50 level crossings to be removed

 
  lkernan Deputy Commissioner

Location: Melbourne
Thompsons Rd LYNDHURST
Nightfire


Thompsons Road LX is tied into the whole Westernport Highway roundabout removal / Thompsons Road duplication project.  
Not as quick and easy as it seems.

Sponsored advertisement

  Nightfire Minister for Railways

Location: Gippsland
Thompsons Road LX is tied into the whole Westernport Highway roundabout removal / Thompsons Road duplication project.
Not as quick and easy as it seems.
lkernan

It Is easy, because of the open space around the crossing, a twin bridge over railway would do the job.

Build a new Eastbound bridge, slew al traffic onto this bridge, close level crossing, build Westbound bridge where the level crossing once was/
  Gman_86 Chief Commissioner

Location: Melton, where the sparks dare not roam!
Yep, just like was done with Kororoit Creek Rd, and Somerton Rd. Very simple and fairly cost effective.
  Nightfire Minister for Railways

Location: Gippsland
Yep, just like was done with Kororoit Creek Rd, and Somerton Rd. Very simple and fairly cost effective.
Gman_86

Yes the duplication of the Kororoit Creek Road from Grieve PRE to Millers Road cost about $50 Million and Included two new overpasses over the railway and pipelines, a new bridge over Kororoit Creek and about 2 km's of road.

The Idea that the average cost of a level crossing grade separation Is around $200 Million Is nonsense.
  Gman_86 Chief Commissioner

Location: Melton, where the sparks dare not roam!
That's right. The $200m figure that gets bandied around is a result of projects like Springvale Rd Nunawading, where the majority of the cost is the construction of a new station, along with the excavation of a deep cutting and the re-routing of the railway line.

Add to that gold-plating of these stations to a much higher standard than that of the stations which have been replaced. Usually added into the project are about 3 or 4 sets of lifts, as well as a DDA compliant ramp as well as the stairs. This all adds significant cost, all of which is nothing to do with the level crossing.

Another example is the new Williams Landing station, unique circumstances signifiacantly pumped up the price of that station. If it weren't for the fact that it was sandwiched between the 10 lane Princes FWY, and the Western Standard Guage Line, then most of what was put into place at Williams Landing wouldn't have been required, meaning the cost of the project would have been significantly cheaper.
  duttonbay Minister for Railways

Add to that gold-plating of these stations to a much higher standard than that of the stations which have been replaced. Usually added into the project are about 3 or 4 sets of lifts, as well as a DDA compliant ramp as well as the stairs. This all adds significant cost, all of which is nothing to do with the level crossing.
"Gman_86"

Which stations on double track lines have 3 or 4 lifts?
  712M Chief Commissioner

At the risk of sounding insensitive, do we really need lifts at stations if there are already DDA- compliant ramps in place? People seem to cope with ramps at busy stations like Richmond, South Yarra, Caulfield, Camberwell and North Melbourne prior to its upgrade. Not to mention the majority of suburban stations that do not have lifts and yet are all accessible.
  Heihachi_73 Chief Commissioner

Location: Terminating at Ringwood
All but Heyington, that is. Smile

I'd rather see DDA-compliant platforms which meet the train at level ground with minimal gaps, as they have done at Box Hill and a few other stations. I wouldn't be surprised if the only reason we still have low platforms dates back to the Swing Door carriages, when a crush-loaded carriage would get its doors stuck and no-one could get in or out (at least as the story goes). Richmond is a horrible station for a disabled person to change trains, as is Footscray (Ringwood and Dandenong are horrible full stop, without even needing to change trains, and the wasted millions rebuilding Ringwood won't even address that in the slightest; if anything, it will make it even more of a maze to get from one platform to the other, just like Mitcham). Changing from an up Burnley group train to a down Caulfield/Sandringham train means travelling about 10 carriage lengths from the MCG end, down the ramp, through the subway, up the ramp at the other side of the station (platforms 1-6), then all the way to the down end to get to the first carriage.
  Comeng552M Assistant Commissioner

Location: In Sydney "Fixing the trains"
I wouldn't call Footscray reliant on lifts when it has DDA compliant ramps at all entrances and platforms (but yes, interchanging sucks). Although lifts are desirable they shouldn't be used alone as it can strand the disabled should it break down, which is why I'm in favor of having stairs and a ramp at new/upgraded stations as default with a lift installed afterwards (or at least provision for one).
  northbritish Chief Train Controller

Well seemingly, the rail maintenance yard at Bayswater hasn't been considered in this, or perhaps glossed over.

It's all well and good to say lets just drop Bayswater station and road crossings at Mountain Highway/Scoresby Rd, but unless you relocate the maintenance facility to elsewhere (and where to I ask) then you haven't entirely eliminated the need for a crossing to get into there at Mountain Hwy, have you???.

Regards
davesvline

Hi Davesvline. I attended the meetings for theplanning of these crossings. The intention was to leave the level crossing access to the maintenance yard as the number of moves across the level crossing was only a few per day.
  LancedDendrite Chief Commissioner

Location: North Haverbrook; where the monorail is king!
Hi Davesvline. I attended the meetings for theplanning of these crossings. The intention was to leave the level crossing access to the maintenance yard as the number of moves across the level crossing was only a few per day.
northbritish

Not being able to entirely get rid of the level crossing was part of the reason why the pollies put it on the back-burner. It's not a good look to have spent up to $200 million on a new station and two new grade separated crossings only to keep the boom gates at one of them!

Well seemingly, the rail maintenance yard at Bayswater hasn't been considered in this, or perhaps glossed over.
Davesvline

But I had heard that although a maintenance etc. facility at Coldstream was under consideration, it would not happen, if at all, until after the Mooroolbark duplication was completed. Removal of the Maroondah Highway crossing, in whatever form it takes, could/should be done without waiting for the duplication.

Having a maintenance facility at Coldstream also raises questions about extending the passenger service as well, but that's not for here.
Lad_Porter

I believe the intent was to stage these projects (Bayswater & Lilydale grade seps, Mooroolbark duplication) so that the Bayswater workshops are moved to an Epping/Craigieburn-style facility at Coldstream.

Thing is, the Maroondah Highway grade separation has 3 realistic options with downsides for each:

  1. New station between John St and Maroondah Hwy, retain level crossing - cheap but doesn't solve the whole problem

  2. Rail over road, new station above existing one, large reconfiguration of stabling facilities (roads lead to headshunt next Beresford Rd then proceed to station). Requires demolition or 'moving' of Lilydale Station, including the heritage-listed refreshment rooms

  3. Rail over road, track slews to the north over the current stabling yards, new station north of the existing one. Significant reduction in stabling capacity, which could be compensated for by new facilities at Coldstream.


That line-up of choices should put it in the 'too-hard' basket for quite some time. There are lower-hanging fruit elsewhere.
  Braddo Deputy Commissioner

Location: Narre Warren
Unsurprisingly Toorak Rd is not on the list. It's one of the busiest roads in Melbourne for gods sake. It should have been done 50 years ago.
  Comeng552M Assistant Commissioner

Location: In Sydney "Fixing the trains"
Unsurprisingly Toorak Rd is not on the list. It's one of the busiest roads in Melbourne for gods sake. It should have been done 50 years ago.
Braddo

Toorak Road at Kooyong is on the list. On the first link Retromelb posted it's listed as number 49.
  Nightfire Minister for Railways

Location: Gippsland
The Maroondah Highway grade separation has 3 realistic options with downsides for each:

  1. New station between John St and Maroondah Hwy, retain level crossing - cheap but doesn't solve the whole problem

  2. Rail over road, new station above existing one, large reconfiguration of stabling facilities (roads lead to headshunt next Beresford Rd then proceed to station). Requires demolition or 'moving' of Lilydale Station, including the heritage-listed refreshment rooms

  3. Rail over road, track slews to the north over the current stabling yards, new station north of the existing one. Significant reduction in stabling capacity, which could be compensated for by new facilities at Coldstream.


That line-up of choices should put it in the 'too-hard' basket for quite some time. There are lower-hanging fruit elsewhere.
LancedDendrite

4.  Sink the existing Highway under the railway, William Street East and West Streets also gets grade separated from the Highway.

5. Build the Lilydale Highway bypass than close the level crossing.
  Nightfire Minister for Railways

Location: Gippsland
Hi Davesvline. I attended the meetings for theplanning of these crossings. The intention was to leave the level crossing access to the maintenance yard as the number of moves across the level crossing was only a few per day.
northbritish

The media would drag the Government over the coals for not fully grade separating a level crossing.

If the workshops siding crossing did remain, train movements across Mountain Highway would be controlled by traffic light signals and a flag person (traffic control) and not have booms and flashing lights.
  LancedDendrite Chief Commissioner

Location: North Haverbrook; where the monorail is king!
4. Sink the existing Highway under the railway, William Street East and West Streets also gets grade separated from the Highway.

5. Build the Lilydale Highway bypass than close the level crossing.
Nightfire


4. Seems plausible, except that you've got a hill to climb at the end of Main St, around where Maroondah Hwy crosses the creek that drains into Lilydale Lake. Might make the grade a bit difficult for a highway, judging on my travels through that stretch of road. Access doesn't seem to be a problem though, which is advantageous.

5. Where is this Bypass to go? John/Hardy St? And what would you do with the rather wide strip of unnecessary road left over around the level crossing?
  Lad_Porter Chief Commissioner

Location: Yarra Glen
4. Seems plausible, except that you've got a hill to climb at the end of Main St, around where Maroondah Hwy crosses the creek that drains into Lilydale Lake. Might make the grade a bit difficult for a highway, judging on my travels through that stretch of road. Access doesn't seem to be a problem though, which is advantageous.

5. Where is this Bypass to go? John/Hardy St? And what would you do with the rather wide strip of unnecessary road left over around the level crossing?
LancedDendrite

One problem with (4) would be the access roads to the car parks and bus bays/taxi rank.  These are immediately on either side of the track, next to the crossing, and the bus bays are at ground level quite close to the road, so some degree of redesign would be necessary (to say the least).

Looking at Melways map 38, the route near Taylor Street/Melbray Avenue, joining back to the existing highway at or east of Anderson Street, is actually labelled "Proposed Lilydale Bypass".  This would eliminate the non-divided stretch through the town, leaving that part for local traffic only, and would enable a continuous divided highway right through, if built to that standard.  But it would still involve a grade separation at or near Taylor Street.  Closing the existing crossing would then follow, and local road traffic would need to use John Street to cross the track(s).  

However, building a Lilydale Bypass of that length is probably outside the scope of a level crossing removal.
  Braddo Deputy Commissioner

Location: Narre Warren
Toorak Road at Kooyong is on the list. On the first link Retromelb posted it's listed as number 49.
Comeng552M

Sorry, I must have missed that. As much as I am glad it's being done, imagine the disruption it will cause.
  Nightfire Minister for Railways

Location: Gippsland
Looking at Melways map 38, the route near Taylor Street/Melbray Avenue, joining back to the existing highway at or east of Anderson Street, is actually labelled "Proposed Lilydale Bypass". This would eliminate the non-divided stretch through the town, leaving that part for local traffic only, and would enable a continuous divided highway right through, if built to that standard. But it would still involve a grade separation at or near Taylor Street. Closing the existing crossing would then follow, and local road traffic would need to use John Street to cross the track(s).

However, building a Lilydale Bypass of that length is probably outside the scope of a level crossing removal.
Lad_Porter

This what I'm thinking

The Lilydale Station level crossing would probably be put In the too hard basket and the bypass would eliminate It as part of a major road upgrade, yes way out of the scope of level crossing removal, though this bypass would take out 2 level crossings (Taylor Street too)
  ZH836301 Chief Commissioner

Location: BleakCity
Wouldn't bank on a bypass, hasn't been talked about seriously by Dicroads for yonks.

Moving the station wouldn't be worth, so expect the status quo to remain unless they try dumping development at Coldstream.
  trainbrain Deputy Commissioner

Living in the local vicinity in the Lilydale area none of fthe above will ever happen, Lilydale was muted years ago for extra stabling sidings and maintenance facilities. All they got was a new Drivers change room. After that everyone concentrated on downing some beers on a  Friday arvo at the VRI............
  bevans Site Admin

Location: Melbourne, Australia
Hearing yesterday the main road level crossing at St Albans and the level crossing at Glenroy will be among the first to be removed from the system.  Word is both stations will be placed underground (the road will come over the top of the line).  

Resources from the nearly completed RRL will be used.
  tom9876543 Train Controller

Why is the talk of sinking the line at Bayswater??

Mountain Hwy has room for building a bridge over existing railway.

Scoresby Rd is a bit more difficult. It could be rebuilt as a bridge, but would require compulsory acquisition of some properties.
I looked on Google Maps and counted about 10 properties that would need to be acquired. I suppose that would cost a fair amount, any ideas? Some of them are commercial properties.

My guess is buying 10 properties and building 2 bridges is cheaper than sinking the line and building a whole new station.
  mickamious Junior Train Controller

Id bloody love to know how they intend to deliver 50 over 8 years when they struggle to do 2 or 3 over a single year?! My math can't be that bad!
Something doesn't add up!
  Lad_Porter Chief Commissioner

Location: Yarra Glen
Id bloody love to know how they intend to deliver 50 over 8 years when they struggle to do 2 or 3 over a single year?! My math can't be that bad!
Something doesn't add up!
Grosso
That's 25 in each four year term, or about six per year, which is unlikely, especially where a new station will also be required.  But resources formerly earmarked for the East West link will no doubt be redeployed, and probably several projects will be worked on at the same time, so who knows?  Looking at the media release, there is no time frame mentioned.  It just says they will remove 50 crossings, but it does not say over what period.  

And if they also get kicked out after four years, an incoming Liberal government would no doubt have other priorities.

Sponsored advertisement

Display from: