Melbourne Public Transport

[BleakCity]

Sorry, here's the link to the currently received East-West Link Submissions

EWLNA Submissions

Macquarie Bank is down at number 83.

[Grollo]

Maquarie Bank realise that just an east west tunnel or a freight only tunnel would not be ceconomically viable so they have included commuter CBD 'portals' similar to previous Vicroads proposal to a have a tunnel 'portal' in Albert Street adjacent to the CBD.

To make the tunnel worthwhile they have to capture the commuter traffic travelling to the CBD. If just the east-west tunnel was built most traffic would still head down Hoddle Street to avoid the tolls. Getting off at Nicholson or Royal Parade would not result in any travel time savings as these roads would slow to a crawl with the extra traffic.

The details are sketchy in the Maquarie submission but it looks like they would have two portals, one in Albert Street and another at the top end of the CBD at King or Spencer Streets.

[Edward]

Originally Posted by Qantas743

What will happen is, is this article will be read, people will get excited, nothing will be done and in a year's time when the next article about this issue comes up with exactly the same contents, the cycle will happen again!

This is the 5th or so article already that talks about the same thing! It's no fun if it's only a vision. We need to see something actually proposed!

too true
just like that huge central pier campaign last year.

[Morjo]

Originally Posted by Qantas743

What will happen is, is this article will be read, people will get excited, nothing will be done and in a year's time when the next article about this issue comes up with exactly the same contents, the cycle will happen again!

This is the 5th or so article already that talks about the same thing! It's no fun if it's only a vision. We need to see something actually proposed!

Well something will be done, but it takes time. The east west link needs assessment study team will take about a year to work out the best solution, and then it's up to the government to implement it.
So the wheels are in motion but at a very slow pace.

[crazyknightsfan]

Originally Posted by ZH836301

Sorry, here's the link to the currently received East-West Link Submissions

EWLNA Submissions

Macquarie Bank is down at number 83.

When do we get to read your submission ZH? :wink:

[BleakCity]

Maybe it's already there

Nah, I've just been so arsed for time that I haven't been able to get it done. I'm going to try and get it finished over the weekend - hopefully they'll still accept it on Monday. Just some left of field ideas that may not have been thought of - probably no chance in hell of ever being implemented, but ya gotta try anyway.

[The Collector]

http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/sto...1-2862,00.html

From Herald Sun

If you thought it was bad now ...
Ellen Whinnett and Ashley Gardiner
June 18, 2007 12:00am

MELBOURNE'S already overcrowded train network is bracing for more than 156,000 extra commuters each day - with just 10 new trains set to ease the load.

The looming crisis comes as State Government funding for new rolling stock fails to keep pace with surging passenger growth.

The number of people using the jammed train network has ballooned by 10 per cent a year for the past two years, and train operator Connex said the growth showed no signs of slowing.

At this rate the number of trips taken on the city train network will surge from 173.8 million this year to 231.3 million by 2009-2010 - an extra 57 million passenger trips a year.

The number of trips taken by commuters will rise from 600,000 a day to 756,000 by the time the Government launches the 10 new trains it has promised by 2010.

The news comes as Connex - which has been fined $62 million for poor performance since it took over the rail network in 2004 - failed to meet its May targets.

The company has failed to meet the benchmarks spelled out in its contract for four of the past five months - a problem blamed partly on the large number of people crowded on trains which delays departures from stations.

Freedom of Information documents show passengers had to wait up to 98 minutes for their trains at the worst of summer's public transport crisis.

Public Transport Users Association spokesman Alex Makin said new trains would be welcome but would not meet the demand.

He said the trains could hold about 900 people per trip but he believed the Government would have to buy more rolling stock just to keep up.

"There has been very little proper planning. The Government has simply been reacting when there is a crisis," he said.

"There is a strong demand for public transport, particularly in light of rising petrol prices."

Bracks government spokesman Cameron Scott said it did not believe passenger levels over the next three years would continue at the current "abnormal levels".

He said extra trains were just part of the response to public transport demand and $1 billion more was available for new rolling stock and trams after 2010.

"The Government is also improving maintenance scheduling and investing in rail infrastructure, which allows more services to be run using the existing train fleet," he said.

Connex spokesman Andrew Cassidy said no meaningful analysis could be done of how many journeys the 10 new trains could undertake each day.

He said timetables and other operational areas, such as maintenance, all affected how many people the trains could take.

He described the surge in passenger numbers as "absolutely unprecedented and unexpected", and said Connex was working on ways to provide new services.

"The highest growth in any previous year until two years ago was 3 per cent," Mr Cassidy said.

On its website, Connex says there is "no sign that record patronage growth, which currently exceeds 10 per cent a year, is losing any steam".

"We expect punctuality to remain below 92 per cent until speed restrictions that apply to the Siemens train fleet are lifted," it says. "However, punctuality is unlikely to return to levels we saw 12 months ago - in the short or medium term - due to high (and steadily increasing) customer numbers."

More than 2500 services were delayed last month, Connex figures showed.

Speed restrictions imposed on the troubled Siemens trains delayed more than 3900 services.

Overall, 4961 services were officially late - by six minutes or more - and 382 were cancelled.

Opposition transport spokesman Terry Mulder said the new trains would be "hopelessly inadequate" to meet the soaring demand.

"It is nothing. It won't come anywhere near enough," Mr Mulder said.

He said the lack of planning by the Bracks Government could lead to assaults and abuse on overcrowded platforms as commuters fought for a place on a train.

Seven old Hitachi trains, non-airconditioned and built in 1971, have had their retirement postponed indefinitely and are being used regularly to fill in when other trains are unavailable.

Documents obtained by the Opposition show that angry commuters endured waits of up to 98 minutes for their trains at the height of the crisis caused by the withdrawal of 31 Siemens trains due to braking problems.

During the first three months of this year, 38 services were delayed by 45 minutes or more and 47 were late by at least half an hour.

The documents show that 5039 train services on nine of Melbourne's 16 lines were at least six minutes late.

Mr Mulder said the problem was greater than just the brakes.

"It is not just Connex's operational issues causing late-running trains, but the age of the fleet, driver shortages, and the poor condition of the track and signals," Mr Mulder said.

"Melburnians can look forward to more freezing winter days standing on platforms waiting for trains that run late or which pass them by due to overcrowding," he said.

"Commuters rightly believe they are paying more, getting less and going slower."

[Yardmaster]

I saw the front page of the Herald/Sun today although I didn't have time to read it.

Can't say I've ever been kept waiting for 98 minutes (and would have walked home long before that). When was it, when the power went out during the bushfires last summer?

These statistics can be exceedingly misleading ... there are certainly times when I've been delayed by 5 to 10 minutes by trains running late (or cancelled trains). But if a train arrives for my destination I get on it, I don't think "hell no, this is the 4.30 running 98 minutes late, I'd better wait until 6:00 comes along!".

[BleakCity]

EWLNA Submissions

RACV and ConnectEast have their submissions up and the amount of BS posted is almost unbelievable.

RACV keeps parroting on about the 'Greensborough Gap', but lack the balls to actually put up a route plan - they probably know the various environmental groups in the area are just waiting with flamethrowers at the ready. Of course RACV thinks the gap filler needs to pass through Greensborough, because their lead-heads are unable to grasp the concept that a Ring Road doesn't need to be round.

The Mullum Mullum valley was saved by putting Eastlink in tunnel, I hardly think they would cut a path through it with a surface freeway further north. I wonder if they have a secret plan that would allow a freeway to pass through kilometres of housing and environmentally sensitive areas without disturbing a soul. Wait a minute. I know the perfect route for a freeway, little indirect, but the landholders would be more than willing to give it up for the greater good. And while we're going that way, may as well smash a hole through the Dividing Range for fast egress to the Hume. Driving freedomness.

The perfect freeway:



ConnectEast has named the routes they want for a East-West freeway, and are unlikely to be invited to any ripping parties in the inner north. The possible options raised by them are:

*Option 1: Hoddle St to Citylink at Brunswick Rd ($2.5 billion)
*Option 2: Hoddle St to Racecourse Rd to Geelong Rd ($3.5 billion)
*Option 3: Hoddle St to Dynon Rd to Geelong Rd ($4 billion)
*Option 4A: Hoddle St to Footscray Rd to Geelong Rd ($4 billion)
*Option 4B: Geelong Rd to Western Ring Road ($1 billion)

All of the options include north-south interchanges at positions such as Elizabeth St to raise the viability of such a proposal. Some also include elevated sections, or the desecration of public open space. And rail amplification to Sunshine, no way, we need that alignment for a mega-freeway. Don’t tell them it won’t fit or they’ll come for the actual railway. The etchings of a two-year old are shown below:



Some of the proposals also funnel high amounts of traffic into residential areas – obviously another chance for salami building tactics in the future. I asked a local Footscray kid what his thoughts were on all the extra traffic that would clogs the areas streets if some of these plans were implemented, and his response says it all.



But of course, where would a roads proposal be without logic black holes and brain-farts. Like this extract from option three in their submission

Because it is closer to the city, it is also proposed that this option include direct access to the city via (either or both) Elizabeth and King Streets. These streets have been chosen as they both have greater capacity at their northern ends. The preliminary traffic modelling undertaken by ConnectEast has shown that by providing these direct links, a much higher volume of traffic is attracted to the new route which in turn increases its financial viability, giving greater relief to the current congestion on surface roads, and enhancing urban amenity.

Yes after much twirling of the mainframe wheel…



…ConnectEast have deduced that increasing road supply increases road demand – congratulations on their stunning insight. They have also perfected the art of the black hole, causing surface traffic to magically disappear, never to be seen again. Just look at this amazing projection that shows traffic reductions on roads that aren’t even affected by an East-West road tunnel, and an overall net reduction in traffic:



I love the tiny increase in traffic at the tunnel portals - like I said, masters of time and space ConnectEast are. Here is an actual visual of what the inside of the tunnel would look like, as vehicles are zapped to another dimension.



What your journey could look like:



Meanwhile the constant reassurance that it will benefit public transport is provided (but of course no bus lanes in the tunnel, that would mean less room for cars). Some random single-lane rail tunnel, bus services speed increases etc. (though who actually bothers with a bus anyway) will be achieved with the plans integrated glory. And residents will shower them with hugs and kiss and tickertape parades for all.

I hope to Zeus this is never built - Cross City Tunnel Mark II

[BroadGauge]

What a fucked up plan that is.

Going off-topic from the current discussion, here are two plans I have for rail lines to service Chadstone. I doubt both would need to be built - but here's my map. I'd explain both in detail, but I'm tired as at the moment.

[Yardmaster]

I've thought about (Bangholme)-Oakleigh-Camberwell and (Ferntree Gully-Monash)- Oakleigh-Elsternwick railways since the (19)60's.

Why not move Holmesglen station west instead of that serious loop in the Alamein-Oakleigh line ?

And the simple fact is: leaving aside the cost, the disruption that would incur digging up Dandenong Road would throw any government out of office. At least until the oil really starts to run out!

[Yardmaster]

Originally Posted by The Collector

http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/sto...1-2862,00.html

From Herald Sun

If you thought it was bad now ...
Ellen Whinnett and Ashley Gardiner
June 18, 2007 12:00am

MELBOURNE'S already overcrowded train network is bracing for more than 156,000 extra commuters each day - with just 10 new trains set to ease the load.

The looming crisis comes as State Government funding for new rolling stock fails to keep pace with surging passenger growth.

The number of people using the jammed train network has ballooned by 10 per cent a year for the past two years, and train operator Connex said the growth showed no signs of slowing.

At this rate the number of trips taken on the city train network will surge from 173.8 million this year to 231.3 million by 2009-2010 - an extra 57 million passenger trips a year.

The number of trips taken by commuters will rise from 600,000 a day to 756,000 by the time the Government launches the 10 new trains it has promised by 2010.

The news comes as Connex - which has been fined $62 million for poor performance since it took over the rail network in 2004 - failed to meet its May targets.

2004?

[BroadGauge]

Originally Posted by Yardmaster

Why not move Holmesglen station west instead of that serious loop in the Alamein-Oakleigh line ?

The loop isn't exact.

Holmesglen needs to connect with the 700 SmartBus on Warrigal Rd and be near the TAFE so it can't be moved west

[Yardmaster]

Originally Posted by BroadGauge

The loop isn't exact.

Holmesglen needs to connect with the 700 SmartBus on Warrigal Rd and be near the TAFE so it can't be moved west

I'd move the bus ... and even the TAFE: it'd be cheaper. The TAFE is probably outmoded by now & would welcome a new site. Cheaper to relocate than refurbish.

[BroadGauge]

The 700 already takes forever to get from Box Hill to Mordialloc/Oakleigh/Chadstone/Mentone withour doing a diversion.

People would rather a station on Warrigal Rd not 400m west of it.

[Leon...]

What about deregulating it more? We know that we live in a sparse, sprawling city. The cost of building infrastructure out to these far-flung McMansion-esque developments is huge.

Why can't individual routes have their own prices?

There should be a huge amount of incentive for PT companies to try to innervate e.g. the Doncaster area as there are huge numbers of untapped people who would love to commute to the city by train.

If a company like TransUrban can front hundreds of millions of dollars for what is a well-used, profitable infrastructure link, why does the government have to be involved in funding and micromanaging every extension which people whinge about?

[OSJ]

Originally Posted by BroadGauge

What a fucked up plan that is.

Going off-topic from the current discussion, here are two plans I have for rail lines to service Chadstone. I doubt both would need to be built - but here's my map. I'd explain both in detail, but I'm tired as at the moment.

BroadGauge, I think this is a brilliant suggestion. Yardmaster, I disagree about the disruption to Dandenong road, as it is quite wide, including service roads. It would only be a little worse than the disruption to Burwood Hwy, during the Vermont tram extension.

But the main brilliance of this, is that it would probably be a hell of a lot easier than trying to dig around/under the existing alignment for tripli/quadruplification and level crossing removal. I've always wondered how (without simply ignoring cut and cover) they'll do the widening from Oakleigh to Caulfield, as the alignment is not that wide, so there is no real option to widen it without disrupting train services.

And all that is before mentioning the fact that it puts a station at Chadstone, for probably a similar cost to the planned triplification anyway.

Talk about win-win-win.

[OSJ]

^The other fantastic aspect of this, is that it would create a direct connection to (eventually) 4 different destinations from Chadstone - Camberwell, Caulfield, Dandenong and Rowville, whereas all other alignments (extensions of the alamein line) have simply had 2 destinations, requiring changes for Danenong or Caulfield at Oakleigh.

The issue I've always had with Alamein line extensions, is that it makes Oakleigh the main transfer station, when Chadstone (which I last heard has over 30 million people pass through every year), is the logical centre in that area - as much as I can't stand the place.

Having a station here, with the busiest rail corridor passing straight through makes absolutely perfect sense. Being that triplification works are on the cards anyway, any arguments of patronage not being justified are blown out of the water.

Add the sale of the land on the existing corridor, and this just keeps getting better.

[gappa]

Hey guys please check out these threads and correct/add relevant data. Thanks.

Melb's trains: http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=489480
Melb's trams: http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=487046

[BleakCity]

Oh how I hate Chadstone - wish the thing would just explode. It has to be in the worst possible position imaginable for rail upgrades. Probably our best option would be to use it for RAAF bomber training. Just think how much pain would have been averted had it been built at say Huntingdale.

Here's what I was thinking for Chadstone rail - removes Alamein and moves Ashburton slightly east to eliminate tight curves.



Now this was what I was thinking as an overall endgame - equals zero chance in hell.



Something like what BroadGauge posted would be good except I wouldn't want to see Murrumbeena and Hughesdale lose their rail service - these places have more life than Chadstone ever will. And I'd have to disagree on having Chadstone as the major centre in this area - Oakleigh has so much more class, character and potential.