50 level crossings to be removed

 
  Djebel Train Controller

The flour mill sidings are at ground level.  If the Macaulay Rd LX is removed by elevating the rail, how will the train be able to gain access?
That's what I was asking, thank you. So the SSR trains go to Broadmeadows, not the city. That complicates things a tad. From the flyover you'd need to build a siding that the grain trains can reverse from to get down.

(So trains at height go over the road, onto the flyover siding then reverse into the grain siding)
Trains to the Mill come from both directions but the more common one is from the the city end. Pretty sure they run through the LX and then back into the siding but happy to be corrected

The end of the siding (the limit of shunt where the locos sit) is only a few metres from Macauley Rd so I cannot see how your elevated siding idea would work, there wouldn't be enough room for the descent to ground level

Unless they built an elevated unloader at the same time but I have no idea how that would work in practice or indeed if it would work at all
BrentonGolding
How would trains traveling UP gain access to the siding?  I can only see a connection from the down line.

Sponsored advertisement

  justarider Chief Commissioner

Location: Released again, maybe for the last time??
The flour mill sidings are at ground level.  If the Macaulay Rd LX is removed by elevating the rail, how will the train be able to gain access?
That's what I was asking, thank you. So the SSR trains go to Broadmeadows, not the city. That complicates things a tad. From the flyover you'd need to build a siding that the grain trains can reverse from to get down.

(So trains at height go over the road, onto the flyover siding then reverse into the grain siding)
Trains to the Mill come from both directions but the more common one is from the the city end. Pretty sure they run through the LX and then back into the siding but happy to be corrected

The end of the siding (the limit of shunt where the locos sit) is only a few metres from Macauley Rd so I cannot see how your elevated siding idea would work, there wouldn't be enough room for the descent to ground level

Unless they built an elevated unloader at the same time but I have no idea how that would work in practice or indeed if it would work at all
How would trains traveling UP gain access to the siding?  I can only see a connection from the down line.
Djebel
Definitely over-thinking this one people. What is certain is that the whole district needs to be re-designed, not just a little patch up. All for one LX.

The more pressing question for "rail over" is re-configure of the merge between Metro and Vline tracks.

As for Allied Mills, it may be a less expensive solution to just pay them to re-locate. (And that would not be cheap).

cheers
John
  YM-Mundrabilla Minister for Railways

Location: Mundrabilla but I'd rather be in Narvik
The flour mill sidings are at ground level.  If the Macaulay Rd LX is removed by elevating the rail, how will the train be able to gain access?
That's what I was asking, thank you. So the SSR trains go to Broadmeadows, not the city. That complicates things a tad. From the flyover you'd need to build a siding that the grain trains can reverse from to get down.

(So trains at height go over the road, onto the flyover siding then reverse into the grain siding)
Trains to the Mill come from both directions but the more common one is from the the city end. Pretty sure they run through the LX and then back into the siding but happy to be corrected

The end of the siding (the limit of shunt where the locos sit) is only a few metres from Macauley Rd so I cannot see how your elevated siding idea would work, there wouldn't be enough room for the descent to ground level

Unless they built an elevated unloader at the same time but I have no idea how that would work in practice or indeed if it would work at all
BrentonGolding
Easy fixed. Just kill the rail traffic and put it on road like everything else...................
  Djebel Train Controller

The flour mill sidings are at ground level.  If the Macaulay Rd LX is removed by elevating the rail, how will the train be able to gain access?
That's what I was asking, thank you. So the SSR trains go to Broadmeadows, not the city. That complicates things a tad. From the flyover you'd need to build a siding that the grain trains can reverse from to get down.

(So trains at height go over the road, onto the flyover siding then reverse into the grain siding)
Trains to the Mill come from both directions but the more common one is from the the city end. Pretty sure they run through the LX and then back into the siding but happy to be corrected

The end of the siding (the limit of shunt where the locos sit) is only a few metres from Macauley Rd so I cannot see how your elevated siding idea would work, there wouldn't be enough room for the descent to ground level

Unless they built an elevated unloader at the same time but I have no idea how that would work in practice or indeed if it would work at all
Easy fixed. Just kill the rail traffic and put it on road like everything else...................
YM-Mundrabilla
How many a-doubles per train?
  Lockie91 Assistant Commissioner

The flour mill sidings are at ground level.  If the Macaulay Rd LX is removed by elevating the rail, how will the train be able to gain access?
That's what I was asking, thank you. So the SSR trains go to Broadmeadows, not the city. That complicates things a tad. From the flyover you'd need to build a siding that the grain trains can reverse from to get down.

(So trains at height go over the road, onto the flyover siding then reverse into the grain siding)
Trains to the Mill come from both directions but the more common one is from the the city end. Pretty sure they run through the LX and then back into the siding but happy to be corrected

The end of the siding (the limit of shunt where the locos sit) is only a few metres from Macauley Rd so I cannot see how your elevated siding idea would work, there wouldn't be enough room for the descent to ground level

Unless they built an elevated unloader at the same time but I have no idea how that would work in practice or indeed if it would work at all
Easy fixed. Just kill the rail traffic and put it on road like everything else...................
YM-Mundrabilla
The site the Mill sits on is included in the Arden Structure Plan, its days are numbered. No doubt Ailled is holding onto it for as long as possible as an inner city site like that would be worth a bomb.

There is no reason why Allied couldn't relocate to an industrial area in the west... Truganina comes to mind. And still rail their grain in as well as their flour out. Similar to what happened with the Summer Hill Mill in Sydney, which was moved to Picton.

Until that happens, Kensington will stay as is.

Lockie
  Dangersdan707 Chief Commissioner

Location: On a Thing with Internet
The flour mill sidings are at ground level.  If the Macaulay Rd LX is removed by elevating the rail, how will the train be able to gain access?
That's what I was asking, thank you. So the SSR trains go to Broadmeadows, not the city. That complicates things a tad. From the flyover you'd need to build a siding that the grain trains can reverse from to get down.

(So trains at height go over the road, onto the flyover siding then reverse into the grain siding)
Trains to the Mill come from both directions but the more common one is from the the city end. Pretty sure they run through the LX and then back into the siding but happy to be corrected

The end of the siding (the limit of shunt where the locos sit) is only a few metres from Macauley Rd so I cannot see how your elevated siding idea would work, there wouldn't be enough room for the descent to ground level

Unless they built an elevated unloader at the same time but I have no idea how that would work in practice or indeed if it would work at all
How would trains traveling UP gain access to the siding?  I can only see a connection from the down line.
Definitely over-thinking this one people. What is certain is that the whole district needs to be re-designed, not just a little patch up. All for one LX.

The more pressing question for "rail over" is re-configure of the merge between Metro and Vline tracks.

As for Allied Mills, it may be a less expensive solution to just pay them to re-locate. (And that would not be cheap).

cheers
John
justarider
Nah, do what what was done at Essendon, not every grade separation entails a station rebuild. Also keeps the Heritage mob happy.
  justarider Chief Commissioner

Location: Released again, maybe for the last time??
The flour mill sidings are at ground level.  If the Macaulay Rd LX is removed by elevating the rail, how will the train be able to gain access?

Nah, do what what was done at Essendon, not every grade separation entails a station rebuild. Also keeps the Heritage mob happy.
Dangersdan707
Double Nah,

Macaulay Rd is only 13m wide. That's a whole 2 lanes fewer than Buckely St.

Not just Heritage, its a tight fit all around.

cheers
John
  Valvegear Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Richmond Vic
As for Allied Mills, it may be a less expensive solution to just pay them to re-locate. (And that would not be cheap).
"justarider"
That would be just about a guaranteed loss of freight from rail to road. Where can the mill relocate beside an active railway line without going a long distance from where it is now? Who will pay for construction of a siding? Will the siding involve a road crossing? Are the mill's customers going to be happy about having longer drives to collect their orders?
Putting such a proposal to the mill would be grounds for armed insurrection.
  Dangersdan707 Chief Commissioner

Location: On a Thing with Internet
The flour mill sidings are at ground level.  If the Macaulay Rd LX is removed by elevating the rail, how will the train be able to gain access?

Nah, do what what was done at Essendon, not every grade separation entails a station rebuild. Also keeps the Heritage mob happy.
Double Nah,

Macaulay Rd is only 13m wide. That's a whole 2 lanes fewer than Buckely St.

Not just Heritage, its a tight fit all around.

cheers
John
justarider
Disagree, if you want to avoid messing with the track layout and the heritage listings its the way to go, even if it entails truncating Eastwood and Bellair streets on the south side. It'd still be possible in that narrower street to do it, just a bit harder.
  Valvegear Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Richmond Vic
I think we should face the fact that not every level crossing will be removed. There will be cases where the alternative to the existing crossing will be technically very difficult, politically difficult by needing to acquire many existing houses or other buildings, or fiendishly expensive.
  Dangersdan707 Chief Commissioner

Location: On a Thing with Internet
I think we should face the fact that not every level crossing will be removed. There will be cases where the alternative to the existing crossing will be technically very difficult, politically difficult by needing to acquire many existing houses or other buildings, or fiendishly expensive.
Valvegear
There is also the fact that a few get little to no traffic over them, ie, the 2 soon to be remaining ones on the Sunbury in (the one in diggers rest, and another on a country road) where it is really a why bother? scenario. Some Gunzels want every crossing on the network removed, that will never happen. We may get most removed, but never all.

Another group of crossings that come to mind that probably will never be touched are the driveway crossings on the Hurstbridge line and the residential area crossings along the Sandringham line. There really isn't that much point.

Another I can't see being removed is Mordialloc, due to the bridge over the creek at the down end, the stabling, the general poor geology and the heritage listings (again).

Others here will undoubtably disagree with this assessment.
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

There is also the fact that a few get little to no traffic over them, ie, the 2 soon to be remaining ones on the Sunbury in (the one in diggers rest, and another on a country road) where it is really a why bother? scenario. Some Gunzels want every crossing on the network removed, that will never happen. We may get most removed, but never all.

Another group of crossings that come to mind that probably will never be touched are the driveway crossings on the Hurstbridge line and the residential area crossings along the Sandringham line. There really isn't that much point.

Another I can't see being removed is Mordialloc, due to the bridge over the creek at the down end, the stabling, the general poor geology and the heritage listings (again).

Others here will undoubtably disagree with this assessment.
Dangersdan707

I don't disagree but what you can't remove you should close if there is an alternative option nearby. That old level crossing at Lydiard street is a perfect example. There is a road overpass just one block away and so close the crossing down instead.
  Tii Train Controller

I think we should face the fact that not every level crossing will be removed. There will be cases where the alternative to the existing crossing will be technically very difficult, politically difficult by needing to acquire many existing houses or other buildings, or fiendishly expensive.
There is also the fact that a few get little to no traffic over them, ie, the 2 soon to be remaining ones on the Sunbury in (the one in diggers rest, and another on a country road) where it is really a why bother? scenario. Some Gunzels want every crossing on the network removed, that will never happen. We may get most removed, but never all.

Another group of crossings that come to mind that probably will never be touched are the driveway crossings on the Hurstbridge line and the residential area crossings along the Sandringham line. There really isn't that much point.

Another I can't see being removed is Mordialloc, due to the bridge over the creek at the down end, the stabling, the general poor geology and the heritage listings (again).

Others here will undoubtably disagree with this assessment.
Dangersdan707
I agree that it's not a perfect word and some will remain for various reasons in the decades ahead. My original interest was simply are there any we could close now with minimal effect on traffic where another nearby crossing exists. At present I see this more likely on the Frankston line right now.
  historian Deputy Commissioner

Another I can't see being removed is Mordialloc, due to the bridge over the creek at the down end, the stabling, the general poor geology and the heritage listings (again).
Dangersdan707

Mordy should be straightforward.

The costly part of any of these projects is building around a running railway. The stabling sidings and the car park are actually assets in the construction, as is the general topography.

The existing line falls quite steeply from the north into McDonald St (at the north of the platform). There's a three track station yard with a massive car park behind it, then more car park and a four track stabling siding south of Bear St, the creek, then a park, then Station St before a steep climb onto the sand dune.

Move the stabling to Kannanook. Build a skyrail on the east side of the existing line from north of McDonald St to south of Station Street (abolishing three level crossings). The only tight bits would be the ramps north of McDonald St and south of Station St. If you wanted more land, you could even abolish the Down platform loop and close Mordy for Down trains in the peak. A new bridge over the Mordy Creek is unlikely to be anything of an engineering challenge - they've had lots of experience in building viaducts now.

Bonus. You could keep one of the existing Mordy Creek bridges as a bike/pedestrian path.
  Adogs Chief Train Controller

Historian is correct.  Grade separating Mordialloc wouldn't be particularly complicated, it'd just be a big job - basically Skyrail from just past the Nepean Hwy bridge all the way to the other side of the creek opposite Mordy College.

You'd lose the stabling though.
  ARodH Chief Train Controller

Location: East Oakleigh, Vic
The site the Mill sits on is included in the Arden Structure Plan, its days are numbered. No doubt Ailled is holding onto it for as long as possible as an inner city site like that would be worth a bomb.

There is no reason why Allied couldn't relocate to an industrial area in the west... Truganina comes to mind. And still rail their grain in as well as their flour out. Similar to what happened with the Summer Hill Mill in Sydney, which was moved to Picton.

Until that happens, Kensington will stay as is.

Lockie
Lockie91

The Kensington Mill is also where Allied's Victorian Corporate offices are at, and I believe a section of those offices have had a recent referbishment, while other sections are currently unused.
  Gman_86 Chief Commissioner

Location: Melton, where the sparks dare not roam!
I have said it before and I will say it again, the 2 crossings on Macaulay Rd are unlikely to be removed in the near future (next 10 years).

Just too damn messy.
  Lockie91 Assistant Commissioner

I have said it before and I will say it again, the 2 crossings on Macaulay Rd are unlikely to be removed in the near future (next 10 years).

Just too damn messy.
Gman_86
Is there even a need to remove it, even in the long term.

If we thought more like planners...

The area surrounding Macaulay Station is set to dramatically change over the next 20 years. With the old warehouses along the Moonee Ponds Creek to become new appartments. The Macaulay Road LX on the Upfield line could be closed to traffic and replaced with a pedestrian overpass. Traffic is diverted up Boundary Road and onto Racecourse Road, which is the designated truck route/arterial road. The structure plan identifies Boundary Road as a possible route for the re-routed 58 tram, essentially connecting this new residential area into Arden Station.

Macaulay Road Kensington could be have its speed limit reduced, footpaths extended and separated bike lanes installed discouraging through traffic along the shopping strip. With Macaulay Road closed at Moonee Ponds Creek, there would be little traffic crossing the Craigieburn Line. The crossing could remain open to allow local access to the residential areas between the Craigieburn Line and the Creek. (Think Porter Street, Prahran)

A lot of these older inner city crossing where built for a reason, access to now gone industrial areas. Just because it has been there for the last one hundred years, doesn't mean it still needs to be. Melbourne City Council is doing all it can to discourage car use in the inner city areas. Increase in frequencies and MM1 are only going to assist with this.

Lockie
  Rossco T Chief Train Controller

Location: Camberwell, Victoria
Traffic is diverted up Boundary Road and onto Racecourse Road, which is the designated truck route/arterial road.
Lockie91
Not sure that Racecourse Road can be the designated truck route due to the two low clearance rail bridges where trucks regularly bring down the overhead tram wires.  I think for this reason alone that the Macaulay level crossing would need to stay open.

If you look at a Google Streetview Image of Racecourse Road just east of Stubbs Street, you will see that there are existing signs in place directing trucks to exit Racecourse Road and travel down Stubbs Street to Macaulay Road.

Melbourne City Council is doing all it can to discourage car use in the inner city areas. Increase in frequencies and MM1 are only going to assist with this.
Lockie91

I bet Melbourne City Council must be thrilled that the West Gate Tunnel will be dumping heaps of extra traffic onto North Melbourne and West Melbourne with new ramps connecting onto Dynon Road!

Ross
  justarider Chief Commissioner

Location: Released again, maybe for the last time??
I have said it before and I will say it again, the 2 crossings on Macaulay Rd are unlikely to be removed in the near future (next 10 years).

Just too damn messy.
Is there even a need to remove it, even in the long term.

If we thought more like planners...

The area surrounding Macaulay Station is set to dramatically change over the next 20 years. With the old warehouses along the Moonee Ponds Creek to become new appartments. The Macaulay Road LX on the Upfield line could be closed to traffic and replaced with a pedestrian overpass. Traffic is diverted up Boundary Road and onto Racecourse Road, which is the designated truck route/arterial road. The structure plan identifies Boundary Road as a possible route for the re-routed 58 tram, essentially connecting this new residential area into Arden Station.

Macaulay Road Kensington could be have its speed limit reduced, footpaths extended and separated bike lanes installed discouraging through traffic along the shopping strip. With Macaulay Road closed at Moonee Ponds Creek, there would be little traffic crossing the Craigieburn Line. The crossing could remain open to allow local access to the residential areas between the Craigieburn Line and the Creek. (Think Porter Street, Prahran)

A lot of these older inner city crossing where built for a reason, access to now gone industrial areas. Just because it has been there for the last one hundred years, doesn't mean it still needs to be. Melbourne City Council is doing all it can to discourage car use in the inner city areas. Increase in frequencies and MM1 are only going to assist with this.

Lockie
Lockie91
A bit late, but anyhoo.

If the long term aim is to limit traffic in Macaulay Rd, and make the area more pedestrian friendly,  
then the current LX are doing a very good job, and should remain.

cheers
John
  True Believers Chief Commissioner
  Carnot Minister for Railways

Update on Gap Rd Sunbury LX crossing (road under rail) to be mostly done in 2022:
https://www.premier.vic.gov.au/work-stepping-remove-sunburys-worst-traffic-bottleneck
  Steamboat Willie Beginner

An update on the Williamstown line and Ferguson St level crossing removal.

The new road bridge at Ferguson St is open to pedestrians and should be open to all traffic in the next day or two.  The piling rigs all left site about a week ago after working 24 hours a day for a few weeks.  Easy sleep again for locals for a while until the trench is excavated.  Hopefully the silt with basalt floaters is deep enough that not much rock-breaking is needed.  I have no insight into that.

The power system on the rest of the line south of North Williamstown is being upgraded, with all-new stanchions mostly in place.

Williamstown Beach Station has had a facelift with new platform surfaces.  Currently installing new lighting and fencing.
  Steamboat Willie Beginner

Easy sleep again for locals for a while until the trench is excavated.  Hopefully the silt with basalt floaters is deep enough that not much rock-breaking is needed.  I have no insight into that.
Steamboat Willie
The Ferguson Street level crossing is now fully open for traffic on the new road bridge, with pedestrian access on the south side only.

Unfortunately for locals, LXRA advises that 24x7 rock-breaking with high levels of constant noise will be required between mid-September and late October.  Thankfully it is mid-September already and the top layer of clay and soil has not yet been removed.

A separate notification from PTV advises that maintenance works will occur between North Williamstown and Williamstown including six short periods of 24x7 works between 26 September and 8 November.  That's a bit odd since no trains can run on the line anyway, so there is no need to work overnight unless their critical path is really under pressure or the critical track machines (track laying, ballast tamping or profile grinding?) are being well-sweated.
  steve195 Train Controller

A bit of curiosity in Carnegie along the original flavour Skyrail(TM); there are some 'LXRP Public Open Space' construction works going on.. three years after the project was completed.
Between Princes Hwy and Girdwood Av (where single the viaduct transitions to two viaducts), there's a new paved area which looks like it will become a basketball court. On Egan St they have dug up grass and trees (that were planted by LXRP a few years back) and replaced them with a few more parking spaces. And finally on the down side of Carnegie, they're building some sort of playground area.
I can only assume that this project has been a victim of its own success - the bike path, play equipment and basketball courts almost always seem to be in use - perhaps it has gotten too busy so extra stuff is being installed?

In any case, it's very nice to see a lot of the trees and other greenery growing nicely, as well as an almost unbelievable lack of graffiti vandalism. Honestly anyone who has been to this area or Clayton and doesn't think that it is so far the best public space outcome from a level crossing removal must have rocks in their heads.

Sponsored advertisement

Display from: