I attended the Thursday night meeting, and discussed the designs with the various VicRoads enginners. There were no Department of Transport or VicTrack representatives present, at least in their official capacity.
Four options were presented. The first three had the railway in a cutting, either on the existing alignment, or north, or south of the existing track. The fourth option involved putting Springvale Road underneath the railway, with the side streets connected up in various ways. The resulting road map would've been very similar to what Oakleigh ended up with in the mid 1970's.
No consideration was given to elevating the road, and rightly so, but no consideration was given to elevating the railway either, and that disturbed me. The main concerns the VicRoads personal I talked to raised, involved noise and local aesthetics, both of which I consider irrelevant in the long-term, when the area will likely have multi-storey buildings all over the shopping centre. Most of the points I raised in favour of elevated stations were glossed over without adequete replies, and I got the impression that VicRoads was only looking towards the next ten years, and not beyond. Reading between the lines, it seems the key reason why elevated railway has not been considered is political, because there is no engineering reason why it couldn't be done.
Of course, there's nothing wrong with elevated stations in principle: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NmB53ryu6ZA
As for the options in which the railway will be placed in a cutting, the model will be very similar to Nunawading. The main difference is that apparently, they will build two side platforms rather than one island platform, on account of curvature, although the maps didn't indicate that clearly enough. My preference is always for one island platform with two tracks either side (express outside) or for two island platforms where interchange between trains is important. They were also not sure whether or not they were going to provide a non-platform-side entrance/exit with unpaid-area underpass, as is provided at Nunawading. This is a shame, but they justified this on cost grounds.
One positive outcome of the night is that rather than the style at Nunawading, where the bridge only covers the existing tracks and any extra tracks would require another bridge, I suggested that they build a full-width bridge from Sandown Rd to Queens Ave, even if the unused half of the bridge remained full of dirt underneath; this means that when a future quadruplication takes place, the works will not have to be repeated.