Rowville - proposed extension

 
  MelbourneCity Chief Commissioner

Views of Knox City council:


RAIL EXTENSION MOVES UP THE AGENDA



“Knox Council firmly believes a rail link to Rowville is a must,” said Cr Emanuele Cicchiello, Taylor Ward Councillor and Chair of the Knox Public Transport Advisory Committee.



“The concept is not new, it was first mooted nearly thirty years ago.  It was a major omission from the Department of Infrastructure’s Draft Outer Eastern Public Transport Plan released last May.



“Thirty years ago, Knox was a semi rural region and the southern end of the municipality in particular was under developed.  The need for a rail link to Rowville was arguable then.  



“However, over the last thirty years the whole situation has changed as the population in Knox has trebled and the outer eastern parts of Melbourne have been developed to the current levels.  



“There is now a very strong argument for a rail link to Rowville.  



“Public transport provisions to, from and within this region of Melbourne are woeful.



“The Council has put the Rowville rail link back on the public transport agenda, along with the tram extension to Knox not just Vermont South.



“An independent study into all aspects of the Rowville rail link has been included in the new budget to quick start the new campaign.  The study aims to highlight potential project constraints and identify the necessary station and rail reservations to ensure that parallel developments do not compromise any future rail link projects.



“Knox Council is making a clear statement to the State Government that Council will again lead the local community by stepping up the campaign for a rail link to Rowville.  



“Extra buses stuck in traffic are not the solution to the transport and environmental concerns plaguing the outer eastern region.  They are useful bandaids, which will be more effective if they intersect with new railway stations in the traffic-congested section of the City.



“The State Government should be sponsoring this study, we expect them to face the issues squarely if they are serious about their intention of having 20% of all motorised trips taken by public transport by the year 2020,” said Cr Cicchiello

http://www.knox.vic.gov.au/content.cfm?infopageID=2621

Sponsored advertisement

  Aussie Steve Deputy Commissioner

This is great news. I just wished the City of Monash woudl also back up the remarks made about the Rowville Line as well as an extended Glen Waverley Line to Knox City.
  bevans Site Admin

Location: Melbourne, Australia
This is great news. I just wished the City of Monash woudl also back up the remarks made about the Rowville Line as well as an extended Glen Waverley Line to Knox City.
"Aussie Steve"


Extending the Glen Waverley line to Knox City would be the highest priority rail project in Melbourne and should have been completed years ago.  I am not sure what it is about these Victorian governments, but they continually invest in slow tram networks over and above heavy rail, high volume projects.

Regards,
Brian
  standard_gauge Dr Beeching

Location: Outside the toilet, waiting for Della Bosca to come out !!
This is great news. I just wished the City of Monash woudl also back up the remarks made about the Rowville Line as well as an extended Glen Waverley Line to Knox City.
"Aussie Steve"


Good news that local council wishes to support investment in rail, bad news...it's just a local council, remember City of Port Phillips Bay wanted a tram line from Port Melbourne? and a St Kilda tram loop couple of years back?
  bevans Site Admin

Location: Melbourne, Australia
Good news that local council wishes to support investment in rail, bad news...it's just a local council, remember City of Port Phillips Bay wanted a tram line from Port Melbourne? and a St Kilda tram loop couple of years back?
"james_c"


A tram line from Port Melbourne to where?

Regards,
Brian
  melbtrip Chief Commissioner

Location: Annoying Orange
Views of Knox City council:


RAIL EXTENSION MOVES UP THE AGENDA



“Knox Council firmly believes a rail link to Rowville is a must,” said Cr Emanuele Cicchiello, Taylor Ward Councillor and Chair of the Knox Public Transport Advisory Committee.



“The concept is not new, it was first mooted nearly thirty years ago.  It was a major omission from the Department of Infrastructure’s Draft Outer Eastern Public Transport Plan released last May.



“Thirty years ago, Knox was a semi rural region and the southern end of the municipality in particular was under developed.  The need for a rail link to Rowville was arguable then.  



“However, over the last thirty years the whole situation has changed as the population in Knox has trebled and the outer eastern parts of Melbourne have been developed to the current levels.  



“There is now a very strong argument for a rail link to Rowville.  



“Public transport provisions to, from and within this region of Melbourne are woeful.



“The Council has put the Rowville rail link back on the public transport agenda, along with the tram extension to Knox not just Vermont South.



“An independent study into all aspects of the Rowville rail link has been included in the new budget to quick start the new campaign.  The study aims to highlight potential project constraints and identify the necessary station and rail reservations to ensure that parallel developments do not compromise any future rail link projects.



“Knox Council is making a clear statement to the State Government that Council will again lead the local community by stepping up the campaign for a rail link to Rowville.  



“Extra buses stuck in traffic are not the solution to the transport and environmental concerns plaguing the outer eastern region.  They are useful bandaids, which will be more effective if they intersect with new railway stations in the traffic-congested section of the City.



“The State Government should be sponsoring this study, we expect them to face the issues squarely if they are serious about their intention of having 20% of all motorised trips taken by public transport by the year 2020,” said Cr Cicchiello

http://www.knox.vic.gov.au/content.cfm?infopageID=2621
"MelbourneCity"



I think the rail link to Rowville will be good idea, but I can't see this government doing anything about to make it happen.
I believe this government is a do nothing government when comes to public transport in Melbourne.
  realmakoym8 Chief Commissioner

Location: Melbourne
This ..............................is ...............................
the ..........................labou........r ......................
part...............y .......................we..........are..............
re.......ferr......ing.............to........................Ah!
...........Tired..................
Will............look...........into...........it..........!
  John of Melbourne The Ghost of George Stephenson

Location: Melbourne suburbs
I believe this government is a do nothing government when comes to public transport in Melbourne.
"melbtrip"
That's not fair.  They are doing things, just not necessarily the right things.

Light rail on existing roads is a lot cheaper than heavy rail on routes to be acquired.  Unfortunately, the government is not prepared to spend the money necessary to do the job properly.
  Aussie Steve Deputy Commissioner

Light rail is a hell of a lot slower then heavy rail. Melbourne does not need trams in the middle to outer ring suburbs. It needs more heavy rail and the termination of existing tram lines at more logical locations.
  standard_gauge Dr Beeching

Location: Outside the toilet, waiting for Della Bosca to come out !!
Good news that local council wishes to support investment in rail, bad news...it's just a local council, remember City of Port Phillips Bay wanted a tram line from Port Melbourne? and a St Kilda tram loop couple of years back?
"james_c"


A tram line from Port Melbourne to where?

Regards,
Brian
"bevans"


St Kilda,along the beach road
  Eaglemist Assistant Commissioner

Location: East Gippsland

Extending the Glen Waverley line to Knox City would be the highest priority rail project in Melbourne and should have been completed years ago.  I am not sure what it is about these Victorian governments, but they continually invest in slow tram networks over and above heavy rail, high volume projects.

Regards,
Brian
"bevans"


That'd be by a rack railway down Wheelers Hill?
  mjja Sir Nigel Gresley

Location: Mount Waverley, Melbourne
Yes, in a way it's good news. However, as has been said, it's just a local council - not the people who have the power to make it happen.

As well as benefiting the Knox people, an extension of the GWY line would mean that some improvements to services would have to happen - for example more and better express services. At the moment GWY has just about no expresses, and the morning ones all get into the city after 9am so they're no use to 9-5 commuters.

A third track to Darling or maybe Holmesglen (with services running express from Richmond to Holmesglen for the students) would be nice too but I guess that won't happen at the same time.

Incidentally, it's amazing what proportion of evening commuters go all the way to GWY. Something like 75%. I'd say a lot are from Knox and either drive or bus to the station. A rail extension would take that much pressure off the roads almost immediately, and then the slower effects (freeway commuters transferring) would kick in and help even more.
  Brunny Chief Commissioner

Location: Peoples Republic of Moreland
Light rail on existing roads is a lot cheaper than heavy rail on routes to be acquired.  Unfortunately, the government is not prepared to spend the money necessary to do the job properly.
"John of Melbourne"


Actually, no, Light Rail is more expensive per passenger carried, even if you do need to do a bit of tunneling.

The track costs a little less, though not much less in this specific situation if you consider that the corridor is already there down the middle of Wellington Road (it was made intentionally wide enough for Heavy Rail in the median yonkers ago, though some work may be needed at two or maybe three station locations).

However, these small capital cost savings are more than offset by the fact that each tram costs $3m (assuming something like a Combino or Citadis 3 section) and only seats 36-40 people, with standing room for another 100 or so. Longer trams with more seats cost more, probably the same cost per passenger carried. Anyway, we're looking at $75k per seat. Oh, and they are slower than trains, so you need to buy more to run the same frequency, and more still if you want to cater for large crowds.

Let's not forget that you could easily expect a peak of 5000 staff and students leaving Monash Clayton to get to the Dandenong Line on PT in a window of about an hour if the service were any good.  Assuming a 20 minute round trip for short runs from Monash to Huntingdale, you need 11 trams for peak load plus whatever you need for the normal rotation and spares (probably about 25 all up - for about $75 million).

They also tend not to last as long in service, we've all seen the recent discussions about design issues for all low floor smeg-o-trams.  You also need to hire a driver per 140 passengers or so, at about $50k, $1250 per seat or $357 per passenger.

Meanwhile, a 3 car train in the usual Melbourne configuration costs about $10 million, seats about 400, and can carry about 600. That's $25k per seat. You need to hire a slightly more expensive driver, costing about $80k. That's's $200 per seat ($100 for 6 car trains) or $133.33 per passenger ($66.67 for 6 car trains).

Light Rail is best suited to revitalizing medium size towns, like many of the newer setups in Europe. Like Sydney in the 1890s, or Geelong, Ballarat, Bendigo, Aldonga, Wagga, Goulburn, Tamworth etc today. Where it still exists in big cities, it probably should be kept, but I can't see any reason to build substandard little orphan systems that will inevitably go the way of the two VR tramways and be replaced by buses when the financial justification for fleet replacement every few decades kills a system that never really made sense in the first place.

Bus-Rail is a more effective combination on all levels.
  Nexas The Ghost of George Stephenson



A third track to Darling or maybe Holmesglen (with services running express from Richmond to Holmesglen for the students) would be nice too but I guess that won't happen at the same time.
"mjja"


The majority of students on the GWY line board at Burnley, Heyington, Kooyong, Tooronga, Gardiner, and Glen Iris. Expressing these stations for the students is NOT a good idea.

More expresses following the Non-PSR pattern heading in peak direction for the workers would be of good use, but perhaps adding some stops in.

No point expressing trains through Kooyong and Gardiner if the train slows to 15km/h anyway.
  4UrbanTransit Train Controller

Location: Bored on Collins Street
Sideline question - why is there still so many level crossings through Toorak/Glen Iris area of the GW line? Given the amount of traffic(especially Toorak Rd) and the fact two tram lines cross the line - would not this be a priority for grade separation?

And if not - would it be a priority if the GW line was extended to rowville? One would like to think so
  Aussie Steve Deputy Commissioner

The Glen Waverley line between (but not including) Heyington to Darling shoudl be placed underground. There is plenty of room on both side of the tracks to do this and it would eliminate the level crossings at:
Toorak Rd, Kooyong;
Glenferrie Rd, Kooyong;
Burke Rd, Gardiner;
Tooronga Rd, Tooronga and
High St, Glen Iris

Once that is done, or better still, at the same time that is being done, the following should be built.



There is also potential for redevelopment over the Glen Iris and Gardiner Train Stations once the lines go below ground.
  Nexas The Ghost of George Stephenson

Sideline question - why is there still so many level crossings through Toorak/Glen Iris area of the GW line? Given the amount of traffic(especially Toorak Rd) and the fact two tram lines cross the line - would not this be a priority for grade separation?

And if not - would it be a priority if the GW line was extended to rowville? One would like to think so
"4UrbanTransit"


The GWY line was supposed to be grade seperated in the 70's.

If I had my way, the line would be underground from Darling to Kooyong, then follow a new path, stopping at Toorak Village, Jam Factory, St Kilda Road, Flinders Street, Melbourne Central, and Melbourne Uni.

This would allow track from Burnley Sidings to the up side of Kooyong to be used for more stabling if needed. Possibly shuttles from Heyington to Burnley or the City. Or even convert Kooyong-Burnley to Light Rail, and run a tram service from the City to Dandenong Road via Glenferrie Road.
  Aussie Steve Deputy Commissioner

  gwmss15 Locomotive Driver

in my frist year in melbourne i created a proposal fro a driverless computer controlled train running from above huntingdale station to ringwood via monash uni, stud park and knox city  

all on a raised guide way allong wellington road and stud road with sations about ever 1000 metres and i fowarded it to PUTA but they did not like the idea at all. i thing it was too high tech for them to understand and they think that i would no fit into melbournes transit system at all

this sytem would be much cheaper than a tunnel and can carry up to 300000 people a day there is on like this running in KL malayisa and in BBK thailand also a smaller verison in singapore

what do people think abouth this kind of idea for outer suburban melbourne it should be cheap to run as it has no drivers and only a couple of staff on each station to sell tickects and to keep it clean and tidy
  Brunny Chief Commissioner

Location: Peoples Republic of Moreland
what do people think abouth this kind of idea for outer suburban melbourne it should be cheap to run as it has no drivers and only a couple of staff on each station to sell tickects and to keep it clean and tidy
"gwmss15"


The last thing Melbourne needs is an orphan network of anything, be it Trams, Light Rail, Monorails, Maglevs or Driverless trains.  The massive cost of specialized fleet maintenance, and particularly vehicle replacement over the life of the line would outweigh any possible benefits of choosing an inferior transport mode to try and save a few bucks on the capital cost.

(Not that it would necessarily do that, but hey, some people have these ideas).

If anything, we should be standardising the PT network, not adding ridiculous little routes like the two VR tramways that sat on their own because some Government was too stingey to extend the real train lines, and ended up being replaced by buses because orphan networks just don't make financial sense.
  Brunny Chief Commissioner

Location: Peoples Republic of Moreland
Sideline question - why is there still so many level crossings through Toorak/Glen Iris area of the GW line? Given the amount of traffic(especially Toorak Rd) and the fact two tram lines cross the line - would not this be a priority for grade separation?
"4UrbanTransit"


Not really.  You don't grade separate a line just because there are level crossings, you need to find a much better reason.

Besides, if it was too easy for large volumes of car traffic to get into Toorak and Glen Iris, all you'd do is move the congestion from the Monash overpasses to Toorak and Glen Iris, and create lots more delays for the trams.  Right now, most of the congestion is in areas where there are no trams.

A good reason might be to create a decent bus/train interchange, similar to Boronia (or in that part of town, bus/train/tram interchanges (including some short tram extensions).  Maybe to facilitate some airspace development, though you're not likely to ever see much of that on the GW line.  Maybe to create a bit of road capacity to strategically help stop a freeway being built (but that horse has kinda already bolted for the GW line, while there's still a flicker of hope for Nunawading).

And if not - would it be a priority if the GW line was extended to rowville? One would like to think so
"4UrbanTransit"


Nope.  Firstly, the GW Line should probably continue East, not South, because an extension of the GW line would only really catch a small number of passengers, whereas the Huntingdale-Rowville option would take in the somewhat more populous Monash Uni.

Secondly, the overall number of trains on the line would probably not change much even if it was extended.
  MelbourneCity Chief Commissioner

I think this line should go ahead, but the problem is, Knox cant do much. Monash council would also have to support it, but even then... where do they get the money and authority to do so?
  Brunny Chief Commissioner

Location: Peoples Republic of Moreland
I think this line should go ahead, but the problem is, Knox cant do much. Monash council would also have to support it, but even then... where do they get the money and authority to do so?
"MelbourneCity"


Monash Council don't have to come to the party, though it would be nice.  Knox Council are doing this to create an up-to-date document that they can use to thwap the State Government with.  

We all know how useless the state is when it comes to designing rail projects.  Everything the state bureaucracy puts up on the subject of PT is complicated, lengthy, expensive and controversial.  Any pollie in his right mind would knock those kinds of projects back, particularly an anti-PT government, like we have now.

If Knox Council can hire someone that can nut out a serious plan to make the project quick, simple, popular and cheap, they'd be able to go over the heads of the DoI, drop it on the minister's desk, then have a good reference document when the minister starts saying it's too expensive, complicated etc.  It might theoretically have a better chance at success that way.
  gwmss15 Locomotive Driver

The idea was to build the driverless system on the Monash Rowville route is to see if it is an effective system that could be used on all metro lines in  Melbourne thus all lines in Melbourne could have MRT class service with a frequency of no less than 7 mins any time or day of the week. And there would be massive savings if the driverless system was used on the whole network i.e. no drivers need so there would be more money for maintenance staff and customer service staff as these staff cost much less to employ than the drivers

One big benefit is that you will never hear this message a flinders st again "the 5.30pm Frankston train has be cancelled due to a lack if drivers stupid connex does not apologise for any extra and cost inconvenience to me and everyone else on the platform"

plus much less fare evasion as it would be a full closed in system
  John of Melbourne The Ghost of George Stephenson

Location: Melbourne suburbs
Light rail on existing roads is a lot cheaper than heavy rail on routes to be acquired.  Unfortunately, the government is not prepared to spend the money necessary to do the job properly.
"John of Melbourne"

Actually, no, Light Rail is more expensive per passenger carried, even if you do need to do a bit of tunneling.
"Brunny"

I didn't say it wasn't.  I was talking about total cost, not cost per passenger.  I was describing it the way a politician would look at it.

Sponsored advertisement

Display from: