Melbourne Public Transport

[Eco-rat]

Originally Posted by John_Proctor

this is just a quick map I made re: our immediate inner south discussions.

a very 'do-able' proposal would require about 2km of tram extension to link Tram Route 8 through to Port Melbourne along Park Street and perhaps Liardet Street. For 2km of track you'd link all 5 Port Melbourne/South Melbourne/Southbank/Albert Park/Middle Park trams back through to the EddingTunnel station at Domain interchnage (not to mention linking between each other and also the St Kilda Road tram routes and South Yarra Station).

I think this is the most obvious connection to take one route off St Kilda/Swanston corridor after the Eddingtunnel is constructed. another could be to connect the 55 (Kings Way) through Domain to any of the other St Kilda Road routes. I've also shown a variation on L2's St Kilda-Port Melbourne bus service.

just an out of interest more than anything perked by the above discussion.

http://maps.google.com.au/maps/ms?hl...15398&t=h&z=13

Looking at the map makes you wonder why one of Route 96, 109 and 112 don't go up to La Trobe Street? Could be a good way to Get 109 out of the Collins Street crush with 4 tram routes on it at the moment (plus R31 city shuttles) compared to only city circle and R30 city shuttle on La Trobe.

Excellent stuff JP, great minds think alike.

My aim would be to get as many of the Swanston St tram routes running east-west across St K Rd, and putting a full or light metro under St K Rd instead of the current slow, inefficient (a driver on every tram) and unsatisfactory arrangement.

And my first and favorite would be the recreation of the Windsor St Kilda railway, via the tramline down the St K bypass road, but instead of turning right, veer left, and towards Fitzroy St.

As for more generally, I notice in Toronto rather than having trams converge on a few city streets, they tend to run on their own route on an individual street.

So for Melbourne, if you did this, you'd be looking at separate tram routes on all the CBD grid streets, plus my idea of a dedicated Victoria St route from St Vs to Errol St or beyond.

[John_Proctor]

Originally Posted by manila_playa87

John Proctor i agree that maybe atleast one tram service be taken off swanston st and redirected to port or south melbourne since transport there is quite poor especially port melbourne. Instead of north north melbourne wat about a west melbourne underground station. That is wat i really wanna see along with urban development in that area all along dynon rd. Southbank could also do with an underground station but i dunno how the eddington tunnel could do that...

where do you want a West Melbourne station?

the existing North Melbourne station is actually in West Melbourne nad most of WEst Melbourne is within a 500m walk of either North Melbourne Station, tram route 57 (Victoria/Elizabeth Street), Tram Route 55 (peel street) or even reasonably close to Flagstaff/Southern Cross Stations.

I've often thought that a Dudley Street station could be built and used solely by Laverton/Williamstown services. in the short term it is a pretty sh!tty service provision but should get up to 10 minute metro service in the longer haul.

A Dudley Street station, plus North Melbourne, 'North' North Melbourne on the Eddingtunnel and East Kensington plus the various tram routes through west melbourne and docklands would be plenty for that area. .


Here is some further thinking on tram route 'shifting' along St Kilda Road corridor. (ended up more detailed than I'd planned)
http://maps.google.com.au/maps/ms?hl...07699&t=h&z=14

FROM SOUTH TO NORTH
Route 67 - Stays as is Carnegie to City - Glen Huntly Road, Nepean Highway, St Kilda Road
Route 3 (always operates as Route 3A) - East Malvern to City down Waverley Road through Caulfield, Balaclava Road, Carlisle Street, The Esplanade, connect to Route 112 through Middle Park
Route 96 - As is
Route 64* - 'High Capacity Light Rail' Malvern Station to City down Dandenong Road/St Kilda Road/Kings Way
Route 5 - stays as is Malvern to City - Wattletree Road, Dandenong Road, St Kilda Road
Route 6/Route 55 - Glen Iris to West Coburg - High Street, St Kilda Road, Domain, Kings Way, William Street, Peel Street, Royal Park
Route 72 (INNER) - Malvern to Lygon Street (north section of old Rotue 8)- Malvern Road, St Kilda/Swanston, Lygon
Route 8 (south section) - Toorak to Port Melbourne down Toorak, across Domain down Park Street. (requires 2km new track)
Route 1 - AS IS
Route 109 - AS IS


non city bound routes

Route 79 - Richmond to St Kilda - Chapel Street, Carlisle Street, Fitzroy Street. St Kilda Loop extension is designed to connect routes 3A/112, 96 to St Kilda Junction.
Route 72 (eastern) - Burke Road from Camberwell to Caulfield (requires ~2.5km new track)
Route 16/64 (eastern) - Glenferrie Road/Hawthorn Road route and not enter into the city. 64 only runs on dedicated Dandenong Road reserve, and Route 3a covers 16 into the city, Route 16 covers the Hawthorn Road section of current Route 64.

[Yardmaster]

Originally Posted by Eco-rat

Huh?

Who asked for loco-hauled trains?

Who asked for food facilities?

It's only Traralgon, after all, in a string of rail motors.

And given that they all should be going to Traralgon- why not empty the toilets there?

They do run 3 services to & from Bairnsdale each day: which serve bus connections through to Lakes Entrance, Canberra, & along the highway past Mallacoota into New South Wales. I can't say how many Traralgon services are loco-hauled (if any), but I often see the Gippsland train sitting waiting to go at Sth. Kensington.

[invincible]

I guess the question here is then why can't Traralgon (not the ones that go on to Bairnsdale) services all be run using Sprinters and Vlocities, originating from Flinders St? Why do we need to keep the status quo when there is another solution that will streamline things without inconvenicing passengers?

It's not like the Gippsland services even use the country platforms at Southern Cross - they're just taking up space on the suburban platforms (in terms of increased dwell times) and that could have implications if the number of trains running through those platforms are increased.

It's about thinking for the future and how we can change things a bit and make the most of the infrastructure we have.

[manila_playa87]

[QUOTE=John_Proctor;54803457]where do you want a West Melbourne station?

the existing North Melbourne station is actually in West Melbourne nad most of WEst Melbourne is within a 500m walk of either North Melbourne Station, tram route 57 (Victoria/Elizabeth Street), Tram Route 55 (peel street) or even reasonably close to Flagstaff/Southern Cross Stations.

I've often thought that a Dudley Street station could be built and used solely by Laverton/Williamstown services. in the short term it is a pretty sh!tty service provision but should get up to 10 minute metro service in the longer haul.

A Dudley Street station, plus North Melbourne, 'North' North Melbourne on the Eddingtunnel and East Kensington plus the various tram routes through west melbourne and docklands would be plenty for that area. .

Yes Dudley St i reckon could be a good spot for a west Melbourne station or dynon Rd which is ripe for development in coming decades. It would be pretty strange if it just went parkville station then footscray without any others. Flagstaff and North Melbourne aern't connected to eddington tunnel so west melbourne would be handy but i suppose u could interchange at flinders or melbourne central. Btw isn't north of north melbourne considered west melbourne still for some reason?

[L2]

What nessecarily says the tunnel is actually going to go that way? I thought it was going to follow more around South Kensington than Dynon Rd.

And North Melbourne is actually a fairly quiet station in terms of people actually entering/exiting the PT system there. I have the figures and an equivalent station might be Heatherdale perhaps.

[John_Proctor]

from the various media reports, public discussions I have heard the tunnel will use the at grade tracks through Footscray and start in a tunnel somehwere near East Kensington Station, The Parkville Station is at Grattan Street between Flemington Road and Royal Parade and if you draw a line between those two places you get something passing under roughly Arden Street.

the block surrounding by Arden Street, Laurens Street, Citylink and Dynon Road is a big chunk of Public Land that would be suitable for a 'North' North Melbourne Station and urban infill development anchored of the station. There won't be any other stations.


Whole block is publicly owned
http://maps.google.com.au/maps?hl=en...09624&t=h&z=17

my Dudley Street proposal was only on the existing tracks.

[crazyknightsfan]

Originally Posted by John_Proctor

from the various media reports, public discussions I have heard the tunnel will use the at grade tracks through Footscray and start in a tunnel somehwere near East Kensington Station

So how are we getting the extra capacity through Footscray? RRL tunnel?

[John_Proctor]

the Eddingtunel will take the Sunbury line.

RRL and Sunbury Electrification provide the additional capacity on Sunbury and Newport groups - effectively giving back about 20 train paths across them both when you add up the removal of Sunbury diesels (through electro) and then Melton, Bendigo, Ballarat adn Geelong services to RRL.

You'll have noticed recently Clay Lucas has started to talk about the '$5 billion RRL' project. watch this space as it could be that rather than it becoming a '$5 billion RRL' it might become a 'slightly less gold plated' RRL with a less perfect solution to Sunshine and Footscray issues than previously expected.

[crazyknightsfan]

^ Im still confused though - there's more tracks east of Footscray than west of Footscray if Eddingtunnel surfaces at East Kensington. Are these two tracks from the Eddingtunnel going through Footscray at grade or back into tunnel?

[John_Proctor]

at grade as the existing tracks to sunshine and on to Sunbury.

Footscray will have 2 tracks to Sunshine, 2 tracks to Newport and 2 RRL tracks. those 6 tracks will continue across the Maribyrnong River then at East Kensington there'll be 2 Sunbury Tracks going into the Eddingtunnel, 2 RRL tracks and 2 Newport tracks.

it hasn't been decided how the RRL will get through Footscray - tunnel or at grade.

(I suppose there is a chance there'll be 4 electrified tracks in that area 2 for Werribee's to bypass East Kensington Station and 2 for Laverton's to stop at East Kensington Station.)

[marki]

Originally Posted by John_Proctor

just heard some interesting stats re the 901 Smartbus (Altona-Mordiallic)

17,000 passengers per weekday
10,000 per day on saturday
8,000 per day on sunday.

Extrapolates to nearly 5.5 million trips per year (although you'd think it'd be less when taking into account school holidays etc.)

I expect that'd be comparable to some tram routes - the highest patronage tram routes are about 12-15 million per year.

Originally Posted by cjm911

Do you know the passenger stats for the 401 bus from North Melbourne?

Originally Posted by John_Proctor

not sure but much less than that. I think I heard somewhere a couple of months ago about 4000 per day.

but remember 401 is only about 3km of route whereas 901 smartbus is 65km.

Thats right, you cant compare 3km with 65km. Also, the 903 and other smartbus are actually 2 or more bus routes joined together. So you'd have to joint the patronage numbers of other routes too. And of the 17,000 on a weekday you may get 15,000 lazy schoolkids cramming aboard to do the half km leg from say Oakleigh school to Oakleigh station.

More useful is the 'passenger_kilometre' but harder to collect (should be easier with Myki?), then compare it with total 'bus_seat_kilometre' or similar, as well as patronage at different times of day.

Originally Posted by Planks & Sticks

I really do wish that they publish these information for all the public transport routes in Melbourne on a convenient website

Originally Posted by cowface

Nothing about patronage yet, but the site looks slightly promising.

http://data.vic.gov.au/

Absolutely, but unfortunately: "The data made available via www.data.vic.gov.au is specifically for the App My State competition at this time"

I dont think the Vic (or any State Govt) would want to make that data easy to get (even with FOI), it would be too embarrassing.

[Dark_matter]

Because knowing that your government is incompetent is bad. Having the proof is guaranteeing the next government will be better.
And we can't have that!



(Even Hitler played the shy submissive type with his weird ass waves before he was elected)

[Yardmaster]

Originally Posted by crazyknightsfan

So how are we getting the extra capacity through Footscray? RRL tunnel?

I run a risk here through not having read all the last posts, but things certainly point to a tunnel through here: they've been drilling like buggery all around here, & are drilling in South Kensington now (yesterday).

My understanding is that RRL lines will come out on the former goods lines on the south side of South Kensington, there will be a new bridge, and then a tunnel under Footscray, essentially on the North side of the current tracks. But I've also been told they've made provision for extra tracks (one at least) on the surface.

My observation: at least four bores have been put down in the carpark where the old bowling alley used to be in Irving St, and two just NE of there, around Cowper/Ryan Street. A couple have gone down on the south side of the line (probably more I didn't notice).

[manila_playa87]

A station in East Kensington on the rail tunnel? That's the first i've heard of it. I always thought the transport plan would explore an additional station in west melbourne along with one near commercial rd?

[city_thing]

Originally Posted by John_Proctor

from the various media reports, public discussions I have heard the tunnel will use the at grade tracks through Footscray and start in a tunnel somehwere near East Kensington Station, The Parkville Station is at Grattan Street between Flemington Road and Royal Parade and if you draw a line between those two places you get something passing under roughly Arden Street.

the block surrounding by Arden Street, Laurens Street, Citylink and Dynon Road is a big chunk of Public Land that would be suitable for a 'North' North Melbourne Station and urban infill development anchored of the station. There won't be any other stations.


Whole block is publicly owned
http://maps.google.com.au/maps?hl=en...09624&t=h&z=17

my Dudley Street proposal was only on the existing tracks.

That'd be a fantastic spot for a new station as passengers could walk through a Queensbury Street exit into North Melbourne. The current North Melbourne station is in a bit of an awkward position, and you have to go through a bit of a maze of streets to find it.

[Dark_matter]

I don't know if its publicly owned. TNT freight and many other businesses are based there.

[John_Proctor]

yep many companies are based there but they are leasing crown land. similar to the E-Gate precinct which houses Bluescope Steel terminal amongst others but they'll be kicked out when all leases expire in 2014 to make way for whatever is proposed there.

no East Kensington station for the tunnel. Footscray direct to a station near North Melbourne and then Parkville.

Yardy - very perceptive regading bore hole locatiosn etc and all you've said is about right for thinking for RRL... but I think the Clay Lucas 'cost blowout' issues are starting to catch up with the project and they might be looking at cheaper options (which presumably would be back at grade)?

[cjm911]

For an "at-grade" option, would demolishing Middle Footscray and platform 1 at Footscray work? The extra tracks would have to be "express" tracks i.e. no platforms.

The building at Platform 1 can always be rebuilt using the same materials if heritage is an issue ...

[John_Proctor]

heritage is an issue.

I assume an at grade option would have to have tracks on the north side of platform 1 between Plat 1 and Irving Street. just carparking and crappy shops at hte moment. might need to extend the new footbridge though which'd be a bit embarassing.

most interesting part of 'at grade' would be immediately west of the station between Nicholson and West Footscray Stations. You've got plenty of houses and stuff abutting a very small reserve and the bunbury tunnel connection as well.


link below to Nearmap. I reckon you'd go (starting at Footscray):
- south side of tracks under Nicholson Street and Albert Street (probably slew existing tracks south and new RRL tracks cross over Bunbury Tunnell and are placed roughly where the current Metro tracks are) - (may require some creativity with Platforms 1 and 2?)
- shift to 2 new tracks on north side west of Albert Street (slew freight tracks to north side and RRL tracks in the middle of the relocated freight tracks and existing Metro tracks) (carparking/landscaping removed from Albert to Victoria Streets)
- just east of Victoria Street start to switch back to the south side for the 2 new tracks. aquire perhaps 4 houses and a couple of warehouses near Middle Footscray Station.
- probably rebuild West Footscray Station and Middle footscray station


fvck it... heres a map - hopefully it clicks up for you at the right scale. on my screen each 'track line' is roughly the width of the tracks in the aerial photo.
http://maps.google.com.au/maps/ms?hl...29153e40f367f5
obviously this is very simplisitic, doesn't take into account vertical clearances of bridges etc. and grades (I suspect you'd need to rebuild Albert and Nicholson Street bridges at least) and you'd probably ahve to shuffle the track alignments under Geelong Road depending on bridge abutment locations. But it gives a good idea of the land that is available relatively painlessly...