Melbourne Road and Infrastructure Projects - Page 71

John_Proctor · May 1st, 2012, 06:26 AM

there is still at least 12 months of studying on this before it gets anywhere near close to a genuine 'proposal'.

they'll spend $20-30 million on design, investigations, geotech, commercial model development this year and then still ahve 2-3 years of work before it can be tendered out for construction.

no reason to get too excited about it being constructed yet.

cjb287 · May 1st, 2012, 07:38 AM

Rooks Rd, Mitcham and Springvale Rd, Springvale have been confirmed as gaining funding for level crossing removal

bobman · May 1st, 2012, 08:58 AM

$156 million to construct the Dingley Bypass between Warrigal & Westall Roads as I suspected would happen.

They better grade-separate as much as possible as it was originally planned.

John_Proctor · May 1st, 2012, 09:24 AM

I think the plan doesn't propose any grade separations.

redbaron_012 · May 1st, 2012, 12:28 PM

More Traffic lights............I don't think they will encourage traffic to move from Eastlink- Mulgrave Freeway.

John_Proctor · May 1st, 2012, 01:03 PM

Nnot supposed to relieve those roads... More about relieving springvale, cheltenham, lower dandenong, old dandenong, white, heatherton...

Cheltenham, springvale intersection is one of the most hardcore going around...

As the name suggests it's about bypassing dingley area largely linking the dandenong south and moorabbin industrial areas.

MisterMarcus · May 1st, 2012, 01:55 PM

Yeah given it stops dead at Warrigal/South Road with nowhere to go, the last you want is a "freeway" style road down there.

The whole thing's basically just a glorified duplication and straightening of Old Dandenong Road.

ChrisJudd83 · May 1st, 2012, 06:48 PM

Even then I still can't see the east-west link starting within this decade. I always thought the north east link to be a better alternative for freight and other service vehicles bypassing the city. SurelY the Feds won't give this proposal the time of day

Aussie Steve · May 1st, 2012, 11:39 PM

It is a shame that the Dingley Freeway wasn't built to allow for future freeway conversion. They should at the very least build an overpass at Springvale Rd.

NoshowwithoutPunch · May 1st, 2012, 11:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aussie Steve

It is a shame that the Dingley Freeway wasn't built to allow for future freeway conversion. They should at the very least build an overpass at Springvale Rd.

Yeah i dont buy the idea that it couldnt have been built as freeway standard from south gippy fwy to warrigal rd, and north to dandy road at ikea and potentially back round to springy rd.

It would have been a south dandy feeder freeway for traffic from east and south east.

As others have said, all it is now is glorified old dandy road.

As i posted in my tribute to the franga freeway, australia lacks the second level of freeway granularity that is common overseas. We are struggling to finish the 1st level, but it is typical in other places to have feeder or branch freeways. Not the main corridor artery to large cities, but enough to feed a group of suburbs. Also you could build a morn peninsula elevated freeway above springy road from edithvale wetlands to dingley freeway, avoid destroying wetlands and leave enough local traffic room below for hailebury school, the yugo churches and so on.

Of courase hou would now have to compensate eastlink for the competing road.

John_Proctor · May 2nd, 2012, 02:41 AM

there is provision for springvale road to be grade separated. the existing Westall Extension and the new link have their Springvale Road interscetion widely spaced with room in between for the grade sep - the current/under construction 'road' would become the ramps.

the biggest shame of it is the Dandenong Bypass... not saying it should have been freeway standard but all the roads that aren't able to be made Freeway standard interchanges in the future shouldn't have had access to the bypass. eg. future interchanges only proposed at Springvale, Perry, Eastlink, Frankston Dandenong Road, South Gippsland Hwy... so why are there signals at Hammond, Chandler, Chapel Roads?

at least they aren't signalising the intersection with Cheltenham!

Concept Map showing proposed signal locations for the Westall Extension-South Road extension section:
would have been good if it was an interchange at Westall Road Extension/Dingley Bypass intersection (just south of Heatherton Road). not sure of the need for a Tootal Road intersectino only a few hundred metres west of the main Westall/Dingley intersection!
http://vicroads.vic.gov.au/NR/rdonly...lMapaccSML.pdf

NoshowwithoutPunch · May 2nd, 2012, 04:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John_Proctor

not sure of the need for a Tootal Road intersectino only a few hundred metres west of the main Westall/Dingley intersection!
http://vicroads.vic.gov.au/NR/rdonly...lMapaccSML.pdf

That's the point. A real freeway doesn't need so many exits. Eastlink between its start at Rutherford (=Hall Rd) then only interacts with Thompsons Rd then Green Rd, probably 10 kms away. Then Dandy Bypass, Cheltenham Rd and the Hwy and then the Monash.

That sort of level of interaction is all that is required.

If someone want to go to these minor cross roads, they could use Greens Rd or the Hwy or Cheltenham/Lower Dandy Rd etc.

Same with the Northern Ring Road, runs parallel to Mahoneys Rd for much of its journey so use Mahoneys for all those little roads.

For the Dingley Freeway, starting at South Gippy Fwy, exit at Franga-Dandy, exist at East Link, exist at Springvale, then the interchange for Westall and Moorabbin, with Westall section only exit at Heatherton/Kingston, cross the railway, Centre, Dandy Rd, and back to Springvale Rd. For Moorabbin section, at Boundary, possibly at Clarinda and then Warrigal. No further exits needed.

bobman · May 2nd, 2012, 05:42 AM

VicRoads did advise that the road will be built to freeway standards, but we know that it will end up how it's built - with traffic lights.

Although, look at the South Eastern Arterial project with lights at Burke Road etc. Maybe there is hope in the long, long future.

Springvale Road & Westall Road extension definitely needs to be grade separated and given the construction around that intersection at the moment, here's hoping.

Morjo · May 2nd, 2012, 07:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChrisJudd83

Even then I still can't see the east-west link starting within this decade. I always thought the north east link to be a better alternative for freight and other service vehicles bypassing the city. SurelY the Feds won't give this proposal the time of day

There is a call for a second east-west link as a backup to the M1. There is a lot of commercial transport that goes between Altona and Dandenong along the M1. If this link (the westgate and citylink southern in particular) were to fail for a substantial amount of time the chaos to traffic and the economy in general would be disastrous. A NE road tunnel wouldn't be a sufficient backup as east-west traffic would have to re-route up to the north east of Melbourne, effectively making their journey twice as long or more.

The north east link is beneficial for freight obviously heading north from the east and south east.

ChrisJudd83 · May 2nd, 2012, 09:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Morjo

There is a call for a second east-west link as a backup to the M1. There is a lot of commercial transport that goes between Altona and Dandenong along the M1. If this link (the westgate and citylink southern in particular) were to fail for a substantial amount of time the chaos to traffic and the economy in general would be disastrous. A NE road tunnel wouldn't be a sufficient backup as east-west traffic would have to re-route up to the north east of Melbourne, effectively making their journey twice as long or more.

The north east link is beneficial for freight obviously heading north from the east and south east.

Isn't most of the traffic headed to the city though with only 10 % west bound? So Victoria is proposing 10 Billion for a project to act as a substitute back up for the M1 on the off chance that it fails once every few weeks? I can forsee a future empty tollway ala Eastlink

Morjo · May 2nd, 2012, 09:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChrisJudd83

Isn't most of the traffic headed to the city though with only 10 % west bound? So Victoria is proposing 10 Billion for a project to act as a substitute back up for the M1 on the off chance that it fails once every few weeks? I can forsee a future empty tollway ala Eastlink

Where did you get that 10% westbound data from? Is it 10% westbound on the M1? I think you'll find the data you provided is for Alexandra Pde.

The east-west is just not just as a backup for a M1 fail every few weeks due to a major collision. It's also for heaven forbid if westgate collapses or the citylink tunnels need to be closed for extended periods of time due to a major structural incident.

Also Eastlink is hardly empty, plenty of vehicles use it everyday, just not the ridiculous amount that the government and toll operator hoped for. Eastlink is a vital link.

tayser · May 2nd, 2012, 10:54 AM

it was under 10% headed to Tullamarine FWY, 40% to City, 30% to the local burbs and inner north and the rest distributed elsewhere IIRC.

I note that two big Bell St level crossings were, at least a few years ago, rated quite high in priority to be removed: Coburg and Bell Stations. Removing these two level crossings would go along way to making that route an even better City bypass that could just as easily be a diversionary route.

Creating the East-West road tunnel from the Eastern to The Tulla and then beyond to the ring would will only INDUCE more traffic, not provide a faster route for people who already use it - as it's already an abysmal amount of people who only go as far as the Tullamarine FWY.

And again, cheaper to complete the Metro Ring road further out away from the city where land prices are cheaper and population density is lower than to cut yet another corridor through the inner city.

DAJAN · May 2nd, 2012, 12:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChrisJudd83

a substitute back up for the M1 on the off chance that it fails once every few weeks?

The M1 fails on average once every 12 hours (it's called morning and afternoon peak hour)

DAJAN · May 2nd, 2012, 01:08 PM

Seriously though, adding extra roads or lanes in the inner suburbs provides some short term relief, but it does not take long for it to fall back to crap again. This was seen with recent adding of a 4th lane to the Monash.

The answer would be to allow as much traffic as possible to cross the city without actually going near it - the whole idea of ring roads. However merely joining the Nth Ring Rd to Eastlink via Bullen is only part of it, as outer suburban & country traffic faces congestion even just to reach those roads.
We need the second ring road around Melbourne - There already is a reservation from the outer side of Werribee to the outer side of Craigieburn. It then goes a bit poxy by running down towards Epping, (that bit really serves little purpose as the recently built Hume Fwy already goes more or less that way). From Craigieburn, it should continue east towards Lilydale / Coldstream, then south via Silvan through to Pakenham and Koo Wee Rup.

Another option is to make a southern ring road, by extending Peninsula Link / MPF as a bridge from Portsea to the Bellarine Hwy near Queenscliffe. (this one's more of a pipe dream - unlikely given the high property costs & mega cashed up NIMBY's in Sorrento & Portsea). Given the location, call it the Harold Holt Bridge?

John_Proctor · May 2nd, 2012, 01:27 PM

I think this project is unfortunately inevitable. (unfortunate because our infrastructure budget means the $10 billion on this will be lieu of spending on rail when it really should be complimentary). Hopefully the trade offs are properly provided for I.e. Bus lanes on punt road (and Alexandra?) tram priority for 86,96,112 etc.

Re: the need in the most basic sense i think, Melbourne survived without city link up until 10 years ago, we will survive with city Link for the next 10 years... East-west link will be the city link of the 20 years after that.

I do think it'll be 3-4 years before this is in a position to be funded. Ssssoooo much to work through in design, consultation, approvals, and most importantly legals. I expect city link material adverse affects to take years to agree and be a noose hovering over the project until it is agreed... I also expect that the greens, city of yarra, friends of (insert inner northern park name here) to fight legal battles every chance they can to obstruct project development.

Cmparitvely melburne metro could be funded by this time next year as the planning process has been announced and most issued will be publicly thrashed out as part of that in the next 12 months.

May 1st, 2012, 08:58 AM	#1403
bobman Regulator Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 315 Likes (Received): 3	$156 million to construct the Dingley Bypass between Warrigal & Westall Roads as I suspected would happen. They better grade-separate as much as possible as it was originally planned. __________________ Regards, Bobby

May 1st, 2012, 12:28 PM	#1405
redbaron_012 Registered User Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Melbourne Posts: 6,044 Likes (Received): 115	More Traffic lights............I don't think they will encourage traffic to move from Eastlink- Mulgrave Freeway. __________________ "Make no small plans, for they have not power to stir the blood" - Daniel H. Burnham

May 2nd, 2012, 05:42 AM	#1413
bobman Regulator Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 315 Likes (Received): 3	VicRoads did advise that the road will be built to freeway standards, but we know that it will end up how it's built - with traffic lights. Although, look at the South Eastern Arterial project with lights at Burke Road etc. Maybe there is hope in the long, long future. Springvale Road & Westall Road extension definitely needs to be grade separated and given the construction around that intersection at the moment, here's hoping. __________________ Regards, Bobby

May 2nd, 2012, 10:54 AM	#1417
tayser Champagne Socialist Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Melbourne Posts: 10,531 Likes (Received): 32	it was under 10% headed to Tullamarine FWY, 40% to City, 30% to the local burbs and inner north and the rest distributed elsewhere IIRC. I note that two big Bell St level crossings were, at least a few years ago, rated quite high in priority to be removed: Coburg and Bell Stations. Removing these two level crossings would go along way to making that route an even better City bypass that could just as easily be a diversionary route. Creating the East-West road tunnel from the Eastern to The Tulla and then beyond to the ring would will only INDUCE more traffic, not provide a faster route for people who already use it - as it's already an abysmal amount of people who only go as far as the Tullamarine FWY. And again, cheaper to complete the Metro Ring road further out away from the city where land prices are cheaper and population density is lower than to cut yet another corridor through the inner city. __________________ "America gave the world George Bush, France gave the world the ménage à trois... Game Over." UrbanMelbourne.info

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

May 1st, 2012, 06:26 AM	#1401
John_Proctor Registered User Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Melbourne Posts: 5,905 Likes (Received): 87	there is still at least 12 months of studying on this before it gets anywhere near close to a genuine 'proposal'. they'll spend $20-30 million on design, investigations, geotech, commercial model development this year and then still ahve 2-3 years of work before it can be tendered out for construction. no reason to get too excited about it being constructed yet.

May 1st, 2012, 07:38 AM	#1402
cjb287 Registered User Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Melbourne Posts: 1,003 Likes (Received): 5	Rooks Rd, Mitcham and Springvale Rd, Springvale have been confirmed as gaining funding for level crossing removal

May 1st, 2012, 09:24 AM	#1404
John_Proctor Registered User Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Melbourne Posts: 5,905 Likes (Received): 87	I think the plan doesn't propose any grade separations.

May 1st, 2012, 01:03 PM	#1406
John_Proctor Registered User Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Melbourne Posts: 5,905 Likes (Received): 87	Nnot supposed to relieve those roads... More about relieving springvale, cheltenham, lower dandenong, old dandenong, white, heatherton... Cheltenham, springvale intersection is one of the most hardcore going around... As the name suggests it's about bypassing dingley area largely linking the dandenong south and moorabbin industrial areas.

May 1st, 2012, 01:55 PM	#1407
MisterMarcus Registered User Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Melbourne Posts: 141 Likes (Received): 0	Yeah given it stops dead at Warrigal/South Road with nowhere to go, the last you want is a "freeway" style road down there. The whole thing's basically just a glorified duplication and straightening of Old Dandenong Road.

May 1st, 2012, 06:48 PM	#1408
ChrisJudd83 BANNED Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Perth Posts: 372 Likes (Received): 0	Even then I still can't see the east-west link starting within this decade. I always thought the north east link to be a better alternative for freight and other service vehicles bypassing the city. SurelY the Feds won't give this proposal the time of day

May 1st, 2012, 11:39 PM	#1409
Aussie Steve Registered User Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 4,618 Likes (Received): 12	It is a shame that the Dingley Freeway wasn't built to allow for future freeway conversion. They should at the very least build an overpass at Springvale Rd.

May 2nd, 2012, 02:41 AM	#1411
John_Proctor Registered User Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Melbourne Posts: 5,905 Likes (Received): 87	there is provision for springvale road to be grade separated. the existing Westall Extension and the new link have their Springvale Road interscetion widely spaced with room in between for the grade sep - the current/under construction 'road' would become the ramps. the biggest shame of it is the Dandenong Bypass... not saying it should have been freeway standard but all the roads that aren't able to be made Freeway standard interchanges in the future shouldn't have had access to the bypass. eg. future interchanges only proposed at Springvale, Perry, Eastlink, Frankston Dandenong Road, South Gippsland Hwy... so why are there signals at Hammond, Chandler, Chapel Roads? at least they aren't signalising the intersection with Cheltenham! Concept Map showing proposed signal locations for the Westall Extension-South Road extension section: would have been good if it was an interchange at Westall Road Extension/Dingley Bypass intersection (just south of Heatherton Road). not sure of the need for a Tootal Road intersectino only a few hundred metres west of the main Westall/Dingley intersection! http://vicroads.vic.gov.au/NR/rdonly...lMapaccSML.pdf

May 2nd, 2012, 01:08 PM	#1419
DAJAN Registered User Join Date: Jan 2012 Posts: 405 Likes (Received): 12	Seriously though, adding extra roads or lanes in the inner suburbs provides some short term relief, but it does not take long for it to fall back to crap again. This was seen with recent adding of a 4th lane to the Monash. The answer would be to allow as much traffic as possible to cross the city without actually going near it - the whole idea of ring roads. However merely joining the Nth Ring Rd to Eastlink via Bullen is only part of it, as outer suburban & country traffic faces congestion even just to reach those roads. We need the second ring road around Melbourne - There already is a reservation from the outer side of Werribee to the outer side of Craigieburn. It then goes a bit poxy by running down towards Epping, (that bit really serves little purpose as the recently built Hume Fwy already goes more or less that way). From Craigieburn, it should continue east towards Lilydale / Coldstream, then south via Silvan through to Pakenham and Koo Wee Rup. Another option is to make a southern ring road, by extending Peninsula Link / MPF as a bridge from Portsea to the Bellarine Hwy near Queenscliffe. (this one's more of a pipe dream - unlikely given the high property costs & mega cashed up NIMBY's in Sorrento & Portsea). Given the location, call it the Harold Holt Bridge?

May 2nd, 2012, 01:27 PM	#1420
John_Proctor Registered User Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Melbourne Posts: 5,905 Likes (Received): 87	I think this project is unfortunately inevitable. (unfortunate because our infrastructure budget means the $10 billion on this will be lieu of spending on rail when it really should be complimentary). Hopefully the trade offs are properly provided for I.e. Bus lanes on punt road (and Alexandra?) tram priority for 86,96,112 etc. Re: the need in the most basic sense i think, Melbourne survived without city link up until 10 years ago, we will survive with city Link for the next 10 years... East-west link will be the city link of the 20 years after that. I do think it'll be 3-4 years before this is in a position to be funded. Ssssoooo much to work through in design, consultation, approvals, and most importantly legals. I expect city link material adverse affects to take years to agree and be a noose hovering over the project until it is agreed... I also expect that the greens, city of yarra, friends of (insert inner northern park name here) to fight legal battles every chance they can to obstruct project development. Cmparitvely melburne metro could be funded by this time next year as the planning process has been announced and most issued will be publicly thrashed out as part of that in the next 12 months.