1 25/04/2015 CLIENT ISSUE – REVISED LIST SS RT SS
0 06/02/2015 CLIENT ISSUE SS RT SS
REV NO.
DATE DESCRIPTION OF REVISION BY REVIEWED APPROVED
Lycopodium Rail Pty Ltd, ABN: 65 152 593 149, Level 3, 16a Bolton Street, Newcastle NSW 2300
RDA CENTRAL WEST & CENTROC
CENTRAL WEST FREIGHT, LOGISTICS AND TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE REGIONAL PRIORITIES
6046-REP-002
April 2015
CENTRAL WEST FREIGHT, LOGISTICS AND TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE REGIONAL PRIORITIES
6046-REP-002
Table of Contents
Page
6046-REP-002
April 2015 Lycopodium Rail Pty Ltd
1.0 INTRODUCTION 2
2.0 BACKGROUND 2 2.1 Location 2 2.2 Freight Task 5
3.0 PURPOSE 6
4.0 METHODOLOGY AND APPROACH 7 4.1 Approach 7 4.2 Evaluation Matrix Input Sheet 8 4.3 Initial Workshop to Agree on Evaluation Matrix Methodology 9
5.0 CAPTURE OF PROJECTS AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROJECT LIST 9
6.0 EVALUATION OF PROJECTS 9
7.0 FREIGHT, LOGISTICS AND TRANSPORT PRIORITY RANKING 11 7.1 Top 25 Projects 11 7.2 Projects 26 – 73 12 7.3 Weighting 14 7.4 Comments on the Project Ranking 14
8.0 PROJECTS RANKED BY BANDING 15 8.1 Priorities Greater than $10M in Capital Investment 15 8.2 Priorities Between $5M-10M in Capital Investment 16
6046-REP-002
April 2015 Lycopodium Rail Pty Ltd
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Lycopodium Rail Pty Ltd (Lycopodium) were engaged to develop a list of regional freight, logistics
and transport priorities across the Central West of NSW, specifically across the 14 LGA’s within
CENTROC. In delivering the study Lycopodium reviewed the region’s current freight, logistics and
transport infrastructure priorities and plans, assessed the extent of the supporting evidence base,
identified opportunities according to defined criteria, and recommend priorities for the New South
Wales Central West region. This report documents the purpose, methodology, consultation
undertaken and the findings of the Central West Transport Infrastructure Priorities Study.
This project was jointly sponsored and project managed by RDA Central West and CENTROC on a
collaborative basis and through a joint steering committee (“the Committee”).
2.0 BACKGROUND
Regional Development Australia Central West (RDACW) and Central NSW Councils (CENTROC)
are in the process of reviewing and establishing the key infrastructure priorities for the New South
Wales Central West region.
This is Stage 2 of the NSW Central West - Regional Infrastructure Review and Assessment
Project. Where infrastructure priorities have been classified according to a number of tranches, this
component of the project addresses only Tranche 1 - Freight, Logistics and Transport.
This project provides regional stakeholders with clear articulation of those projects that are
considered to have the greatest relative merit and worthy of more detailed investigation.
This Tranche was commissioned and overseen by RDA Central West. The study area
encompasses the local government areas of Bathurst, Blayney, Boorowa, Cabonne, Cowra,
Forbes, Lachlan, Lithgow, Oberon, Orange, Parkes, Upper Lachlan, Weddin and Young.
2.1 Location
The following illustrations were generated during the study to outline the transport networks within
the study area.
6046-REP-002
April 2015 Lycopodium Rail Pty Ltd
Figure 2.1 – Study Area Boundaries against major interstate Transport Corridors
Figure 2.2 – Rail Network (CENTROC Boundaries)
6046-REP-002
April 2015 Lycopodium Rail Pty Ltd
Figure 2.3 – Road Network (CENTROC Boundaries)
Figure 2.4 – Combined Road and Rail Network (CENTROC Boundaries)
6046-REP-002
April 2015 Lycopodium Rail Pty Ltd
2.2 Freight Task
During the study the Freight Model developed for the recently completed Central West Freight
Study was updated to incorporate data for the 3 additional LGA’s of Boorowa, Upper Lachlan and
Young. The current freight task as illustrated below combines freight generation and consumption
at a commodity level and also at a modal level shown as Net Tonnes per annum. Road volumes
include freight flows from each direction and so volumes approximate net tonnes moved in both
directions. Rail volumes are also shown as the combination of both directions and derived from
gross tonnes per annum.
The following illustrates the freight task volumes on road and rail through the study area, which was
considered in evaluation of individual projects.
Figure 2.5 – Net Annual Freight Volumes on Road and Rail 2014 (CENTROC Boundaries)
Predicted Increase in the Total Freight Task
The Central West Freight Study adopted the projected increases in the total freight task across
NSW as well as the predicted growth rates for major commodities as depicted in the NSW Freight
and Ports Strategy.
To approximate freight flows on key routes across the Central West Region, growth rates in the
Central West Freight Model were applied to current tonnages for locally produced commodities and
then factored into current road/rail volumes allowing for existing through freight. Increases in
through freight (such as Melbourne – Brisbane road volumes, which are expected to rise by
approximately 80% over the next 20 years) were also approximated. The Central West Freight
6046-REP-002
April 2015 Lycopodium Rail Pty Ltd
Model was expanded to include the 3 additional LGA’s of Boorowa, Upper Lachlan and Young in
order to represent the freight volumes within the CENTROC Boundaries to assist in the
assessment of regional transport priorities.
The combined road and rail volumes approximated at 2034 are illustrated below:
Figure 2.6 – Net Annual Freight Volumes on Road and Rail 2034 (CENTROC Boundaries)
3.0 PURPOSE
There is an increasing trend at both a State and Federal level to link available program funding to
infrastructure projects, particularly where an economic benefit is able to be derived and where the
proposed projects are underpinned by a strong supporting evidence base. The amount of funding
available varies from program to program, as does the area of infrastructure emphasis.
Increasingly, the region needs to be ready to take advantage of opportunities to attract funding to
the region across the broad infrastructure spectrum.
In this context, readiness requires the following:
Up-to-date local and regional priorities for the respective categories of infrastructure;
Project proposals that vary according to degree of funding required and amount of overall
spend required;
6046-REP-002
April 2015 Lycopodium Rail Pty Ltd
Where appropriate, supporting business cases with benefit cost analyses and other
substantiation.
This purpose of this project was to undertake the preparatory work necessary to identify and
assess those freight, logistics and transport infrastructure projects with an anticipated regional
benefit which may be the subject of further, detailed analysis at a subsequent stage.
This project addresses the first of the following six tranches:
Tranche 1: Freight, Logistics and Transport;
Tranche 2: Water;
Tranche 3: Education and Health;
Tranche 4: Sporting and Cultural;
Tranche 5: Energy;
Tranche 6: Communications.
This tranche is to cover all infrastructure priorities and candidate projects relating to freight,
logistics and transport including but not limited to:
Road and highway networks including structures;
Rail infrastructure including structures, terminal facilities, level crossings, signalling and
communications;
Air infrastructure including air navigational systems and airport structures and facilities;
Logistics infrastructure including, but not limited to, intermodal terminals, warehousing,
truck driver interchanges, agriculture storage and distribution;
Public transport infrastructure (including community transport), bicycle paths, pedestrian
walkways, bridges and underpasses.
4.0 METHODOLOGY AND APPROACH
4.1 Approach
In delivering the study Lycopodium carried out the following:
Conducted a literature review relating to government strategy, policy, plans and programs
as well as plans and strategies available from local and regional stakeholders;
6046-REP-002
April 2015 Lycopodium Rail Pty Ltd
Conducted focus groups with stakeholders including Council engineers and others to
further inform the study;
Identified of a long list of possible projects;
Compiled information on projects provided in order to populate the evaluation matrix;
Developed an evaluation matrix calculation tool;
Evaluated each project against the defined criteria included in the Matrix;
Provided recommendations as to key follow up actions in order to better position projects
considered to have high potential or impact.
4.2 Evaluation Matrix Input Sheet
Stage 1 of the project developed a decision making matrix input sheet. The methodology and input
developed during Stage 1 has been used to assess infrastructure priorities as it offers:
A consistency of approach with regard to regional priorities;
Cross tranche comparison and prioritisation;
A point of difference to other infrastructure plans; and
A tool for member use for the future.
The evaluation matrix input sheet was prepared by MWH Global for CENTROC and RDA Central
West and was provided at the commencement of the study to be used in assessing individual
projects. The evaluation matrix covered the following key areas.
Economic Efficiency;
Economic cost;
Economic benefit;
Connection;
Grows Economy;
Equity;
Culture Heritage Impact;
Environmental;
6046-REP-002
April 2015 Lycopodium Rail Pty Ltd
Social;
Resilience;
Funding;
Risk.
Within each of the broad evaluation elements above a number of evaluation criteria exist.
Definitions of the abovementioned evaluation criteria are included in the glossary that accompanies
the matrix.
4.3 Initial Workshop to Agree on Evaluation Matrix Methodology
A workshop was convened on the 10th October 2014 by CENTROC and chaired by MWH Global to
review and agree on the evaluation matrix methodology and the evaluation criteria included in the
matrix. Some minor adjustments to the criteria and evaluation methodology were suggested at the
workshop and a final version of the evaluation matrix was provided on the 13th October.
5.0 CAPTURE OF PROJECTS AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROJECT LIST
Where possible, face to face consultation sessions were held with representatives from the LGA’s
within the study area. These sessions were conducted between the 23rd
October 2014 and the 28th
October 2014 and involved 4 days across the Central West. Subsequent phone hook-ups were
held where face to face meetings could not be arranged.
Information supporting projects in various forms was provided during and subsequent to these
sessions. The consultation forums were not used as a way of populating information into the
matrix, they were primarily held in order to discuss and determine local and regional freight,
logistics and transport projects and priorities. The project descriptions contained in the evaluation
matrix was later populated by Lycopodium based on information supplied as well as other
supporting information gathered during the study.
It is relevant to note that some projects score relatively poorly where limited information was
available to assess these projects against the matrix criteria. Through the assessment period
additional consultation has taken place with representatives within the LGA’s and where
substantiated through additional information some of the project in the list have been reassessed.
The matrix tool allows this process to continue into the future.
6.0 EVALUATION OF PROJECTS
After a period of reviewing the information supplied, relevant details on each project were captured
in the matrix to assist in the evaluation. Much of the text has been taken from previous reports
6046-REP-002
April 2015 Lycopodium Rail Pty Ltd
including the Western Roads plan. Each project was assessed against the 28 evaluation criteria
and in the majority of cases provided a score out of 10.
Some notes relevant to the scoring of projects are provided below:
Phase: Projects that are well scoped with detailed designs completed scored well in this
category and others that are in early stages suffered through lack of detailed information
Capital Costs: The matrix provides a high score to expensive projects, however this is
offset against avoided costs and potential revenue. Capital costs were derived from
previous reports, comments from LGA representatives or derived by Lycopodium;
Operating and Maintenance Costs: General industry benchmarks for maintenance of
road and rail infrastructure (per km) was used to derive costs for this criteria. The annual
net tonnage on the transport corridor was taken into consideration through the application
of varied costs per km to maintain. Whilst this methodology could be improved upon, it
provided a relatively effective way of ranking projects;
Service Levels and Utility: The assessment contains some subjectivity however all
projects were assessed against one another and so the assessment is considered
reasonable;
Revenue: Only projects such as new road, rail and airport infrastructure were considered
able to generate additional revenue. Revenue for these projects was calculated based on a
per km pa rate and then applied across the initial 10years of operation. Further information
on predicted revenue for projects should be used to update the matrix as business cases
are developed for projects;
Avoided cost: Projects that deliverer improved infrastructure such as road widening, road
pavement strengthening, upgrade from gravel to bitumen roads were seen as delivering
significant avoided costs. These avoided costs were calculated based on the cost of
operations/maintenance on the existing versus new infrastructure and based on a per km
pa rate factored to consider the net tonnage on the transport corridor.
Links to markets: Projects were assessed against the strategic role they play in providing
a link to domestic and international markets.
Other: It was difficult to separate the vast majority of projects against a number of the
evaluation criteria and particularly within the hourly estimated time for the study (which was
agreed to prior to receiving the evaluation matrix). In general strategic projects that are
very likely to generate large scale growth and employment in the region such as the Bells
Line of Road Upgrade and bypasses on the Newell Highway score well through the
majority of evaluation criteria whereas upgrades on rural roads with low annual volumes do
not score as well, apart from isolated criteria such as safety which may be a feature unique
to the project.
6046-REP-002
April 2015 Lycopodium Rail Pty Ltd
7.0 FREIGHT, LOGISTICS AND TRANSPORT PRIORITY RANKING
7.1 Top 25 Projects
RANK ACROSS REGION
OVERALL ASSESSMENT
PROJECT TITLE
1 98.4 BELLS LINE OF ROAD UPGRADE
2 94.6 CADIA ROAD RECONSTRUCTION
3 86.9 INLAND RAIL PROJECT
4 85.6 GREAT WESTERN HWY UPGRADE EAST
5 85.6 BATHURST HEAVY VEHICLE BYPASS
6 80.9 CADIA TO MITCHELL HWY STRATEGIC LINK
7 78.9 SOUTHERN FEEDER ROAD ORANGE
8 78.7 SOUTHERN RING ROAD PARKES
9 78.4 HEAVY VEHICLE ROUTE NORTH FORBES
10 76.7 WESTERN RING ROAD PARKES
11 76.2 GOULBURN RD. BATHURST TO GOULBURN VIA CROOKWELL
12 75.4 BLAYNEY TO DEMONDRILLE RAIL LINE - REOPENING
13 73.9 BELUBULA WAY - TRUNKEY CREEK TO CANOWINDRA
14 73.8 BOGAN GATE TO TOTTENHAM RAIL LINE
15 72.8 MARY GILMORE WAY - BARMEDMAN TO ORANGE
16 72.4 UPGRADING OF RAIL NETWORK TO SUPPORT MORE EFFICIENT PASSENGER AND FREIGHT TO SYDNEY
17 69.8 PARKES AIRPORT UPGRADE
18 68.4 ABERCROMBIE HILL (MAIN ROAD 256)
19 68.1 ORANGE BULLET (TRAIN SERVICE)
20 66.9 HEAVY VEHICLE TRAFFIC RELIEF ROUTE
21 66.5 PEISLEY ST RAIL OVERBRIDGE WIDENING
22 66.5 BATHURST AIRPORT UPGRADE
23 66.0 ORANGE AIRPORT UPGRADE
6046-REP-002
April 2015 Lycopodium Rail Pty Ltd
24 65.7 BEASLEY RD UPGRADE (LINKING TO FOREST RD)
25 65.5 GLEN DAVIS RD / GLEN ALICE RD
Table 7.1 – Projects 1 - 25
7.2 Projects 26 – 73
RANK ACROSS REGION
OVERALL ASSESSMENT
PROJECT TITLE
26 65.5 RANGE ROAD CONNECTING WEST TO CASTLEREIGH HWY
27 64.8 COL DREW DRIVE
28 62.6 COCKATOO HILL AT SOFALA
29 61.7 ELECTRIFICATION OF RAIL NETWORK TO BATHURST
30 60.6 YOUNG INNER CITY HEAVY VEHICLE ROUTE UPGRADE
31 60.3 HENRY LAWSON WAY - NAGS HEAD BRIDGE UPGRADE MR236
32 60.2 BANJO PATTERSON WAY, HANOVER BRIDGE UPGRADE
33 59.6 COWRA INTERMODAL HUB
34 59.3 MURRINGO RD YOUNG TO BOOROWA
35 59.1 YOUNG HEAVY VEHICLE BYPASS
36 58.8 MILVALE ROAD SHOULDER WIDENING: TEMORA TO YOUNG
37 58.5 57 NORTH (CONDO TO TULLAMORE)
38 58.2 ORANGE ROAD UPGRADE
39 58.1 TOTTENHAM AERODROME
40 58.0 348 - TULLAMORE TO PEAK HILL
41 57.9 COWRA AIRPORT UPGRADE
42 57.2 BOGAN WAY WIDENING
43 57.2 GUMBLE ROAD INITIAL SEAL
44 57.2 RENSHAW - MCGIRR WAY REALIGNMENT: PARKES TO WELLINGTON (MR233)
45 57.0 350 - TULLAMORE - BOGAN GATE - FORBES (BOGAN WAY)
46 56.8 GREENTHORPE TO BUMBALDRY B-DOUBEL UPGRADE
6046-REP-002
April 2015 Lycopodium Rail Pty Ltd
47 56.6 LACHLAN VALLEY WAY - OVERTAKING LANES
48 56.5 WOMBEYAN CAVES RD
49 56.2 LACHLAN AND DOG ROCKS RD
50 56.1 HEAVY VEHICLE BYPASS - COWRA
51 56.1 MORONGLA RD - FROM LACHLAN VALLEY WAY TO OLYMPIC WAY
52 56.0 MIDDLE TRUNDLE - PART SEALED
53 56.0 GRABINE RD - BIGGA TO WQYANGALA
54 55.3 LEEDS RD (INTERSECTION WITH NORTHERN DISTRIBUTOR) REST AREA
55 55.0 COLLECTOR RD - GUNNING TO COLLECTOR
56 54.9 DRIFTWAY ROAD
57 54.6 FROGMORE RD
58 54.6 BATTERY RD - GLENALLA QUARRY
59 53.7 HOBBY'S YARDS ROAD
60 53.5 LAGGAN RD EAST - LAGGAN TO TARALGA - GRAVEL SECTIONS
61 53.2 BURRAGA RD
62 53.2 REOPENING OF THE OBERON TO TARANA RAIL LINE
63 52.7 BEACONSFIELD ROAD (RESEALING / SHOULDER UPGRADES)
64 52.3 SAFETY BARRIER INSTALLATIONS
65 52.1 LACHLAN AND KENDAL ST REALIGNMENT TO CONNECT LACHLAN VALLEY WAY AND MID WESTERN HWY
66 52.1 BENNETT SPRINGS RD
67 51.9 REALIGNMENT OF ACCESS TO BLAYNEY SEALINK
68 51.6 CUNNINGAR RD
69 51.6 LACHLAN VALLEY WAY PASSING LANES
70 51.2 MAIN ROAD 253: EDITH RD
71 51.1 RUGBY ROAD – BOOWROWA TO CROOKWELL
72 51.0 NEWELL HWY REST AREA - WEST WYALOING TO FORBES
73 51.0 GUNNING ROAD - DEVILS ELBOW REALIGNMENT
6046-REP-002
April 2015 Lycopodium Rail Pty Ltd
74 50.9 JENOLAN CAVES ROAD
75 47.8 ORANGE CYCLEWAY NETWORK
Table 7.2 – Projects 26 - 75
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
OV
ERA
LL A
SSES
SMEN
T A
CR
OSS
REG
ION
PROJECTS
Rank in Region
Figure 7.1 – Chart of All Projects Ranked Across Region
7.3 Weighting
Note: the above represents the ‘un weighted’ ranking. The matrix evaluation tool allows weighting
of certain criteria to reflect their importance over other criteria, however it is recommended that any
weighting be applied specific to an application such as a specific government funding program.
7.4 Comments on the Project Ranking
Ranking of individual projects within an LGA across regional boundaries is a contentious exercise.
By utilising a standard matrix and agreed evaluation criteria, it is expected that the subjectivity of
any ranking process is reduced and projects can be assessed on a uniform and transparent basis.
The process used in this study is considered to be transparent however the variation comes from
the input data. Limited data was available for certain projects, making the assessment against
other projects more difficult. It is likely that stakeholders will identify projects that they believe to be
of significant merit and are under represented in the matrix. To this end it is recommended that
6046-REP-002
April 2015 Lycopodium Rail Pty Ltd
stakeholders have the opportunity to provide additional data to support projects that appear under
represented through the initial evaluation process.
8.0 PROJECTS RANKED BY BANDING
To assist stakeholders with future funding submissions the ranked projects in the following bands
have been outlined below.
8.1 Priorities Greater than $10M in Capital Investment
RANK ACROSS REGION
OVERALL ASSESSMENT
PROJECT TITLE
1 98.4 BELLS LINE OF ROAD UPGRADE
2 94.6 CADIA ROAD RECONSTRUCTION
3 86.9 INLAND RAIL PROJECT
4 85.6 BATHURST HEAVY VEHICLE BYPASS
6 80.9 CADIA TO MITCHELL HWY STRATEGIC LINK
7 78.9 SOUTHERN FEEDER ROAD ORANGE
10 76.7 WESTERN RING ROAD PARKES
12 75.4 BLAYNEY TO DEMONDRILLE RAIL LINE - REOPENING
14 73.8 BOGAN GATE TO TOTTENHAM RAIL LINE
16 72.4 UPGRADING OF RAIL NETWORK TO SUPPORT MORE EFFICIENT PASSENGER AND FREIGHT TO SYDNEY
19 68.1 ORANGE BULLET (TRAIN SERVICE)
23 66.0 ORANGE AIRPORT UPGRADE
25 65.5 GLEN DAVIS RD / GLEN ALICE RD
29 61.7 ELECTRIFICATION OF RAIL NETWORK TO BATHURST
35 59.1 YOUNG HEAVY VEHICLE BYPASS
50 56.1 HEAVY VEHICLE BYPASS - COWRA
53 56.0 GRABINE RD - BIGGA TO WQYANGALA
59 53.7 HOBBY'S YARDS ROAD
6046-REP-002
April 2015 Lycopodium Rail Pty Ltd
61 53.2 REOPENING OF THE OBERON TO TARANA RAIL LINE
71 51.1 RUGBY ROAD – BOOWROWA TO CROOKWELL
Table 8.1 – Projects Ranked Across Region Over $10M
8.2 Priorities Between $5M-10M in Capital Investment
RANK ACROSS REGION
OVERALL ASSESSMENT
PROJECT TITLE
4 85.6 GREAT WESTERN HWY UPGRADE EAST
8 78.7 SOUTHERN RING ROAD PARKES
20 66.9 HEAVY VEHICLE TRAFFIC RELIEF ROUTE
33 59.6 COWRA INTERMODAL HUB
43 57.2 RENSHAW - MCGIRR WAY REALIGNMENT: PARKES TO WELLINGTON (MR233)
48 56.5 WOMBEYAN CAVES RD
55 55.0 COLLECTOR RD - GUNNING TO COLLECTOR
65 52.1 LACHLAN AND KENDAL ST REALIGNMENT TO CONNECT LACHLAN VALLEY WAY AND MID WESTERN HWY
67 51.9 REALIGNMENT OF ACCESS TO BLAYNEY SEALINK
68 51.6 LACHLAN VALLEY WAY PASSING LANES
Table 8.2 – Projects Ranked Across Region between $5M and $10M
