Melbourne Public Transport (Part II)

[John_Proctor]

Well Buckley street not in governments 10 grade sep list ATM and the ones most likely to get added are dandenong corridor ones and their 16tph...

[tayser]

Originally Posted by L2

It's any different to the various Dandenong line level crossings how?

At least Mount Alexander Rd has a nearby road underpass. Couple of years ago at Buckley St they changed the crossing setup so the booms went off when a train approached Glenbervie (WTF) when previously they were set off when trains hit the middle of the platform at Essendon, now thankfully fixed.

It's no different - in fact they're all the same: all the [major] level crossings should be removed.

Mount Road really isnt that much of an option for people driving to get out to Buckley & beyond - it's a massive detour and not really a justification for not doing the Buckley St grade sepping IMO.

Plus - there's potential for some crafty design here:

- Essendon Station as it stands is a good setup - island platform with a centralised access with pedestrian subway to both sides. Any grade separation here would have to see Buckley st go below the current rail grade (too expensive to demolish Essendon station and rebuild given that to the north is the rail overpass of Mount Road which would fuck the trains around too much (steep grade on the down to get up onto the current Mount Road overpass)) and at the lower street grade on the northern side of the street is the perfect spot to put the bus interchange currently on the western side of the station in Rose St.
The pedestrian subway can be extended south from the landing where it turns north to the current access points on both sides to directly access Buckley St / Bus interchange as well.

[John_Proctor]

Bell requires rebuild of coburg station and Because of the proximity of the other roads in the area you,d also have to do at least o'hea and Munro streets. (or close them)

No point separating park, so little traffic. And that means removing only Brunswick is of value in your proposal, which is lower than probably 30 other crossings across Melbourne.

[tayser]

Originally Posted by John_Proctor

Well Buckley street not in governments 10 grade sep list ATM and the ones most likely to get added are dandenong corridor ones and their 16tph...

It'll change if 1) this plan comes to fruition and 2) the ALP gets back in power in the next decade (this is their bread and butter territory like Doncaster/Rowville is to the Libs)

[John_Proctor]

Correct on Buckley going under, have seen a plan some years ago of a project option for it.

[tayser]

Originally Posted by John_Proctor

Bell requires rebuild of coburg station and Because of the proximity of the other roads in the area you,d also have to do at least o'hea and Munro streets. (or close them)

No point separating park, so little traffic. And that means removing only Brunswick is of value in your proposal, which is lower than probably 30 other crossings across Melbourne.

Fair points - what's your opinion on the Upfield corridor being able to take 6 TPH now without grade seps? it might irk people - but at the very least if it does get up someone's goat - those two extremities are the ones you'd do first IMO.... no?

[John_Proctor]

Bell street is so congested along it's length though that maybe their isn,t much congestion relief from grade sepping it - just shifting the problem to another intersection along it's length?

I think the only option is probably to do it all at once ala nswp,s suggestions (only thing is a question of priority and timing!)

I don,t really travel any of those roads enough to comment in an informed manner on how going to 6tph would be taken. If the people of those suburbs want a bettr train service in the next 20 years then they,d just better get used to the boom gates being down for longer.

[John_Proctor]

Originally Posted by John_Proctor

http://www.rowvillerailstudy.com.au/...ing-report.pdf

Here is the report. Page 41 shows it's 7 craigieburns running direct to fss presumably over the north Melbourne flyover.

Also includes a service plan with Melbourne metro on page 42.

Service increases:
24 tph sunshine- dandenong line (includes electrified Melton)
18 tph werribee - sandringham line (with some trains terminating at south yarra)
22 tph northern loop (including 6tph upfield)
18 tph franks ton loop

So looking at the base case that is
3 trains extra in frankston
4 trains extra werribee
2 trains extra upfield
4 tph extra craigieburn
8 tph extra dandenong
Similar sunbury. Big increase due to Melton being added.

I.e about 20 tph extra from the project.

[cjb287]

Originally Posted by OneMelbGuy

To my mind, Melbourne was a perfect city at 2 million, and it could have simply worked with that and enhanced it. I definitely don't think either Melbourne or Sydney are better cities today due to the immigration flood of the last decade.

So in your eyes initiatives like Postcode 3000 are a failure? The fact that life has returned to the streets is a bad thing? Melbourne was a stale backwater up until we started seeing substantial population growth again.

The world doesn't stop after clock off at 5 like you seem to think it should. That's such a 1950s mentality. Being able to fire a cannonball down Swanston Street on a sunday arvo without a soul in sight isn't a good thing either. It's just plain depressing is what it is.

A city where everyone shuts up shop and scurries off to their own little burrows at night to hide and watch Wheel of Fortune does not appeal... unless you're a 90 year old pensioner or something. But even then I've heard from friends and family who've travelled to certain European cities where people from all walks of life including the elderly go out for strolls in the middle of the night. There's no fear or angst because everyone is out doing their own thing. The city is active and alive. Not dead and suddenly an open range to the dregs of society.

I'm so glad Melbourne has become the city that it is today because of population growth and I can't wait to see it in another 10 or 20 years.

[get400]

Originally Posted by cjb287

I'm so glad Melbourne has become the city that it is...and I can't wait to see it in another 10 or 20 years.

Are you serious?

While we bicker over which train line to build...the Government's No. 1 priority is to build another freeway for $5b. As reported in the age today.

If we all get behind an airport rail link costing $2-3b then they would be forced to build it and we get a brand new train line with 0 level crossings.

And then people living in the east will campaign to get the line extended to Dandenong.

[cjb287]

Yes it still could be a hell of a lot better. Particularly the outer suburbs. My point was though that the city has become so much more interesting and vibrant in the last 10 years.

There's an article in the Age today confirming that Infrastructure Australia has no intentions of providing funds even for the planning of the road link for now. This is probably good news for those hoping to see the metro tunnel get off the ground first. Although I wouldn't be expecting funds for actual construction of the rail tunnel either at this stage.

http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/fr...417-1x5kq.html

[Planks & Sticks]

Originally Posted by John_Proctor

Reason this plan wouldn,t happen Because why abandon a perfectly good two track railway less than 1km away. It's not like camberwell road is a existing activity centre so if you are going t shift land use to a transport corridor it might as well be to the existing one (Alamein line) and not spend $1 billion + to build a tunnel to the same place the line goes anyway.

The premise of linking to the Alamein line I agree with though. Honestly there are probably almost as many people going along that corridor as there are into the city...

Oh I just placed it along Camberwell Road because I felt that it would need to go to Glenferrie which itself is a major destination. Would be a tight squeeze to add another transport corridor between Camberwell and Glenferrie if we were to have Blackburn and Ringwood services to run all day. I suppose terminating it at Camberwell and a quick transfer to another train to hop 2 stations down should be acceptable in the meantime (if they were to ever focus on inner city transport options ) as long the frequency makes up for it.

[John_Proctor]

Blackburn and that line could share tracks up of camberwell... Would never need full 48 trains per hour quadded track would allow so could run as a branch quite reliably at say 8tph Blackburn 8tph 'rowville via alamein'. (with 8 each belgrave/lilydale on te other pair)

[tayser]

My submission to the Rowville Rail Study draft report.

[sealedjono]

As far as investigating a cheaper light-rail alternative to rowville, could you do it cheaper than the 75 tram extension to knox then down stud road? you could sell it as part of a network wide 21st century upgrade to the century old tram network (i would probably do other sections first like sth melb and/or st.kilda, but i don't need the votes in rowville) and just the first rail in rowville with a train to come when they sort out all those dandy crossings or extend alemain in about 20 years to meet the lightrail.

They could badge light rail like the supper stops (or premium stations) as a major step up (put the upgradded light rail on train maps), plan and phase convert/build it, using existing rolling stock/tracks. Like getting some driver activated light priority before later grade sepping major roads and closing other cross points (and many stops, call them stations, have inner city train station spacings maybe: 'alemain line', warrigal rd, deakin, middleborough, blackburn, springvale, vermont sth, east of eastlink, knox city, then swinburne uni/highstreet, george st/middle-of-suburbia, ferntree gully rd, then rowville meeting train).

Run vehicles to 10-12 minute minimum frequencies, using traffic light control to space them evenly so they don't bunch and you don't need a schedule, or at least no schedule between say 6am and 10pm.

focus on alemain line to rowville section as light rail. then when you get enough light rail upgraded sepperate the lines at glenferrie or cambwell or alemain line, inner city leave as tram for now then upgrade as needed/can like Planks sugested for camberwell rd (see below), as it would be best to connect to belgrave/lilydale at some point. Don't worry tram fanboys i think the completed lightrail line should still be the longest in world even with the break. (and propper light rail all the way to city would be expensive and difficult, that's what the train line is for).

Originally Posted by Planks & Sticks

I might support this idea if they actually did the Alamein extension to Huntingdale Station and onwards from there as stage two. But it doesn't appear to be the case in that video, which is a disappointment.

I would have preferred something like this: http://g.co/maps/w489y , though I can see the NIMBYs going apeshit about the idea of having higher density living along Camberwell Road, so I highly doubt this kind of approach will ever take off. Which is a shame. Could have added a compromise, densify the streets covered in the map and add protection outside of those higher density living boundaries (some distance from the stations) for 20 years so that there is a mixture of housing. Heck, add grants to help people buy the house itself, but not the land and have it transported somewhere else, possibly saving on materials while at it!

Anyway that's just a quick idea on how cheap "technically rail" could get to rowville, and how you could ease proper light rail into our transport options through many baby steps, building it up later, of course proper future planning and forethought will be needed.

[sealedjono]

Originally Posted by tayser

My submission to the Rowville Rail Study draft report.

very interesting Tayser, my previous post was partially inspired by your light rail proposals (and some negative responses you've had in regards to implementing them) but not this Rowville submission, i just left it unfinished for a few hours and only saw your post afterwards. specifically i was just thinking how you could get politicians, the public, gunzels, financiers, etc to sign off on modern light rail line in response to rowville rail.

[17 floors up]

Originally Posted by tayser

My submission to the Rowville Rail Study draft report.

Interesting - I like your proposal. I too, think it is ridiculous spending huge amounts of money on 250m platforms, tunnelling etc, only to have 15 min frequencies. Smaller trains at higher frequencies woudl be much better, espcially as a connecting orbital line with higher capacity radial lines.

[John_Proctor]

I like the line but...

double the cost of your proposal and you'd be closer to the actual cost.

$10 million to add a platform pair to Huntingdale Station?

I expect that the tunnel portals, land acquisition and platform alterations you propose at Huntingdale and Oakleigh is probably abotu $200 million each. ($400 million = 1 quarter of your budget while construction abotu 1/60th of the length of line)

[tayser]

ah yes, Huntingdale is an error - look at the map (did those costings first rather than the accompanying text).

$100 million per kilometre for underground track, $20million per km for surface and $50million per km for elevated track?

And likewise, doubling the cost of stations when they're 2/3s the length of a current stations (180-200m - as opposed to 100m platforms in the proposal)????

[NoshowwithoutPunch]

Tays I don't agree with much you say, but well written and thought out submission! And much more that could have been said, but can't be within the format.