Dandenong triplication given go-ahead

[tayser]

http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/com...55E661,00.html

Green light for $1b rail project
Liam Houlihan, transport reporter
08apr06

A $1 BILLION project to build a third rail track on the crowded Dandenong line has been given the green light in secret.

The extra track will speed up travel times for tens of thousands of commuters in Melbourne's growing east.

Houses and shops will be demolished, stations widened and roads diverted for the length of the 19km third track from Caulfield to Dandenong.

The extra track will allow express trains to overtake stopping-all-stations trains and free the network for more frequent services.

It is shaping as the Bracks Government's most expensive transport project.

The Government wanted to keep the third track project quiet until a major transport statement next month.

But the Herald Sun discovered the Government has already signed off on more than $6 million worth of contracts for the "Dandenong Rail Corridor Project" in the past three months.

A source close to the project confirmed the third track has been officially approved by the Bracks Government.

It could take a decade to build the extra line.

Transport Minister Peter Batchelor's office said the Dandenong rail contracts were for development of the project, but not the start of works.

Dandenong is the city's second busiest line after Belgrave with 55,000 boardings each week day.

The Government is also looking at building new stations on the Cranbourne and Werribee lines.

It has spent $283,000 on advice for options to build a station between Dandenong and Merinda Park stations at Lynbrook, and another at Point Cook.

The third track project stalled last year when the Government failed to fully commit to it in the 2005 budget.

Instead it funded a $25 million study of options for the Dandenong growth corridor.

That left open the possibility of extra buses as an alternative to a third rail.

The Public Transport Users Association said there were less costly ways to serve more passengers on the busy line.

"The people living on that line will be happy to see the extra trains when they arrive but that will be in a long time," said association president Daniel Bowen.

"Revamping signalling and timetables and introducing passing loops where there's available land, like in Oakleigh, would be much cheaper."

One of the Dandenong contracts, for survey services, has gone to Connell Wagner, which designed roads, tunnels and noise walls for EastLink.

Another is to a rail company involved in the Government's Regional Fast Rail project.

___________

With a price tag of $1 billion it better include a shitload of grade seperation.

[MrPC]

I don't believe there's any grade separation involved unless the plans have changed a fair bit since I last saw them.

Besides, with a 10 year window that leaves plenty of scope for the project to be cancelled mid way particularly during a change of government. Meanwhile, the real problem is crappy scheduling that's creating phoney capacity constraints, and they could fix that in a few months if they really wanted. Pity they have no intention of doing anything of the sort. This entire project is just a gift from taxpayers to Bracks' construction buddies.

[Aussie Steve]

The way the government can make some money out of this $1B project is to sell air rights over all the railway land. They must grade separate, otherwise what's the point? Wasn't there a report released this week outlining the problem with transport in Melbourne and the level of conjestion? Gee, lets run more trains and conjest the suburbs even further without grade separating them! Oh, and let's forget about safety too!!!

[The Olderfleet]

I wonder if this will actually happen. In 1999, we were going to get triplication between Box Hill and Ringwood, which is urgently required. It would also have enabled the undergrounding of Nunawading, which is much needed. Now in 2006, nothing has happened (and as much as I can ascertain, there is already sufficient railway reservations for this to happen). The best they can manage is the odd express skipping Laburnum and Nunawading, which have to wait for the stopping-all-stations in front of them anyway.

I am pleased they are triplicating Dandenong, but I will not hold my breath!

[MrPC]

Originally Posted by Aussie Steve

They must grade separate, otherwise what's the point?

To give a billion taxpayer dollars to the private sector over 10 years and cause 10 years worth of closures and miscellaneous hell for Dandenong line passengers who those despotic government types feel ought to be using CityLink.

Wasn't there a report released this week outlining the problem with transport in Melbourne and the level of conjestion? Gee, lets run more trains and conjest the suburbs even further without grade separating them! Oh, and let's forget about safety too!!!

Grade Separation causes problems too. Heck, the Selby crash in February 2001 is proof of that. A car rolled down an embankment onto the tracks, derailing one train, which an oncoming train then collided with.

Anyway, once peak oil starts to bite, grade separation works will become a tad redundant in hindsight.

[Hypernovean]

Originally Posted by MrPC

Grade Separation causes problems too. Heck, the Selby crash in February 2001 is proof of that. A car rolled down an embankment onto the tracks, derailing one train, which an oncoming train then collided with.

I think you ought to realistically compare the number of crashes caused by a car on a road being hit by a train, and a car under a road being hit by a train. Not to mention pedestrians.

[MrPC]

Considering that there are easily visible steel rails, and that train movements are entirely predictable (except during derailments of course) it's arguable that level crossings are safer than road intersections. As such, grade separation of road intersections ought to be a higher priority than grade separation of road/rail crossings.

[OSJ]

With a 1 billion dollar fund, what should happen, but won't is:

1. Start immediately to build passing loops where possible.
2. Start signaling upgrades immediately
3. Start a design/tender program to sell air rights for 200m in either direction of level crossings. In other words, link all grade separations to developments in order to share the capital works costs.
4. Force Gandel to include a station as a condition of new development, so a new Rowville line doesn't clog up the Dandenong corridor.

10 years later, you would have added a few thousand homes built right near public transport in the main growth corridor, would have eliminated level crossings, would have a link to one of the main regional centres in the east and 6 extra stations between rowville and alamein covering 3 activity centres and the largest university campus.

That would be logical... but we'll probably see basic new platforms built at 5 or 6 stations, at grade, and at full cost to the taxpayer as a "cheap" way of getting a 3rd track between Caulfield and Dandenong. There'll be no new stations, no new lines, and the "redeveloped" stations will prohibit any good use of the land around and above them..

Hope I'm wrong, but I'm not holding my breath.

[Daffy]

Sensible suggestions OSJ. The Shinkansen system in Japan basically runs with two tracks and it can accommodate a mix of various expresses and stopping all stations just by using signaling and high quality passing loops at stations.

I think that the grade separation of rail lines is a road project not public transport project. Let road levys and Vicroads do the jobs and get them to ensure that the works will not hold up any trains.

[NJANJA]

Originally Posted by MrPC

Anyway, once peak oil starts to bite, grade separation works will become a tad redundant in hindsight.

Yeah, no one in the year 2042 will care about grade separation! Well spotted!

[tayser]

anyhow, it's a bit too much to ask for increased line speeds isn't it?

Assuming a U-U/D-D configuration, the up and down lines @ 100kph and the central bi-directional line at 130kph or higher would be nice eh.

Pakenham's more a line suited to a Siemens is it not? any express track is going to see fewer trains per hour than either of the other therefore extra dwell times for passengers at stations would be more acceptable....... ? and they could cut journey times between Dandenong and Pakenham a fair bit with higher lines speeds too.

[/shameless bump]

[Blabbyboy]

tays, stop acting like you live on the dandenong line!

[tayser]

[tayser]

Thank christ for that.

http://www.theage.com.au/news/nation...335671131.html

$500m plan to cut number of level crossings

By Royce Millar and Stephen Moynihan
May 2, 2006

MAJOR level crossings in Melbourne's south-east are likely to be removed as part of a $1 billion upgrade of the crowded Dandenong rail line.

Government sources have confirmed that a key project in the much-awaited Transport and Liveability statement to be released this month will be a third track between Caulfield and Dandenong.

As the final touches are put on the statement this week, one of the last issues being thrashed out within Government is whether to take the opportunity of the upgrade works to grade-separate 10 level crossings at a cost of about $50 million a crossing. Fixing pedestrian crossings would be an additional cost.

Pressure is mounting for Government action on level crossings after Friday's train crash involving a new V/Locity train and a truck at Trawalla, near Ballarat, which claimed the lives of two people and injured dozens.

Train driver Ian Glasson remains in a medically induced coma in The Alfred hospital.

Mindful of the need for political goodwill in the south-eastern suburbs, Treasurer John Brumby is understood to be keen on the idea of removing the crossings.

But other insiders are worried about the time and cost that the extra work would involve, especially in light of the cost and time blow-out from the regional fast-rail project.

Last night, Government sources said a likely outcome would be the removal of five or six, but not all, of the major crossings along the 19-kilometre route, such as at Springvale, Centre and Clayton roads.

When the Government announced a study of the Dandenong upgrade in late 2004, there was no mention of the grade separations. However, local councils and others in the corridor have since called for the removal of the level crossings to ease congestion and improve rail and road efficiency and safety.

The Public Transport Users Association has backed the grade separations.

"If the third track is going to be constructed, then grade separation must be included as part of these works," said spokesman Alex Makin. "The Government needs to commit to a rolling project of grade separation across Melbourne and intersections such as Springvale Road need to be targeted as high priorities."

Whereas almost all of the level crossings in Sydney were removed in the 1930s, Victoria failed to follow suit, leaving the state with a costly and dangerous transport headache.

Last week's crash occurred at a "passive" level crossing marked only by a stop sign, not boom gates or flashing lights.

Inquiries by The Age have revealed that 63 per cent of the state's 2274 level crossings are passive. Train speeds on four new regional fast rail lines will be slowed in the vicinity of 18 passive crossings.

Louise Perry, a spokeswoman for Transport Minister Peter Batchelor, said the cost of fixing all the level crossings across the state was a prohibitive $60 billion.

She said the Government would await the outcome of the three investigations into the Trawalla crash before recommending improvements to crossings.

Yesterday, Mr Batchelor rejected Opposition calls for the Australian Transport Safety Bureau to investigate the crash.

He said comments by Liberal transport spokesman Terry Mulder were "just plain wrong".

"I think the comments that the Opposition have made here in Victoria are quite frankly disgusting," Mr Batchelor said.

"I was there on Friday at the crash site and at the hospital … I don't think it's appropriate for the Liberal Party here to be trying to make political mileage."

________________

now for the fun part, what to do, what to do?

Rail under road and build on top? Road over rail with ugly overpasses (think Oakleigh) and slicing through suburban centres?

I'm hoping all 4 crossings are eliminated between Caulfield and Oakleigh, Clayton Road and Springvale Road.

In Clayton if the whole line was sunk from the up side of Clayton road to the down side of Centre road they'd surely be able to recoup massive amounts of cash by selling air-rights and building on top (very wide corridor would make it less painful to build as well). Springvale road I think is a no-brainer in terms of sinking the rail line. a massive overpass would chew up too much space, look like arse and would probably go against any plans for the area.

If Grange Road wasn't included, ideally Glenhuntly station would be sunk under Glenhuntly road.

[Aussie Steve]

Sink them all!!!

[bobman]

Clayton & Centre Roads are among the worst I've seen.
Given the close vicinity of the Monash hospital, it is possible ambulances can be delayed numerous times in one day (emergency services cannot cross again'st boom gates? at least fire trucks don't anyway).

The queues at Clayton Road are ridicolous especially at peak times, it's only a matter of time those delays result in a fatality.

The Oakleigh overpass is just as ugly as Huntingdale's, they should've built Huntingdale Road under the rail line for continuous flow. Don't forget the two skinny and narrow overpasses on Worthing Road, Moorabbin and Brewer Road, Bentleigh

[invincible]

Springvale, Clayton and Centre Rds need grade separation since they're all major roads and traffic is bad enough as it is. Heatherton Road at Noble Park could do with a similar project too - the crossing has a roundabout immediately to the west and a set of traffic lights a short distance to the east. Triplication to Dandenong would probably require that anyway since the lack of space is around stations and level crossings mainly. There's plenty of room elsewhere - you can still see the tracks of sidings where Westall station currently is, and there's four tracks between Westall depot and Springvale.

Most people that die at level crossings are pedestrians who have less trouble ducking under a boom gate compared to a car. Of course, our media only covers the spectacular incidents.

It's kind of funny how when there's an accident at a passive crossing, people demand that every passive crossing in the state have flashing lights installed. Then when someone dies at a crossing with lights, someone demands that every crossing with lights have boom gates installed. Then when someone drives/walks around or under the gates and gets collected by a train, someone will demand that every crossing with gates be grade separated.

[Yardmaster]

Originally Posted by MrPC

Considering that there are easily visible steel rails, and that train movements are entirely predictable (except during derailments of course) it's arguable that level crossings are safer than road intersections. As such, grade separation of road intersections ought to be a higher priority than grade separation of road/rail crossings.

I wonder if anyone would even consider linking two freeways, or even letting a freeway cross an arterial road, without a grade separation?

Let's get real ... improvements probably can be made through timetabling, and maybe the project could be approached so that it initially creates long-length bypass-tracks, e.g. at Oakleigh and Springvale. But ultimately, without this sort of infrastructure spending, Melbourne Public transport will end up in the horse and buggy era.

As for the "1 billion to private enterprise" suggestion (I refer to a previous posting) well, what is this for, public transport infrastructure or what?

I've previously compared the no. of level crossings in Melbourne and Sydney: there may be reasons why (Sydney's system: heavier traffic on fewer lines) but, as regards level crossings, compared to Sydney, Melbourne is a cot-case!

[invincible]

Late reply: Grade separation (and triplication) of Springvale is only possible by closing the line and sinking the tracks - there's shops on both sides of the crossing.

The PTUA was saying in one of the local papers that there's no need for a third track because it moves congestion beyond Dandenong. But peak trains terminate at Dandenong and the line branches immediately after Dandenong anyway, with half of the trains going to Pakenham and the other half to Cranbourne, plus freight and intercity services to Gippsland.

[Yardmaster]

Originally Posted by invincible

Late reply: Grade separation (and triplication) of Springvale is only possible by closing the line and sinking the tracks - there's shops on both sides of the crossing.

The PTUA was saying in one of the local papers that there's no need for a third track because it moves congestion beyond Dandenong. But peak trains terminate at Dandenong and the line branches immediately after Dandenong anyway, with half of the trains going to Pakenham and the other half to Cranbourne, plus freight and intercity services to Gippsland.

There've been plenty of grade separations implemented in Melbourne in the past. Look at Box Hill, Elsternwick or Moorabbin. So far as I'm aware, they were all done without closing the line.

I think it was still the sixties when quadruplication of the lines from Caufield to Dandenong and Footscray to Sunshine was proposed (source: VR Newsletter)