50 level crossings to be removed

 
  Valvegear Dr Beeching

Location: Norda Fittazroy
t would be great if the grade separation had provision for a station at Camp Road for connections to the 902 Smartbus. The platform is most likely to be on near-level track between Camp Road and the Ring Road. The Camp Road bridge span should be long enough to accommodate not only a double track, but also a pedestrian path from each platform to the north side of Camp Road for connections to buses. As part of the road rebuild, there should be provision for bus stop bays on each side of the road for an easy connection to the station.

This could be a very useful station in the event of disruption on the Craigieburn or South Morang lines, because a bus bridge could easily be set up between Camp Road and Broadmeadows Station, or Camp Road and Keon Park station.

While the surrounding area is industrial, there are pockets of residential such as behind the Campbellfield Shopping Centre.
mm42
You just don't understand the system, do you? What you're suggesting is called planning, and we don't go for that nonsense here. If a station is to be built there, it will be after the grade separation has been complete for at least ten years, and will be of considerably higher cost than if it were done now. Furthermore, what does the convenience of travellers matter? The shiny bums get well paid regardless of what level of service the public gets. Some may say I'm a cynic, and they'd be right.
(Note: "cynic":- a man who smells flowers and immediately looks for the funeral.)

Sponsored advertisement

  Adogs Chief Train Controller

But either way - it sounds like a fantasy off the noskyrail site.  Decking over a trench in a way that's usable for building on (or even just for putting a park on) is very expensive and would add a huge amount to the project cost.  The only place it's maybe justified is right next to the station (such as they did in Ormond).
Brumby's government had a thought bubble called "Project Double Fault" which was to trench the Glen Waverley line all the way from the Yarra Bridge to Kooyong and sell the land created above the line to the private sector for as many apartments as they could possibly cram onto it. The issue was that once the lines had been covered it brings in a whole lot of issues with longer term maintenance, access to tracks in an emergency etc. and the government wanted the private sector to stump up for any of those future liabilities as part of the project. They couldn't get anyone interested.

IN the same vein, Napthine offered the land between Federation Square and the MCG to the private sector for free provided they accepted liabilities for any future maintenance of the support structures and allowed clear access to the tracks ... again, no takers. I guess there must be a good reason why the private sector don't want to touch these things with a barge pole - presumably developers and insurance companies have done the sums and come to the conclusion that it's too risky and/or simply not worth it?
don_dunstan

Yep - and people have proposed it for the Sandringham line too at least once that I remember.

Essentially my point is the same as you stated above - the potential financial returns aren't anywhere near big enough for anyone to want to do it.  Land prices would have to be astronomical to be worth it - if they can't do it in Brighton or through Glen Iris/Camberwell areas, then definitely not worth it out in Nunawading.

And yet, it's an argument I've seen skyrail opponents put forward for putting rail under, generally along the lines of "the extra expense of putting the line underground can be offset by decking the trench and selling the above ground space".  Points for optimism, but the numbers suggest they're dreaming.
  AJW Chief Train Controller

Location: Melbourne
Today at Murrumbeena the first tower/pillar/support for skyrail was erected. Lots of very big cranes.

There has been a lot of excavation, overhead and foundation work along the line, but this is the first elevated thing.
  drunkill Junior Train Controller

Location: Melbourne, Australia
Yep, and a video from LXRA on it too:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9_SERLFb6ZE
1 down, ~350 to go.


It seems like the erection of the huge gantry crane at Murrumbidgee for the assembly and transportation of the concrete beams has been pushed back to March. It was originally going to go up in November last year but I suppose design work for the entire line has pushed it back a bit.
  historian Deputy Commissioner

But either way - it sounds like a fantasy off the noskyrail site.  Decking over a trench in a way that's usable for building on (or even just for putting a park on) is very expensive and would add a huge amount to the project cost.  The only place it's maybe justified is right next to the station (such as they did in Ormond).
Brumby's government had a thought bubble called "Project Double Fault" which was to trench the Glen Waverley line all the way from the Yarra Bridge to Kooyong and sell the land created above the line to the private sector for as many apartments as they could possibly cram onto it. The issue was that once the lines had been covered it brings in a whole lot of issues with longer term maintenance, access to tracks in an emergency etc. and the government wanted the private sector to stump up for any of those future liabilities as part of the project. They couldn't get anyone interested.
don_dunstan

No, Brumby's government didn't have this idea.

A private consortium had the "Project Double Fault" idea and announced to all and sundry what they wanted to do. The government was non-committal. The consortium went quiet while they did the sums, and then announced that they had changed their plans. The project now included a tunnel from the Glen Waverley line to Oakleigh with a station at Chadstone, and a massive amount of government investment. The government said "no thanks". The project sank without trace.
  Adogs Chief Train Controller

Tunnel from East Malvern to Oakleigh (or wherever) under Chadstone to Oakleigh isn't likely for two reasons:

1. $$$
2. Gandel is staunchly opposed.
  Lad_Porter Chief Commissioner

Location: Yarra Glen
Ringwood to Box Hill is due to reopen on Monday morning.  Free coffee, cakes and gfiveaways at the new Heatherdale station 0600 to 0930.
  Adogs Chief Train Controller

Had anyone already posted this?  Rosanna station to be elevated, video shows route with duplication of Rosanna-Heidelberg section.  Works to start this year.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FjMG40gFvKc
  jdekorte Deputy Commissioner

Location: Near Caulfield Station
Had anyone already posted this?  Rosanna station to be elevated, video shows route with duplication of Rosanna-Heidelberg section.  Works to start this year.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FjMG40gFvKc
Adogs
Yep I saw it. Looks good. They are obviously aiming to preserve much of the heritage structures of the Burgundy St bridge and the Heidelberg tunnel. I think with the Rosanna parklands elevated was the only real way to go  - although opponents of elevated rail will no doubt cry foul no matter if the elevation is a short bridge or a long viaduct.
  True Believers Chief Commissioner

Removing level crossings is great, but there is a problem where at some site they able to do rail duplication and others it is only for provision. Altona and Hurstbridge lines receive duplication, whereas Upfeild and Cranbourne lines don't get any. At the very least make a passing loop so trains at can pass each other. Then when full funding comes can duplicate in between. Anyone else agrees with me?
  Nightfire Minister for Railways

Location: Gippsland
Removing level crossings is great, but there is a problem where at some site they able to do rail duplication and others it is only for provision. Altona and Hurstbridge lines receive duplication, whereas Upfeild and Cranbourne lines don't get any. At the very least make a passing loop so trains at can pass each other. Then when full funding comes can duplicate in between. Anyone else agrees with me?
James974
The whole scheme Is mostly designed to ease road congestion and eliminate the crossings where motorists engage In risky dangerous behavior (sometimes not by choice, but chance or by Intimidation through road rage)
  True Believers Chief Commissioner

Removing level crossings is great, but there is a problem where at some site they able to do rail duplication and others it is only for provision. Altona and Hurstbridge lines receive duplication, whereas Upfeild and Cranbourne lines don't get any. At the very least make a passing loop so trains at can pass each other. Then when full funding comes can duplicate in between. Anyone else agrees with me?
The whole scheme Is mostly designed to ease road congestion and eliminate the crossings where motorists engage In risky dangerous behavior (sometimes not by choice, but chance or by Intimidation through road rage)
Nightfire
I know but improving the rail network at the same time would help run more trains into the future and save future costs for duplication. It is already designed into the project this is exactly why they duplicate the Hurstbridge and Altona lines and upgrade the whole Dandenong line. The benefits would increase for rail users not just road users. A small cost for a huge benefit to those that have to wait for delayed train because they have wait for another train in another direction. You know it's 2017, should not be any single track anymore its a relic of the past just like the level crossings.
  Nightfire Minister for Railways

Location: Gippsland
I know but improving the rail network at the same time would help run more trains into the future and save future costs for duplication. It is already designed into the project this is exactly why they duplicate the Hurstbridge and Altona lines and upgrade the whole Dandenong line. The benefits would increase for rail users not just road users. A small cost for a huge benefit to those that have to wait for delayed train because they have wait for another train in another direction. You know it's 2017, should not be any single track anymore its a relic of the past just like the level crossings.
James974
All boils down to available budgets !

From a bean counters point of view, spending more money now "that not available" doesn't save money In the future !

Though If a project comes In early and under budget, the opportunity exists to broaden the scope of works, but saying that If a project goes over budget (or change In Government) the scope of works could be narrowed to the bare minimal (such as what happened with Regional Rail Link)
  True Believers Chief Commissioner

I know but improving the rail network at the same time would help run more trains into the future and save future costs for duplication. It is already designed into the project this is exactly why they duplicate the Hurstbridge and Altona lines and upgrade the whole Dandenong line. The benefits would increase for rail users not just road users. A small cost for a huge benefit to those that have to wait for delayed train because they have wait for another train in another direction. You know it's 2017, should not be any single track anymore its a relic of the past just like the level crossings.
All boils down to available budgets !

From a bean counters point of view, spending more money now "that not available" doesn't save money In the future !

Though If a project comes In early and under budget, the opportunity exists to broaden the scope of works, but saying that If a project goes over budget (or change In Government) the scope of works could be narrowed to the bare minimal (such as what happened with Regional Rail Link)
Nightfire
Wait a minute the Regional Rail Link scope of works was narrowed to a bare minimum not because it went over budget, its was because the previous government wanted to cut the cost. Regional rail link is like what happened with Craigeburn electrification where they do it cheap as possible but end up having to adding additional station at Coolaroo and built a proper stabling yard later on. Regional rail link will need a flyover and extension of Werribee line to Wyndham vale. I just don't want the Level Crossing program leave out duplication and do it so cheap because the money is available. The port of Melbourne brought in an extra money than originally proposed, which exactly why the western and northern groups of level crossings were brought forward ahead of time.
  Nightfire Minister for Railways

Location: Gippsland
Wait a minute the Regional Rail Link scope of works was narrowed to a bare minimum not because it went over budget, its was because the previous government wanted to cut the cost. Regional rail link is like what happened with Craigeburn electrification where they do it cheap as possible but end up having to adding additional station at Coolaroo and built a proper stabling yard later on. Regional rail link will need a flyover and extension of Werribee line to Wyndham vale. I just don't want the Level Crossing program leave out duplication and do it so cheap because the money is available. The port of Melbourne brought in an extra money than originally proposed, which exactly why the western and northern groups of level crossings were brought forward ahead of time.
James974
I did say "or a change of Government" (the lead to the de-scoping of RRL)

On duplication, at present there Is no valid reason the duplicate the Gowrie - Upfield line, a future project to connect this line to the Seymour line at Somerton will see this line transformed Into a double track though out.

As to why there Is a resistance to duplicating the Dandenong - Cranbourne line, I do not know.

Merinda Park has an unused second platform.

Western Port Highway overpass has plenty of room underneath for a second track.

A goods line runs from Greens Road to the Bombardier factory, that could be developed Into a crossing loop.

Webster Street (Dandenong) though could pose a problem, as a 4th track probably wouldn't be aloud across It (It's not on the removal list)
  True Believers Chief Commissioner

Wait a minute the Regional Rail Link scope of works was narrowed to a bare minimum not because it went over budget, its was because the previous government wanted to cut the cost. Regional rail link is like what happened with Craigeburn electrification where they do it cheap as possible but end up having to adding additional station at Coolaroo and built a proper stabling yard later on. Regional rail link will need a flyover and extension of Werribee line to Wyndham vale. I just don't want the Level Crossing program leave out duplication and do it so cheap because the money is available. The port of Melbourne brought in an extra money than originally proposed, which exactly why the western and northern groups of level crossings were brought forward ahead of time.
I did say "or a change of Government" (the lead to the de-scoping of RRL)

On duplication, at present there Is no valid reason the duplicate the Gowrie - Upfield line, a future project to connect this line to the Seymour line at Somerton will see this line transformed Into a double track though out.

As to why there Is a resistance to duplicating the Dandenong - Cranbourne line, I do not know.

Merinda Park has an unused second platform.

Western Port Highway overpass has plenty of room underneath for a second track.

A goods line runs from Greens Road to the Bombardier factory, that could be developed Into a crossing loop.

Webster Street (Dandenong) though could pose a problem, as a 4th track probably wouldn't be aloud across It (It's not on the removal list)
Nightfire
Im not asking for a full duplication on upfeild line just additional passing loop where they are removing the crossing, e.g. Altona line is getting only a small bit more of duplication so trains can pass. Cranbourne line definite should be full duplication since it serves a growth corridor it makes total sense to duplicate the line
  OzFrog Locomotive Driver

Location: Melbourne
A couple of things to add here to clarify some of the points made above:

  • The Abbotts Road separation on the Cranbourne line will definitely have active provision for duplication when the need arises (similar to Western Ring Road on the Upfield line)
  • The Camp Road separation on the Upfield line will allow for both track duplication and also a new station at Campbellfield.


I have a feeling as well that Merinda Park will get an overhaul when Thompsons Road gets separated. That will possibly involve activation of the other island platform edge.
  True Believers Chief Commissioner

A couple of things to add here to clarify some of the points made above:

  • The Abbotts Road separation on the Cranbourne line will definitely have active provision for duplication when the need arises (similar to Western Ring Road on the Upfield line)
  • The Camp Road separation on the Upfield line will allow for both track duplication and also a new station at Campbellfield.


I have a feeling as well that Merinda Park will get an overhaul when Thompsons Road gets separated. That will possibly involve activation of the other island platform edge.
OzFrog
Yes I know, but how long will it take for funding for duplication? This is unknown and could be for a very long time. This is probably might be because there are many other level crossing removals that need to happen before rail duplication is even considered. I'm thinking the Altona and Hurstbridge got duplication not just from additional funding but it connected by duplicated track. e.g. extending the junction loop, remove a small section of single track between double track.

Merinda Park may not get touched at all because it Vic roads undertaken the project they only worried about the duplication of the Thompson Road and only grade separating it at the same time to save money to do it in the future.
  drunkill Junior Train Controller

Location: Melbourne, Australia
Was passing through this morning, temporary supports going up for construction of the gantry at Murrumbeena.

They've also added catwalks and rails around the top of each pylon as well (you can see one on the left), one of the pylons has a scaffold staircase going upto it as well. Didn't have a chance to take a photo of it though.
  Valvegear Dr Beeching

Location: Norda Fittazroy
One salient point needs to be emphasized again.

Level crossing removal is not intended to improve rail travel at all, so there's no point in taking a rail enthusiast's viewpoint on it. It is all about convenience for road traffic ( as is most infrastructure expenditure.)
  True Believers Chief Commissioner

One salient point needs to be emphasized again.

Level crossing removal is not intended to improve rail travel at all, so there's no point in taking a rail enthusiast's viewpoint on it. It is all about convenience for road traffic ( as is most infrastructure expenditure.)
Valvegear
But removing the whole lot of crossings on one line unlocks the limitation to add more trains. So yeah in the case of the Dandenong rail project it doesn't nesserary improve rail travel but unlocks capacity on the line. This is because if you add too many trains, the level crossings would be stuck all thee time.
  Lad_Porter Chief Commissioner

Location: Yarra Glen
One salient point needs to be emphasized again.

Level crossing removal is not intended to improve rail travel at all, so there's no point in taking a rail enthusiast's viewpoint on it. It is all about convenience for road traffic ( as is most infrastructure expenditure.)
Correct, but you could also say that a crossing removal eliminates the possibility of "incidents" at that crossing, which could cause trains to be slowed or stopped, and in some cases would allow trains to travel through the site at a higher speed than before.
  Myrtone Chief Commissioner

Location: North Carlton, Melbourne, Victoria
Another thing that helps is replacing flat junctions with grade separated branching.
  Lad_Porter Chief Commissioner

Location: Yarra Glen
Another thing that helps is replacing flat junctions with grade separated branching.
Myrtone
This thread is about level crossings removal.  How many flat junctions are there at a level crossing?
  drunkill Junior Train Controller

Location: Melbourne, Australia
Not many, but you could argue for extending the ramp for the Carnegie elevated section near Caulfield so that the line clears the Frankston line junction. ~200m extension to the elevated section for the upline to jump over the top of the other tracks.

Sponsored advertisement

Display from: