Suburban Rail Loop (Election promise)

 
  John E Station Master

Agree Skyrail is an issue when the geography doesn't suit but could be useful in Clayton South and western suburbs. Also $62M for each tunnel km seems way too low even in a suburban environment- I'm no expert but it would have to be at least $250 million per km (before station boxes). Cost of excavating all that soil alone would be pretty expensive unless they come up with a creative solution.

Sponsored advertisement

  ptvcommuter Train Controller

Let's just knock the "skyrail is cheaper" nonsense out. It is cheaper IF IF IF there already is an existing easement which the railway owns AND that easement is fairy FLAT Neither is true for SRL Basic cost (5 year old, inflate however you like), http://hotrails.net/resources/cost-estimates/ Tunnel $62M per km Skyrail $25M pier & beams + $40M land acquisition = $65M per km that is just the construction of pathway, no tracks, signal, electric, stations, earthworks (hills and valleys) Then cost in the difficulty skyrail would have climbing 3 of the highest hills in Melbourne - Box Hill, Doncaster, Heidelberg. Skyrial over Banyule flats - and you thought Dandenong 9 was a big fight, now it's in Mr Guy's backyard. Neither of which are a major issue for the tunnel. Can't be bothered pointing out the complexity of finding a route through Monash Uni, Latrobe Uni, Box Hill shopping, etc etc. Cheaper, Skyrail is NOT cheers John
justarider
This anti skyrail rubbish that some people have is ridiculous. Yes, Skyrail originally wasn’t overly consulted on with residents which isn’t the right thing to do. But that’s what happens when you live near a rail line. Now it is being consulted and residents in other areas such as reservoir are looking forward to it. It opens up communities spaces and improved amenity.

When ever has elevated rail been more expensive then tunneling. That is a total lie, those estimates are false and been grossly miscalculated. That website calculates the average for Australia, Melbourne has different terrain to other cities in Australia, the West is rock hard and the east is full of hills.

Elevated Rail can run thorough certain areas but the majority of the SRL will be Tunnel
  mejhammers1 Deputy Commissioner

Skyrail would be cheaper than tunnelling but likely only if the Skyrail is in long stretches e.g. > 3km. It's probably only the western section where this could be done. Tunnel entrances can be very expensive. Correct me if im wrong but im pretty sure the Melbourne metro tunnel entrance works package is greater than $600 million
If anything, building anything "skyrail" should per km be cheaper than a tunnel. Not sure why they've gone straight to tunnels and driven up the price from day dot.

Let's just knock the "skyrail is cheaper" nonsense out.

It is cheaper IF IF IF
there already is an existing easement which the railway owns
AND
that easement is fairy FLAT

Neither is true for SRL

Basic cost (5 year old, inflate however you like),
http://hotrails.net/resources/cost-estimates/

Tunnel $62M per km
Skyrail $25M pier & beams + $40M land acquisition = $65M per km
that is just the construction of pathway,
no tracks, signal, electric, stations, earthworks (hills and valleys)


Then cost in the difficulty skyrail would have climbing 3 of the highest hills in Melbourne - Box Hill, Doncaster, Heidelberg.  
Skyrial over Banyule flats - and you thought Dandenong 9 was a big fight, now it's in Mr Guy's backyard.
Neither of which are a major issue for the tunnel.

Can't be bothered pointing out the complexity of finding a route through Monash Uni, Latrobe Uni, Box Hill shopping, etc etc.

Cheaper, Skyrail is NOT

cheers
John
justarider
$62 Million if the Geology is like London or Sydney. But Melbourne's West where it is Flint hard basalt? Good luck with that.

Michael
  potatoinmymouth Chief Commissioner

$62 Million if the Geology is like London or Sydney. But Melbourne's West where it is Flint hard basalt? Good luck with that.
mejhammers1

There’s no tunnelling being proposed for the western burbs.
  John.Z Chief Train Controller


Let's just knock the "skyrail is cheaper" nonsense out.

It is cheaper IF IF IF
there already is an existing easement which the railway owns
AND
that easement is fairy FLAT

Neither is true for SRL

Basic cost (5 year old, inflate however you like),
http://hotrails.net/resources/cost-estimates/

Tunnel $62M per km
Skyrail $25M pier & beams + $40M land acquisition = $65M per km
that is just the construction of pathway,
no tracks, signal, electric, stations, earthworks (hills and valleys)


Then cost in the difficulty skyrail would have climbing 3 of the highest hills in Melbourne - Box Hill, Doncaster, Heidelberg.  
Skyrial over Banyule flats - and you thought Dandenong 9 was a big fight, now it's in Mr Guy's backyard.
Neither of which are a major issue for the tunnel.

Can't be bothered pointing out the complexity of finding a route through Monash Uni, Latrobe Uni, Box Hill shopping, etc etc.

Cheaper, Skyrail is NOT

cheers
John
justarider
You're comparing apples with oranges mate.

$62m for tunnelling is best case scenario, assuming best soil conditions (it won't be) and public land for soil dumping and ventilation shafts (they won't be). You're looking at, at least $100m if not more per km based on these factors alone.

$40m per km for median acquisition from Vicroads would make them very happy I'm sure, but government land means that cost would be $0. $40m per km would be the acquisition cost of going through Toorak (it won't be), so even if some private land had to be bought, it won't be that much. Again, if it's near a busy road, Vicroads might already "own" it.
  justarider Chief Train Controller

Location: Stuck on VR and hoping for better.
Let's just knock the "skyrail is cheaper" nonsense out.
It is cheaper IF IF IF
there already is an existing easement which the railway owns
AND that easement is fairy FLAT
Neither is true for SRL .....
This anti skyrail rubbish that some people have is ridiculous. ...

When ever has elevated rail been more expensive then tunneling. That is a total lie, those estimates are false and been grossly miscalculated. That website calculates the average for Australia, Melbourne has different terrain to other cities in Australia, the West is rock hard and the east is full of hills.
ptvcommuter
Not anti skyrail at all. Just pointing out the fallacy of pricing being bandied about.
Website calculated from Australia where available, and comparable overseas.

Don't want to shock everybody, but most cities in the world have rocks and hills.
Melbourne is not special.
If you are worried about hills, look at Sydney and Rome. Melbourne hills are pimples.

Agree Skyrail is an issue when the geography doesn't suit but could be useful in Clayton South and western suburbs. Also $62M for each tunnel km seems way too low even in a suburban environment- I'm no expert but it would have to be at least $250 million per km (before station boxes). Cost of excavating all that soil alone would be pretty expensive unless they come up with a creative solution.
John E
I'm not an expert either, that's why I try to find comprehensive research already done by others.
It does include soil removal (up to 5km from entry point).

Nobody is suggesting tunnel in the West. But even if they did, European granite mountains are pretty hard too.
It is sure hard for you and me with a pick & shovel, but those TBM monsters eat rock for breakfast, lunch and tea.

Now some tin tacks.

Hills are irrelevant. Tunnels go on a straight(ish) horizontal plane, regardless of the topography above.
The only issue is some very deep stations. Not any harder to build, but scarier for passengers to enter/exit

The figure quoted are from 2013.
Current prices are probably double that. That includes all components, including the Skyrail bits.
So comparison is still valid. Just now $124M vs $130M

You all are so hung up about the lower than assumed cost of digging a tunnel ($250M wow! that's a lot of thin air),
that you conveniently ignore the really big skyrail cost - LAND - when it must be purchased.

$40M per km in 2013 , now $80M.?
You could use the "Melbourne is special" argument here. I think that number is underdone - probably double it again.

Skyrail has it's place , so do trenches, and so do Tunnels.
Just get the real costs for each situation into perspective.

cheers
John
  justarider Chief Train Controller

Location: Stuck on VR and hoping for better.
You're comparing apples with oranges mate.

$62m for tunnelling is best case scenario, assuming best soil conditions (it won't be) and public land for soil dumping and ventilation shafts (they won't be). You're looking at, at least $100m if not more per km based on these factors alone.

$40m per km for median acquisition from Vicroads would make them very happy I'm sure, but government land means that cost would be $0. $40m per km would be the acquisition cost of going through Toorak (it won't be), so even if some private land had to be bought, it won't be that much. Again, if it's near a busy road, Vicroads might already "own" it.
John.Z
apples & oranges - of course they are different. that is the point.

$62M tunnel in 2013, $124M now. Not the best case, it's the average case.

You do realise that Melbourne is a North/South, East/West grid? Most of the required route is on the diagonals.

The large routes
North/South -  Clayton/Middleborough Rd , Blackburn Rd, Waterdale Rd,
East/West -     Park/Centre Dandenong Rd, Kingston Rd, Mahoneys /Camp/Broadmeadows Rd
are mostly not big enough for adding Skyrail. Most places, need to knock out a row of houses on one side.

NO idea how a train does a left hand turn at the traffic lights though

VicRoad might own a few, but then re-build the road to squeeze in the train. Bang goes the cost.

And have you bought in the Eastern suburbs in the last 10 years (not Toorak).
Av. block 16 meter = 62 per km @ $1M (minimum) = $62M per km
without any proper measurement, which the website quoted did do.

Of course the all up costs for both methods are way more. ToMARto, toMARto so what.
They both cost a bomb. No point pretending that Skyrail, is cheap it isn't.

cheers
John
  chomper Locomotive Driver

Heard a couple of rumours this morning; the route west of La Trobe University is being reconsidered as some within the corridors of power have realised that to get this over the line, they need Melbourne's west to come onboard. The only way that will happen is if the SRL reaches more of the west than it does now.

The second rumour is that the Glen Waverley "kink" is also being reconsidered as the cost of such a deviation isn't justifiable.
  ZH836301 Chief Commissioner

Location: BleakCity
You do realise that Melbourne is a North/South, East/West grid? Most of the required route is on the diagonals.
justarider

This is fairly basic stuff, that many can't see this is a simple explanation as to why I hold many of the opinions posted here in disdain.


Heard a couple of rumours this morning; the route west of La Trobe University is being reconsidered as some within the corridors of power have realised that to get this over the line, they need Melbourne's west to come onboard. The only way that will happen is if the SRL reaches more of the west than it does now.
chomper

Shows how little thought went into the thing in the first place.
  Lockie91 Train Controller



Heard a couple of rumours this morning; the route west of La Trobe University is being reconsidered as some within the corridors of power have realised that to get this over the line, they need Melbourne's west to come onboard. The only way that will happen is if the SRL reaches more of the west than it does now.

Shows how little thought went into the thing in the first place.

The planing was around development and how it would work in conjunction with Melbourne 2030. DECENTRALISATION! Which is why $300 million was announced to develop the business plan. Expect many more chops and changes as the experts advise the government.

I suspect that come next year when the bean counters look at it, they will estimate the development going to occur at GW and make a decision as to if it is "worth" it or not. If the population base is forecast to increase then it will be, if not, it won't be.
  Crossover Train Controller

Location: St. Albans Victoria
You're comparing apples with oranges mate.

$62m for tunnelling is best case scenario, assuming best soil conditions (it won't be) and public land for soil dumping and ventilation shafts (they won't be). You're looking at, at least $100m if not more per km based on these factors alone.

$40m per km for median acquisition from Vicroads would make them very happy I'm sure, but government land means that cost would be $0. $40m per km would be the acquisition cost of going through Toorak (it won't be), so even if some private land had to be bought, it won't be that much. Again, if it's near a busy road, Vicroads might already "own" it.
apples & oranges - of course they are different. that is the point.

$62M tunnel in 2013, $124M now. Not the best case, it's the average case.

You do realise that Melbourne is a North/South, East/West grid? Most of the required route is on the diagonals.

The large routes
North/South -  Clayton/Middleborough Rd , Blackburn Rd, Waterdale Rd,
East/West -     Park/Centre Dandenong Rd, Kingston Rd, Mahoneys /Camp/Broadmeadows Rd
are mostly not big enough for adding Skyrail. Most places, need to knock out a row of houses on one side.

NO idea how a train does a left hand turn at the traffic lights though

VicRoad might own a few, but then re-build the road to squeeze in the train. Bang goes the cost.

And have you bought in the Eastern suburbs in the last 10 years (not Toorak).
Av. block 16 meter = 62 per km @ $1M (minimum) = $62M per km
without any proper measurement, which the website quoted did do.

Of course the all up costs for both methods are way more. ToMARto, toMARto so what.
They both cost a bomb. No point pretending that Skyrail, is cheap it isn't.

cheers
John
justarider
And can we PLEASE stop calling elevated rail "Skyrail "! It is not way up in the sky . Does anyone think that the line near ner Victoria Park is a "Skyrail "for goodness sake ?
  potatoinmymouth Chief Commissioner

I just call them “railway bridges”. That’s what they are.
  justarider Chief Train Controller

Location: Stuck on VR and hoping for better.
Heard a couple of rumours this morning; the route west of La Trobe University is being reconsidered as some within the corridors of power have realised that to get this over the line, they need Melbourne's west to come onboard. The only way that will happen is if the SRL reaches more of the west than it does now.

The second rumour is that the Glen Waverley "kink" is also being reconsidered as the cost of such a deviation isn't justifiable.
chomper
Geography always confuses me.

I thought that "west of La Trobe Uni" is the NORTHERN suburbs until about Broadmeadows.

So what has the "west to come onboard" got to do with that part of the SRL

Rumour is just rumour (until it's true)

cheers
John
  chomper Locomotive Driver

Heard a couple of rumours this morning; the route west of La Trobe University is being reconsidered as some within the corridors of power have realised that to get this over the line, they need Melbourne's west to come onboard. The only way that will happen is if the SRL reaches more of the west than it does now.

The second rumour is that the Glen Waverley "kink" is also being reconsidered as the cost of such a deviation isn't justifiable.
Geography always confuses me.

I thought that "west of La Trobe Uni" is the NORTHERN suburbs until about Broadmeadows.

So what has the "west to come onboard" got to do with that part of the SRL

Rumour is just rumour (until it's true)

cheers
John
justarider

There need to be more stations in the western side of Melbourne beyond the two in the current plan. Running the SRL via the airport makes providing more stations to the west very difficult, running an alignment further south would allow for more stations in the west without impacting end to end travel times.

So everything "west of La Trobe Uni" has lots to do with the eventual alignment of the SRL.
  LeroyW Junior Train Controller

Location: Awaiting MM2

There need to be more stations in the western side of Melbourne beyond the two in the current plan. Running the SRL via the airport makes providing more stations to the west very difficult, running an alignment further south would allow for more stations in the west without impacting end to end travel times.

So everything "west of La Trobe Uni" has lots to do with the eventual alignment of the SRL.
chomper

What if...

Instead of heading so far North, SRL went from Reservior to Gowrie to Glenroy and then surfaced to become a new track pair sharing the freight alignment somewhere West of Glenroy West Primary School.

Put a new station (Airport West) across the road from Westfield and then send every second train North to join the MARL alignment along Airport Drive, giving Eastern suburbs commuters a direct line to the Airport.

The other trains continue around the loop to Sunshine, with new stations at Keilor East and Sunshine North.  The MARL will rejoin the track pair here between Airport West and Keilor East and run express to Sunshine and then the city.  After Sunshine the SRL goes... somewhere - nobody seems to really know yet.

You get three new stations along an existing rail alignment with a huge amount of space on it. You get express services from the Airport to the City. You get Eastern Suburbs commuters a direct line to the Airport. You save on tunnelling the distance from Broadmeadows to the Airport, by using the existing surface alignment. Lots of win Laughing

(Alternately, you could send all SRL trains to the Airport from the East and run standard Metro trains up and down from Broadmeadows following new tracks along the freight alignment - eg. Broadmeadows, Glenroy West, Airport West, Keilor East, Sunshine North, Sunshine, City)
  justarider Chief Train Controller

Location: Stuck on VR and hoping for better.

There need to be more stations in the western side of Melbourne beyond the two in the current plan. Running the SRL via the airport makes providing more stations to the west very difficult, running an alignment further south would allow for more stations in the west without impacting end to end travel times.

So everything "west of La Trobe Uni" has lots to do with the eventual alignment of the SRL.
What if...

-chomper


Instead of heading so far North, SRL went from Reservior to Gowrie to Glenroy and then surfaced to become a new track pair sharing the freight alignment somewhere West of Glenroy West Primary School.

Put a new station (Airport West) across the road from Westfield and then send every second train North to join the MARL alignment along Airport Drive, giving Eastern suburbs commuters a direct line to the Airport.

The other trains continue around the loop to Sunshine, with new stations at Keilor East and Sunshine North.  The MARL will rejoin the track pair here between Airport West and Keilor East and run express to Sunshine and then the city.  After Sunshine the SRL goes... somewhere - nobody seems to really know yet.

You get three new stations along an existing rail alignment with a huge amount of space on it. You get express services from the Airport to the City. You get Eastern Suburbs commuters a direct line to the Airport. You save on tunnelling the distance from Broadmeadows to the Airport, by using the existing surface alignment. Lots of win Laughing

(Alternately, you could send all SRL trains to the Airport from the East and run standard Metro trains up and down from Broadmeadows following new tracks along the freight alignment - eg. Broadmeadows, Glenroy West, Airport West, Keilor East, Sunshine North, Sunshine, City)
LeroyW
why can't people just say what the are talking about instead of being so cryptic.

"more stations in the west side.." can mean anywhere in the arc between Essendon Airport, Rockbank, Weribee.

@LeroyW thinks that is Airport West/Keilor East/Sunshine North - as reasonable assumption as any.

2 things we know for certain. MARL will go to the Airport. SRL will also go to the Airport.

Many posts here keep saying lack of train in the Airport West region. But why try and hang your hopes on MARL/SRL to fix it?

@LeroyW just gave the answer and didn't seen to realise.

Just run a Metro service on the Albion loop.
Flinders/SCS, Sunshine, Jacana, Craigeburn - with the stations suggested.
Single track in the loop, with passing at the stations, would work as a starter - double the BG line a bit later

The full run to Craigeburn would be longer than the other existing one, but includes all those extra stops to collect/drop off a whole new group of pax.
That could be up and running years before MARL and decades before SRL

PS: Gowrie instead of Fawkner makes more sense.
Gowrie already has some bus interchange and could increase. No way doing that at the cemetery.

Besides Gowrie is in the suburb of "Fawkner".
All the other SRL stops are named by Suburb, coincidentally also often a Station name.
Makes you wonder that the SRL diagram drawer goofed.

cheers
John
  John.Z Chief Train Controller

why can't people just say what the are talking about instead of being so cryptic.

"more stations in the west side.." can mean anywhere in the arc between Essendon Airport, Rockbank, Weribee.

cheers
John
justarider
For me, the Western allignment that makes most sense would be:
Airport
Watergardens
Taylors Hill
Caroline Springs
Connecting to the RRL with any additional stops needed between Caroline Springs and Werribee via Wyndham Vale/Tarneit
  ptvcommuter Train Controller

Could The Line be extended from Werribee to Point Cook ?
Also could the southern portion be extended from Southland to Sandringham ?
  potatoinmymouth Chief Commissioner

Now that you mention it that’s not a bad idea - sparking to Werribee from WV and extending it into Point Cook. Operationally effective way of getting more public transport into the area.

The big problem would be the lack of an alignment.
  reubstar6 Chief Train Controller

For me, the Western allignment that makes most sense would be: Airport Watergardens Taylors Hill Caroline Springs Connecting to the RRL with any additional stops needed between Caroline Springs and Werribee via Wyndham Vale/Tarneit
John.Z
Seems good to me. I think the notion of going through Sunshine is a bit overrated. I would prefer for any station access fees for the airport be dropped upon the opening of SRL through the station, meaning this could be utilised as an interchange. If Bendigo/Seymour services end up going through the airport, there will be connections with every other V/line service anyway. Ballarat potentially at Caroline Springs, Geelong at Werribee, and of course Traralgon at the south eastern end.
If you quad RRL within the medium term, you can get a bypass for Geelong trains and a metro service. Then in the long term, SRL takes over the Geelong track pair, Wyndham Vale retains the existing track pair, and Geelong goes via Metro 2.
Would it be better for SRL to go to Werribee or Avalon? An extension of the Werribee line to Black Forest Rd would allow interchange between the Werribee line and SRL.
  ngarner Train Controller

Location: Seville
The concept of providing a loop around a city can be seen in what Paris has been doing. They've built two thirds of a light rail loop around the city and intend to close the gap. It is the busiest line in that city with 500,000 riders per day and the newly opened extension adding a projected 90,000. It interchanges with Metro, RER and over 20 bus routes. The current length of line is 26.2km with 51 stations and a further 3.2km extension, with an additional 7 stations, being looked at now.
It is closer to the centre of Paris than SRL is planned for but then Paris is a lot more compact city than Melbourne (as are most European cities). Building began in 2006 with an recent extension opening this month. That's spread the construction and cost out over 13 years to date and it's going to more than a few more to complete. This shows that SRL could be built over a long time frame without major financial costs in a compact time frame.

Links to both IRJ and Wikipedia here

If SRL is built and achieves anywhere near the success of this example then it will live up to Andrews claims of it becoming the busiest line in Melbourne.

Neil
  True Believers Chief Commissioner

Anyways for those who think this project is wasteful, at the very least it's getting assessed and getting a full business case.

Back in 2008, when Regional Rail Link came along, I don't think a business case was produced. Correct me if I'm wrong.
https://www.audit.vic.gov.au/report/assessing-benefits-regional-rail-link-project
  tayser Deputy Commissioner

Location: Melbourne
Anyways for those who think this project is wasteful, at the very least it's getting assessed and getting a full business case.

Back in 2008, when Regional Rail Link came along, I don't think a business case was produced. Correct me if I'm wrong.
https://www.audit.vic.gov.au/report/assessing-benefits-regional-rail-link-project
True Believers

Regardless, interesting correlation: all the flipped Liberal seats (except Matthew Guy's Bulleen) were in the path of the SRL: Mount Waverley, Burwood, Box Hill.  Ringwood flipped as well and Hawthorn/Caulfield might go too.
  True Believers Chief Commissioner

Anyways for those who think this project is wasteful, at the very least it's getting assessed and getting a full business case.

Regardless, interesting correlation: all the flipped Liberal seats (except Matthew Guy's Bulleen) were in the path of the SRL: Mount Waverley, Burwood, Box Hill.  Ringwood flipped as well and Hawthorn/Caulfield might go too.
tayser
Yeah I noticed it too.

https://www.urban.com.au/transport/2018/11/25/did-the-suburban-rail-loop-win-the-victorian-election-for-labor
  drunkill Junior Train Controller

Location: Melbourne, Australia
Anyways for those who think this project is wasteful, at the very least it's getting assessed and getting a full business case.

Regardless, interesting correlation: all the flipped Liberal seats (except Matthew Guy's Bulleen) were in the path of the SRL: Mount Waverley, Burwood, Box Hill.  Ringwood flipped as well and Hawthorn/Caulfield might go too.
Yeah I noticed it too.

https://www.urban.com.au/transport/2018/11/25/did-the-suburban-rail-loop-win-the-victorian-election-for-labor
True Believers
Tayser wrote that Razz

Sponsored advertisement

Display from: