Then it would follow the alignment in this video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xb9PKxqpyaY
This is my proposed Rowville rail-line route. The rail-line between Camberwell and Burnley would have to quadruplicated. Camberwell Station would have to be upgraded with an extra platform. A tunnel would run between Alamein and Oakleigh. Then it would join the Dandenong line. East Malvern Station could be left out of the Plan if needed and the tunnel would travel directly to Chadstone.
Then it would follow the alignment in this video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xb9PKxqpyaY
The Rowville Line could enter a tunnel north of Huntingdale station. There is a easement corridor next to the tracks between Oakleigh and Huntingdale, I believe there is enough room for extra tracks to run besides the existing tracks. But I could be wrong. The Oakleigh interchange station would probably need to be placed underground. I am not a planning expert this is only a proposal or suggestion, other people know more about the specific details. .
Following the original Outer-Circle route is a better idea.
Instead of building an expensive train tunnel, all that is required is roads are grade-separated.
The roads can go under the rail line where required.
A lot cheaper I presume.
Following the original Outer-Circle route is a better idea.
Instead of building an expensive train tunnel, all that is required is roads are grade-separated.
The roads can go under the rail line where required.
A lot cheaper I presume.
So you're probably looking at either a tunnel going from Alamein to Monash Uni Clayton or a stonking great viaduct following a few of the roads along the way
It should travel to Oakleigh not directly to Monash via a tunnel from Alamein, as Oakleigh can become an interchange. Passengers then have options of transferring trains at Oakleigh.
The people who conducted the comprehensive study into the Rowville line recommend building a tunnel north of Huntingdale station as I stated. There have not been any detailed studies into extending the Alamein line via Chadstone to Oakeigh to my knowledge.
Chadstone is actually undergoing a $580m facelift with a 10-storey office building fronting Princes Highway and a hotel. You would believe that would include some type of transport plan with this. Carparking is already quite difficult at Chadstone.
And therefore the two proposals do not overlap much at all. You don't want the latter to go via both Huntingdale and Oakleigh stations as your first map stated.
They do overlap because if you are adding an extra train-line to the Dandenong transport corridor that will cause issues. By redirecting the Rowville line to the Alamein line you are effectively amplifying the number of tracks towards the city. You are also solving the issue of low patronage on the Alamein line. The area surrounding Chadstone such as Oakleigh itself, Monash University all would have the patronage levels/commuters to support heavy rail. Buses are not really sufficient.
The capacity problem becomes shifted towards the Burnley Group instead of the Caulfield Group,
Your presumptions are mostly incorrect:
- The former Outer Circle railway line reservation south of Alamein towards Oakleigh is almost entirely parkland, road or freeway. You won't go through any of them without either a tunnel or a rather tall viaduct.
- Grade separation can be just as expensive as tunnels and creates more headaches for both types of transport.
- Road-under-rail creates lots of headaches for local road access which increase linearly with how much clearance you want to give them. The minimum clearance/'loading gauge' is a garbage truck. Look at what the DoT and VicRoads are dealing with when it comes to the Dandenong corridor grade separations for a better idea.
- Everything about building a new railway line* is expensive. Doubly so if you're building it in an existing suburban environment.
So you're probably looking at either a tunnel going from Alamein to Monash Uni Clayton or a stonking great viaduct following a few of the roads along the way. There's no other choices for building heavy rail in the area unless you want to put caveats on properties along the alignment and wait a good 30-40 years for the land to be acquired in a peaceable manner.
* Yes, it is new - the last time trains ran through that part of the Outer Circle was 1895, 119 years ago.
The Rowville, Mulgrave and Waverley areas are no different to any other suburban areas in terms of density. I do not see why the rail-line would not be viable past Monash University.
Here's the best Rowville proposal I've seen.
Many suburban lines if built today would not be anywhere near viable, some still aren't (Eltham-Hurstbridge).
They only exist because they were built a century ago.
Following the original Outer-Circle route is a better idea.
Instead of building an expensive train tunnel, all that is required is roads are grade-separated.
The roads can go under the rail line where required.
A lot cheaper I presume.
Why are overseas companies lining up to operate Melbournes transport network if it is not viable.
Where do you live mate how would you like it if they never built your line
LancedDendrite is trying to claim option A is more expensive than option B...
I don't think Lanced can justify his claim a long tunnel is cheaper.
So you're probably looking at either a tunnel going from Alamein to Monash Uni Clayton or a stonking great viaduct following a few of the roads along the way.
Lanced, if old Outer-Circle is used
The Outer Circle corridor is hundred-year old parkland and is not going to be used for an above-ground railway alignment (elevated or not) at any stage. It's not politically feasible.
A line using the old alignment seems pointless to me as it does not serve any major trip generators and is to [sic] far from Chadstone shopping centre.
We've disabled Quick Reply for this thread as it was last updated more than six months ago.