Suburban Rail Loop (Election promise)

 
  ptvcommuter Train Controller

"Fawkner" may not actually be Fawkner anyway - it may be more like Gowrie. Regarding development potential, Fawkner obviously won't realistically change much given the location of the cemetery. Gowrie is currently a light industrial nothingsville, but given another 30 years, the urban redevelopment happening in places like Preston/Coburg/Reservoir could be happening there also.
Adogs
Fawkner and Gowrie are ridiculous for SRL, Campbellfield would be much better and it can connect to the existing Upfield Line with a future planned at Camp Rd.

Reservoir again is ridiculous, Epping or Thomastown would be better because they have bigger population and it is a large employment area. You can cover the Preston/Reservior with a Station at Northland S.C in West Preston area

Of course there is little room left, it's being taken up by all those buses. Eleven - 11- different routes visit here making the station one of the busiest hub in Melbourne. The station may be the end of the line, but it already is a huge capture point from GW out to the hills in all directions. SRL will make it an even more attractive destination.
justarider


Agree with Glen Waverley area is becoming a huge hub for transport and SRL will further enhance that. With tunnelling how the hell do you do the Sandringham Connection from Southland (via Beaumaris perhaps, large population). Would be challenging engineering but nothing too mind blowing

Sponsored advertisement

  justarider Chief Commissioner

Location: Released again, maybe for the last time??
Fawkner and Gowrie are ridiculous for SRL, Campbellfield would be much better and it can connect to the existing Upfield Line with a future planned at Camp Rd.

Reservoir again is ridiculous, Epping or Thomastown would be better because they have bigger population and it is a large employment area. You can cover the Preston/Reservior with a Station at Northland S.C in West Preston area
ptvcommuter

careful using words like "ridiculous". It often says more about the writer than the subject matter

The SRL plan chose the middle ring, and rejected the outer ring (Cambellfield, Epping, Greenborough, Ringwood etc...) for a bunch of sensible planning reasons, which boil down to better connectivity to the most customers.

Fawkner/Gowrie, whilst not huge, is an established suburb, full of a mix of light industry and residential. That's actually people moving about.
Cambellfield is not much apart from a shut down car factory and a freeway carved through the middle - with maybe a future in 20 years.

"Epping" - so all those customers in Thornbury thru Keon Park corridor have to make the long trek out to meet the SRL, instead of the more central Reservoir. The sort of thinking that could kill SRL, and why the planners chose the middle ring.

"northand" - you jest surely. A wild deviation 3km south-west on the line after Latrobe Uni. The line needs to go west.

PS: West Preston (where the Preston station is) is 3 km away from Northland.
Did you mean Preston Market (ha ha) or East Preston??

cheers
John
  ptvcommuter Train Controller

The problem is you can make the SRL connect to all lines in the middle of connect to all lines, employment areas, education and housing. I’d go with the latter. Let’s remember that the line also connects to Broadmeadows which is far away from Essendon.

Huge development potential around some areas including Heatherton/Kingston, Campbellfield and Werribee, exisiting large housing/commercial around Northland, Epping, Beaumaris, Lower Templetsowe and Point Cook

So you could either choose

Sandringham, Beaumaris, Southland, Kingston, Clayton, Monash, Glen Waverley, Burwood, Box Hill, Doncaster, Lower Templestowe, Heidelberg, Northland, Bundoora, Epping, Campbellfield, Broadmeadows, Airport, Keilor East, Sunshine North, Sunshine, Tarneit, Werribee East, Werribee and Point Cook

Or for making it easier to connect for passengers on all lines and tunneling

Brighton, Southland, Clayton, Monash, Mount Waverley, Burwood, Box Hill, Doncaster, Bulleen, Heidelberg, Bundoora, Resevrior, Fawkner, Broadmeadows, Airport, Keilor East, Sunshine North, Sunshine, Tarneit, Werribee East, Werribee

Or

Elsternwick, Caulfield, Tooronga, Camberwell, Kew, Fairfield, Northcote, Coburg, Essendon, Maribyrnong, Footscray, Newport

I’ll let you decide with connects with most lines, employment clusters, growth areas, existing big suburbs and education precincts. Here’s a clue, it’s the first one
  Lockie91 Assistant Commissioner

@John_E ever visited Glen Waverley station ??

Of course there is little room left, it's being taken up by all those buses.
Eleven - 11- different routes visit here making the station one of the busiest hub in Melbourne.
The station may be the end of the line, but it already is a huge capture point from GW out to the hills in all directions.
SRL will make it an even more attractive destination.

The point of building tunnels is that you don't need much room at the surface.
It can all be done underneath. The equipment, personnel, components, spoil travel many km down the tunnel to a suitable entry portal.

All the SRL station needs is space for the escalators and lift to appear on the surface, which is already reserved in the new station entrance building at Kingsway. The foundations were built with "underneath" in mind.

Gowrie is a lot easier to imagine. It's pretty much a greenfield, so any method could work.
Again, Gowrie is a bus destination. Sure pretty small ( 4 bus routes) but plenty of scope to increase as required.

PS: certainly not Fawkner Cemetry. The mind boggles at the thought of bus stops inside the cemetery, and never ever a PTV car park.

cheers
John

You have just listed the reasons as to why the station may be cut if it does meet a cost benefit ratio.

For example, Box hill has 17 bus routes passing through or terminating at the station including the 903 smart bus, plus the 109 tram. During the morning peak there are 202 bus movements per hour with approx. 6000 passenger movements. PTV lists this as the second busiest bus - train interchange in the metro network. Weekday boardings for Box Hill Station are 9940. (2011 PTV Station Data)

Glen Waverley weekday boardings are at 6900, with the only major bus routes being the 902 Smart Bus and the 737 which services Monash uni.

You've mentioned above that the station will be a mined cavern, Box Hill will most likely be the same. Same as what are being constructed in the CBD as part of MM1 Project. This are extremely expensive and difficult to construct as they are completely underground with the only connection the the surface being those for passenger connections. As opposed to the cut and cover station boxes with are being used at North Melbourne, Parkville and ANZAC. These are giant holes which are dug then fitted out from the bottom back to the surface then covered over. They are generally easier to construct.

When the transport planners sit down with the bean counters they are going to work out how much it is going to cost to build a station at Glen Waverley and Box Hill versus the expected and forecast patronage. As I've said previously there is limited opportunity for devlopment in the area with Urban Melbourne lisitng 13 current projects under construction, in planning or proposed for Glen Waverley yielding 1806 dwellings.  Box Hill has 33 projects in the pipeline with an expect yield of 4594 dwellings. Box Hill has an average growth rate of 26% second only to the CBD.

If both stations cost 1 Billion dollars to construct a cost benefit analysis is going to swing in favour of Box Hill and not Glen Waverley. The same methodology can be used for Fawkner with has zero development projects in the pipeline.

https://www.urban.com.au/transport/2018/09/03/whats-happening-in-the-suburbs-the-suburban-rail-loop-might-link
Station Patronage Research - PTVhttps://www.ptv.vic.gov.au/assets/PDFs/Random/Station-by-station-patronage-data.xls
https://transport.vic.gov.au/Getting-around/Public-transport/Box-Hill-transit-interchange
  potatoinmymouth Chief Commissioner

Again mate - this is a map-drawing exercise. Read the Strategic Assessment and the SGS Economics catchment report, and try to understand why the route was chosen before suggesting diversions on a wing and a prayer.

There's a lot of debates to be had here, but they all involve better justifications than "there's a few houses there".

The North East section is the dodgiest anyway and trying to involve non-events like Campbellfield and Northland won't help its cost-benefit ratio...
  Lockie91 Assistant Commissioner

The problem is you can make the SRL connect to all lines in the middle of connect to all lines, employment areas, education and housing. I’d go with the latter. Let’s remember that the line also connects to Broadmeadows which is far away from Essendon.

Huge development potential around some areas including Heatherton/Kingston, Campbellfield and Werribee, exisiting large housing/commercial around Northland, Epping, Beaumaris, Lower Templetsowe and Point Cook

So you could either choose

Sandringham, Beaumaris, Southland, Kingston, Clayton, Monash, Glen Waverley, Burwood, Box Hill, Doncaster, Lower Templestowe, Heidelberg, Northland, Bundoora, Epping, Campbellfield, Broadmeadows, Airport, Keilor East, Sunshine North, Sunshine, Tarneit, Werribee East, Werribee and Point Cook

Or for making it easier to connect for passengers on all lines and tunneling

Brighton, Southland, Clayton, Monash, Mount Waverley, Burwood, Box Hill, Doncaster, Bulleen, Heidelberg, Bundoora, Resevrior, Fawkner, Broadmeadows, Airport, Keilor East, Sunshine North, Sunshine, Tarneit, Werribee East, Werribee

Or

Elsternwick, Caulfield, Tooronga, Camberwell, Kew, Fairfield, Northcote, Coburg, Essendon, Maribyrnong, Footscray, Newport

I’ll let you decide with connects with most lines, employment clusters, growth areas, existing big suburbs and education precincts. Here’s a clue, it’s the first one
ptvcommuter
As @PIMM as mentioned this isn't about connecting every major, minor and possible activity centre with one rail line. Cost of tunnelling is a huge factor, as well as station construction and most importantly and the thing that is overlooked is travel time.

Your first options lists 26 stations. If dwell times are between 60 and 120 seconds you've just created over 30 minutes of dwell time with out even factoring in travel time between stations. You've basically just put the 903 smart bus underground, people will not use the line if it is going to take an hour to get to their destination. We are talking about a high capacity metro line, Major interchanges only, with low dwell times and low travel times between stations. This is what people will want. Spending 50 Billion on an underground suburban line that will trawl through half of Melbourne is a waste of money.
  True Believers Chief Commissioner

My reasonable take on the matter.

Currently the SRL is: Southland (Cheltenham), Clayton, Monash, Glen Waverly, Burwood East (Deakin Uni), Boxhill, Doncaster, Heidelberg, Bunboora (Latrobe Uni), Reservior, Faulkner, Broadmeadows, Airport, Sunshine, Tarneit, Wydnham Vale, Werribee.

Yes SRL is confirmed via RRL, as shown by the Western rail plan.

Already 17 stops confirmed. Most of them are in great potential activity centres.
Only 1 odd one is at Faulkner, since Coburg is too far inwards and any further out is just industrial.

Only additional stops that I would add is Keilor East. That's it. Any more is not feasible.

Connecting up with Sandringham would be nice, but for the challenges tunneling near the bay, and due to the proximity to Southland. A rapid bus link would be sufficient. Sandringham isn't a growing area or anything too special to have it's connection to the SRL. And it's relatively close to the CBD anyways.

Connecting Frankston and Dandenong could be long term proposal for a seemless connection btw those hubs. But I would say that would probably happen after the Dandenong corridor gets a proper quadruplication and the Frankston line has triplication to Mordialloc. You think those won't happen soon, that's correct. The Frankston Dandenong connection is still a pipe dream as of now. Talk about it when I'm 50 (30 years from now).

As for anyone saying we need to expand the rail out to the outer suburbs instead of putting all the money into SRL. First of all it's a mighty 30 or more year project. It's not gonna suck up all the resources instantly, it's a continuous investment. The rail network is getting upgraded already and it's still struggling. Expanding rail outwards funnels more patronage towards the centre. Honestly bus options are too slow cause it stops too much. This is why people wanting 26 stations should think first cause adding stations can significantly adds to the overall cost (especially if they are the underground) and slows the journey.
  ptvcommuter Train Controller

@True Believers

There is plenty of development going on between Sandringham and Southland, there's more that is being planned at the moment. Population in the area jumped by 3000 in 4 years

It's 3.2km of tunnelling to Sandringham, the benefits are plenty. Geographically, it isn't impossible. You could even underground the current Sandringham Station and value capture would pay for it back  

That's another issue. But to Sandringham is a must, via Beaumaris maybe not so much. Same as Werribee to Point Cook
  True Believers Chief Commissioner

@True Believers

There is plenty of development going on between Sandringham and Southland, there's more that is being planned at the moment. Population in the area jumped by 3000 in 4 years

It's 3.2km of tunnelling to Sandringham, the benefits are plenty. Geographically, it isn't impossible. You could even underground the current Sandringham Station and value capture would pay for it back  

That's another issue. But to Sandringham is a must, via Beaumaris maybe not so much. Same as Werribee to Point Cook
ptvcommuter
Seems pretty low if Melbourne is growing about 750000 in 4 years. So let's calculate the percentage shall we?
WOW! Only a growth of 0.4% when compared with the overall growth of the entire Melbourne area. How stupid do you think I am.

Value capture in suburbia not in the city never pays back unfortunately. The Ormond site is about to break even. Only major value capture in the city is Fed square. If value capture was so profitable I'd see all the rail trenches covered up with apartments. I don't see it happening. Only works in super dense cities like in China. Doesn't work in Australian sprawl cities unfortunately. Good concept but it doesn't work here.

Honestly Point Cook doesn't need heavy rail. A light rail system would be sufficient. It's not like Point Cook is very dense to be served by heavy rail. Maybe if you can prove that it's needed in 50 years by the massive developments there, maybe a heavy rail line could cut through there. As of now it is not worth it.

Even 3.2 km of light rail btw Sandringham and Southland is much more better bang for buck than an over engineered rail tunnel only to serve an area growing 0.4%. Rapid bus way or light rail seem like a sufficient connection for Sandringham to the SRL.
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

This project is nothing more then a vanity project to out do Sydney and claim the title of Australia's biggest project. It has no validation at all and the cost is monumental. It is likely to take at least 50 years and take more money then the Victorian portion of the proposed vhst rail line to Sydney.

Where is the money coming from as well? Victoria doesn't have the monetary resources that NSW has and our first biggest ever project has finished construction and we are on to our next one in the cbd metro. Soon to be followed by the western metro, the new north south rail link in western sydney, a possible inner west metro, the northern beaches metro is likely to be built before this project.
  True Believers Chief Commissioner

This project is nothing more then a vanity project to out do Sydney and claim the title of Australia's biggest project. It has no validation at all and the cost is monumental. It is likely to take at least 50 years and take more money then the Victorian portion of the proposed vhst rail line to Sydney.

Where is the money coming from as well? Victoria doesn't have the monetary resources that NSW has and our first biggest ever project has finished construction and we are on to our next one in the cbd metro. Soon to be followed by the western metro, the new north south rail link in western sydney, a possible inner west metro, the northern beaches metro is likely to be built before this project.
simstrain
Have you been to Victoria lately?

Metro tunnel. 2015 start. 2019 well construction. Cost: 11 billion dollars.

75 Level crossings removals. 2015 start. 2019, 29 crossings gone and 25 more added from 50. Cost: 15 billion dollars

Regional rail upgrades. 2016 start. 2022 estimate finish time. Cost: 2 billion dollars

High Capacity upgrades on the Dandenong line are well on progress to be finished. Costs another few billion.

Mernda rail. 500 million. Built on budget, finished early and an extra station was built. Remarkable

Hurstbridge line upgrade. Also built on budget, finished quickly and now the line is duplicated all the way to Greensborough, what an achievement, after 100 years of bottlenecks. And it's now set to be more duplicated in the next few years.

Our Port was leased 9.7 billion dollars for infrastructure. Our economy is booming recently. And we are borrowing for infrastructure that's desperately needed.

Melbourne isn't copying Sydney. The city is just growing as much as Sydney, and finally the government is now finally noticing it needs serious investment with infrastructure. We had 4 years btw 2010-2014 with little momentum. Sydney was fortunate to get a fresh start from 2011 and got the pipeline sooner. Melbourne started around 2015 with Andrews and yeah it will take many years to keep the pipeline going.

These are now into the future pipeline: Airport rail, High speed rail, Western Rail plan, Clyde/Baxter rail and the SRL.
Nothing to do with copying Sydney. It's just we are both facing the same population crush issues and the government are now playing catch up with infrastructure.
  ptvcommuter Train Controller

@True Believers

‘It’s not like point Cook is very dense’

Population of just under 50,000
SRL is best way to deliver rail to the Point Cook if it is ever going to be done. Extensions to Sandringham  from Southland and Point Cook from Werribe will do nothing to the current travel times. The Point Cook sector can run above ground which would make it cheaper.

You also said ‘3.2km of Light Rail is more bang for you buck’

There was a tram between Sandringham and Beaumaris. You can’t put a tram anywhere between the two. This is the biggest transport project in Victoria’s history, cost isn’t the driving factor with the project but connecting most of our busiest lines to education, employment and retail centres. The cost is already going to be high adding or not adding Sandringham to it won’t drive it up or down dramatically. It’s a 3.2km extension that would service the town as well as neighbouring suburbs and increase down demand on the line as people would travel down from Elsternwick to Hampton to take the SRL. Heck, people from other suburbs can even travel to the beach in summer months on the SRL To Sandringham. Point Cook being above ground will make the cost minimal and connect to a very large catchment.

‘17 Stations confirmed and only one I would add is Keilor East’

That’s 18, Sandringham 19 and Point Cook 20. If the SRL is going to be a quick, fast system than that means no stations like Northland, Heatherton, Sunshine North, Beaumaris and Werribee East
  True Believers Chief Commissioner

ptvcommuter
Yes I'm aware the population is 50000, but it's spread out over a large area. So light rail would work significantly better, since you can spread out the stops along the route, instead of one station. Just connect the light rail up to Williams Landing station. Now Point cook heavy rail would not be any cheaper above ground. You have to consider the land costs money.

Travel times would improve having light rail system or rapid bus network. Since they have priority on the road, traffic will not slow it down. Honestly light-rail would help development happen and make the area would dense. The capacity of light rail is much higher than the regular bus routes. Having the light rail instead heavy rail is the best option for Point Cook, it's cheap, easy to implement, and capacity increases and time savings would benefit the area just as heavy rail would.

Point Cook isn't so far from a train station, all it needs is better connections to it. Light rail would just do that. If light rail is too expensive the second best thing is a bus rapid system.

What's so special about Point Cook that desperately needs the highest capacity mode of transport? It's just another middle/outer suburb that's not too far from a station, there are many areas in Melbourne way more further from a station than Point Cook.

"You can’t put a tram anywhere between the two" (Sandringham and Southland)
You can. It's definitely a great spot to put light rail in. The area can have more stops in between and create development along the route. The route is only 3.2 kilometres. If the tram stops were spaced out nicely, you can get a tram go faster and it would only be a 5-10 minute trip.

It actually makes more sense than your expensive underground rail connection, only to save 5 minutes and at what price?

Anyone who wants to go to the beach from the outer suburbs can change at Southland and travel down the Frankston line. lol. But at 10 minutes I'd think some people would be happy to change for the light rail service.

18 and 19 are not needed to be served by SRL. Neither of all your other mentions. If you want a fast, quick system.
  potatoinmymouth Chief Commissioner

In any case, I’m fairly confident that the SRL will not be a contiguous system. From Cheltenham to Airport, yes, I expect a stand-alone Metro-type operation, but then a conventional airport train to Sunshine, and a conventional Werribee extension to Wyndham Vale (or vice versa). So the Point Cook question in my view is more or less moot because I don’t think the structure of the system will easily allow for it.
  True Believers Chief Commissioner

In any case, I’m fairly confident that the SRL will not be a contiguous system. From Cheltenham to Airport, yes, I expect a stand-alone Metro-type operation, but then a conventional airport train to Sunshine, and a conventional Werribee extension to Wyndham Vale (or vice versa). So the Point Cook question in my view is more or less moot because I don’t think the structure of the system will easily allow for it.
potatoinmymouth
I'd think it would be a continuous line to be honest for the whole length. Of course there would be sections where the SRL may share other services ( eg. Airport line, or the future Wyndham line). If it's in sections people would have to change train in btw and would not be so attractive cause you'd have to change at the Airport each time.

It's one line and one train service throughout the whole section. Of course there are 2 different sections getting built so it would not be connected at first. Perhaps they might run it like what you are saying PIMM when the first sections open.

But I think the aim is a standalone metro service operation. It seemed that way in the promotion videos. I'd think the business case would make it clear what the objectives are.
  LeroyW Junior Train Controller

Location: Awaiting MM2
In any case, I’m fairly confident that the SRL will not be a contiguous system. From Cheltenham to Airport, yes, I expect a stand-alone Metro-type operation, but then a conventional airport train to Sunshine, and a conventional Werribee extension to Wyndham Vale (or vice versa). So the Point Cook question in my view is more or less moot because I don’t think the structure of the system will easily allow for it.
I'd think it would be a continuous line to be honest for the whole length. Of course there would be sections where the SRL may share other services ( eg. Airport line, or the future Wyndham line). If it's in sections people would have to change train in btw and would not be so attractive cause you'd have to change at the Airport each time.

It's one line and one train service throughout the whole section. Of course there are 2 different sections getting built so it would not be connected at first. Perhaps they might run it like what you are saying PIMM when the first sections open.

But I think the aim is a standalone metro service operation. It seemed that way in the promotion videos. I'd think the business case would make it clear what the objectives are.
True Believers
Some interesting discussion around this to be had for sure.  One thing is certain - SRL is planned to be built in stages, so there will certainly be non-contiguous running for several decades until it all joins up.

I tend to be with potato on this though, mainly due to configuration around the Airport station. Even though it's only a tentative line on a map, the MARL website and MARL Strategic Appraisal (https://bigbuild.vic.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0007/318571/MARL-Sunshine-Route-Strategic-Appraisal.pdf) both show the route travelling up Airport Drive from the Albion line, under the Long Term Carpark and then swinging West to place the station under the forecourt/T2 area.  I'm guessing this is to avoid tunnelling under runways and other Airport infrastructure as much as possible (makes some sense really - it's pretty easy to dig up a giant carpark in comparison).

SRL from Broadmeadows now approaches from the same general direction as MARL, which is also a win, because it potentially means only one rail tunnel needs to be built into the Airport from the city side.  But this then means you have to effectively terminate the service there anyway (driver change ends etc.) so why not use it as a chance to switch to a different type of rolling stock as well? SRL runs metro style trains into the Airport from the East and then back out, MARL runs airport/regional style trains from there into the ctiy via Sunshine.

If they eventually tunnel out Clarkefield way to fully separate Bendigo and Seymour then the regional trains could well be a similar type to those already running the Airport route and would just add capacity or extend the existing Airport services.

Too easy Laughing.
  Mr. Lane Chief Commissioner

This project is nothing more then a vanity project to out do Sydney and claim the title of Australia's biggest project. It has no validation at all and the cost is monumental. It is likely to take at least 50 years and take more money then the Victorian portion of the proposed vhst rail line to Sydney.

Where is the money coming from as well? Victoria doesn't have the monetary resources that NSW has and our first biggest ever project has finished construction and we are on to our next one in the cbd metro. Soon to be followed by the western metro, the new north south rail link in western sydney, a possible inner west metro, the northern beaches metro is likely to be built before this project.
simstrain

Flamebait.
  reubstar6 Chief Train Controller

Any chance of a station in Gladstone Park/Greenvale? This area seems to have been ignored in the study. It has quite poor public transport (especially Greenvale) and could do with a direct connection to Broadmeadows. It would release a lot of the pressure on local buses.
  x31 Chief Commissioner

Location: gallifrey
Any chance of a station in Gladstone Park/Greenvale? This area seems to have been ignored in the study. It has quite poor public transport (especially Greenvale) and could do with a direct connection to Broadmeadows. It would release a lot of the pressure on local buses.
reubstar6

Totally agree with you on this one it is about time that gap in the area was filled.

Would a suburban loop be the best approach perhaps linked to the airport line?
  Adogs Chief Train Controller

Any chance of a station in Gladstone Park/Greenvale? This area seems to have been ignored in the study. It has quite poor public transport (especially Greenvale) and could do with a direct connection to Broadmeadows. It would release a lot of the pressure on local buses.
reubstar6

I would think there will likely be stations added/shifted once the planning progresses.  It is a growth area, will probably depend on how the population develops over the next few years and whether your local MPs etc put pressure on.
  TOQ-1 Deputy Commissioner

Location: Power Trainger
An additional station would probably depend on how the Airport station is set up - will trains to the west terminate, then depart again, will there be a loop?

Once the Craigieburn and Upfield lines are split from each other in the future, there may be capacity for a branch line somewhere down of Broadmeadows, but that is decades away.
  The Vinelander Minister for Railways

Location: Ballan, Victoria on the Ballarat RFR Line
Any chance of a station in Gladstone Park/Greenvale? This area seems to have been ignored in the study. It has quite poor public transport (especially Greenvale) and could do with a direct connection to Broadmeadows. It would release a lot of the pressure on local buses.

I would think there will likely be stations added/shifted once the planning progresses.  It is a growth area, will probably depend on how the population develops over the next few years and whether your local MPs etc put pressure on.
Adogs

There are decent hills and valleys in the Greenvale area. This may well preclude SRL going through that part of the suburbs.

M.
  Rodo Chief Commissioner

Location: Southern Riverina
A branch toward Greenvale is not part of the suburban link.
May be a useful thing but does not belong I this this thread.

I would say that services would run from Broadmeadows to Southland with the Werribee and airport services as separate runs.
  reubstar6 Chief Train Controller

SRL has to go either through Greenvale or Gladstone Park, so I'm suggesting a station there, not an additional branch.
  John E Locomotive Driver

SRL has to go either through Greenvale or Gladstone Park, so I'm suggesting a station there, not an additional branch.
reubstar6
The most direct route to the Airport SRL is likely to take is about half way between Greenvale Shopping centre and Gladstone park - is there where you are proposing a station be built near Mickleham Road? This station wouldn't get anywhere near enough patronage to justify being on the SRL- the population isn't that large (I am excluding all the house close to the Craigeburn line) and its development is somewhat restricted with the airport so close by. For the time being good buses to the Craigeburn line should suffice.

Best hope would be for the airport line to be a metro line extended out to Wallan, then you could have stations at Greenvale, West Craigeburn, Donnybrook x 2 and Wallan, however this is more likely to go through Upfield.





     

Sponsored advertisement

Display from: