Melbournes underground rail network comparatively to Sydney

 
  LancedDendrite Chief Commissioner

Location: Trapped in a meeting with Rhonda and Karsten
Growth suburbs along current rail corridors deserve new urban rail services first - corridors like Melton, the west of Werribee, the north of Craigieburn. Following that are the growth corridors that could extend existing rail, such as Mernda - they might need rail eventually, but would be best served by high frequency buses such as the Mernda Busway proposal in the interim.

Further down the list are lower-growth areas not served by urban rail at all, such as Rowvile and Doncaster. At best, you're looking at busways and Smart Buses for them.

Want to make new urban/suburban railways work? Make them pay for themselves. There are plenty of ways of doing it, big and small:

  • Value capture through local land value levies/taxes (used quite a lot)

  • Government or train operator-owned Transit Oriented Developments (aka the Japan/Hong Kong model)

  • Cross-subsidies from congestion charges and tolling existing urban freeways (a hard sell but worth it)

  • Lower government subsidies of full-price fares

  • Charging for railway station parking, whilst providing alternatives - look at Perth, it's working:

Sponsored advertisement

  thadocta Chief Commissioner

Location: Katoomba
Melbourne should not remove its suburban level crossings then. Through the 1960s and 1970 the NSW Government undertook a program to remove crossings. There are now just three remaining level crossings in suburban Sydney. Should we halt this program because Sydney has done it previously.
wxtre

And if you needed any further proof that this clown needs to be totally ignored, purely because they don't have a clue, it is this statement. Sydney has LX at Fairfield, Clyde, and eight on the Richmond line, and they are just the ones I remember.

Dave
  thadocta Chief Commissioner

Location: Katoomba
That is what I have read in a Victorian Labor government report about level crossing removal in Melbourne. Sorry there is no need to verbally abuse me.

Melbourne has approximately 180 level crossings.

Sydney did removed its level crossings and there is not many left. that is the point I was making.
wxtre

This thread is right up there with your assertion that any airport link to Melbourne Airport MUST have two stations, for no other reason than both Sydney and Brisbane have two stations, whilst ignoring any and all arguments as to why it isn't needed.

You seem to have a major inferiority complex when it comes to Melbourne, and it shows in your posting history.

Dave
  TheBlacksmith Chief Commissioner

Location: Ankh Morpork
Don't let the bed-bugs bite.....
  mrmarcus Station Master

Topography may be an issue. But Melbourne has not constructed any rail-lines above or below ground. In a news article recently I read Melbourne had not constructed a suburban rail-line since 1930 until the Regional Rail Link which is two new railway stations at Wyndham Vale and Tarneit. There have only been re-openings of raillines along old alignments: Werribee, Sunbury, Craigieburn, Cranbourne and the city-loop as mentioned above. Sydney has also constructed other railway lines, stations and extensions in addition to the underground railway stations mentioned.
wxtre

Melbourne's flat topography meant that a whole bunch of above-ground lines could be whipped out very early in the piece. There are gaps in the coverage, but it's fair to say that most parts of Melbourne have had reasonable-ish access to a railway line. There hasn't been the same pressing need as Sydney for building new lines.

Sydney has had whole sections of the city without coverage, and they've been forced to build new lines long after development has taken place. That plus the difficult topography has forced them to build underground.

It's completely different situation, can't compare.
  Some rail man Junior Train Controller

Location: CIA Headquarters in Washington D.C
If you want to winge about level crossing removals, do it somewhere else, like here

http://www.railpage.com.au/f-t11380114.htm
  kuldalai Chief Commissioner

If you want to winge about level crossing removals, do it somewhere else, like here

http://www.railpage.com.au/f-t11380114.htm
Some rail man

Melbourne has constructed two totally new piecse of suburban railway since the glen waverley line  in  the City Loop and the link between Altona and Laverton .
  Gman_86 Chief Commissioner

Location: Melton, where the sparks dare not roam!
Melbourne should not remove its suburban level crossings then. Through the 1960s and 1970 the NSW Government undertook a program to remove crossings. There are now just three remaining level crossings in suburban Sydney. Should we halt this program because Sydney has done it previously.
wxtre

This is factually incorrect. The majority of Sydney's level crossings were removed after World War II during the Depression. That for your information is the 1920s and 1930s, not the 1960s and 1970s.

Again, you have completely failed to miss the point. What I was saying, is that Melbourne shouldn't do something 'just coz Sydney did it', something you continually suggest. The Andrews Government is not removing the level crossings to emulate Sydney, they are removing the crossings because they are clogging up our roads, and preventing us from running more trains.
  railblogger Chief Commissioner

Location: At the back of the train, quitely doing exactly what you'd expect.
This is factually incorrect. The majority of Sydney's level crossings were removed after World War II during the Depression. That for your information is the 1920s and 1930s, not the 1960s and 1970s.
Gman_86

Don't you mean World War I? World War II was 1939-1945.
  kuldalai Chief Commissioner

This is factually incorrect. The majority of Sydney's level crossings were removed after World War II during the Depression. That for your information is the 1920s and 1930s, not the 1960s and 1970s.

Again, you have completely failed to miss the point. What I was saying, is that Melbourne shouldn't do something 'just coz Sydney did it', something you continually suggest. The Andrews Government is not removing the level crossings to emulate Sydney, they are removing the crossings because they are clogging up our roads, and preventing us from running more trains.
Gman_86

The Depression was between the First & Second World Wars !!!!!
  torrens5022 Junior Train Controller

Sydney Underground:
2 Platforms
St James
Museum
Martin Place
4 Platforms
Wynyard
6 Platforms
Town Hall

Melbourne Underground
4 Platforms
Melbourne Central
Flagstaff
Parliament

Melbourne has a much better loop in comparison, Sydney's loop is only two tracks while Melbourne has four.  Plus Central is not even in the Sydney CBD it's in Haymarket a good 1km south of the CBD.
  Nightfire Minister for Railways

Location: Gippsland
Sydney Underground:
2 Platforms
St James
Museum
Martin Place
4 Platforms
Wynyard
6 Platforms
Town Hall

Melbourne Underground
4 Platforms
Melbourne Central
Flagstaff
Parliament

Melbourne has a much better loop in comparison, Sydney's loop is only two tracks while Melbourne has four. Plus Central is not even in the Sydney CBD it's in Haymarket a good 1km south of the CBD.
torrens5022

Though I think Melbourne Central station Is poorly named.
  Bogong Chief Commissioner

Location: Essendon Aerodrome circa 1980
Though I think Melbourne Central station Is poorly named.
Nightfire

So what would you name it?

Swanton St Station or La Trobe St Station wouldn't be any good as there are other stations on those streets. RMIT is no good because it doesn't convey the sense that it is a city station.
  speedemon08 Mary

Location: I think by now you should have figured it out
So what would you name it?

Swanton St Station or La Trobe St Station wouldn't be any good as there are other stations on those streets. RMIT is no good because it doesn't convey the sense that it is a city station.
Bogong

Just swap Southern cross and Melbourne Central Wink
  Nightfire Minister for Railways

Location: Gippsland
So what would you name it?

Swanton St Station or La Trobe St Station wouldn't be any good as there are other stations on those streets. RMIT is no good because it doesn't convey the sense that it is a city station.
Bogong

La Trobe would fit the bill nicely !

Flagstaff Is associated with nearby Flagstaff Gardens.
  LancedDendrite Chief Commissioner

Location: Trapped in a meeting with Rhonda and Karsten
Museum.
wxtre

There is no museum there now.

I second the suggestion of La Trobe. A dignified name that is geographically relevant.
  Transtopic Assistant Commissioner

Sydney Underground:
2 Platforms
St James
Museum
Martin Place
4 Platforms
Wynyard
6 Platforms
Town Hall

Melbourne Underground
4 Platforms
Melbourne Central
Flagstaff
Parliament

Melbourne has a much better loop in comparison, Sydney's loop is only two tracks while Melbourne has four. Plus Central is not even in the Sydney CBD it's in Haymarket a good 1km south of the CBD.
torrens5022

You left out Circular Quay (2 platforms). Although above ground, it is part of the City Circle. There are also 2 unused underground platforms at both St James and Wynyard.

Central certainly IS in the CBD. The Sydney CBD runs from Railway Square at Central to Circular Quay. Central has 10 suburban platforms (in addition to the 15 Intercity terminal platforms), including 2 underground and a further 2 unused underground platforms which are likely to be used for the new Rapid Transit link. Redfern, which is on the CBD fringe and proposed as part of an extension of the CBD, has 4 underground platforms, 2 of which are unused and 10 above ground platforms.

While the City Circle may only have 2 tracks (4 splitting from Central forming the loop), it is complemented by another 2 tracks running through the city's busiest CBD stations across the Harbour Bridge to the North Shore.
  Bogong Chief Commissioner

Location: Essendon Aerodrome circa 1980
There is no museum there now.

I second the suggestion of La Trobe. A dignified name that is geographically relevant.
LancedDendrite

A La Trobe station in the City would be too easily confused with La Trobe University in Bundoora, or the La Trobe Valley / City of La Trobe in Gippsland.

Charlie La Trobe was a great man who in 17 years oversaw the development of the Port Phillip District from a tiny illegal squatter settlement to the large and booming colony of Victoria. But he has been remembered in plenty of place names already.

Victoria has a long tradition of avoiding conflicting names. Two examples: the former town of Talbot near Dargo was forced to change it's name to Talbotville so as not to clash with Talbot near Maryborough which had been founded a few years earlier. In more recent times when the holiday shacks at Cape Bridgewater (near Portland) developed into a village, the small town of Bridgewater in the Northern Country changed it's name to Bridgewater-on-Loddon to avoid confusion with Cape Bridgewater. There are other examples of this sort of thing too.

So I would submit that renaming Melbourne Central station to La Trobe station would cause confusion with other places called La Trobe and wouldn't work.
  kuldalai Chief Commissioner

A La Trobe station in the City would be too easily confused with La Trobe University in Bundoora, or the La Trobe Valley / City of La Trobe in Gippsland.

Charlie La Trobe was a great man who in 17 years oversaw the development of the Port Phillip District from a tiny illegal squatter settlement to the large and booming colony of Victoria. But he has been remembered in plenty of place names already.

Victoria has a long tradition of avoiding conflicting names. Two examples: the former town of Talbot near Dargo was forced to change it's name to Talbotville so as not to clash with Talbot near Maryborough which had been founded a few years earlier. In more recent times when the holiday shacks at Cape Bridgewater (near Portland) developed into a village, the small town of Bridgewater in the Northern Country changed it's name to Bridgewater-on-Loddon to avoid confusion with Cape Bridgewater. There are other examples of this sort of thing too.

So I would submit that renaming Melbourne Central station to La Trobe station would cause confusion with other places called La Trobe and wouldn't work.
Bogong

It was originally  named MUSEUM and was changed to  Melbourne  Central  when the Developer of the shopping centre paid big  $  to Government to have it renamed.  Result is now it is virtually impossible to find the actual entrances to the station proper .
  Bogong Chief Commissioner

Location: Essendon Aerodrome circa 1980
My understanding was that the owner/developer of Melbourne Central shopping centre offered to pay big money for the name change about 14 years ago, but the newly elected Labour government of the time refused. Then, when the museum shifted to the Carlton Gardens site, the station name was changed to Melbourne Central without the state government benefiting from the payment. Sad

But all that was a long time ago and my memory may be wrong, so I'm not totally confident that the previous paragraph is definitively correct.
  Gman_86 Chief Commissioner

Location: Melton, where the sparks dare not roam!
Don't you mean World War I? World War II was 1939-1945.
railblogger

Yes I did, simple mistake on my part there.


Must try harder!
  torrens5022 Junior Train Controller

Transtopic - Circular Quay is above ground, I was only listing underground stations and Central is in Haymarket not "Sydney 2000".  I prefer the layout of the Melbourne loop compared to Sydney - more specifically the way all lines service it (well in theory). Melbourne is a bit behind but the trams make up for less underground stations.
  torrens5022 Junior Train Controller

There was a trial of a Double decker in Melbourne "4D" in the 90's - it was a complete failure - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4D_Train The train was similar to a Tangara. It was too tall for many lines due to low bridges etc.
Here it is in the loop -

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZlvaSmSj-oQ
  Transtopic Assistant Commissioner

Transtopic - Circular Quay is above ground, I was only listing underground stations and Central is in Haymarket not "Sydney 2000". I prefer the layout of the Melbourne loop compared to Sydney - more specifically the way all lines service it (well in theory). Melbourne is a bit behind but the trams make up for less underground stations.
torrens5022

I did qualify my post with regard to Circular Quay acknowledging that it was above ground, but still part of the City Circle loop.  Believe me, Haymarket is in the CBD and by inference so is Central.  It has the same postcode as "Sydney 2000" but a separate postcode for PO boxes (1240), as do other parts of the CBD.
  Bogong Chief Commissioner

Location: Essendon Aerodrome circa 1980
Interesting, I never saw the 4D running solo. As I remember it, they always ran it coupled to a 3 car ?Comeng? set, so there would be something reliable to tow it when it inevitably broke down.

The 4D was the Alfa Romeo of trains. Both look nice, but both are profoundly unreliable.

Sponsored advertisement

Display from:   

Quick Reply

We've disabled Quick Reply for this thread as it was last updated more than six months ago.