50 level crossings to be removed

 
  Galron Chief Commissioner

Location: Werribee, Vic
Latest WON has a notation of the east and west tracks at Werribee St, Werribee being disconnected on the down side of Werribee Station from 6/8 until at least December. This has been expected as part of the removal works. Covid restrictions have kept me at home, so am not aware if the SG has has been slewed onto the expected temporary alignment yet, but I would imagine that's imminent if its not happened yet.

For those interested or living next to the wyndamvale line, this will mean all BG trains, passenger and freight, will be going via the RRL until the project is finished.

Sponsored advertisement

  billjohnston Station Master

I think this sums it up nicely. Easy interchange is the key word. Ringwood line passengers have no issue changing at Richmond as it is so easy. Contrast that with Caulfield line passengers who are forced to run up and down stairs. I have said it before but a huge mistake was made with the Richmond Caulfield resignalling when the line was not converted to up up down down to make changing at Richmond as simple as on the Ringwood line. Of course all that is now lost with the ridiculous separation plans for the Dandenong line,

Bill Johnston
  speedemon08 Mary

Location: I think by now you should have figured it out
I think this sums it up nicely. Easy interchange is the key word. Ringwood line passengers have no issue changing at Richmond as it is so easy. Contrast that with Caulfield line passengers who are forced to run up and down stairs. I have said it before but a huge mistake was made with the Richmond Caulfield resignalling when the line was not converted to up up down down to make changing at Richmond as simple as on the Ringwood line. Of course all that is now lost with the ridiculous separation plans for the Dandenong line,

Bill Johnston
billjohnston
It'd be a hell of a project somewhere along the line to make a set of flyovers to make this possible.
  Lockie91 Chief Train Controller

I think this sums it up nicely. Easy interchange is the key word. Ringwood line passengers have no issue changing at Richmond as it is so easy. Contrast that with Caulfield line passengers who are forced to run up and down stairs. I have said it before but a huge mistake was made with the Richmond Caulfield resignalling when the line was not converted to up up down down to make changing at Richmond as simple as on the Ringwood line. Of course all that is now lost with the ridiculous separation plans for the Dandenong line,

Bill Johnston
billjohnston
A rebuilt Caulfield Station is all that is needed. Modern overpass with lifts and escalators.

The time for trying to squeeze in a pair of flyovers has long gone.

P.S there are also no stairs at Caulfield. Just a dodgy dimly lit subway accessible by no complaint ramps. Don't even get me started about having to leave and re enter the station to access city bound trains on platform 1.
  billjohnston Station Master

Caulfield needs a large bull dozer. It should be rebuilt as two island platforms. It will have to be done at some time and if there is a long term plan it can be done in stages but the current plans rule it out for ever. I am not convinced there is not enough room for a flyover for Frankston line trains at the down end if the rebuilt station is moved in the up direction. There is no need for a flyover at Richmond if the up up down down arrangement was planned and worked towards. As I said earlier we have now gone too far to go back and do it properly so the line will remain non passenger friendly for the foreseeable future.

Bill Johnston
  Upven Locomotive Driver

Caulfield needs a large bull dozer. It should be rebuilt as two island platforms. It will have to be done at some time and if there is a long term plan it can be done in stages but the current plans rule it out for ever. I am not convinced there is not enough room for a flyover for Frankston line trains at the down end if the rebuilt station is moved in the up direction. There is no need for a flyover at Richmond if the up up down down arrangement was planned and worked towards. As I said earlier we have now gone too far to go back and do it properly so the line will remain non passenger friendly for the foreseeable future.

Bill Johnston
billjohnston
Being heritage listed also probably rules it out forever, even the subway is heritage listed.
  True Believers Chief Commissioner



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ww2EMc4mDOU

By the looks of it, Cardinia road grade separation looks to be almost done.
  lkernan Deputy Commissioner

Location: Melbourne

By the looks of it, Cardinia road grade separation looks to be almost done.
True Believers
Your car must have much better ground clearance than mine then.
  True Believers Chief Commissioner


By the looks of it, Cardinia road grade separation looks to be almost done.Your car must have much better ground clearance than mine then.
lkernan
I meant the Cardinia road over rail grade separation. You know what I meant.
  davesvline Chief Commissioner

Location: 1983-1998
My former neighbour is a member of Vicpol. He once told me that Bedford Rd Ringwood (Maroondah Hwy to Canterbury Rd) is the busiest secondary Rd in the state. Now I can’t find any evidence to support his claim, other than personal experience on it.
Suffice to say, the Bedford Rd level crossing would have to be the easiest piece of piss crossing removal of all time.
Why?? The Rd is on the highest point, and the line down, goes down hill to Heathmont via a dip, and the up side is excavated rail yard (of which 2 roads could be stolen) lending itself to atleast 30% of any required excavation costs being mitigated by the pre existing situation.

Considering there’s a T intersection of Great Ryrie Rd just about on it, and Ringwood Secondary College on the other side, the mind absolutely boggles at to why )with such ease of removal) that it hasn’t already been done??

Maybe it’s because no one has been killed there (that I know of- yet) to be higher up the list.

FFS just do the damn thing!! Plumb easy job for sure compared with 98% of the others done/proposed.

Regards
  lkernan Deputy Commissioner

Location: Melbourne
I meant the Cardinia road over rail grade separation. You know what I meant.
True Believers
I didn’t and I still don’t?  That’s nowhere near done, the approach ramps aren’t even filled to bridge height!
  Lockie91 Chief Train Controller

Caulfield needs a large bull dozer. It should be rebuilt as two island platforms. It will have to be done at some time and if there is a long term plan it can be done in stages but the current plans rule it out for ever. I am not convinced there is not enough room for a flyover for Frankston line trains at the down end if the rebuilt station is moved in the up direction. There is no need for a flyover at Richmond if the up up down down arrangement was planned and worked towards. As I said earlier we have now gone too far to go back and do it properly so the line will remain non passenger friendly for the foreseeable future.

Bill Johnston
billjohnston
Will never happen.

The station is heritage protected. All that Caulfield will get is a new overpass with lifts and escalators to improve connections. This allows for the station buildings to remain where they are.

It is a Passenger Friendly station, there are a lot worse on the network. Your claims are based on the number of people that will choose to interchange there. It will not be that many more than now. Passengers can change at Town Hall to reach the City Loop, it will be much easier to remain on your HCMT and change at Town Hall to change onto an emptier service to reach Flagstaff or Parliament.

Besides, this is the wrong thread for this discussion.

Lockie
  True Believers Chief Commissioner

I meant the Cardinia road over rail grade separation. You know what I meant.
I didn’t and I still don’t?  That’s nowhere near done, the approach ramps aren’t even filled to bridge height!
lkernan
The approach ramps are about 80% filled up. It's definitely nearing completion, probably about 2 months away from opening.

When I meant nearing completion, I meant relatively to the whole construction. 2 months away from an overall 12-18 month build is almost near the finishing stages of completing the project.
  kitchgp Chief Commissioner

Dandenong line interchanging to and from South Yarra, Richmond (MCG specials perhaps) and Sandringham line.
Frankston line interchanging to and from Anzac
  ngarner Assistant Commissioner

Location: Seville
For those wanting to follow the Upfield work, the Melbourne Trains Reddit thread has a poster who lives locally to Moreland station and, so far, has posted a daily series of photos since the first full day closure.
From the pictures posted they are getting on at a good rate. The Anstey crossover looks ready to go, including signalling; Moreland's elevated station has stairs being constructed; a number of piers for the future elevated line are already in place within the original Moreland platform and, according to the LXRP website, the boom gates have gone from all for crossings, although the rails were still in the roadway as of yesterday

Reddit thread

Neil
  TrackRailroad Train Controller

Location: Frankston Line
Caulfield needs a large bull dozer. It should be rebuilt as two island platforms. It will have to be done at some time and if there is a long term plan it can be done in stages but the current plans rule it out for ever. I am not convinced there is not enough room for a flyover for Frankston line trains at the down end if the rebuilt station is moved in the up direction. There is no need for a flyover at Richmond if the up up down down arrangement was planned and worked towards. As I said earlier we have now gone too far to go back and do it properly so the line will remain non passenger friendly for the foreseeable future.

Bill Johnston
Being heritage listed also probably rules it out forever, even the subway is heritage listed.
Upven
I don't think two island platforms and new flyovers at Caulfield are necessary to create the same result as the Ringwood corridor interchanges at Richmond, as this would be very expensive. I think just a second passenger interchange at the Down end is required, with escalators to allow easier interchanging, similar to North Melbourne. Caulfield is a very busy station and when there is bus replacement and passengers need to interchange , the current ramps and subway are not adequate.
  TrackRailroad Train Controller

Location: Frankston Line
Converting the Alamein line to a tram doesn't make sense. The line already crosses 2 tram lines that go via camberwell junction (70 on Riversdale Road and 75 on Toorak road) so it's unnecessary dupliction of routes. High street ashburton also has a bus that goes to Glen Iris station on the Glen Waverley line.

I'm not sure if you could say that the Alamein line (in it's current form) duplicates the routes 70/75 trams... It would seem to me to be multimodal interactions between the trams and the trains? So I am not sold on the idea that converting this line (on the proviso that it is extended to join the Rowville tram, connecting to Chadstone and Monash eventually) is an unnecessary duplication of routes.
I am sure the bus from High street, Ashburton could be effectively integrated to operate with the converted route (just like the 70/75 could be rejigged to integrate with the route) if it ever were to be converted.

As was mentioned there probably isn't room for more trams at Camberwell tram depot and I highly doubt the the current train stabling at Camberwell station could take trams as well, so trams would have no where to terminate.

I would suggest that this project should be timed to occur just around/after the Coldstream maintenance centre would be opened, which would cover for lost stabling capacity at Camberwell. Have to say though, the Camberwell stabling looks pretty small and stuffy to me, not sure it is of much use as we enter into a world of fixed consists' of 7 carriage trains. I'm sure it would be big enough to stable a few E-class trams as necessary, but would make more sense to look for a bigger site in the local vicinity that could replace Camberwell at the same time as providing additional space for the converted Alamein line vehicles, and any possible extension of the 75 towards Knox (an inevitability IMO).

People who catch the Alamein line are mostly going to the city or changing at Camberwell to go towards Ringwood. A tram would make things a lot harder to do either.

If it was timetabled properly, and Camberwell was upgraded to a proper interchange station, it could actually be quite seamless. Would certainly be of much more utility to have a link to Chadstone/Monash Clayton Campus/East Malvern/Rowville and wherever else you might want to extend it from there, and this would draw in additional commuters. Modal transfers can be frustrating, but if you open up the places that can be accessed from one form of transit, then people are more willing to switch between modes because of the extra accessibility the enhanced service offers. With SRL seemingly still on the cards (especially important in light of the economic malaise that has set in due to COVID-19), I cannot see Alamein being connected via heavy rail to the Glen Waverley/Cranbourne/Pakenham lines.

Better to try and make use of the infrastructure we've got left and provide a more functional link. Doesn't have to be a tram either? Could be tram-train or whatever if there are plans afoot to integrate into the heavy rail network eventually?
ElliotProvis
I think the best solution is heavy rail from Alamein to Monash Uni or Rowville connecting via Chadstone and Oakleigh, to take advantage of the existing heavy rail line and no costs associated with conversion to a tram line. This would generate good patronage for the Alamein line and make it far more useful connecting major train lines and employment/activity hubs like Chadstone, Glenferrie, Camberwell, Mulgrave and Monash University National Employment Industrial Cluster on one line.

However it may be a lot cheaper to convert the line to a 'DLR' style line like in London, U.K, and connect to the government planned Caulfield to Rowville tram line, as another poster has commented. I have had heard construction of such light rail style services are cheaper than heavy rail, especially if a lot of the line is elevated along the existing median strips of Dandenong and Wellington Roads. As mentioned by other posters, there is not much room for tram/ DLR stabling at Camberwell, but if the Coldstream maintenance/ stabling facility is built, this should resolve this issue.

Over time Chadstone is likely to gain more office/commercial space, maybe housing too, which would make a dedicated through public transit link more attractive.
  NSWGR8022 Deputy Commissioner

Location: From the lands of Journalism and Free Speech
No level crossing removals are going on hold with the recent announcements from the Victorian Premier.
  Adogs Chief Train Controller

No level crossing removals are going on hold with the recent announcements from the Victorian Premier.
NSWGR8022

The Vic govt will want to ramp up work to take advantage of the weeks of low traffic volume - you'll see quite a lot of progress happen before we come back out of hibernation.
  ElliotProvis Junior Train Controller

Location: Melbourne, Victoria
Yes, well never let a good pandemic go to waste — As the saying goes!

In relation to the future of the Alamein line, I think a heavy rail line is not on the books.
For one, if you wanted to link up all the areas you’re describing you’d be building through some very expensive suburbs. So you’ll either have to tunnel the majority of the route, or expend a great deal of political capital convincing people in the well to-do suburbs that a skyrail option is feasible. Considering the median house price in that area of Melbourne, I suspect a tunnel would be the only option a left leaning state government could realistically propose without being absolutely eviscerated in those seats. You’d also have to duplicate the remaining single sections of the line (if you wanted to run the service at any better frequency than you have now — which is the whole point you went about extending and linking the line to Chaddy, East Malvern, and Rowville of course. You’d have to grade separate the tram square at Riversdale too. Then to support that increase in service levels, at a minimum you’d need to quad all the way from Burnley to Camberwell. Or run shuttles from Camberwell to Chaddy/Rowville/East Malvern, or where ever it was you imagined the service linking into the Cranbourne/Pakenham lines would be.

So, for those reasons alone, heavy rail is very unlikely. You also have to ask questions of equity “should we be spending multi-billion dollars on a project to enhance the already highly accessible public transport oriented suburbs of Melbourne’s East, when Geelong line passengers have to fight with pax commuters for space on the trains at Wyndhamvale and Tarneit?”
Doesn’t seem to be particularly equitable to me.

Now on the other hand, a DLR system might be more palatable because it is a smaller system able to negotiate tighter curves, and the space for a depot of some sort would be smaller but you’d still need to grade separate the tram square in Riversdale, and all of the intersections with roads (I’m not aware of DLR-style) systems that do at ground running with traffic light intersections. would all of these intersections need to be grade separate the vehicles? It would seem so... how will you do this? Tunnels? Bridges? How many people in Ashburton will want their local streets with Skyrail bridges? Then you have the problem of introducing an orphan system into the Eastern suburbs... I wonder about the potential capacity to expand this system... where would it be expanded to? To make scale economies you’d probably want to be able to expand this system.

So one begins to wonder why not just use a proven technology, which people already interact with (like a conversion to light rail?). As far as I am aware, the Rowville tram proposal was for an extension of the Route 3/3A to Rowville with an intermediate stop at Chaddy? It would be a surprise to me if this extension was to be built as a DLR style system as you suggest... only because it would require an intermodal transfer, or it would require sections of the Route 3/3A being partially converted to DLR style too. That seems unlikely to me. I was under the impression (happy to be corrected) that it would be an extension of the tram service which currently terminated at Caulfield station.

So we now ask the question: if the route 3/3A extension was likely to be a tram extension, built more closely to a light rail standard, how would the DLR system from Alamein link in? I’m not aware of any places in the world in which DLR vehicles and trams share the same tracks?

Furthermore, if you do have an LRV conversion of the Alamein line, and then extension to interchange with East Malvern and the Monash/Rowville team extension, it makes wayyyyyyyy more sense to use the same compatible vehicles and signalling system (I believe DLR is automatic?). It also means part of the reason the Riversdale tram square needed to be eliminated can be ignored — Alamein line and tram lines would run at the same voltage.

You would also have an interface with the tram network at this square, which means you get wider tram network compatibility.
If the tram depot were to be somewhere near Rowville then no need to worry about a new depot in Camberwell.


I imagine, you could probably get away with keeping the remaining level crossings on the Alamein line, which also saves you a great deal of cash! For sure, you would need to more than likely elevate over Gardiners Creek and the Monash Freeway. You’d also want to rebuild East Malvern to be a true interchange station, and more than likely think about how you’re going to deal with the HVDC power lines running alongside the Monash (could cause a bit of a mess if not dealt with properly).

But once the light rail returned to grade, you could easily run it through East Malvern station Car Park, and then continue along the Urban Forest reserve before coming onto the Princess Highway. From here you would have to grade separate and have the LRV’s run down the median, or you could run the line down the Princess Highway Service road. The latter will be less popular than the former. Once you’re on here, you’ve  integrated with the Rowville/Monash light rail.


Now warning, this is even more tin-hat foamy than usual... so be warned that this is just an idea, and not in any way a kind of serious proposal.

We could also try merging our proposals and have all Alamein-East Malvern/Chaddy/Monash/Rowville services run by LRV’s (with passing loops at stations so the LRV’s can be overtaken as necessary) but keep your heavy rail idea and link this line up at around Huntingdale, you could potentially divert V/Line services on this route. Would still require quadding and grade separation, would be a nightmarish mix of gauges, and probably very unpopular with the locals. So really, not a viable option... always good to put ideas out on the table though.

Anyway apologies for the long post, and apologies for the many spelling and grammatical mistakes that are undoubtedly dotted throughout my response. Just had words in my head and needed to get them out onto the web!
  John.Z Chief Train Controller

The route would run Caulfield-Rowville, interchange but separate to the 3/3a.

Think L2/L3 in sydney (and the mess which that is including low average speed and poor priority even with the best of intentions).

Instead I would like to see:

Elevated DLR, can take tight corners and steep grades.Has a higher average speed and can be automated.

Line 1: Camberwell to Southland via Ashburton/East Malvern/Chadstone/Warrigal Rd

Line 2: Caulfield to Rowville (Stage 1), Rowville to Ferntree Gully (Stage 2).
  True Believers Chief Commissioner

The above discussion is going off-topic from the level crossing removal thread. Can you move the discussion elsewhere.

Currently the Bell to Moreland project is going well so far.
  speedemon08 Mary

Location: I think by now you should have figured it out
No level crossing removals are going on hold with the recent announcements from the Victorian Premier.

The Vic govt will want to ramp up work to take advantage of the weeks of low traffic volume - you'll see quite a lot of progress happen before we come back out of hibernation.
Adogs
And the project worksites have been pretty good at handling all the rules related to Covid anyway, from what I've experianced.
  TrackRailroad Train Controller

Location: Frankston Line
The above discussion is going off-topic from the level crossing removal thread. Can you move the discussion elsewhere.

Currently the Bell to Moreland project is going well so far.
True Believers
Good idea, I don't know how to shift the Alamein line discussion into another thread, or a suitable existing thread, if someone can do this please.
  slowcoach Junior Train Controller

The above discussion is going off-topic from the level crossing removal thread. Can you move the discussion elsewhere.

Currently the Bell to Moreland project is going well so far.
Good idea, I don't know how to shift the Alamein line discussion into another thread, or a suitable existing thread, if someone can do this please.
TrackRailroad
It can entitled "Fantasy Melbourne rail".

Sponsored advertisement

Display from: