Level Crossing Removal for Ferguson Street Williamstown

 
Topic moved from News by bevans on 12 Nov 2019 17:34
  bevans Site Admin

Location: Melbourne, Australia
The Andrew's Government has now announced the removal of yet another level crossing at Williamstown. This crossing includes a complicated roundabout near interestingly the railway museum.

I cannot say there has been a lot of traffic through this crossing on my visits to Williamstown.  Not sure of the number of safety issues at this crossing.

The question is under or over for the rail.  I am guessing the rail line will go over the road in the new setup.  Time will tell.

I can;t imagine Skyrail myself.

Level Crossing Removal for Ferguson Street Williamstown

Sponsored advertisement

  Valvegear Dr Beeching

Location: Norda Fittazroy
I can't see the point of changing Ferguson Street. Sparks to Williamstown Beach and Williamstown cross it, and that's your lot; no V/Line pass and no freighters. You don't have the booms down while a succession of trains go by a la Springvale for example. And Williamstown itself is almost an island; it's on it's own sort of peninsula, and you don't go through Williamstown to get to anywhere else. The crossing just doesn't carry heavy traffic.

On top of that, it's one of the safest State ALP seats, so there's no need for pork barrelling.
  chomper Junior Train Controller

The Ferguson St can get properly backed up during the peak periods, granted it's not as bad as some of the other crossing removal projects, it's still crap.
  route14 Chief Commissioner

Surprising decision for such a quiet line.
  ngarner Chief Train Controller

Location: Seville
This is not 'new' news, just a re-announcement of the one of the original 50 level crossings to be removed as part of the Labor party's 2014 election promises. Considering virtually every one of the original 50, and almost all of the additional 25, have had their designs announced, this one is really being dragged out. Could it be that they really can't decide what to do with it? Especially since it is on the Williamstown line, as commented on above, and there isn't that much rail traffic to deal with. I remember reading quite some time ago that the locals are not that keen on the idea of removing the crossing because of the roundabouts, pedestrian crossings and other complications inherent in replacing it.

Neil

Surprisingly, this one ranks at #22 in the ALCAM 2008 level crossing ratings;a lot higher than I would have thought without looking. However, in Vicroads 2014 assessment it didn't rate even as lower priority (of high, medium and lower) for 2022.
  Myrtone Chief Commissioner

Location: North Carlton, Melbourne, Victoria
Upon this grade separation, how about also closing the level at Giffard street, the part north of the railway being renamed Electra street? That level crossing is very quiet and only one block away from a road bridge over the tracks.
  TOQ-1 Deputy Commissioner

Location: Power Trainger
Wonder what the cost of this one removal would be vs say, converting the Williamstown Line to light rail?
  True Believers Chief Commissioner

Wonder what the cost of this one removal would be vs say, converting the Williamstown Line to light rail?
TOQ-1

Williamstown line turned into a light-rail, I think it's better it can stay as heavy rail and have the Werribee line diverted via Metro 2 and then the Williamstown and Altona lines can take the loadings in the inner west.

If you turned the Williamstown and Altona corridors to light-rail, what would serve btw Newport and Footscray when Metro 2 opens and Werribee line diverted. Or you want light rail btw Newport and Footscray? It gets messy then.

Just leave the setup as it is. Eventually, it'll make sense when Metro 2 comes into the picture.

Light-rail between Newport and Sunshine would probably make more sense via the freight corridor in the future.
  Gman_86 Chief Commissioner

Location: Melton, where the sparks dare not roam!
Upon this grade separation, how about also closing the level at Giffard street, the part north of the railway being renamed Electra street? That level crossing is very quiet and only one block away from a road bridge over the tracks.
Myrtone
You can leave that one alone. Its presence isn't hurting anything.
  Myrtone Chief Commissioner

Location: North Carlton, Melbourne, Victoria
If closed, would its absence hurt anything? Removing level crossings is probably among our top ten priorities (if not top five) and if that means closing a level crossing with a local access road if there is a grade-separated way around, then it should be considered. If closing a level crossing with a local access road doesn't hurt anything, then we can get rid of it cheaply and easily.
  Gman_86 Chief Commissioner

Location: Melton, where the sparks dare not roam!
Grade separating problematic level crossings is a priority yes. This crossing is in no way a problem for anybody. Therefore there is no valid reason to remove it.

Focus your effort elsewhere where there are valid issues.
  Rossco T Chief Train Controller

Location: Camberwell, Victoria
Upon this grade separation, how about also closing the level at Giffard street, the part north of the railway being renamed Electra street? That level crossing is very quiet and only one block away from a road bridge over the tracks.
Myrtone
But why would you close the level crossing at Giffard Street other than to piss off the residents who live in the area?  If it is as quiet as you say it is then what's the harm in leaving it open?

Ross
  Myrtone Chief Commissioner

Location: North Carlton, Melbourne, Victoria
If it is quiet and there two bridges over the tracks less than three blocks away, do we need it? If not, closing it is just a cheap and easy way of removing a level crossing.
There have been level crossing closures before and two level crossings on the Frankston line are to be closed upon grade separation of nearby ones. Take the Upfield line where this happened during the 1998 upgrade, and there aren't even nearby grade-separated alternative routes.
  Engineeringlogic Station Master

I'd do Lara before this one. This is classic looking after your electorate type stuff.
  True Believers Chief Commissioner

If closed, would its absence hurt anything? Removing level crossings is probably among our top ten priorities (if not top five) and if that means closing a level crossing with a local access road if there is a grade-separated way around, then it should be considered. If closing a level crossing with a local access road doesn't hurt anything, then we can get rid of it cheaply and easily.
Myrtone
Like I told Myrtone beforehand, there's no priority on this particular crossing. In the case of the Frankston level crossing closures, these level crossings were very close to the removal site so needed to be removed as the rail slopes near those sites.

By the way, if you did some research Myrtone, one of the closures on the Frankston line got rejected.

https://levelcrossings.vic.gov.au/media/publications/mentone-community-update-february-2017

Last year we consulted on the option to close Latrobe Street level crossing because of its relatively low traffic volumes and close proximity to the other level crossings being removed at Charman, Park and Balcombe Roads. However, over half of the community feedback that we collected from September to October 2016 showed a preference to keep the street open. We have decided not to close Latrobe Street at this stage.
  Myrtone Chief Commissioner

Location: North Carlton, Melbourne, Victoria
I realise there is no priority on that particular crossing, but closure is surely quite cheap. An alternative to closure of this crossing is, wait for it, providing it with full-skirted barriers closed by default and even restricting which vehicles can cross the railway there.
  bevans Site Admin

Location: Melbourne, Australia
Coming to the conclusion this is not a good investment and the money earmarked for this crossing should infact be directed to an alternative crossing.
  Myrtone Chief Commissioner

Location: North Carlton, Melbourne, Victoria
Which of the crossings mentioned in this thread do you mean?
  John.Z Chief Train Controller

I'd do Lara before this one. This is classic looking after your electorate type stuff.
Engineeringlogic
Lara should've been done when the station was rebuilt.

With the SG line they might have a problem. Not enough space for road over either.
  Nightfire Minister for Railways

Location: Gippsland
I'd do Lara before this one. This is classic looking after your electorate type stuff.
Lara should've been done when the station was rebuilt.

With the SG line they might have a problem. Not enough space for road over either.
John.Z
Lara's level crossing could be grade separated by building a direct straight line road link between McClelland Ave and Station Lake Road over the railway tracks (local road Intersections would be reconfigured and the level crossing would than be closed)
  John.Z Chief Train Controller

Lara's level crossing could be grade separated by building a direct straight line road link between McClelland Ave and Station Lake Road over the railway tracks (local road Intersections would be reconfigured and the level crossing would than be closed)
Nightfire
Between the two roundabouts? No chance, gradients would be too steep, especially if accounting for future electrification or double stack containers.
  justarider Assistant Commissioner

Location: Stuck on VR and hoping for better.
Lara's level crossing could be grade separated by building a direct straight line road link between McClelland Ave and Station Lake Road over the railway tracks (local road Intersections would be reconfigured and the level crossing would than be closed)
Between the two roundabouts? No chance, gradients would be too steep, especially if accounting for future electrification or double stack containers.
John.Z
err NO.

re-read the suggestion to take out the McCelland Rd dog leg, and move the crossing 100m further west.
Added advantage is works could be done without much interruption to existing road or rail.

cheers
John
  ZH836301 Chief Commissioner

Location: BleakCity
I'm guessing that the only reason any notice is given to Ferguson St at all is that it's a part of heavy vehicle route schemes, particularly for transport between the refineries and to the rail workshops, along Kororoit Creek Rd and Melbourne Rd.

For anybody upset with the cost, you'd surely have to agree that conversion to light rail, or truncation to North Williamstown, would be an even wiser move economically.
  John.Z Chief Train Controller

err NO.

re-read the suggestion to take out the McCelland Rd dog leg, and move the crossing 100m further west.
Added advantage is works could be done without much interruption to existing road or rail.

cheers
John
justarider
Good luck doing that without pissing off the RSL.
  True Believers Chief Commissioner

Converting the Williamstown and Altona rail lines is not an economical saving decision, otherwise, the Upfield line would have trams running on it. But that idea was ditched.

Why does no-one talk about converting the Alemain line (that's a quiet line)?

Melbourne's west has the poorest railway infrastructure, considering its growth.

In the other growth corridors

The North got Craigieburn electrification 2007, a new station at Coolaroo in 2010, Sunbury electrification in 2012, South Morang in 2012, Mernda in 2018.

The Southeast got Cranbourne electrification in the 1990s, Cardiner road station in 2012, introduced 10-minute services or better from Dandenong in 2012, Cranbourne line is getting a full duplication, new signaling/HCMTs underway, but their triplication project got canceled & will be the first to receive the orbital railway.

The west gets Regional Rail Link in 2015, little improvement to timetable on Werribee line after RRL opened, Duplication to Melton is opening, but all of those are regional services, a new station at Williams Landing (which is so busy, that it makes sense to keep Aircraft as a back-up), and western rail plan is only a plan. Metro 2 tunnel is delayed, which is what the west needs.

And now economically saving in someone's mind is degrading the service to light-rail which has less capacity than the existing service. The Williamstown/Altona corridors are to serve the suburbs of Altona, Altona North, Newport, Williamstown, Spotswood (potential development), Yarraville, Seddon, and South Kensington. Werribee line will express past the inner-west via Metro 2.

The inner-west needs to be developed more and this has been happening, have you been to Altona? High density exists along Pier street and there's potential for more development in the future. Altona line could always be used as an opportunity to be a branch line to Point Cook. This is long term thinking, short term thinking may involve light-rail conversions, but there is more to the west than urban sprawl.

If you upgraded Melbourne's western rail lines, I'm sure the west would have more patronage and more residential growth going upwards. At the moment, the west has a poor-service for transit and because of this, we're building a west-gate road tunnel instead of metro 2.

Sponsored advertisement

Subscribers: bevans, Myrtone, Nightfire, reubstar6

Display from: