream of
the Robinvale alignment (and all of the alignment options) to the west and therefore are not considered further in
this document.
Threatened Ecological Communities identified as potentially occurring within 5 km of the Robinvale alignment
option are listed in Table 54. These communities are recognised on a national basis to be threatened by extinction
and are survival-dependent on active conservation. The ecological communities listed in Table 54 may occur
within the study area. Where the Robinvale alignment option is pursued detailed investigations would be required
to verify the presence of these ecological communities and evaluate the potential impacts the Robinvale
alignment option could have upon them.
Table 54: Commonwealth listed Threatened Ecological Communities associated with the Robinvale alignment option
Threatened Ecological Community
Buloke Woodlands of the Riverina and Murray-Darling Depression Bioregions
Grey Box Eucalyptus microcarpa Grassy Woodlands of Derived Native Grasslands of
South-eastern Australia
Weeping Myall Woodlands
White Box-Yellow Box-Blakely’s Red Gum Grassy Woodland and Derived Native
Grassland
Conservation Status
Endangered
Endangered
Endangered
Critically Endangered
Nationally listed threatened flora and fauna species identified within 5 km of the Robinvale alignment option are
provided in summary in Table 55. These results are detailed in Appendix J, Table 97 and Table 98. Potential
habitat for these species exists within the study area. Where further consideration is afforded to the Robinvale
alignment option further investigations would be required to determine the potential impacts to these species and
their potential habitats. Potential habitat for the 22 nationally listed Migratory species (protected under the EPBC
Act and JAMBA 8 , CAMBA 9 and/or ROKAMBA 10 ) also occurs in the study area and would also warrant further
investigations.
Table 55: Nationally Listed Threatened Species
Threatened Species (total species) Conservation Status and Number
Critically Endangered Endangered Vulnerable
Birds (8) - 3 5
Frogs (1) - - 1
Mammals (1) - - 1
Ray-finned Fishes (3) - 1 2
Reptiles (1) - - 1
Plants (8) - 3 5
Victorian
Ecological Vegetation Classes
Interrogation of DSE modelled vegetation mapping (DSE, 2007) indicates 35 EVCs occur across the Robinvale
alignment study area.
The Robinvale alignment crosses the fringes of the Murray Fans bioregion to the north of Swan Hill. This
bioregion supports a relatively complex array of vegetation communities of which 20 EVCs were detected as
occurring within 5 km of the alignment option. Of these EVCs five hold a bioregional conservation status (BCS) of
Endangered, including:
Low Rises Woodland
8 JAMBA – refers to the Japan-Australia Migratory Bird
9 CAMBA – refers to the China-Australia Migratory Bird Agreement
10 ROKAMBA – refers to the Republic of Korea-Australia Migratory Bird Agreement
7 October 2010 103

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
Plains Savannah
Ridged Plains Mallee
Riverine Chenopod Woodland
Semi-arid Chenopod Woodland
In addition, seven EVCs hold a BCS of Vulnerable while seven EVCs are classed as Depleted.
The majority of the Robinvale alignment crosses through the Murray Mallee bioregion, which is less complex than
the Murray Fans in this case. Twenty-five EVCs were identified as occurring within 5 km of the alignment option,
including five Endangered EVCs:
Low Rises Woodland
Plains Grassland
Plains Savannah
Plains Woodland
Ridged Plains Mallee
Ten Vulnerable EVCs were identified along with four of Least Concern and six EVCs with a Depleted BCS.
The north-eastern portion of the Robinvale alignment travels through the peripheries of the Robinvale Plains
bioregion of which 28 EVCs have been modelled to occur within 5 km. Of these EVCs three hold a BCS of
Endangered:
Floodplain Grassy Wetland
Plains Grassland
Plains Woodland
Nine Vulnerable EVCs were identified as well as two EVCs of Least Concern and 12 Depleted EVCs.
The Robinvale alignment option crosses the Mallee and North Central Catchment Management Areas (CMAs).
The Native Vegetation Plans applicable to these CMAs must be considered if the Robinvale option is developed
further. The Mallee and North Central NVPs both indicate that EVCs with a Very High BCS that are to be cleared
require offsetting of up to two times the habitat hectares 11 removed. EVCs with a High BCS require an offset of
1.5 times the loss and medium and low BCS vegetation requires a one-to-one offset arrangement.
Threatened Flora Species and Habitat
A query of the DSE threatened flora database returned 746 records of 139 species. This species list includes 18
‘Listed’ under the FFG Act. 138 of the species were listed as Very Rare Or Threatened Species (VROTS),
including 20 Endangered, 39 Vulnerable, 60 Rare, 18 Poorly Known and 1 Extinct species. Two of the species
were listed under the EPBC Act (1 Endangered and 1 Vulnerable species). These species are listed in Appendix
J, Table 97.
Potential habitat for these threatened flora species may occur within the vicinity of the Robinvale alignment option.
Should this alignment option be further explored, investigations to determine the potential impacts of the rail
corridor to these species will be required.
Threatened Fauna Species and Habitat
Search results indicate 527 records pertaining to 71 threatened fauna species. This suite of species includes one
amphibian, 54 birds, one invertebrate, five mammals and ten reptiles. The conservation status of these species
includes 41 species ‘Listed’ under the FFG Act. Of these species 69 are listed as VROTS, including four Critically
Endangered, 17 Endangered, 19 Vulnerable, 24 Near Threatened, two Extinct and 3 Data Deficient. Nine species
are listed under the EPBC Act, including five Endangered species, one Critically Endangered bird, one Vulnerable
bird and two extinct mammals. These species are listed in Appendix J, Table 97.
Potential habitat for these threatened fauna species may occur within the vicinity of the Robinvale alignment
option. Should this alignment option be further explored, investigations to determine the potential impacts of the
rail corridor to these species will be required.
11 ‘Habitat hectares’ is a unit of measurement of the quality and quantity of remnant vegetation patches that is
assessed in the context of the relevant native vegetation type (DSE, 2004).
7 October 2010 104

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
Biosites
Two biosites were detected occurring within 5 km of the alignment in the Mildura area. Biosite 72 holds a State
significance level and is reported to support significant flora and significant ‘Other’ biodiversity attributes (DSE,
2004). Biosite 14 holds a local significance class and supports ‘other’ biodiversity attributes (DSE, 2004). Where
works have the potential to affect these biosites additional investigations will be required to ascertain the extent of
potential impacts.
New South Wales
The Robinvale alignment option passes through NSW between Mildura and Robinvale. This section details the
ecological attributes detected within this area. In NSW ecological values are protected under the TSC Act and the
NV Act.
Threatened Ecological Communities
Threatened Ecological communities detected as potentially occurring within the study area include:
White Box-Yellow Box-Blakely’s Red Gum Grassy Woodland (Endangered)
Buloke Allocasuarina luehmannii Woodland in the Riverina and Murray-Darling Depression Bioregions
(Endangered)
Inland Grey Box Eucalyptus microcarpa Woodland in the Riverina, NSW South Western Slopes, Cobar
Peneplain, Nandewar and Brigalow Belt South Bioregions (Endangered)
Myall Acacia pendula Woodlands in the Darling Riverine Plains, Brigalow Belt South, Cobar Peneplain,
Murray-Darling Depression, Riverina and NSW South Western Slopes (Endangered)
In NSW these communities are protected under the TSC Act and the NV Act. Should the Robinvale alignment be
pursued, it may involve the removal of these vegetation types and development constraints will likely be
presented. In such case further investigations will be required to establish the extent of potential impacts to these
protected communities.
Threatened Flora Species and Habitat
Four threatened flora species listed under the NSW TSC Act, including three Endangered species (Swamp
Sheoak Casuarina obsea, Santalum murrayanum, Pimelea serpyllifolia subsp. serpyllifolia) and one Vulnerable
species, the Yellow Darling Pea Swainsona pyrophila.
Threatened Fauna Species and Habitat
Fifty threatened fauna species were detected occurring within the study area, including 11 Endangered species
and 39 Vulnerable species. This suite includes one amphibian species, 36 bird species, eight mammals and five
reptiles. These species are detailed in Appendix J.
Where the Robinvale alignment option is subject to further consideration investigations of the potential impacts to
these NSW ecological attributes will need to be conducted.
7.2.2.2.3 Option 5 (via Ouyen)
Commonwealth
A search of the EPBC Act Protected Matters Search Tool has indicated a suite of Matters of National
Environmental Significance (NES) have the potential to occur within 5 km of the Mildura – Ouyen – Swan Hill
alignment option (5O). These matters are listed in Table 56.
Table 56: Commonwealth Matters of National Environmental Significance
Matter of NES
Number of Occurrences
World Heritage Properties -
National Heritage Places -
Wetlands of International Significance (Ramsar Sites) 11
Commonwealth Marine Areas -
Threatened Ecological Communities 4
Threatened Species 23
Migratory Species 18
7 October 2010 105

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
The 5O alignment occurs within the same catchment as the 11 Ramsar sites detected. The Hattah-Kulkyne Lakes
are the closest of these Ramsar sites to the 5O alignment, located approximately 38 km north of Ouyen. This
wetland complex does not interact directly with the 5O alignment. However, where the 5O alignment drains to
waterways that collect at this Ramsar site further assessment of these interactions would be required to establish
the potential for ecological impacts to be incurred.
The NSW Central Murray State Forests and Barmah Ramsar sites occur approximately 45 km east of the Swan
Hill line along the Murray River. Although this Ramsar site lines the Murray River, which the Swan Hill line
environs would drain to, the distance from the alignment option to these Ramsar sites would likely be too great to
experience any significant related affects. Similarly, the Kerang Wetlands Ramsar site occurs approximately 25
km south of Swan Hill and is unlikely to be within range of potential impacts incurred by the 5O alignment. The
Lake Albacutya Ramsar site occurs approximately 75 km to the south-west of Ouyen and is also unlikely to be
affected by the Mildura Rail options.
As discussed above, the Coorong and Lakes Alexandrina and Albert, Banrock Station Wetland Complex and
Riverland Ramsar sites are unlikely to be affected by the current Mildura rail alignment options.
Threatened Ecological Communities identified as potentially occurring within 5 km of the 5O alignment option are
listed in Table 57. These species are recognised on a national basis to be threatened by extinction and survivaldependent
on active conservation.
Table 57: Commonwealth listed Threatened Ecological Communities associated with the 5O alignment alignment option
Threatened Ecological Community
Buloke Woodlands of the Riverina and Murray-Darling Depression Bioregions
Grey Box Eucalyptus microcarpa Grassy Woodlands of Derived Native Grasslands of
South-eastern Australia
Weeping Myall Woodlands
White Box-Yellow Box-Blakely’s Red Gum Grassy Woodland and Derived Native
Grassland
Conservation Status
Endangered
Endangered
Endangered
Critically Endangered
Nationally listed threatened flora and fauna species identified within 5 km of the MASH alignment option are
provided in summary in Table 58. These results are detailed in Appendix J, Table 100 and Table 101. Potential
habitat for these species exists within the study area. Where further consideration is afforded to the 5O alignment
option further investigations would be required to determine the potential impacts to these species and their
potential habitats.
Table 58: Nationally Listed Threatened Species
Threatened Species Conservation Status and Number
(total species)
Critically Endangered Endangered Vulnerable Extinct
Birds (7) - 2 5 -
Frogs (1) - - 1 -
Mammals (1) - - - 1
Ray-finned Fishes (0) - - - -
Reptiles (1) - 1 - -
Invertebrates (0) - - - -
Plants (5) - 2 3 -
Potential habitat for the 18 nationally listed Migratory species (protected under the EPBC Act and JAMBA,
CAMBA and/or ROKAMBA) also occurs in the study area and would also warrant further investigations.
Victoria
Plant Communities
Searches indicate the potential occurrence of 71 plant communities recognised as Ecological Vegetation Classes
(EVCs) across five Bioregions within 5km of the 5O alignment. Of these EVCs, nine are listed as Endangered, 21
are listed as Vulnerable, 27 as Depleted and 12 listed as Least Concern. There were also three EVC’s with no
Bioregional Conservation Significance, which are areas of bare rock/soil and waterbodies.
7 October 2010 106

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
Within the Lowan Mallee Bioregion, five EVCs have been found to potentially occur within 5 km of the rail
alignment. One of these have a Bioregional Conservation Significance of Depleted and four are listed as Least
Concern.
Within the Murray Fans Bioregion, 14 EVCs were detected as occurring within 5 km of the 5O alignment option.
Four Vulnerable and six Depleted EVCs were found to be within 5 km of the alignment, as well as four
Endangered EVCs:
Low Rises Woodland
Ridged Plains Mallee
Semi-arid Chenopod Woodland
Riverine Chenopod Woodland
Within the Murray Mallee Bioregion, 22 EVCs were found to potentially occur within 5 km of the alignment. Of
these EVCs, eight have a Bioregional Conservation Significance of Vulnerable, five Depleted, three least concern
and one waterbody. There are eight communities listed as Endangered within this section:
Low Rises Woodland
Ridged Plains Mallee
Plains Grassland
Chenopod Grassland
Parilla Mallee
The alignment passes through the Murray Scroll Belt Bioregion, with 13 EVCs identified as potentially occurring
within 5 km of the alignment. None of the EVCs identified are listed as Endangered, although there are four listed
as Vulnerable, six listed as Depleted and two as Least Concern. There is also one EVC (Bare Rock/Ground)
without a Bioregional Conservation Significance.
A portion of the alignment is located within the Robinvale Plains Bioregion, with seventeen EVCs potentially
occurring within 5 km of the alignment. Five of these EVCs are listed as Vulnerable, nine as Depleted and two as
least concern. There is also one EVC (Bare Rock/Ground) without a Bioregional Conservation Significance.
Threatened Flora Species and Habitat
A query of the DSE threatened flora database returned 163 species that may potentially occur within 5 km of the
alignment. Of these species, twenty are listed under the FFG Act. Of the species identified, 162 are listed as Very
Rare or Threatened Species (VROTS). Of these species four are listed as extinct, 19 as Endangered, 41 as
Vulnerable, 85 as Rare and 13 as Poorly Known.
Two species are listed as Endangered and three as Vulnerable under the EPBC Act. All of the significant species
found are listed in Appendix J, Table 100. Potential habitat for these threatened fauna species may occur within
the vicinity of the 5O alignment option. Should this alignment option be further explored, investigations to
determine the potential impacts of the rail corridor to these species will be required.
Threatened Fauna Species and Habitat
A query of the DSE threatened fauna database returned 84 species with potential to occur within 5km of the rail
alignment. Two of the species were listed as Endangered, six as Vulnerable and one as Extinct under the EPBC
Act. Fifty-two of the identified species are ‘Listed’ under the FFG Act.
Seventy-nine of the species were listed as Very Rare or Threatened Species (VROTS), including three Critically
Endangered, 22 Endangered, 24 Vulnerable, 30 Near Threatened, and five species for which data was deficient.
The VROTS list also included the White-footed Rabbit-rat and the Agassiz's Chanda Perch, which are listed as
Extinct and Regionally Extinct respectively.
Six of the species identified during the database search are listed as protected migratory species on the CAMBA
treaty, and five of these are also listed on the JAMBA treaty. All of the threatened fauna found during this
database search are listed in Appendix J, Table 101.
Potential habitat for these threatened flora species may occur within the vicinity of the MOSH alignment option.
Should this alignment option be further explored, investigations to determine the potential impacts of the rail
corridor to these species will be required.
7 October 2010 107

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
Biosites
Six Biosites were found to occur within 5km of the 5O alignment. Four of these have State significance (significant
flora and significant ‘other’), one has regional significance (significant flora and significant ‘other’) and one has
local significance (significant ‘other’ only).
7.2.2.3 Option Analysis
Four criteria have been selected to assess the potential impact of each alignment option. The level of impact of
each of the Mildura Rail alignment options is summarised in Table 59 below. Definitions of each of the rating
values are outlined in Table 60.
Table 59: Options assessment for the three rail link alignments
Criteria Objective Mildura –
Ballarat Fast Rail
Swan Hill –
Robinvale –
Mildura
Mildura –
Ouyen – Swan
Hill
Impact on Flora and
Fauna
Minimise impact on listed
fauna and flora
Meets objective
well
Meets objective
poorly
Meets objective
well
Impact on Native
Vegetation
Minimise impacts to native
vegetation
Meets objective
Meets objective
poorly
Meets objective
Impact on
Threatened
Species/Communities
Minimise impacts to
threatened
species/communities
Meets objective
poorly
Meets objective
Meets objective
Impact on Protected
Areas
Minimise impacts on areas
of the Victorian/New South
Wales conservation estate.
Meets objective Meets objective Meets objective
well
Table 60: Defined values and descriptions for impact ratings
Supplementary description Defined values Ratings Impact
Best practice
High level of policy
compliance
Significant benefits for the region
Meets objective very
well
Positive impact
Improved practice
Policy compliance
High level of benefit for the local
area or moderate benefit for the
region
Meets objective well
No distinct positive or negative impact Meets objective Neutral
Policy non-compliance
Negative impact
High level of impact for local
area or moderate level of impact
over the region
Meets objective
poorly
Negative impact
Policy non-compliance
Major negative impact
High level of impact for the
region
Meets objective very
poorly
7.2.2.4 Constraints analysis
Significant species and communities listed under State and Commonwealth legislation, National Heritage Places
and Ramsar Wetlands form constraints to each alignment option for the Mildura Rail. These constraints have
been used to quantify the ecological values within the proximity of each alignment. The constraint information
gathered during the desktop assessment of each option is collated in Table 61, and a discussion of constraints for
each alignment is below.
7 October 2010 108

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
Table 61: Constraints Analysis Summary
Alignment Option
Constraints
Commonwealth VIC NSW
NH Ram TEC TSp M FFG VROTS Biosites TSC NV
Option 3 1 5 4 44 20 73 195 - n/a n/a
Option 5 (via Robinvale) - 11 4 22 22 59 207 2 43 4
Option 5 (via Ouyen) - 11 4 23 19 52 247 6 n/a n/a
Where:
NH = National Heritage Places
Ram = Wetlands of International Significance (Ramsar Sites)
TEC = Threatened Ecological Communities
TSp = Threatened Species (flora and/or fauna)
M = Migratory Species
FFG = Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act 1988 (Vic)
VROTS = Very Rare or Threatened Species
DSE = DSE Advisory Lists
TSC = Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 (NSW)
NV = Native Vegetation Act 2003 (NSW)
Option 3
Upgrading an existing line is expected to have significantly less impact to the surrounding environment than
constructing a new line on a new alignment, as it is expected that less clearing would be required. Offset
requirements would likely be much lower for this option than for the other options.
The following constraints have been identified:
Close proximity to Lake Buloke
Close proximity to the Wyperfeld National Park
Close proximity to the Murray-Sunset National Park
Line currently runs adjacent to the Hattah-Kulkyne National Park, including the Hattah-Kulkyne National Park
Lakes.
Option 5 (via Robinvale)
This option includes a new rail alignment between Yungera, Robinvale and Red Cliffs. The sections of the
alignment from Swan Hill to Piangil, through Robinvale, and from Red Cliffs to Mildura will be along existing rail
track, from Piangil to Yungera on former rail corridor, and the remainder new construction.
The following constraints have been identified:
Cross-state legislative/political complexity
Close to environmentally and politically sensitive Murray River and associated Ramsar sites
Alignment passes near the Mallee Cliffs National Park, the new Kemendok National Park, the Manie State
Forest and the new Euston Regional Park.
Option 5 (via Ouyen)
This option involves construction of a new section of rail running between Ouyen and Swan Hill. This section is
situated north of Lake Tyrrell and the scattered lakes south-east of Chinkapook. From Ouyen to Mildura, the track
will follow the existing alignment.
The following constraints have been identified:
Close proximity to the Murray-Sunset National Park
Existing line runs adjacent to the Hattah-Kulkyne National Park, including the Hattah-Kulkyne National Park
Lakes.
7 October 2010 109

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
7.2.3 Application of precautionary principle
The application of the precautionary principle is recommended in the Transport Integration Act policy framework.
The framework states that:
a) if there are threats of serious or irreversible environmental damage, lack of full scientific certainty should not
be used as a reason for postponing measures to prevent environmental degradation
b) decision-making should be guided by:
i) a careful evaluation to avoid serious or irreversible damage to the environment wherever
practicable; and
ii) an assessment of the risk-weighted consequences of various options.
The two possible threats of serious or irreversible environmental damage that may be related to transport
decisions in the Mildura rail corridor are the climate impact of transport and the risk of damage to vegetation.
These impacts have been outlined above.
7.3 Economic Appraisal
The economic appraisal for this feasibility study has investigated a number of patronage forecasting techniques
including benchmarking against other similar services, regression modelling and generalised cost analysis. Due to
the range of forecasts derived, we have also undertaken a number of sensitivity tests on passenger rail options
with fewer technical, environmental or social barriers to ensure that the economic case for rail is not understated.
7.3.1 Patronage Forecasting
A key element of developing an economic assessment of the options is to undertake patronage forecasting. It is
common to draw on a strategic model of a transport network to develop a patronage forecast for a project as
potentially significant as this, but there is a relative lack of robust regional public transport patronage forecasting
tools in Victoria. For example, there is no readily available strategic network model for regional transport that
adequately reflects the different characteristics of the modes. Accordingly a range of patronage forecasting
techniques have been investigated to develop a range of patronage forecasts.
Benchmarking rail services
The options discussed for passenger rail services all propose a daily service in each direction. There are limited
comparable services in Victoria to estimate patronage given the different service plan that operates on most other
lines (see section 6.2.1 for a discussion of regional service planning in Victoria). However, New South Wales and
Western Australia have a number of comparable services. The population of Australian census urban centres and
localities located directly on the railway service on the rural parts of these routes, the service level, and patronage
figures for these services are summarised in the table below.
In the case of Dubbo, Griffith and Broken Hill, other complementary coach services operating under similar terms
and conditions (as part of the Countrylink network) are regularly available on an alternate route. On the routes
served by the Prospector, the Armidale-Moree service and the Grafton service, there are alternative rail services
but no complementing coach services. However, there are competing, rather than complementing, coach services
offered on most of these corridors as well.
Table 62: Comparison to other rail corridors in Australia
Other
Corridor
Corridor
Population (2006) Total Weekly Services
Rail
Patronage
(2008/09)
equivalent
PT options
available
Armidale - Moree 114,704 14 155,790 No
Broken Hill 95,616 2 10,109 Yes
Dubbo 99,875 14 109,507 Yes
Grafton 150,303 14 126,637 No
Griffith 45,436 2 4,067 Yes
Prospector 40,566 18 92,337 No
7 October 2010 110

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
All options for Mildura propose that services via Swan Hill will be maintained (see section 6.4.2), and under
current policies it is assumed that these would be under the same terms and conditions as the proposed train. As
a result, the most operationally comparable forecast is the Dubbo service. By contrast, the service to Kalgoorlie,
the Prospector, has a similar journey time, population and service level offer and is more demographically
comparable. Accordingly, the Mildura corridor is benchmarked against both these services as shown in the table
below.
Table 63: Mildura forecast based on benchmarking
Corridor
Corridor
Population (2006)
Total Weekly Services
Rail
Patronage
(2008/09)
Prospector 40,566 18 92,337
62,000 –
Mildura 57,213 14
75,000 (est)
Dubbo 99,875 14 109,507
Armidale - Moree 114,704 14 155,790
Grafton 150,303 14 126,637
Griffith 45,436 2 4,067
Broken Hill 95,616 2 10,109
This method estimates rail patronage between Melbourne and Mildura in the range 62,000 – 75,000 passengers
per year. This compares favourably with current patronage to and from Mildura on long distance services of just
over 40,000 trips per year. It should be noted that it is likely that much of this patronage is diverted from existing
services.
Similar benchmarking can be applied to estimate patronage on the St Arnaud train Option 6. The proposed
service plan is similar to that on the Echuca corridor, but the population of the catchment of the St Arnaud
extension is much smaller, only about one-tenth of the population of the Echuca corridor. Consequently only a low
patronage forecast is derived by comparison to the Echuca train.
Table 64: St Arnaud benchmarking comparison
Corridor Population (2006) Total Weekly Services
Rail
Patronage p.a.
Echuca 19,213 18 29,391
St Arnaud (St Arnaud and
Dunolly) 2,879 14 ~3,500 – 4,000
Benchmarking indicates that the St Arnaud train would attract 3,500 to 4,000 passengers per year. By
comparison, current patronage from St Arnaud is approximately 5,700 trips per year.
Benchmarking coach services
Coach options can be benchmarked based on the average boardings shown in Figure 25. This appears to be a
reasonable measure given the similarity in average patronage across the region. The median of these averages is
32 passengers per service.
Benchmarking against this median indicates that the estimated patronage of Option 8, the long distance coach
package, is 53,250 passengers per year.
Benchmarking connecting services
Benchmarking other Options is problematic, due to the lack of easily identified comparable services. There are
significant differences in schedule, rolling stock, service plans and operational models such as flexible services
that make finding suitable comparable services with readily available data difficult.
Regression Model
A regression model uses a range of data sources to identify and evaluate the statistical relationship between input
variables and outputs.
7 October 2010 111

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
For example, ‘input variables’ for forecasting public transport patronage on a regional railway service are likely to
include fares, service frequency, journey time/ speed, whether a competitive alternative is available, population
and many other factors.
Interstate data was used to investigate whether a regression model could be developed to forecast patronage.
Only a limited amount of data was available, and a suitably robust regression model for application in this study
was not identified.
Generalised Cost Forecasting
A public transport trip typically comprises a number of components – walking to the stop, waiting, on board travel,
sometimes the inconvenience of a transfer, and further walking and waiting where transfers are involved.
Generalised cost forecasting requires converting the overall trip into a time or monetary cost using values for each
of the separate elements so that the overall trip’s ‘cost’ can be compared to alternatives.
AECOM has developed a generalised cost comparator spreadsheet with a number of assumptions in favour of
train travel:
In cases that involve a transfer between train and coach or train and train, the actual elapsed time between
arrival for the transfer and departure is doubled when calculating the disbenefit to transferring passengers.
This recognises the inconvenience and potential stress in addition to the actual time involved in transferring.
This disbenefit is included for the existing services via Swan Hill and Bendigo, the St Arnaud train services
and the long-distance coach services.
Recognising the community feedback that people have a preference for train travel compared with coach
travel, a 30% penalty to all time spent travelling by coach has been applied. This implicitly values the
perceived amenity values of trains. Note that this penalty has been applied to the services recommended to
be operated by high quality coaches (see section 6.3.2), despite the amenity offered on these services, thus
enhancing the comparative performance of the train.
For example on the existing service via Swan Hill the time spent travelling by train is valued at actual elapsed
time, the time spent transferring at Swan Hill is doubled, and the time spent travelling coach between Swan Hill
and Mildura is multiplied by 1.3. The total of these components is referred to as the generalised journey time
(GJT).
Limitations of the approach
It should be noted that the analysis is for travel between Melbourne and Mildura and does not account for
intermediate patronage. This assumption is based on:
the bulk of the population of the rail corridor being located in Mildura;
the service options for Mildura being relatively less effective for passengers in the southern part of the
corridor;
the predominance of existing travel being from Mildura as shown in Table 19;
the existing pattern of use of the services demonstrating low patronage on the overnight service at
intermediate towns given its time of departure.
The model includes car travel and air travel. In theory it is able to reflect decisions to change between modes to
catch improved public transport services. It has not been applied to estimate patronage of Option Nine, which
comprises primarily smaller-scale services designed to allow people with no travel alternatives to undertake trips.
Accordingly a model that compares the attractiveness of trip options is not appropriate for that option.
Similarly, the model has not been applied to Option Six which considers travel within a different market (i.e. St
Arnaud to Maryborough, Ballarat and Melbourne only). As described above, the potential patronage of this service
has been benchmarked against a near equivalent concept, the Echuca train. Similarly, the parts of Option Eight
that do not serve Mildura (the Sea Lake route) have been excluded.
Also, the model does not weight the actual departure or arrival time of any particular service, although it is noted
that community feedback included comments that the early morning departure and late evening arrival times for
particular Melbourne – Mildura services were unattractive and a more reasonably scheduled alternative service
would be better patronised.
7 October 2010 112

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
Methodology
Using the detailed patronage analysis detailed in Appendix C, each individual service’s patronage was estimated
by day of week, and the attributes of each service were also entered to estimate the generalised cost of each
travel option. This represents the base case. The characteristics of the proposed service changes in each option
were then added to the mix of services on offer and the shifts from existing public transport services and from cars
estimated. Due to the relatively high travel time under all ground transport options, it was assumed that no air
travel would be diverted. A factor for new (induced) travel is also estimated, based on the assumption that only
15% of users new to public transport would otherwise have been car drivers because of factors such as people
needing their vehicle at the end of their journey. The remaining 85% of new users are thus assumed to be entirely
new trips which were previously not made.
Model results
The model’s outputs are summarised in Table 65.
Table 65: Summary of generalised cost based forecasts
Patronage
Existing patronage diverted from
existing PT services
New induced patronage (new
or diverted from other modes)
Option
One 26,301 8,724 35,026
Two 12,205 1,306 13,511
Three 24,454 20,189 44,643
Four 23,773 3,659 27,432
Five (via Robinvale) 43,959 19,961 63,920
Five (via Ouyen) 44,259 16,580 60,839
Six
Not assessed
Seven 8,174 154 8,328
Eight 21,119 1,878 22,997
Nine
Not assessed
The results of the generalised cost model suggest that:
Total
The daytime train is least effective at attracting patronage between Melbourne and Mildura. This is because,
even though the model places a high disbenefit on the use of coach services and transfers, the alternative
coach/train via Swan Hill option is still considered more attractive because of the slow train travel time. This
result may change if a weighting on attractive departure and arrival times was included;
The fast train option is somewhat effective at attracting patronage from other modes, but the slower options
involving new construction via Robinvale or Ouyen are similarly effective and actually achieve higher
patronage due to greater diversion from existing coach services;
Option Seven (coach and train via St Arnaud) performs poorly and is the least effective at generating new
patronage between Melbourne and Mildura. This can be attributed to having a higher proportion of coach to
train travel and a relatively long interchange proposed (even though it performs a refreshment role);
Option Four (extra Swan Hill train and coach) and Eight (long distance coaches via Ballarat) have similar
patronage outcomes, both gaining most of their patronage by diversion from other services. Option Eight
achieves this result by providing a range of travel options with moderate generalised journey time rather than
by having one service with a low generalised journey time. In other words Option Eight reflects the effect of
frequency on influencing travel patterns.
The generalised cost model estimates lower patronage overall than the benchmarking approach.
Table 66: Differences in patronage forecasts by methodology
Option Generalised cost forecast Benchmarking forecast
Two (daytime train) 13,511 62,000 – 75,000 (est)
Eight (coaches) 22,997 53,520
7 October 2010 113

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
As the preceding discussion shows, there is a substantial difference in forecasts for various service options
depending on the technique used. In response to this uncertainty, we have applied a number of sensitivity tests in
its economic appraisal, to demonstrate the performance of the rail service option with the least environmental and
social impacts under an optimistic economic assessment.
7.3.2 Cost Benefit Analysis
This section covers the assessment of passenger benefits and economic analysis of the Mildura train service
options.
The evaluation was carried out using standard cost benefit analysis methodology consistent with the Department
of Transport’s Guidelines for Economic Evaluation of Public Transport Projects issued in June 2001, the
Australian Transport Council’s National Guidelines for Transport System Management issued in August 2006
(ATC, 2006), and the Austroads Guide to Project Evaluation Part 4 issued in November 2008 (Austroads, 2008).
Most valuations have been derived from the latter publication on the advice from the Department of Transport.
The evaluation has been undertaken using a 30-year evaluation period from project opening and a discount rate
of 6.5%. All options are assumed to open in 2016.
Costs
Costs include the capital costs for the infrastructure improvements (immediate and medium term), the additional
annual infrastructure maintenance costs, and the annual costs of operating the service options. The estimation of
these costs is covered in previous sections of this report.
A two-year construction/implementation period has been assumed for those options involving capital works. The
capital cost is divided equally between the two years preceding project opening.
For the scenarios that involve the train running at similar times to an existing coach service, consideration has
been given to removing the coach services on the days that the train operates. Cost savings from eliminated
coach services have been included in the evaluation of these options.
Benefits
Benefits of improved public transport services include:
Benefits to passengers transferring from existing coach/train services;
Benefits to new users (transferring from other modes, or those making trips not made previously);
Non-user benefits, such as reductions in road crash costs and environmental externalities; and
Residual values of rail assets.
Benefits to passengers transferring from existing services
This includes travel time savings, avoidance of transfers, and an amount that recognises people’s preference to
travel by train rather than coach.
A standard value of time of $12.98/hour has been used in determining the value of travel time savings. This is the
value of non-work time from the Austroads Guide to Project Evaluation (Austroads, 2008) for private (nonbusiness)
travel adjusted for CPI change.
In the cases where existing services are retained after re-introduction of the train there will be an additional benefit
from more choices of departure time. Some people may find the new train times more convenient for when they
want to travel than any of the existing service times. This potential benefit has not been valued.
Benefits to new users
Benefits to new public transport users include the same set of benefits as those received by passengers diverting
from existing services, however they are calculated as half the average benefit gained by existing users based on
the “rule of a half”. The theory behind this is that some of the new train users at the margin will be indifferent
about using the service and are assumed to obtain a negligible benefit. At the other margin there are users who
were indifferent about using the coach service before the re-introduction of the train but who will value the benefits
of the train compared with existing at the full value experienced by existing users. Other new users are assumed
to be distributed on a straight line between these two extremes and so the average benefit for new users is half
the benefit for existing users.
Users who transfer from car will benefit from savings in their vehicle operating costs.
7 October 2010 114

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
An additional benefit in the case of new users arises from the “producer surplus”. This is the benefit gained by the
train service provider as a result of the new users. The producer surplus earned by the service provider
(revenues minus costs) is an economic benefit in the same way that consumer surplus is for the passengers.
Increased operating costs are included and increased fare revenues from the new users should similarly be
included.
The producer surplus benefit is calculated as an average fare (exclusive of GST) multiplied by the forecast
additional patronage. GST is excluded as it is not retained by the service provider.
Non-user benefits
The other benefits that have been valued and included in the evaluation comprise road user benefits such as road
crash cost savings and environmental benefits, including changes in greenhouse gas emissions. These benefits
are relatively small because only a small number of the new train users would otherwise have been car drivers.
This trend is also reflected in the environmental assessment. Other new users are assumed to be people who
would not have travelled or would have gone somewhere else. Externality benefits do not arise when new
patronage is diverted from an existing service or would otherwise have been a car passenger. Research has
estimated that approximately 30 percent of new users on public transport in urban areas following a service
improvement or fare reduction were previously car drivers. In this case it has been conservatively assumed that
only 15% of new users would otherwise have been car drivers because of factors such as people needing their
vehicle at the end of their journey. The remaining 85% of new users are thus assumed to be entirely new trips
which were previously not made.
The benefits include the net saving in crashes and greenhouse gas emissions from car, coach and train.
However, these benefits are in fact negative for all rail-based options because the crash costs and greenhouse
gas emissions generated by the train service are estimated to be greater than the savings from the coach and car
trips that are avoided. This result is not entirely surprising due to the social nature of regional long-haul public
transport although it is acknowledged that fast and frequent train services can achieve modal shift.
Other possible benefits such as reduced road congestion, air pollution and noise have not been estimated as they
are likely to be negligible for the numbers of cars removed from the road and most of the route is not congested
and traverses sparsely populated areas.
Residual values
New rail infrastructure assets are assumed to have a design life of 50 years. Since the appraisal period is only 30
years, a residual value of the asset has been added as a benefit in the final year of the appraisal. Straight line
depreciation has been assumed, such that the residual value is 20/50 years (or 40%) of the construction cost.
7.3.3 Economic Analysis Results
In the economic analysis it has been assumed that capital costs are incurred over a period of two years preceding
the opening year.
The following two tables show the economic analysis results for the minimum initial cost and on-going service
options. Table 67 shows the results of the economic analysis.
7 October 2010 115

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
Table 67: Economic analysis results
Patronage
Economic analysis
Existing
patronage
diverted
from
existing PT
services
New
induced
patronage
(new or
diverted
from other
modes)
Total
Present
value of
costs
Present
value of
benefits
Option
Option 1 26,301 8,724 35,026 $736m $37m -$699m 0.05
Option 2 12,205 1,306 13,511 $736m $21m -$715m 0.03
Option 3 24,454 20,189 44,643 $1,464m $100m -$1,364m 0.07
Option 4 23,773 3,659 27,432 $62m $4m -$57.8m 0.07
Option 5a 43,959 19,961 63,920 $627m $54m -$573m 0.09
Option 5b 44,259 16,580 60,839 $738m $54m -$684m 0.07
Option 7 8,174 154 8,328 $113m $3m -$110m 0.03
Option 8 21,119 1,878 22,997 $32m $1m -$31m 0.04
The results show that for all options, the present value over 30 years, of the costs of all of the options and
scenarios is greater than the present value of the benefits.
Table 68 shows a breakdown of the benefits for Option 2 to show the relative magnitude of the different benefit
components.
Table 68: Breakdown of benefits for Option 2
Benefit stream Present value
User benefits
Travel time savings - existing passengers (diverted from existing V/Line services)
Travel time savings - New Passengers (new trips or diverted from other modes)
Car Vehicle Operating Cost Savings (for new users diverted from car)
Total user benefits
Fare revenue from new users
NPV
$1.9m
$0.1m
$0.4m
$2.4m
$0.4m
BCR
Non-user benefits
Train Externalities
Crash/incident cost savings
-$1.5m
Environmental externality benefits
-$1.6m
Coach Externalities
Crash cost savings -
Environmental externality benefits -
Car Externalities
Crash cost savings
$0.0006m
Greenhouse Gases emission savings
$0.041m
Total non-user benefits
-$3.062m
Residual value of rail assets
$21.3m
Total Benefits
Values discounted at 6.5% to 2010 over 30 years from 2016 to 2045
$21.1m
7 October 2010 116

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
The main contributors to the present value of benefits are the travel time savings to existing passengers diverting
from existing services, and the fare revenue from new users. A significant disbenefit arises from crash and
incident costs associated with the re-introduction of the train service, which is due to the relatively high
crash/incident cost per train-km compared to coach and car 12 . It should be noted that this cost is generally
associated with level crossing incidents and it could be considered a road accident cost.
Potential Benefits not Considered Directly in the Analysis
Social Equity
The full social equity issues are not captured within a cost-benefit analysis. Existing patronage includes a large
proportion of pensioners. Community feedback emphasised the appeal of train services compared to coaches
and this has been recognised in the economic evaluation, notwithstanding that high quality coach services may
overcome many of the issues associated with current coach services.
In addition, the supply of public transport is itself a contributor to social equity because of its ability to enable travel
that could not previously be undertaken. Valuing this ‘mobility benefit’ is an emerging area in transport economics.
We have applied a sensitivity test to examine this issue in the next section.
Tourism Impacts
Impacts on tourism, as a direct result of the re-introduction of Mildura train services, is difficult to estimate.
However, it is possible that re-introduction of the train service, combined with targeted marketing including tourism
packages such as car hire at Mildura, will significantly encourage tourism development in the Mildura region. The
patronage forecasts have not allowed for possible higher growth rates that might be achieved by a complete
change in perception of the train service by the tourist market that might be achieved by radical “re-positioning” of
the service. This was assessed as being unlikely with the proposed rolling stock and travel times but could be
achievable if improvements are introduced in future.
It was noted in the course of the community consultation that tourism is a successful and vibrant industry in the
Mildura area even without a train service.
Freight Movements
It has been assessed elsewhere in this report that the benefits to freight movements from the infrastructure
improvements required for re-introduction of Mildura passenger train services are difficult to quantify but in any
case are considered likely to be small.
Regional Population Growth
The re-introduction of passenger rail services could stimulate a higher population growth rate than would be
expected otherwise, particularly of retirees. However, this effect is likely to be marginal as people already have a
range of travel options to/from Mildura and the existing services will already be contributing to such growth.
7.3.4 Sensitivity testing
Sensitivity analysis was undertaken on Option 2 (Daytime slow train) to assess the impact upon the BCR of two
alternative scenarios. This scenario was chosen for sensitivity testing because it has low social and environmental
adverse impacts. The results are shown in Table 69.
In the first test, a benefit of $20 per passenger is applied to reflect the option value of having a train service
available. This figure has been drawn from academic research into the marginal social benefit of mobility in
suburban areas (Stanley 2009).
In the second test, benefits are calculated assuming that all trains every day are full (247 passengers per train).
This patronage forecast would make the Mildura passenger train become the busiest long-distance service in the
state.
The third test combines the first and second tests, and assumes that all trains are full and all passengers incur the
$20 benefit.
In all three cases, it can be seen that whilst there is an improvement in the benefit cost ratio, the net present value
of the project is still highly negative, clearly demonstrating that the increased benefits do not outweigh the
economic costs.
12 Crash/incident cost derived from BITRE data (Rail Accident Costs in Australia, BTRE Report 108, 1999 – values updated to 2010 prices by CPI)
7 October 2010 117

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
Table 69: Sensitivity analysis
Patronage
Economic analysis
Option
Option 2
(central
option)
With
service
option
value
If all trains
full
Combined
sensitivity
test
Existing
patronage
diverted
from
existing PT
services
New
induced
patronage
(new or
diverted
from other
modes)
Total
Present
value of
costs
($m)
Present
value of
benefits
($m)
NPV ($m)
12,205 1,306 13,511 $736m $21m -$715m 0.03
12,205 1,306 13,511 $736m $24m -$712m 0.03
12,205 192,753 204,958 $736m $152m -$584m 0.21
12,205 192,753 204,958 $736m $193m -$543m 0.26
BCR
7.3.5 Cost Effectiveness Assessment
Where it is difficult to arrive at monetised measures of the benefits from a project, the standard decision criteria of
a CBA (e.g. Net Present Value) can be biased since the present value of the benefits is likely to be understated
relative to the present value of costs. An alternative approach to economic analysis of projects is typically
employed where this is the case, known as cost-effectiveness analysis.
Cost-effectiveness analysis differs from CBA in that benefits are expressed in physical rather than monetary
terms. For example, since there are numerous issues relating to putting a monetary value on a life, the benefits
from health projects are usually expressed as lives saved. As a result, cost-effectiveness analysis compares
alternatives in terms of their effectiveness in achieving an outcome and their cost to do so.
In the case of this study, a number of unique elements of the study have meant that it has been difficult to arrive
at monetary measures of the benefits from travelling by each of the alternative modes of transport. Given that the
monetary value of the benefits is likely to be understated, we have also employed cost-effectiveness analysis to
assess the economic impact.
In order for the approach to be valid, it is important that each alternative delivers equally effective outcomes. With
‘lumpy’ investments such as public transport, it is often not feasible for each alternative to deliver equal outcomes.
To overcome this limitation, the effectiveness of each alternative is defined in terms of reaching a set of minimum
criteria. In the case of Mildura, the minimum criteria to be satisfied in order for an alternative to be considered
effective are:
Accessible (to a wide range of users): current coaches are not acceptable because, even though they meet
technical standards like the Disability Standards for Accessible Public Transport, because they pose a
barrier to use because of limited space and amenity on board;
Conveniently scheduled: the service is needed at a reasonable hour and the lack of departure options during
the day, particularly from the northern part of the corridor, makes the existing services unacceptable; and
Have adequate luggage and bicycle space, conveniently available: people want to bring a reasonable
amount of day-to-day luggage and other reasonable items like bicycles, without needing to make special
arrangements.”
Comfort: the service must provide a high standard of on board comfort befitting the long journey time and, if
travelling overnight, suitable for sleeping. At a minimum, good legroom and high quality comfortable seating
is needed.
7 October 2010 118

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
Of the alternatives identified in this report, the following are considered to meet the above criteria for the corridor,
in a way that makes them comparable:
Overnight train (Option 1)
Daylight train (Option 2)
St Arnaud train with connecting coach (Option 7)
Mildura – Ballarat, coach only, two services daily (elements of Option 8)
The capital and operating costs for each option are outlined in Table 70 below. Costs have been appraised over a
30 year period, with a discount rate of 6.5% applied to express costs in present value terms. For the full rail option
we calculated costs under two scenarios. In the first all capital expenditure is incurred in the first year, and
operating expenditure is incurred from the second year. This is consistent with the time pattern of costs for the
remaining options. The second scenario spreads capital expenditure equally over a 10 year period, and as a
result operating expenditure is incurred from 2025 to 2045 only.
Table 70: Discounted cost parameters for each option
Option Capital costs ($m) Aggregate operating Total costs ($m)
costs($m)
Train – Capex incurred in year 1 $375.60 $220.71 $596.30
Train – Capex spread over 10 $287.55 $108.21 $395.77
years
St Arnaud train with connecting $58.22 $47.82 $106.04
coach
Mildura – Ballarat, coach only,
two services daily
$2.35 $17.17 $19.51
It is clear from the analysis above that on the basis of relative cost alone, a coach service from Mildura to Ballarat
is the most cost effective option, driven mainly by the large capital costs associated with the rail options.
In an effort to capture the benefits that stakeholders have identified with the full rail option, we have varied the
discount rate that applies to this option only, with the aim of determining the implied opportunity cost to
government from providing those benefits. The results are outlined in Table 71 below:
Table 71: Implied discount rate assessment
Option
Train – Capex spread
over 10 years
Discount Capital Costs ($m) Aggregate operating Total costs ($m)
rate
costs ($m)
39% $98.75 $1.71 $100.47
The results of our scenario analysis suggest that a discount rate six times that of the standard discount rate would
be required in order for the full rail option to be equally cost effective as the St Arnaud rail option. This is a
significant opportunity cost for government, particular where there is little evidence regarding the relative value of
the benefits derived from a full train service.
Conclusions
In summary, the results of the analysis indicate that all identified public transport options would require
expenditures that exceed the monetised benefits. It is noted that this analysis has not incorporated monetised
estimates of the benefits that the community would clearly derive from having access to a full rail option in
particular. As a result, it is likely that a portion of the benefits have been undervalued in this analysis.
In an effort to realise at least a portion of those benefits, we made a number of generous assumptions regarding
patronage and contingent value of having access to a full train service. In particular, it was assumed that every
train service would be full and that each passenger would derive a benefit of $20 per trip. Even after having made
those adjustments, each rail option still resulted in substantially negative Net Present Values.
Given that benefits in the range of $58.8m to $1.3bn would be required for each of the rail options to generate
positive economic returns it seems unlikely that further investigation with the aim of fully quantifying social benefits
would result in the public transport options generating economic returns.
7 October 2010 119

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
Options are only likely to be economically feasible if the significant capital and recurrent costs associated with
them can be reduced. As the rail options’ capital costs are largely due to either safety critical infrastructure
upgrades or the provision of new rail track, it is unlikely that these can be reduced by the amount required.
7.4 Findings
The triple bottom line assessment of social, environmental and economic aspects shows that no single option
assessed adequately addresses all the issues identified in the community.
Option 6, the extension of the Maryborough service to start at St Arnaud, performed moderately well in the social
impact assessment and had moderate environmental impact. However, providing the service benefits only the
communities of St Arnaud and Dunolly and estimated patronage is very low at 4,000 passengers per year. It was
not assessed economically compared to Mildura services because of its different market role.
Of the options providing passenger trains along the corridor to Mildura, Option 3, fast passenger trains had the
highest score in the social impact assessment. However, it has a moderately high impact on native vegetation and
landscape where deviations are required and a very high capital cost, resulting in poor economic evaluation
results. These could be mitigated by a somewhat slower tilt train option which would have slightly lower costs.
However, it did not achieve substantially better social outcomes than the slower overnight and daylight train
options despite the much higher capital cost.
For Option 5, the option of an extension from Swan Hill to Mildura, the concept route via Ouyen has lower capital
costs and less impact on the natural environment than the route option via Robinvale. However, because this
option benefits only the northern part of the corridor, and because of its potential land acquisition impacts, it had a
lower score on the social impact assessment than the other options using the whole rail corridor to Mildura.
The provision of a third daily train/coach option on the Swan Hill line, and the provision of a day train to St Arnaud
with connecting coach, both performed poorly in the social impact assessment. The problem with the third Swan
Hill train from the perspective of this study is that it only operates at a core time for regular Mildura users in the
‘from Melbourne’ direction, even taking into account local travel. The St Arnaud option better serves the overall
Mildura rail corridor, but is less effective at serving Mildura. The much lower cost of the Swan Hill option is a
significant economic advantage.
The coach options have a net negative environmental impact in greenhouse terms, a higher social impact
assessment score than most of the rail options, and are significantly more cost-effective.
7 October 2010 120

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
8.0 Conclusions and Recommendations
8.1 Conclusions
Mildura is a large growing regional centre, whereas other communities in the corridor are small and some have
been experiencing decline.
The Mildura rail corridor is an area of Victoria with significant transport need. There is a lack of social services and
community assets in many of the towns in the study area, significant gaps in public transport supply and service
effectiveness for basic requirements such as day return travel to a major town, and the services that are provided
are not always appropriately scheduled, accessible or adequately comfortable. There is a limited ability to use
public transport for routine trips in the local area, or for occasional trips to Melbourne. There is a strong case on
social inclusion grounds to provide public transport services that address these issues.
Communities in the Mildura corridor would benefit from a marked uplift in public transport supply to enable access
to important health, education and entertainment services, and social networks such as friends and family, to help
overcome the transport isolation currently being experienced.
Nine options to address the identified issues have been investigated. The options have included rail only services,
mixed rail and road services and road-only services.
Because of the long length of the corridor and the diverse demographic and social conditions along it, a single
transport solution such as a Melbourne – Mildura passenger train is not a sufficient response to the transport
needs identified in the corridor. A solution identified as appropriate in the Mildura and Ouyen area is ineffective at
addressing the transport needs of communities at the southern end of the corridor. These issues mean that
Option 1 (overnight train), Option 2 (daylight train), Option 5 (extension of passenger train from Swan Hill to
Mildura) and Option 6 (extension of Maryborough train to start at St Arnaud) are all ineffective at equitably
addressing the transport needs of the overall corridor.
Option 3 (fast train) would likely be effective but has a very high capital cost and significant operational issues that
makes it an inappropriate response to the transport needs of the corridor.
It is for Government to determine whether a service is to be provided for the corridor as a whole, or for some
communities on the corridor.
It is recognised and acknowledged that the current coach vehicles used to provide connections from Mildura are a
significant barrier to use. An international review of best practice in coach services demonstrates that vehicles are
available that substantially address the issues raised during the community consultation.
Of the options involving road transport, Option 4 (additional train and coach on the Swan Hill corridor) does not
fully address the specific travel times sought by residents of the Mildura rail corridor for access between their
townships, regional centres and Melbourne. Its arrival time in Melbourne is late, although the journey to Mildura is
attractively scheduled. Also, it does not geographically serve most of the study area. Accordingly, it did not score
well on the social impact assessment, and cannot be recommended from a Mildura rail corridor perspective.
However, it would be appropriate in terms of providing an equitable level of service to that provided to other
corridors in Victoria, and thus has benefits in access to communities outside the study area.
Option 7, the day train to St Arnaud, has the disadvantages of less frequency, longer travel time, poorer
integration, more transfers and higher capital cost than the coach-only alternative in Option 8. The train service
identified would be less effective than that in Option 6 for meeting the regular travel needs of Dunolly and St
Arnaud residents.
Finally, Option 9 (short distance services) is the only identified option to address the need to travel to regional
centres on a regular basis compared to the occasional need to travel to Melbourne. This unique attribute is
reflected in its higher score in the social impact assessment.
The assessment has demonstrated that the case for improved public transport on the Mildura Rail Corridor is
neither an economic or environmental one, with probable negative results in both these fields. The case for public
transport in this region is primarily one of social inclusion and provision of access to services that are not available
in the communities of the study area. This public transport should be delivered using a mode that provides
services that are reasonably fast, accessible to a wide range of users, comfortable, conveniently scheduled, has
adequate luggage and bicycle space, and can be supported with customer assistance where required.
7 October 2010 121

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
8.2 Recommended responses
The feasibility study demonstrates that a rail-only solution to transport needs in the study area is not appropriate.
None of the rail options provide adequate access to regional centres important to the Mildura rail corridor
communities, and none of the rail options meet the different needs of the northern and southern parts of the
corridor. Similarly, a response that does not address the community requirement to travel to Melbourne at a
reasonable time will not adequately address the transport issues raised.
Accordingly, it is desirable to combine aspects of the Options assessed to develop a more effective package that
overcomes the weaknesses of a rail-only option. The packages proposed draw on the results of the social,
environmental and economic appraisal to identify the best performing options for a rail option in the corridor, a rail
option outside the Mildura Rail Corridor, and a non-rail option. The options are then combined to ensure that a
range of different transport needs can be addressed.
The following packages are recommended for Government consideration.
Should Government decide to proceed with Mildura passenger rail on the Mildura Rail Corridor
Daytime passenger train, departing Melbourne at about 9:30 am and Mildura at approximately 6:20 am with
a journey time of around 9.5 hours (Option 2);
A coach service between Horsham and Mildura to provide local day-return access to Mildura for towns in the
northern part of the rail corridor (part of Option 8); and
A range of short distance bus services, including improved Donald – Bendigo, Donald – Horsham, Birchip
and Swan Hill –Tooleybuc services and small scale initiatives (Option 9).
- The total capital cost of this option is estimated to be approximately $505 million and the recurrent cost
is estimated at $25.3 million per year.
Should Government decide to proceed with passenger rail to Mildura on an alternative corridor
Extension of passenger train from Swan Hill to Mildura via Ouyen (Option 5); and
A coach service between Horsham and Mildura to provide local day-return access to Mildura for towns in the
northern part of the rail corridor (part of Option 8); and
A range of short distance bus services, including improved Donald – Bendigo, Donald – Horsham, Birchip
and Swan Hill –Tooleybuc services and small scale initiatives (Option 9).
- The total capital cost of this option is estimated to be approximately $446 million and the recurrent cost
is estimated to be $20.46 million per year.
Should Government decide not to proceed with Mildura passenger rail
A range of long-distance coach services, including two daily Mildura – Ballarat coaches to provide regular
services through the corridor; a coach service between Horsham and Mildura to provide local day-return
access to Mildura for towns in the northern part of the rail corridor; and additional services to fill schedule
gaps in the overnight coach and Bendigo – Sea Lake services; and
A range of short distance bus services, including improved Donald – Bendigo, Donald – Horsham, Birchip
and Swan Hill –Tooleybuc services and small scale initiatives (Option 9).
- The total capital cost of this option is estimated to be approximately $1.66 million and the recurrent cost
of this option is estimated to be $3.94 million per year.
To provide an equitable service level as provided on other regional corridors the Government should
consider:
Providing an additional daily train and coach on the Swan Hill corridor, to provide an equitable service level
on this route as provided on other regional corridors (Option 4);
- The recurrent cost of this option is estimated to be $5.4 million per year.
7 October 2010 122

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
References
ATC – Australian Transport Council, 2006. ‘National Guidelines for Transport System Management’, Canberra.
Austroads, 2008, ‘Guide to Project Evaluation – Part 4’, Austroads Publication No. AGPE04/08 (3 rd Edition),
Canberra.
Australian Bureau of Statistics, “2033.0.55.001 - Census of Population and Housing: Socio-Economic Indexes for
Areas (SEIFA), Australia”, available online at
(http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/Latestproducts/2033.0.55.001Media%20Release22006opendocu
ment&tabname=Summary&prodno=2033.0.55.001&issue=2006&num=&view=), last accessed 17 June 2010.
BITRE – Bureau of Transport and Regional Economics, 2002, ‘Rail accident costs in Australia’, Report 108,
Canberra, available on line at: http://www.bitre.gov.au/publications/60/Files/r108.pdf , last accessed 22 July 2010.
http://www.bitre.gov.au/publications/60/Files/r108.pdf
BITRE - Bureau of Transport and Regional Economics, 2010, ‘Road Deaths Australia – March 2010, available
online at http://www.bitre.gov.au/publications/54/Files/RDA_March_2010.pdf, last accessed 17 June 2010
BITRE – Bureau of Transport and Regional Economics, ‘Australian Transport Statistics Yearbook 2009’, available
online at http://www.bitre.gov.au/publications/10/Files/BITRE_TRANSPORT_STATS_YEARBOOK_2009.pdf, last
access 17 June 2010
Central Goldfields Shire, “Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of the Central Goldfields Shire Council”, 28 April 2010,
available online at
http://www.centralgoldfields.com.au/CA2573450006E09E/Lookup/26May2010OrdinaryCouncilMeeting/$file/28Apr
il2010Minutes.pdf, last accessed 18 June 2010
City of Ballarat, “Ordinary Council Meeting – 9 June 2010 – Agenda”, available online at
http://www.ballarat.vic.gov.au/media/349751/9%20june%202010%20-
%20agenda%20public%20copy%20no%20attachments.pdf, last accessed 18 June 2010
City of Ballarat, “Ordinary Council Meeting – 9 June 2010 – Attachments”, available online at
http://www.ballarat.vic.gov.au/media/349801/9%20june%202010%20agenda%20-%20only%20attachments.pdf,
last accessed 18 June 2010
Commonwealth of Australia, Mildura – Melbourne Corridor Strategy, 2007, available online at
http://www.infrastructure.gov.au/transport/publications/files/Melbourne_Mildura_Corridor_Strategy.pdf, last
accessed 11 May 2010
Department of Natural Resources and Environment, 2002. Victoria’s Native Vegetation Management – A
Framework for Action. East Melbourne
DOT – Department of Transport, 2009, ‘Towards Zero: A strategy for improved level crossing safety in Victoria’,
available online at
http://www.doi.vic.gov.au/DOI/DOIElect.nsf/$UNIDS+for+Web+Display/AC9D00EA2BBEB999CA25766F007F35D
C/$FILE/LevelCrossingStrategy.pdf , last accessed 22 July 2010.
DOT – Department of Transport, 2010, ‘Transport Integration Act – Policy Framework’, available online at
http://www.transport.vic.gov.au/DOI/DOIElect.nsf/$UNIDS+for+Web+Display/00A21C49DA3FBFBFCA257751002
2DA0E/$FILE/TIA-Fact-Sheet-Framework.pdf , last accessed 22 July 2010.
DPC – Department of Premier and Cabinet, 2001. ‘Growing Victoria Together – Final Report’, available online at
http://www.dpc.vic.gov.au/CA256D800027B102/Lookup/GVTIIBooklet/$file/growing_vic_together%20final%20rep
ort.pdf , last accessed 22 July 2010
DPCD - Department of Planning and Community Development, 2005, ‘A Fairer Victoria’, available online at:
http://www.dpcd.vic.gov.au/web14/dvc/rwpgslib.nsf/GraphicFiles/A+Fairer+Victoria+2005/$file/AFV+05.pdf , last
accessed 22 July 2010
DPCD – Department of Planning and Community Development, 2010a, “Socio-Economic Indexes for Areas”,
available online at
http://www.dse.vic.gov.au/DSE/dsenres.nsf/LinkView/D31EE5FD5F8FD835CA25749C001AD49EC70997566F01
CABDCA256D6500039059#regional, last accessed 17 June 2010
7 October 2010 123

Mildura Rail Feasibility Study
Final Report
AECOM
DPCD - Department of Planning and Community Development, 2010b, ‘A Fairer Victoria’, available online at
http://www.dpcd.vic.gov.au/Web14/dvc/rwpgslib.nsf/GraphicFiles/A+Fairer+Victoria+2010/$file/A+Fairer+Victoria+
2010.pdf , last accessed 22 July 2010
Department of Sustainability and Environment, 2004, Victoria’s Bioregions, available online at
http://www.dse.vic.gov.au, last access 17 June 2010
Hepburn Shire Council, “Ordinary Meeting of Council – Agenda – Tuesday 18 May 2010”, available online at
http://www.hepburnshire.com/files/AgendaPublic180510.pdf, last accessed 18 June 2010
International Association of Impact Assessment. International Principles for Social Impact Assessment.
2003.Mildura Airport Master Plan 2010, available online at
http://www.milduraairport.com.au/images/file/2010_05_20%20Master%20Plan.pdf, last accessed 17 June 2010
Mildura Rural City Council, “Irymple Structure Plan – Project Bulletin”, available online at
http://www.mrcc.vic.gov.au/Files/Project_bulletin.pdf, last accessed 21 June 2010.
Mildura Rural City Council, Ouyen Structure Plan, Final Report, June 2006, available online at
http://www.mildura.vic.gov.au/Files/Ouyen_Structure_Plan.pdf, last accessed 21 June 2010.
Mildura Rural City Council, Residential Development Plan, Red Cliffs, Final Draft, June 2009, available online at
http://www.mildura.vic.gov.au/Files/RedCliffsRDPReportFINALDRAFT.pdf, last accessed 21 June 2010.
Public Transport Safety Victoria, Statistics @ A Glance, available online at
http://www.ptsv.vic.gov.au/DOI/DOIElect.nsf/$UNIDS+for+Web+Display/08FB813FCEB4FD4FCA257722000BB3
3B/$FILE/PTSV-StatsAtAGlance-MAR10.pdf, last accessed 21 June 2010
Pyrenees Shire Council, Council Minutes, 17 March 2009 and 19 May 2009, available online at
http://www.pyrenees.vic.gov.au/Files/Council_Minutes_17.03.09.pdf and
http://www.pyrenees.vic.gov.au/Files/MinutesMay09.pdf respectively, last accessed 17 June 2010
RACV, “Bus Safety”, available online at
http://www.racv.com.au/wps/wcm/connect/Internet/Primary/my+car/car+safety/safety+advice/bus+safety, last
accessed 18 June 2010.
Roads Traffic Authority, Robinvale to Euston Murray River Crossing: Review of Environmental Factors Volume 1,
available online at http://www.rta.nsw.gov.au/constructionmaintenance/downloads/robinvale/robinvale_ref.pdf, last
accessed 11 May 2010.
SKM, “Mildura and Swan Hill Bus Review”, unpublished report to DoT, 2009
Stanley, J, 2009, “Social exclusion and the value of additional mobility”, Presentation to the Transport Economics
Forum, September 2009.
State of Victoria, 2010, ‘Transport Act 2010’, available online at
http://www.legislation.vic.gov.au/Domino/Web_Notes/LDMS/PubStatbook.nsf/f932b66241ecf1b7ca256e92000e23
be/800014F6404488AACA2576DA000E3354/$FILE/10-006a.pdf, last accessed on 22 July 2010.
V/Line, “Heat Speed Restrictions”, http://www.vline.com.au/travellingwithvline/heat/speedrestrictions.html,
accessed 11 November 2009
V/Line, personal communications, 2009
7 October 2010 124