HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Member Index
House of Assembly - Fifty-First Parliament, Third Session (51-3)
2009-03-25 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE: RAILCAR DEPOT RELOCATION

Ms CICCARELLO (Norwood) (11:35): I move:

That the 313th report of the committee, entitled Railcar Depot Relocation, be noted.

The government's intention to construct the new RAH on the 10 hectare site utilised by TransAdelaide for the maintenance and stabling of its railcar fleet requires the existing facilities to be relocated.

A number of sites for railcar maintenance, cleaning, fuelling and overnight and interpeak stabling facilities were considered and assessed against planning, community, staff impact, environmental, economic and operational criteria.

The preferred outcomes are: to establish a new site at Dry Creek as a new major maintenance, cleaning and fuelling facility, along with stabling capacity for overnight and interpeak storage of railcars; and to expand the existing stabling facility at Lonsdale to provide increased overnight and interpeak capacity to act as a second fuelling facility and a minor maintenance facility.

Other minor works, such as line crossovers, breakdown sidings and additional smaller stabling sites may be needed to achieve operational flexibility and efficiencies. To ensure compatibility with new depots, upgrading of the Operations Control Centre, situated at the eastern end of the proposed hospital site on North Terrace, is also required. At Dry Creek, there will be five sidings giving the capacity for stabling over 70 railcars.

The main maintenance facility comprises five railcar roads that extend the full length of the building, a number of specialised workshops, an integrated warehouse facility, administrative facilities and staff amenities. Activities in this facility include the planned and unplanned maintenance of the railcar fleet, removal and replacement of railcar components, overhaul of major components and carriage works.

Facilities will be provided for the cleaning of railcars. This will include regular spot cleaning of cars to ensure that appropriate conditions for carriage of customers are maintained. Facilities will also be available for railcars to be spring-cleaned as part of the ongoing maintenance program. Railcars will be scheduled for an exterior wash on a regular basis. On average, it is anticipated that up to 50 railcars per day can be washed using the facilities.

It is proposed that water used within this facility will include rainwater harvested from the site buildings. The water used during the wash-down process will also be treated and recycled, and waste products will be directed to the trade waste treatment plant.

The diesel maintenance facility will initially be utilised to support the program for the conversion of diesel railcars to electric drive and from broad gauge to standard gauge, but will transition to a diesel maintenance facility to maintain 12 remaining diesel railcars once the railcar fleet has been electrified.

Fuel storage has been located within a separate compound within a hard-stand area designated for receiving fuel via road tanker. The fuel storage area will include an above-ground purpose-built tank that will sit within an appropriately bunded area that is roofed to prevent the collection of rainwater within the bund. The fuel will be piped to the service and refuelling facility.

The yard has been designed to minimise conflicting movements of railcars, and roads will allow bypass of activities when busy, and as a contingency measure. Catchpoints have been designed at all entrance and egress points for railcar movements so as to eliminate the risk of a 'runaway train' entering the main line.

The Lonsdale site is owned by the Minister for Transport, with the exception of a small portion owned by the City of Onkaparinga. Council is willing to make this land available for the project. The site exists entirely within the City of Onkaparinga council area and is zoned industrial.

The Lonsdale site will include: a fuelling and service inspection facility; stabling facilities for the overnight and/or interpeak stabling of at least 30 railcars; appropriate rail track work linking the facilities to each other and to the main lines; storage facilities for fuel and other consumables; all appropriate drainage, trade waste management and water storage; a TransAdelaide operations building; and appropriate vehicular access roads, car parking and landscaping. Temporary fuel storage at Lonsdale is being investigated. Any facility constructed for fuel storage will be designed to the appropriate standards.

The various service areas will be provided with drainage via settling pits, silt traps, collection pits and sumps, which in turn will be piped to oil plate separator plants, whereby the contaminants are separated out for disposal off site and clean water directed to the sewer system.

The waste water treatment system will separate out grit, dirt, oil, grease and bacterial contaminants that will be generated by the wash process. Both sites will be designed to capture and use rainwater where practicable.

Significant service relocations, including overhead 66kV ETSA and high pressure gas, are required. Negotiations with service authorities will be ongoing during the design development phase of the project.

The receiving environment for stormwater leaving the Dry Creek site is the Barker Inlet Wetlands. Specific treatment measures will be necessary during the operational phase of the project. Treatments may include vegetated swale drains and/or sediment pond areas. The Lonsdale site has a less sensitive receiving environment; however, similar treatment of stormwater will occur prior to release from the site.

Removing the existing railcar maintenance facility on North Terrace will greatly improve the amenity of this area adjacent to the River Torrens and the rejuvenated West End precinct of the city. It will also allow for the area to be rehabilitated of historic contamination and enhanced through the appropriate re-use of the land.

The general amenity of the Dry Creek area will also be improved by the construction of the new maintenance facility. This land is currently under-utilised as a storage area and rail siding. The construction and operation of the facility at this site will improve the security and economic activity of the Dry Creek area.

It is expected that the new facilities will enable future standardisation and electrification of the network and will allow for the growth of the metropolitan passenger rail fleet. The new facilities will also reduce the risk associated with the continued use of the existing site adjacent to the River Torrens on North Terrace for industrial use that includes fuel storage and management of trade wastes.

The estimated cost of the project is $157 million, with work at the Dry Creek depot to be completed in 2010 and at Lonsdale in 2011. The key date aimed for is to be able to have the site available to the Department of Health by September 2010.

The project includes a number of benefits. It replaces a 25 year old maintenance facility with a new facility designed and constructed to current standards and practices. The facilities are purpose designed to accommodate an electric rail fleet and a standard gauge network. The facilities also have the capacity for future expansion to match anticipated growth in public transport patronage.

Based upon the evidence presented to it, and pursuant to section 12C of the Parliamentary Committees Act 1991, the Public Works Committee reports to parliament that it recommends the proposed public work.

Mr PISONI (Unley) (11:43): This was an interesting Public Works Committee hearing to sit on, with the relocation of the works on North Terrace. A couple of things that I was interested in exploring included the increased travel time for trains for refuelling. When we talk about diesel locomotives, I think a lot of people do not think about the process that goes into refuelling.

When we drive our cars there is a petrol station on just about every main road, so we do not have to make a special trip to go to the petrol station; we tend to call into one as we pass. The significant difference here is that we will see—I think for the Belair line alone, which will remain a diesel operation—50 extra journeys to Dry Creek for refuelling only for trains that are using the Belair line. They will be crossing over road intersections more often, so we will see boom gates coming down more often which will obviously cause more restrictions and more chaos on our roads.

We already have bottlenecks at many of the crossing points where the Belair line trains need to cross main roads in order to get down to the refuelling depot at Dry Creek. Members should remember that the refuelling depot is there as a permanent fixture, so that will happen for as long as the Belair line remains on diesel. We are still unsure as to the commencement of the electrification of the rest of the system. It seems very strange to me, if it were to happen in the next couple of years, or even the next two or three years, why a temporary refuelling depot would be built at Lonsdale when we know that it would be ripped up and pulled out once the trains were electrified.

One has to question the government's method here: some would say that there is method in its madness, but I would suggest that it seems to reflect a bit of chaos in the way that the government is managing both this project and its hospital project. The time lines seem to be based more on political time lines than on time lines that get the best value for taxpayers' dollars.

We saw that also with the purchase of the trams that run down through the city. We saw it in the Public Works Committee hearing in 2005, which questioned the purchase of those particular trams. It was made very clear in that report that the sole factor considered for purchasing that particular tram was that it was the only tram available to be delivered before the election—again, a political timetable by this government. It was not a timetable for the best value and the best use of taxpayers' money or the best value for taxpayers.

We are paying the price for those trams now. We have the extraordinary situation where we have the widest tram tracks with the narrowest trams. I think the Premier would like to boast that that is another world first, as he is always quick to boast about world firsts. Another world first here in South Australia is the widest tram tracks and the narrowest trams. Again, we see the inconvenience—the permanent inconvenience—that that political decision has created for South Australians in the longer term.

I am concerned that we are going to see an increase in greenhouse gas emissions for the Belair line. Do not forget that, at the moment, when the trains come into the Adelaide station the fuelling station is right there, so there is no additional travel for refuelling. My understanding is that refuelling has to happen every four or five hours, so the diesel trains will continue to make a number of trips a day to Dry Creek. It does not seem to me to be consistent with the public relations message the Premier keeps popping out there about his green credentials.

This is going to mean that a lot more diesel will be used in trips for refuelling. It will also mean that more cars are stopped at train crossing points, and up to 50 additional crossings a day were identified in the examination of the movement of trains from Belair to Dry Creek. For those who want to read Hansard on the parliamentary website, they will see that the Belair trains will need to use at least five more new crossing points to refuel than they use now. There are five more crossing points, each with 50 additional passes every day.

The Hon. I.F. Evans: Is that from Belair to Adelaide—50 a day extra?

Mr PISONI: That is from Adelaide to Dry Creek, 50 extra crossing points a day. The trains will go into the Adelaide station, out to refuel at Dry Creek and then back to Belair. That is what we will see. Those living in safe Labor seats will, obviously, be heavily relied upon to be patient. Those who use those crossing points might need to give themselves a bit more time to get to work because of the additional time they will spend queueing up at train crossing points.

Another interesting point raised was in relation to the remediation of the site. It was made perfectly clear by Mr Hook that that was the responsibility of the Department of Health. We understand the cost will be around $200 million. It is confirmed by this report that the cost of remediation of the site of the former Marjorie Jackson-Nelson hospital, now the rail depot hospital, is actually $1.7 million plus—$200 million for the remediation of the site. So it is close to $2 billion now for the new hospital.

I urge members to again look at the transcript of that hearing to see that confirmed. It is the responsibility of the Department of Health and DTEI will move out of this project, leaving a contaminated site for the Department of Health and the PPP partners to deal with—if we end up with a PPP for that project. As we know, the government is still undecided on how it will pay for the project, but we learnt from the hearing that the cost to clean up the site was not included in the cost of the hospital, nor was it included in the estimates for the electrification of the train track as well. I asked where the contaminated material was to go and there was no indication. It had still not been decided where the contaminated material would go, and the answer was along the lines that it is up to the Department of Health to deal with it, that it is its project and it has to deal with that.

I was interested to be reminded—I was told that this was announced when the electrification of the train tracks and resleepering was announced last year—that we are moving to standard gauge in our suburban network. That could cause some concern to people living near the tracks, because standard gauge is used by the national rail system, which is predominantly freight. So, there is some concern that we may be seeing freight on our suburban lines, but this has not been addressed in this report. I could not get an answer from Mr Hook along those lines, but I think the term he used was that the tracks would be 'freight ready'.

That is my quick analysis of the hearing. It is an exciting project, especially for someone like me who is very interested in trains. I found it interesting and fascinating, but I was frustrated at the apparent chaos surrounding this project that was exposed during this hearing.

Mr VENNING (Schubert) (11:53): Anything that comes before us with 'train' written in it or on it I will always have something to say about, because I have always been a great supporter of trams, trains and whatever. Figures released yesterday show that Adelaide has possibly the highest percentage of car parking spaces of any city of its type in the world. Why is that? It is because the public transport system has failed. We have become very car-centric here, and we must address this issue as it is causing all sorts of problems. Bring back trains, but make them more user friendly.

As the member for Unley said, trains are more than freight. Interstate freight is important, but they should not necessarily be going through our beautiful foothills when there is an alternative, namely, to go around and by-pass Adelaide. Freight does not need to come into Adelaide. In the future, when I am long gone from this place, if we cannot get freight to Port Adelaide without causing disruption to lovely suburbs like Unley, we need to consider whether we should have another port.

There is an alternative. The member for Goyder is sitting here, and that port is in his electorate. In the Mid North of the state, with deeper water than Port Adelaide, it is Mipony Point, just north of Tickera. It has been talked about for years. I am very sad to realise—

The Hon. M.J. Wright: It's a beautiful part of the world.

Mr VENNING: It is. I think that the freight should bypass Adelaide from Murray Bridge, up through Sedan and Cambrai and linking it around the back (there are two or three options to link into the main line) and then go across, with an existing rail corridor, I point out (which has been in the news in the last week, as the member for Goyder would know), from Snowtown across to Wallaroo. We hear that this connection is mooted to be closed. That part has been operated by the historic railway group from—

Mr Griffiths: The Lions Club of Yorke Peninsula.

Mr VENNING: Yes, the Lions Club of Yorke Peninsula Rail. I was pretty sad to hear they have closed it. The heat we had a few weeks ago buckled the tracks and they are no longer able to maintain that track. It is very sad, because the little community in Bute, which I know very well (my brother lives there), will be really hurt by the closure of that railway. The cost of keeping it up is probably in excess of $1 million.

Mr Griffiths: It is $2 million to repair.

Mr VENNING: The member for Goyder says that it is $2 million to repair, but the government ought to say, 'Well, hang on, we ought to keep this railway open.' I am cross that that rail line closed for commercial traffic, and I blame not the government but the bulk handling authority, which did not renew the rail unloader at Wallaroo. I do not know why it did not do that. My father was at the company so I cannot be too tough about that. My father was a director at the time, and they did not renew it.

I believe there is no reason why, for the sake of half a dozen D9s, we cannot lower the grades through the Hummocks and that rail line could be reopened for commercial traffic, because there is a port on the other end of it. That would indirectly solve the problem here in the suburbs of Adelaide—and we are talking very much in the future here. I note that the ERD Committee, of which I am a member, has before it a reference on transport options, which I am sure will be a fascinating reference. We hope to undertake this task with the University of Adelaide's blessing, using the university's expertise and its professors.

I look forward to this being a very worthwhile exercise, as we need to have a good look at our transport options. In relation to the rail depot about which this motion talks, we need to look at the whole picture and its effects. We need to make the decisions now that will have long-term ramifications; because I agree with the member for Unley that it is not satisfactory hauling all the freight that comes from Adelaide to Melbourne up through the eastern suburbs—it is ridiculous—and then hacking it through the Adelaide Hills. We have restrictions with tunnels and corners, and it is not satisfactory. It is high time we decided, 'Well, enough of that.' If this government does not do it I am very confident that the next government will, because I think it is very important.

Finally, in relation to our transport system here, I am concerned that we are not manufacturing more of these vehicles in South Australia. We do have very good bus/coach builders here. We are saddled with these inferior trams we have out the front now. I do say that with some respect, but they are not the quality tram we should have had; they are the narrower tram. Why did we buy them? Because we could not get the wider body ones in time for the election in 2006, and that makes me cross.

I understand that the chassis can be bought quite readily. The chassis are available for these trams and we should build the bodies here. We have the builders here. Why did we not do that? Even if they cost marginally more, I do not care; I bet the quality would be superior. I can tell members that at least the air-conditioners would work—they can be assured of that. I ask the people in those positions of power who are doing the decision making to consider why we are not making these here—and not just trams: the trains could be built here as well. Over the years we have had many very good coach building companies. Some are still around, even though they are only the remnants of the originals, and they ought to be looked at. It is sad to think that not all of us are using the tram. I wonder how many members came here today on public transport. Out of the 47 of us, I will bet there are not more than two.

Debate adjourned.

PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS
MEMBERS
GET INVOLVED
ABOUT PARLIAMENT
VISIT
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
CONTACT