Working within a constrained railway corridor, there as no space to build a new station clear of the existing tracks.

So instead the entire railway line was shut down for three months, so the old track and stations could be demolished, and a new rail cutting and station built in it’s place.

To speed up the process, much of the station complex was prefabricated – divided up into truck sized modules, which were delivered as required from an offsite storage yard at Elgar Park in Mont Albert North.

But on the morning of 3 April 2023, things didn’t go to plan.

LXRP Update: Mont Albert Road is currently closed to traffic between Elgar Road and View Street. A detour is temporarily in place while a 6.4 metre wide new station building continues to be delivered to site and is needing to temporarily stay parked on Mont Albert Road. Access to driveways will be maintained during this period.

They tried to deliver a prefabricated section, but it couldn’t fit under some low trees – so they abandoned it on Mont Albert Road for the day.

Photo by Extranious A on Twitter

Photo by Extranious A on Twitter

Photo by Extranious A on Twitter

Getting some coverage on the Channel 7 TV news.

A massive portable building is blocking busy Mont Albert Road. https://t.co/5zYfOfGqUb #7NEWS pic.twitter.com/fJIadE5v4U

— 7NEWS Melbourne (@7NewsMelbourne) April 3, 2023

As well as on 3AW Melbourne radio.

Level Crossing Removal Authority contractors wanted to hack their way through the trees of Mont Albert Road.

Believing they were allowed to do whatever they liked.

Current advice (3 April 2pm) Is, that despite their best efforts to negotiate an alternative solution (perhaps even just a different route) City of Whitehorse arborists have been advised by the LXRP they are able to do whatever it wants to in order to progress the project.

This will likely mean more than 40 trees on Mont Albert Road between Elgar and Hamilton Street will be ‘trimmed’ to accommodate the 5.3 metre high toilet block down a road which vehicles over 4.6m are not permitted.

But the City of Whitehorse told them to bugger off.

An update on the building stuck on a truck in Mont Albert Road. Council Officers have advised me tonight that Council does NOT support the trees in Mont Albert Road being pruned. The LXRA have been advised the truck must be backed out along Mont Albert Road and the building returned to Elgar Park. They must then find an alternative method of diverting the building to site.

The result – LXRA backing away with their tail between their legs.

LXRP update: Between 9pm Mon 3 April and 5am Tues 4 April, the station building currently located on Mont Albert Rd will be transported back along Mont Albert Road, Elgar Road and to Surrey Park. Traffic management will be in place to assist while the building is moved.

The modular toilet block being parked in the LXRA’s compound at Surrey Park.

Still sitting on the truck, awaiting their next move.

That time came 10 days later.

An oversized delivery comprising 1 of the new Union Station buildings will be delivered to site overnight between Thursday 13 April and Friday 14 April via Union Road, Windsor Crescent and Leopold Crescent.

This route ensures no permanent loss of trees.

To enable the building to be delivered, on street car parking will be temporarily removed on Leopold Crescent – and continue to be unavailable on Windsor Crescent – from 9am, Thursday 13 April to 9am, Friday 14 April.

Up to 20 trees along Windsor and Leopold Crescents will be pruned to protect these trees from damage. The pruning will be overseen by qualified arborists.

One tree in the roundabout – at the intersection of Windsor and Leopold Crescents – will be temporarily removed and then reinstated once the building has been delivered.

No driveways will be blocked, however residents may have to wait for a small amount of time while the heavy vehicle passes during its overnight journey.

Access to your property and driveway will be maintained, with assistance from traffic control staff.

On-street parking will be closed on both sides of Leopold Crescent and Windsor Crescent. Vehicles will need to be parked overnight within your property or in an adjoining street. Any vehicle parked on these 2 streets after 9am, Thursday 13 April may be towed out of the way.

Alternative off-street parking will be available in the project’s Hamilton Street car park.

And getting in the news again – in The Australian of all newspapers!

State agency musters cops against locals

Rachel Baxendale
Victorian political reporter

Victoria’s Level Crossing Removal Authority has resorted to calling police to deal with residents who were found to have committed no crime, in the latest escalation in a series of disputes with locals affected by a large project in Melbourne’s east.

The incident on Thursday evening came as the Andrews government agency continues to refuse to reveal whether the communications manager for the Mont Albert and Surrey Hills level crossing removal still has a job, two months after footage was aired of him heavying local business owners over their ­concerns about the impact of the construction.

Mont Albert resident Greg Langford said Thursday evening’s clash – relating to the lopping of tree branches to allow for the transport of a large, prefabricated building through narrow residential streets – was the latest example of the Level Crossing Removal Project (LXRP) failing to genuinely consult locals and attempting to bully them into submission.

“The LXRP did one of their scant written communications, which really told us nothing,” Mr Langford said.

“A number of residents tried to contact the LXRP and were rebuffed, so we got in touch with (Whitehorse) Council, who sent one of their arborists down.”

Mr Langford said the council arborist had walked through the planned route with him and local progress association president Greg Buchanan on Thursday morning, detailing “every single tree branch” that was to be removed, ahead of the planned lopping of the trees and trans­portation of the building on Thursday night.

“Council were terrific in sharing the information, and the LXRP just stonewalled us,” Mr Langford said.

When it became clear to residents that numerous trees and branches in the heritage-listed oak, elm and plane tree-lined street were to be removed unnecessarily, more than 20 locals gathered on the nature strip on Windsor Crescent, refusing to move unless the LXRP consulted them on which branches to remove.

Mr Langford said residents were told by project communications manager David Fitzgerald – who appears to have replaced former Labor staffer Lance Wilson in the role after the footage of Wilson made headlines – “If you don’t move, I am calling the police and having you arrested.”

“Rather than engaging constructively with us, they called the police, but we knew exactly where the LXRP exclusion zone began and finished and we knew they had no jurisdiction over the nature strip … and ultimately the police decided that we were committing no offences,” Mr Langford said.

“Ultimately what happened was they were forced to trim the trees one by one in front of the big load, otherwise we were going to delay them and it would disrupt their works further.
“Our intent was to minimise the damage and we succeeded in saving 80 to 90 per cent of the branches they had originally proposed to lop.

“The moral of the story is that we support the level crossing removal, but we’re tired of being bullied by the LXRP and their lack of engagement. It just goes to show that when you force them to the table and they’ve got a deadline to meet, you can actually achieve some constructive, positive outcomes.”

An LXRP spokeswoman said: “Our project team transported one of the buildings for the new Union Station to the eastern concourse overnight. Doing this safely while minimising impacts to vegetation was our main priority.

“We expect all our interactions with community members to be respectful, with our staff treating others, and being treated, with respect.”

A Victoria Police spokeswoman confirmed police had attended a dispute in Mont Albert on Thursday.

“Officers were called to reports of a dispute between residents on Windsor Crescent and workers on a railway upgrade project about 9pm,” the spokeswoman said. “Police had presence in the area to allow the work to take place safely and no crime was committed.”

But eventually, the prefabricated module was delivered to the Mont Albert end of the new Union station.

Facing Lorne Parade.

And still bearing the battle scars from it’s failed journey along the tree lined Mont Albert Road.

Footnote: what’s up with The Australian?

For some reason the level crossing removal project at Mont Albert has been a cause célèbre for Victorian political reporter Rachel Baxendale at The Australian, with no less than 10 pieces published between February and May 2023.

13 Feb 2023: More secrecy claims over Andrews’ crossing project

Members of a second Melbourne community have accused the Level Crossing Removal Authority of secrecy, ‘sham’ consultation and a lack of due process.

15 Feb 2023: Manager caught in threats to business

A senior Victorian Level Crossing Removal Project executive and former Labor staffer has been caught on camera threatening the livelihood of small business owners.

16 Feb 2023: Secrecy on threatening rail boss

Victoria’s Level Crossing Removal Authority has refused to say whether one of its executives will be disciplined after being caught on camera bullying small-business owners.

16 Feb 2023: Project staffer caught ‘bullying’ investigated

The Victorian government says it is investigating after a senior Victorian Level Crossing Removal Project executive was caught bullying small business owners in Melbourne’s east.

21 Feb 2023: Barricaded from home by works

Residents in Melbourne’s east are unable to access properties for the next three months, despite receiving written assurances to the contrary from the Level Crossing Removal Authority.

22 Feb 2023: Level crossing secrecy slammed

A 90-year-old woman has accused the Andrews government’s Level Crossing Removal Authority of extreme secrecy and intimidatory behaviour.

28 Feb 2023: ‘No place for violence’: Andrews on alleged headbutt

Emergency services were called to the scene after a level crossing removal contractor allegedly headbutted the man in Melbourne.

28 Feb 2023: Prangs dent faith in level crossing work

Residents near an Andrews government level crossing removal project have ­accused authorities of ducking ­responsibility after their cars were damaged by construction trucks.

14 Apr 2023: State agency calls cops on the locals

Residents say their peaceful protest succeeded in saving 80 to 90 per cent of the tree branches the Andrews government’s level crossing removal agency had planned to lop.

22 May 2023: Level crossing ‘bully’ still has job

After months of refusing to comment on its investigation into the stakeholder relations manager’s conduct, Jacinta Allan has confirmed the former Labor staffer has kept his job.

You’ve gotta love Rupert’s Murdoch’s ‘flagship’ newspaper sending their Victorian political reporter out to cover local neighbourhood disputes in an feeble attempt to dig up a bad news story about Dan Andrews.

Post retrieved by 35.215.163.46 using

The post LXRA’s stuck station building at Mont Albert appeared first on Waking up in Geelong.

Off to Geelong

On Saturday 25 March 2023 I decided to jump on a train from Melbourne down to Geelong, and the trip was mostly uneventful.

Other than a toilet temporarily out of service.

And rock hard seating in what was a ‘short distance’ VLocity carriage.

The first oddity was the ‘No trains departing from platform 1 for the next hour’ message on the next train display at Tarneit station.

Trains to and from Geelong normally run every 40 minutes on the weekend, so that was a confusing sight.

Another odd sight as the large crowd awaiting at North Geelong station, but given their Collingwood and Bulldogs scarves, I assumed it was just a busy day for footy fans headed to the game.

\

But on my arrival at Geelong I saw that wasn’t the only crowd.

The next Melbourne-bound train was about to depart, and it had standees all the way down the train.

It turns out the previous service – the 10:38 Waurn Ponds to- Southern Cross – had been cancelled.

The 10:38 Waurn Ponds – Southern Cross service will not run today

More information at https://t.co/IiZLwHhuoI pic.twitter.com/kDmNHRRuYG

— V/Line Geelong Line (@vline_geelong) March 24, 2023

And thanks to the 40 minute weekend service frequency, two services worth of passengers had to try and board a normally rather full service.

Admittedly V/Line put some effort into moving the passengers left behind – 15 minutes later a coach from usual rail replacement operator Endeavour Coach Company arrived at Geelong station.

But for my trip home, the same inadequate timetable struck again – Geelong station was full of intending passengers.

With the next service to Melbourne being an already full long-distance service from Warrnambool.

This train had standees on leaving Geelong, and at stations along the way the train had long delays as intending passengers tried to find a doorway not already filled with standing passengers.

I hate to see what these services look after the fare cuts!

Spare trains ahoy

The reason V/Line doesn’t run any more services isn’t a lack of trains – on my way past Wyndham Vale all four sidings were filled with VLocity trains awaiting their next run on Monday morning.

There were more VLocity carriages in the sidings next to the turntable at Geelong.

Three complete 6-car trains worth.

Another 6-car train parked beside the train wash.

And two older locomotive hauled trains stabled beside Geelong station.

And these trains aren’t ‘awaiting maintenance’ – the only work that gets done at these sidings is overnight refuelling and toilet decanting.

The big shed outside Southern Cross Station is the main maintenance facility.

Alongside the Alstom facility at Ballarat East.

The blame lies at the feet of the State Government.

They’ve allocated $207 million over four years to increase the frequency of weekend services in regional Victoria – but the changes won’t occur until July 2024 for the Geelong line, and July 2025 for the rest of the network.

Just a little late!

Footnote: getting pedantic

Trains might be sitting empty in sidings, but if you decided to utilise them more intensively, then maintenance requirements also increase – something that Connex struggled to do in 2009 on the Melbourne suburban network – and which V/Line ignored following the opening of Regional Rail Link in 2015, which resulted in the mass withdrawal of the VLocity train fleet with wheel wear issues.

Post retrieved by 35.215.163.46 using

The post Weekend overcrowding on the Geelong line appeared first on Waking up in Geelong.

The scope

The Melbourne Airport Rail Link project has been divided up into three regions.

With the work to be tendered out as six ‘work packages’.

Which include:

Airport Station Package

The Airport Station package will be responsible for the following scope:

• construction of the new Airport Station including operational control systems (OCS);
• construction of a new 1.5km track pair from the new Airport Station to Mercer Drive;
• overhead wiring system and structures;
• land clearing and minor civil works for traction power substations and Digital Train Radio System (DTRS) Towers;
• Combined Services Route (CSR);
• utility services relocations;
• civil structures; and
• roadworks.

Viaduct Package

The Viaduct package will be responsible for the following scope:

• construction of approximately 5km of twin track viaduct commencing at Mercer Drive and continuing above the median strip of Airport Drive towards Steele Creek North and across the Western Ring Road;
• overhead wiring system, wiring and structures;
• land clearing and minor civil works for traction power substations and DTRS Towers;
• CSR;
• utility services relocations;
• civil structures and grade separations; and
• roadworks.

Corridor Package

The Corridor package will be responsible for the following scope:

• construction of approximately 6km of new track and associated civil works;
• overhead wiring system, wiring and structures;
• land clearing and minor civil works for traction power substations and DTRS Towers;
• CSR;
• utility services relocation;
• modifications to Australian Rail Track Corporation (ARTC) tracks and supporting infrastructure including ARTC signalling works;
• shared user path works; and
• modifications to existing road bridges spanning the rail corridor.

Maribyrnong River Bridge Package

The Maribyrnong River Bridge package will be responsible for the following scope:
• construction of a new elevated twin track rail crossing to the West of the existing Albion Viaduct; and
• associated earthworks, drainage, lineside fencing and maintenance access.

RPV note that the Maribyrnong River Bridge package may ultimately be delivered as part of the Corridor package rather than as a standalone works package.

Rail Systems Package

The Rail Systems package will be responsible for the following scope:

• High Capacity Signalling (HCS);
• Automatic Train Supervision (ATS) system;
• Traction Power System (TPS) including:
– intake substation;
– new traction power substations and 22kV AC reticulation systems;
– 3.3kV Essential Services Distribution System (ESDS) Cable pulling, jointing and any required field equipment;
• Rail Control Systems;
• Communications Systems;
– Fibre optic network;
– Digital Train Radio System; and
• Systems integration and assurance.

And the controversial part

And the most complicated and controversial one – the Sunshine/Albion Package. The state government released the details of this work package back in March 2021 – an ‘exclusive’ media drop made to the Herald Sun by the State Government in return for not asking any difficult questions.

The headline feature – a rail-over-road-over-rail bridge at Albion station.

The rest of the work including.

Sunshine/Albion Package
The SAP Works primarily comprise of works in and around Sunshine Station, extending to the southern end of Albion-Jacana corridor. Key scope will include:

• modifications to the Anderson Road rail underbridge to accommodate the new Melbourne Airport Rail lines and the adjusted positions of the existing lines;
• construction of a new elevated viaduct for the Melbourne Airport Rail lines to span over Ballarat Road bridge, St Albans Road bridge and the Stony Creek;
• Overhead Line Equipment (OHLE) works between Sunshine Station and the Albion-Jacana corridor, crossing Ballarat Road, the Sunbury rail corridor, St Albans Road and Stony Creek;
• upgrades to Sunshine Station, including platform and car park modifications and the construction of a new concourse;
• upgrades to Albion Station car parks and forecourts;
• Shared User Path (SUP) works to connect the Principal Bicycle Network and the Strategic Cycling Corridor;
• relocation and implementation of rail systems;
• modifications to existing substations;
• diversion, relocation and protection of existing utilities and underground services;
• signalling, including relocatable equipment buildings (REB), signalling HT locations, axle counters in the Sunshine/Albion area; and
• CSR works in the Sunshine / Albion area and on the new Melbourne Airport Rail lines to the Corridor package interface.

Resulting in a tangle of new track between Sunshine and Albion.

To be delivered in three parts.

• Final Sunbury and Bendigo Commissioning Works – all track works, signalling works, substations and OHLE in relation to the Sunbury and Bendigo lines and all station works at Sunshine Station;
• MAR Spur Works – all works relating to the new Melbourne Airport Rail lines contained within the SAP scope; and
• Balance of SAP Works – the balance of works contained within the SAP scope.

Locals up in arms

Brimbank City Council had big plans for a ‘super hub’ at Sunshine and a rebuilt Albion railway station.

Their plans made public back in February 2021.

The Sunshine Super Hub and Albion Station precinct is a landmark project that is set to reinvent Brimbank as a thriving economic centre.

The council is hoping the hub will help unlock Brimbank’s investment, development and employment potential.

In preliminary designs for the hub, included in a document presented to last week’s council meeting, the council highlighted two possible scenarios for the future of Sunshine and Albion stations.

– The first scenario will result in both Sunshine and Albion stations being upgraded as dual ‘existing’ stations, with Albion station to move to the north.

– The second scenario involves moving Sunshine station to the north and into the new super hub.

Mayor Ranka Rasic confirmed the council had undertaken preliminary design work on the project.

“These options are indicative and exploratory only and further work is needed on the state-led project to determine the best outcome for our community and the western region.

“The Sunshine Super Hub and Albion Station upgrades could create Sunshine and Brimbank as the economic powerhouse of Melbourne’s west.”

The council has also commissioned art impressions to highlight the enormous transformation potential that could be delivered as part of this major infrastructure project.

Cr Rasic said the council will be discussing these preliminary options with the government.

So the announcement of the rail-over-road-over-rail bridge didn’t go down well.

The locals disappointed with the reduced scope of the project.

The proposed concept plans for the Melbourne Airport Rail Link will drive a “lethal stake through the heart of Sunshine,” according to a local advocacy group

The Greater Sunshine Community Alliance’s convener Stephen Torsi said the group was concerned by the plans which were released last month by the state and federal governments.

The plans include a new bridge over the Maribyrnong River and elevated twin tracks between Sunshine and the Albion Junction.

There was no mention in of the Sunshine Super Transport Hub in the plans.

Mr Torsi said community members were concerned by the information that had been released so far.

He said the alliance was concerned about two issues in particular: the omission of the Sunshine Super Transport Hub and the skyrail between Sunshine and Albion Junction.

As reported by Star Weekly, Brimbank council has raised also concerns that the hub has been overlooked.

“The fact that it looks like the superb hub has been downgraded is a massive blow as a community,” he said.

“We’re keen to work with developers and all the stakeholders and push back on something that looks like it will be second rate.

“We want to make sure we get the best for Sunshine, we don’t want just another track that divides the city.”

Mr Torsi said the proposed elevated tracks from Sunshine to Albion Junction would split Sunshine.

“They split Sunshine in two in the 60s due to bad planning and this goes further in splitting the city,” he said.

“It drives a lethal stake through the heart of Sunshine. We will fight hard on this, Imagine the uproar if this was Toorak.

So what is Albion station like anyway?

The disused railway substation and John Darling & Son Flour Mill form a distinctive industrial backdrop to the area.

But the pebblecrete station building has all the charm of a public toilet block.

Seedy at dusk.

And more so at night time.

Sections of the platform are made of timber.

Which is rotten away.

And the concrete Ballarat Road bridge is crumbling.

And the wider area

A non-DDA compliant ramp is the only access to Albion station.

Connecting to a dank pedestrian subway.

Car parking dominates the entire area.

The Ballarat Road bridge overshadows the Albion side of the station.

Making the car park feel even seedier than they usually are.

Go for a walk down the west side of the tracks, and you’ll find a cyclone fence with rusty barbed wire at neck height.

Or head towards Sunshine North via St Albans Road, where you’ll find a narrow foothpath squeezed beside cars.

Keep going, and you’ll find a second bridge over the Albion-Jacana railway.

Squeeze between the road and the fence.

Hopefully you don’t need to pass someone coming in the other directions.

Or get crushed into the steel guard rail by a wayward motorist.

So I’m not exactly surprised that a rail-over-road-over-rail solution was chosen for Albion – a penny pinching State Government doesn’t want to spend money on fixing the problems of the west, so they’re just throwing a new bridge over it all, so the rest of Melbourne doesn’t have to look at it.

Update – Albion isn’t completely forgotten

Turns out an upgrade to the shared use path between Albion and Sunshine North is in scope.

Designing and undertaking all works for the SUP between the Albion eastern car park and Gilmore Road including:

• SUP along the east side of the eastern Albion Station carpark; and
• SUP connection along St Albans Road under the Ballarat Road underpass and a new stand-alone bridge over the Albion-Jacana corridor.

As is ‘public realm’ improvements to the area:

• the architectural gateway feature including public artwork or creative design treatments associated with the viaduct near Ballarat Road;
• boulevard landscaping treatment to Ballarat Road between Anderson Road and Adelaide Street;
• public realm, shared use zone, public artwork and creative design treatments between rail corridor and John Darling Flour Mill site;
• landscape treatments to Talmage Street;
• establishment of forecourt area, including street furniture, from Albion Station eastern entry to pedestrian underpass;
• landscape upgrade works to existing Albion Station car park on eastern side of rail corridor; and
• temporary creative works to ameliorate construction-phase impacts including creative hoarding treatments, pop-up parklets, street furniture or other pedestrian infrastructure, lighting, programmable spaces, and creative wayfinding.

So at least Albion station is getting something other than a new row of concrete pylons.

Post retrieved by 35.215.163.46 using

The post Melbourne Airport Rail Link – finally some detail appeared first on Waking up in Geelong.

Construction

Design work kicked off in 2017, with a mockup train built for stakeholder consultation, and put on public display in February 2018.

By July 2018 body shells manufactured in China had arrived in Melbourne for final fitout.

With the first completed HCMT train rolled out in October 2018 ready for a political photo op.

In November 2018 this train was transferred from the Downer factory at Newport to the HCMT depot at Pakenham East.

The transfer was made in the dead of night, the untested train towed by diesel locomotives and treated as an unbraked vehicle, with extra wagons added to provide braking effort, and no trains allowed to pass on the parallel tracks.

By October 2019 initial testing at Pakenham East has proven the braking performance, with set 7 allowed to be transferred as a braked vehicle while other trains were still running.

The depot soon started to fill with new trains.

Testing

November 2019 saw the first HCMT run on the Pakenham line under it’s own power.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zQXfT9sIv5U
Video by Railways Of Doom – I didn’t make the trip out east to see the tests

With the government deciding to cancel normal services to enable the testing program to be sped up.

Evening services on parts of the busy Pakenham line have been cancelled for much of this week, as officials race to get Melbourne’s new high capacity trains on the track.

The $2.3 billion program is running months behind schedule, with the first of the new trains only recently allowed to leave the Pakenham East depot under its own power.

The train is required to complete 10,000 kilometres of testing on the suburban network, before being accepted into the Metro fleet.

But the government’s contract with builder Evolution Rail requires the first 2,500 kilometres of tests be undertaken between the last service of the day, and the first service the following day.

That’s prompted PTV to cancel services between Dandenong and Pakenham from just after 8pm each evening this week to maximise the test window.

In January 2020 the test program expanded to the Werribee line, where high speed brake testing was carried out.

And in March 2020 a HCMT set was transferred to Upper Ferntree Gully, so that the brakes could be tested on the steep grades of the Belgrave line.

COVID-19 delays

COVID-19 hit Melbourne during 2020, everyone needing to keep their distance.

And wearing face masks.

HCMT set 3 passes through Windsor on the down, with another trip to Elsternwick

Staff working on the HCMT test program were not exempt – a maximum of two people allowed in the cab.

More testing

June 2020 was another milestone, as the HCMT fleet was cleared to run alongside normal passenger services.

Transfers between Newport and Pakenham East also being carried out by day.

But disruptions to normal services were still needed to enable additional testing – night time on the Pakenham line.

Buses replaced trains on the Pakenham line between Pakenham and Dandenong from Friday 3 July until Sunday 5 July to allow for the checks to take place.

The new trains are tested in real-world conditions, including stopping at stations, responding to signals and undergoing speed tests.

They had been running in-between passenger services where possible, but the weekend’s tests required repeated stopping and braking which is not possible during passenger services.

And from mid-afternoon on the Werribee line.

Buses will replace trains between Newport and Werribee stations from 2.45pm to the last service each day from Monday 24 August to Sunday 13 September to enable important safety and performance testing for Melbourne’s new High Capacity Metro Trains.

In September 2020 the first HCMT was tested on the Sunbury line – initially under the cover of darkness, but then between normal passenger services.

While the rest of the Melbourne was tucked away in bed, High Capacity Metro Trains were also sent to unexpected places like Kensington, to prove that the new trains were compatible with legacy infrastructure on the rest of the network.

These tests were expanded in December 2020 to daylight runs between normal services, showing that a passenger carrying HCMT misrouted from the usual Pakenham and Cranbourne lines could safley unload passengers.

Flemington Racecourse to the north.

Burnley in the east.

And Elsternwick on the Sandringham line.

And into service

Back in February 2019 the Evolution Rail consortium was promoting a “mid-2019” date for the first HCMT operational on the Cranbourne and Pakenham lines.

By February 2020 the date had been changed to “mid-2020” but after they failed to meet that target, the dates were dropped altogether – entry to service “following completion of comprehensive testing program”.

September 2020 saw a new entry to service date appear – the upcoming December 2020 timetable change, but thanks to delays to the Ballarat Line Upgrade project, the timetable change was bumped to January 2021.

But 2020 is full of surprises, and this was no different – on December 27 HCMT set 11 emerged from Pakenham East to beat the end of 2020 and run an inaugural passenger service, making a single trip to Flinders Street Station and return.

The day was low key, with no special ceremonies to mark the occasion – and little media attention.

Two years late, the first of Melbourne’s $2.3 billion fleet of new high capacity @metrotrains has taken its first fare paying passengers. Pictures @9NewsMelb pic.twitter.com/hf9yJbKBtr

— Andrew Lund (@andrew_lund) December 27, 2020

A gaggle of railfans who found out that the train was running forming the bulk of the passengers.

My main take away – useless doors!

Went for a ride on the new High Capacity Metro Train and my main takeaway is the doors – nobody seemed to be able to open them at stations.

— Marcus Wong (@aussiewongm) December 26, 2020

The new timetable starts on Sunday 31 January 2021. Will we have to wait until then to ride a HCMT train, or will more one-off services run – I don’t know.

A technology related footnote

Goodbye to old fashioned keys – an electronic lock gives access to the cab.

The rollout of the HCMT fleet has also seen something new added between the rails on the approach to each station – these yellow bars.

Part of the Correct Side Door Enable (CSDE) and Selective Door Operation (SDO) systems fitted to the HCMT fleet, these ‘TrackLink III’ beacons tell the onboard computer which side the platform is on, and how many doors to open.

And onboard is a new feature for Melbourne trains – fire doors.

Which will automatically close in an emergency, dividing up the seven car walkthrough train into smoke proof compartments a maximum of two carriages long.

Further reading

Max Thum also rode the first public HCMT service – here is his review of the passenger experience.

Post retrieved by 35.215.163.46 using

The post High Capacity Metro Trains finally taking passengers appeared first on Waking up in Geelong.

Some background

Level crossing removal projects in Melbourne can be classified into two groups – “online” and “offline”.

Offline projects cause the least inconvenience to rail users – a new railway line and station is built beside the existing tracks while trains continue running, with the only disruption being the week or so it takes to disconnect the old tracks and hook in the new ones.

Examples of off line projects include Boronia Road at Boronia station, Springvale Road at Nunawading station, and Burke Road at Gardiner station.

However in areas where there is no spare land inside the railway corridor, offline construction is not possible, forcing the new tracks to be constructed on the same alignment as the existing, requiring the shut down of rail services while the works take place.

Examples of online projects include the Middlebrough Road level crossing at Laburnum station, the Rooks Road level crossing at Mitcham, and the Ormond, McKinnon and Bentleigh trio on the Frankston line.

So what about St Albans and Ginifer?

The grade separations at Furlong Road and Main Road are being built offline, thanks to the abundance of land adjoining the existing Sunbury line corridor.

The first stage of works was the relocation of signalling cables, so that excavation of the new tracks would not affect rail services.

Land was cleared beside the existing railway stations, so that the new low level stations could be built.

At separate times Main Road and Furlong Road were closed to road traffic.

These shutdowns allowed concrete bridges to be constructed over the future railway.

To reduce the amount of time road traffic was disrupted, just enough of the bridge foundations and deck were constructed to span the gap – allowing the rest of the rail cutting to be excavated as time permitted.

Piling works commenced to construct the future cutting walls.

Then the excavators moved in to create the rail cuttings.

With none of this affecting passing trains.

Work also started to fit out the new stations – with station buildings, platform, lamp posts, staircases and lift wells all being put into place.

As the four week long shutdown of the Sunbury line from October 4 was fast approaching, and a limited amount of time available to complete the works while trains are not running, one would assume that any task that could be completed while trains are still running would have been completed. But the reality looks different.

This was Ginifer station on September 29 while trains were still running – the new level station was just a bare concrete shell, with no tracks to be seen.

And here is the view north of Main Road at St Albans – an empty rail cutting, with no progress on the new tracks, signalling equipment, or overhead structures.

Maybe taking the trains away would mean work can speed up? Revisiting the Main Road overbridge on October 16, two weeks into the shutdown, suggests otherwise – the only change to the scene is the removal of the old tracks, and the addition of overhead structures.

So why was a four week shutdown of trains required at St Albans, when other projects required far shorter periods of time?

Some theories

My first theory was the size of the works – despite being a single project, the grade separation through St Albans requires four connections to the existing railway tracks – thanks to the rollercoaster trench alignment through Ginifer and St Albans stations. However this theory is easier to discount – each tie in could be constructed in parallel, assuming the availability of enough equipment and workers.

Another theory was the availability of railway signalling engineers. With multiple level crossing removal projects underway in Melbourne at the same time and a critical shortage of engineers in Victoria, perhaps the only way to find staff available to work on the Furlong Main project was to timetable it over a longer period?

Ground conditions are another variable. Melbourne’s west lies on a bed of basalt all the way down, which unlike the sand found under the recent Frankston line works, need to be slowly broken up before it can be hauled out of the rail cutting.

The presence of rare native plants along the railway reserve is another possible factor. Native grasslands are found at Ginifer and St Albans, occupying land that could otherwise be used as part of an offline grade separation, as well as restricting easy access to the tracks during construction works.

And the final wild card is politicians, as this media release from the Minister for Public Transport dated October 2016 shows.

St Albans Level Crossings Gone By The End Of The Year

The two dangerous and congested level crossings in St Albans that the Andrews Labor Government is removing will be gone by the end of the year – more than six months earlier than promised.

Minister for Public Transport Jacinta Allan announced that the construction blitz beginning today will see the crossings at Main and Furlong Road removed well ahead of schedule.

Maybe the trains have been taken away so that the project can be finished sooner, so that the politician’s level crossing removal tally can keep on ticking along?

The official word

I ended up emailing the Level Crossing Removal Authority as to why a four week shutdown of trains was required for the Furlong Main works when projects such as Bourke Road did it much quicker, and this was their answer:

The Burke Road level crossing removal was similar to what we are doing out in St Albans with constructing the new railway corridor next to the existing however the ground conditions are very different.

In St Albans we have a lot of basalt rock which is very hard to break. These ground conditions are also where we are connecting the existing track with the new lowered railway line and are longer than Burke Road.

This means we need to excavate at four separate locations where we are tying in along with some temporary walls closest to the existing railway line and all during October.

We are also removing the two existing stations which are right next to the new railway corridor. For safety reasons we could not have trains running whilst we undertake these works.

The project in St Albans also has quite a few areas which are environmentally protected therefore there is limited access in and around where we are constructing the new lowered railway corridor.

Difficult ground conditions? Check!

Working around grasslands reserves? Check!

The long connections between the new and old tracks were something I’d missed, but as you can see in my photo taken north of St Albans halfway through the shutdown, the scale of the work is apparent.

But the proximity of the running lines to the new stations is a little trickier to see, such as this view behind the old Ginifer station.

However the Level Crossing Removal Authority’s Facebook page takes a closer look, such as this view of the temporary wall that was required to separate the original upper level tracks from the new low level platforms at Ginifer station.

Temporary walls also look to have been used on the eastern side of the new St Albans station.

So where does the truth lie?

In reality I think the truth lies somewhere in the middle – there are plenty of good reasons why the works at St Albans are taking longer than other similar looking projects in Melbourne, but there is evidence to suggest a shorter disruption to rail service could have been possible if more preparatory work was completed before the main shutdown.

Post retrieved by 35.215.163.46 using

The post Four week Sunbury shutdown for Furlong Main appeared first on Waking up in Geelong.

Some background

Here is the original article from The Age:

Southern Cross would be dramatically overhauled under a $300 million plan to cope with an unprecedented surge in patronage that is threatening the station’s ability to function.

Barely 10 years after the station formerly known as Spencer Street was rebuilt, Fairfax Media can reveal Southern Cross is now struggling to deal with passenger numbers.

Growth has been so acute the station could soon rival Melbourne Airport as one of the state’s busiest transport hubs, with long queues to access overloaded platforms and an overburdened coach terminal.

As a result, the station’s owner, AssetCo, a subsidiary of industry superannuation behemoth IFM, has lodged an unsolicited bid proposal believed to be worth about $300 million that includes a new elevated bridge running down the middle of the station to provide extra access to its 16 platforms.

But the story really starts in February 2000, when the Steve Bracks led Labour Government announced a redevelopment of what was then called Spencer Street Station. It was decided that the project would be completed as part of a Public Private Partnership – with the government to determine the scope of the project, then pay a private company to build and operate the new station for 30 years, after which the asset would revert to the state.

The winning private operator was Civic Nexus – a consortium of ABN Amro Australia, Leighton Contractors, Honeywell and Delaware North Australia. The contract with the government was signed in July 2002 and construction commenced in October 2002, with management of the completed station building being handed over to the private operator in August 2006.

As you can expect for a public private partnership, reams of paperwork were required to set out the contractual obligations of the two parties. In the case of Southern Cross Station, the expected passenger handling capacity was among the requirements.

The Spencer Street Station Redevelopment Project ‘Annexture I: Project Brief‘ dated July 2002 documented the passenger numbers that the government expected the new station to cater for (my bolding).

3.3.2 Capacity of Facility

In 2000, the State appointed a range of consultants, led by Flagstaff Consulting Group, to prepare the Planning Report to identify current and future transport needs at the Station. Surveys were conducted in November 2000 to measure passenger numbers and movements at the Station.

The Planning Report identifies current operational parameters and existing infrastructure, as well as the consultants’ views on trends for future public transport usage, patronage increases on a fifty year horizon, and the need to provide for new transport modes.

The State’s estimate of the capacity requirement of the Facility in 2050 is a peak hour passenger flow of 30,000. The State is seeking a Facility with the capacity to meet this target figure over the Concession Term. The State will assess designs on the ability to meet this figure.

The project brief also documented the expectations around passenger flows.

6.3.1 Rail Platforms

Entrances and exits to platforms, including vertical circulation elements serving platforms shall be evenly distributed along the platform, and be located such that they minimise the walking distance for alighting passengers, and facilitate an even distribution of passengers moving along the platform.

Exit points from platforms shall be located so that passengers shall not be required to walk more than 60m along the platform length to reach these exits. This requirement only applies to the suburban platforms, and those portions of the country platforms located south of the Bourke Street bridge. Notwithstanding this requirement, entries and exits shall also meet the requirements for travel distance in the case of an emergency.

Clearance rates for platforms are, to a large extent, determined by train scheduling, so that unsafe crowding conditions are avoided. The design of rail platform circulation elements allowing entry and egress to and from platforms shall be of sufficient capacity such that all passengers can be cleared from the platform within a reasonable period of time of the train stopping and allowing disembarkation. For island platforms, the design must cater for two trains arriving simultaneously.

As well as specific figures relating to how long passengers could clear the platform:

6.3.1.1 Suburban

The calculation shall be based upon a minimum of 300 passengers per train clearing the platform within 90 seconds of the train stopping and allowing disembarkation. Should patronage levels increase such that platform clearance times exceed 90 seconds or should the frequency of trains increase, additional circulation elements shall be provided to rectify this situation.

As a guide, and subject to the design proposal, this may equate to a minimum of four escalators, (one running in a counter direction to the other three) and two sets of 2 metre wide stairs, and one lift.

6.3.1.2 Country and Interstate

The calculation shall be based upon a minimum of 150 passengers per train clearing the platform within 120 seconds of the train stopping and allowing disembarkation. Should patronage levels increase such that platform clearance times exceed 120 seconds or should the frequency of trains increase, additional circulation elements shall be provided to rectify this situation.

As a guide, and subject to the design proposal this may equate to a minimum of two escalators, (one running in a counter direction to the other) and two sets of 2 metre wide stairs, and one lift.

And even ticket barriers.

6.4.1 Ticket Barriers

The design of the Facility shall provide for the installation of ticket barriers leading to the suburban platforms, to separate the “paid” from the “unpaid” areas. The Concessionaire will provide all data and power conduiting to the proposed location/s, base supports and any other requirements for the equipment to enable installation by others. The equipment will be provided, installed and maintained by others.

Provision of areas for ticket barriers shall be sufficient to process a minimum peak hour passenger flow of 7500 passengers at Level of Service C, by providing a minimum number of ticket barriers in a single array at least equal to the existing number of barriers (this is currently 10 barriers, including two wide ticket barriers). The design will allow for future installation of additional ticket barriers (by others) to provide for the target peak hour flow.

Consideration shall be given to the impact that the location and arrangement of banks of ticket barriers may have on the total number of ticket barriers required. Individual entry points shall be provided with a minimum number of three ticket barriers, to allow one with bi-directional flow, and two with opposing direction flows at all times. An area sufficient for a minimum of one wide ticket barrier shall be included at every bank of ticket barriers.

Pretty simple metrics – the station had to handle at least 30,000 passengers per hour, with passengers able to exit the platform within 90 seconds of their train stopping.

So how does the government track that the private operator is meeting the requirements, and what happens if the number of passengers grows beyond what the station was designed to handle?

The ‘Southern Cross Station Transport Interchange Facility – Services and Development Agreement‘ dated August 2006 has the gory details – here is a quick summary:

• every year the private operator must complete a traffic survey to determine how many passengers are using the station,
• if station usage reaches 90% of the 30,000 passenger per hour target capacity, the private operator must inform the government of that fact,
• both parties are to decide whether a ‘verification test’ should be completed to confirm if the target capacity has been reached,
• if the verification test shows that the target capacity has been reached, then the private operator is eligible for an increased annual service payment from the government, a variation to various KPIs they are required to meet, or a government funded modification to the station.

So how do these contracts relate to the current congestion at Southern Cross Station?

Since the new station opened

For a start, rail patronage exploded soon after the new Southern Cross Station was completed – as the Victorian Government’s submission to the 2010 Select Committee on Train Services describes.

Melbourne’s train patronage has grown by more than 70 per cent in the last decade, including more than 50 per cent in the past four years, and is at its highest ever level with the number of trips estimated to have exceeded 220 million in the last 12 months.

In the decade before 2005, public transport patronage was typically growing at a rate of 1 per cent – 3 per cent each year. Since 2005, growth has clearly been of a very different order of magnitude and represents a clear break from these trends.

But the government failed to manage this growth, as the Victorian Auditor General wrote in 2012:

The Department of Transport has not successfully dealt with all of the challenges it has faced over the past decade. It was not prepared for strong patronage growth between 2004 and 2009. Satisfaction for all modes of transport has deteriorated since 2002, with metropolitan trains experiencing the greatest decline.

Meanwhile at Southern Cross Station, the earlier article from The Age has the details.

Under the terms of the contract between the state and IFM, once the station hits a capacity trigger point of about 30,000 passengers per peak period, IFM has the right to renegotiate the deal to factor in extra costs linked to overcrowding.

That could cost the state hundreds of millions of dollars extra over the life of the contract.

The station is already believed to be handling around 25 million passenger visits a year, and is approaching 30 million.

So far everything fits the existing contractual arrangements, but there is a new addition that complicates matters – the Victorian Government’s ‘Unsolicited Proposals Guidelines’ released in February 2014. Back to The Age:

Fairfax Media has learned that IFM wants to extend the lease, in return for the meeting the costs to dramatically boost the capacity of the station, including the elevated walkway spanning the length of the station, boosting the size of platforms and overhauling the coach terminal.

In a statement released after questions from Fairfax Media, IFM confirmed it had submitted an unsolicited, “market-led” proposal to the Victorian government to “help meet future passenger and visitor demand”.

So it looks like the private operator doesn’t just want more money out of the government – they are giving the government the option to ‘fix’ the station congestion problem for free, in return for being allowed to suck on the taxpayer teat for longer through an extended lease.

The full story

So what can go wrong – a government using a 2000 planning study to design a railway station expected to last until the year 2050, only for a wave of unprecedented passenger growth to hit two years later, causing a new rail patronage record to be set in Melbourne and leaving the government completely unprepared to respond.

Meanwhile the contractual straightjacket that governs the station prevents any future government from managing this continued growth, while a private company holds all the cards and is going to use them to extract the maximum profit out of the Victorian taxpayer – all of thanks to a political class too afraid to borrow money to build essential infrastructure, thanks to their obsession with delivering budget surpluses and an irrational fear of debt.

Will we see the same problems in future?

The upcoming Melbourne Metro Rail is another Public Private Partnership with the potential to screw over the Victorian taxpayer. From their page on project delivery.

A multi-billion dollar availability based Public Private Partnership (PPP) will include design and construction of the twin nine-kilometre tunnels and five underground stations, private finance and the provision of maintenance and other services during the operating term.

A partnership with the private sector will help to drive innovation, best practice and value for money on the project. In an ‘availability PPP’ the State Government provides regular payments to the private party for making the asset ‘available’ for use. For this package, that will mean making the tunnel and stations available for public transport operations and Victorians to use.

For a start, the costs of funding a project this way are excessive. From The Age:

Infrastructure expert Chris Hale said availability payments were extremely expensive for governments in the long-term.

“Availability payments are the most expensive model of funding model there is, it’s not possible to find any other model that is going to cost the taxpayer more than an availability-based model in the long run,” Dr Hale said.

But these complicated contractual arrangements also open the door for the same risks we are seeing at Southern Cross Station – future patronage growth may trigger similar clauses in the Melbourne Metro contract, again putting the government on the hook for increased payments to the private operator.

Elsewhere in Melbourne

When the government has more control over rail infrastructure dealing with growth is much easier – an particularly interesting example is the second entrance to Prahan station, which was only built because a candidate promised it during the 2014 state election campaign.

Footnote

Earlier I summarised how the ‘Southern Cross Station Transport Interchange Facility – Services and Development Agreement‘ (dated August 2006) deals with the station reaching target capacity – here is the exact details.

27. Target Capacity

27.1 Annual Monitoring and Reporting

At least once each Financial Year during the Contract Term, the Concessionaire must:

(a) carry out a survey which reports the Hourly Passenger Flow in peak periods for a minimum of four time intervals, which intervals:
(i) are nominated by the Concessionaire;
(ii) are each of one hour’s duration;
(iii) are all during any continuous 30 day period; and
(iv) do not coincide (in whole or in part) with any Special Events which directly affect Southern Cross Station,
(the Passenger and User Survey); and

(b) provide to the SCSA a written report of the details and results of each Passenger and User Survey within 10 Business Days after carrying out such survey.

27.2 Usage Close to Target Capacity

If, at any time during the Contract Term, the Concessionaire is of the reasonable opinion that the Hourly Passenger Flow in peak periods would, if subject to a Verification Test, be no less than 90% of the Target Capacity, then:

(a) the Concessionaire must notify the SCSA in writing of that opinion (including the reasons and evidence justifying such opinion); and

(b) within 10 Business Days after the SCSA receives such notice, the Concessionaire and the SCSA must consult with respect to:
(i) if and when the parties reasonably consider that Hourly Passenger Flow in peak periods will or is likely to exceed the Target Capacity;
(ii) the SCSA’s preliminary view on the timing and manner (if any) in which it intends to address the matter in paragraph (i); and
(iii) each party’s view on the most appropriate methodology for conducting a Verification Test.

27.3 Verification Testing

(a) Subject to Clause 27.2 being complied with, if the Concessionaire is of the reasonable opinion that the Hourly Passenger Flow in peak periods has reached, or is about to reach in the immediate future, the Target Capacity, the Concessionaire may request in writing to the SCSA that a Verification Test be conducted by the SCSA, which request must:
(i) nominate a minimum of four, and a maximum of eight, time intervals, which intervals:
(A) are each of one hour’s duration;
(B) are all during any continuous 30 day period; and
(C) do not coincide (in whole or in part) with any Special Events which directly affect Southern Cross Station; and
(ii) have the first nominated interval being no less than one month after the Concessionaire’s request, (the Concessionaire’s Request).

(b) Following receipt of a Concessionaire’s Request, the SCSA must arrange for, and record, a test to verify the Hourly Passenger Flow in peak periods (Verification Test), to be conducted:
(i) in accordance with the applicable Concessionaire’s Request; and
(ii) using methods and measures determined by the SCSA, in its discretion, having regard to the Concessionaire’s views as provided in accordance with Clause 27.2(b)(iii).

(c) The Usage determined in respect of a Verification Test will be the mean of the four highest levels of Hourly Passenger Flow in peak periods recorded by that Verification Test, as notified to the Concessionaire by the SCSA within 10 Business Days after the Verification Test is conducted.

(d) The Concessionaire must pay for, and indemnify the SCSA against, the cost and expense incurred by the SCSA in conducting a Verification Test.

27.4 Usage Exceeding Target Capacity

If the SCSA’s notification under Clause 27.3(c) specifies a level of Usage that exceeds the Target Capacity then:

(a) within 10 Business Days after the Concessionaire receives such notice, the Concessionaire and the SCSA must consult with respect to the SCSA’s views:
(i) on compensating the Concessionaire by an agreed adjustment to the Core Services Payment over the balance of the Contract Term or an agreed one off payment to the Concessionaire (or failing agreement, in either case, as reasonably determined by the SCSA); or
(ii) on implementing a Service Standard Modification;
(iii) on implementing a Modification; or
(iv) on implementing any combination of (i), (ii) and (iii), if and to the extent required to overcome, or mitigate, the direct effects of Hourly Passenger Flow in peak periods (other than during, in whole or in part, Special
Events which directly affect Southern Cross Station) exceeding the Target Capacity over the balance of the Contract Term;

(b) following the consultation required pursuant to Clause 27.4(a), the SCSA must submit to the Concessionaire its proposal in accordance with this Agreement in respect of the matters described in Clause 27.4(a)(i), Clause 27.4(a)(ii), Clause 27.4(a)(iii) or Clause 27.4(a)(iv), as applicable; and

(c) to the extent that the Concessionaire is unable to provide the Services to the Services Standards as a direct result of Hourly Passenger Flow in peak periods (other than during, in whole or in part, Special Events which directly affect Southern Cross Station) at the Interchange Facility exceeding the Target Capacity, the Concessionaire’s performance of the Services to the Services Standards will, to that extent, be suspended from the date of the notification under Clause 27.3(c) until the earlier of:
(i) the Concessionaire’s performance of the applicable Services to the Services Standards ceasing to be so affected; or
(ii) the implementation of the SCSA’s proposal under Clause 27.4(b).

Clear as mud?

Post retrieved by 35.215.163.46 using

The post Why is Southern Cross Station at capacity? appeared first on Waking up in Geelong.

Some background

Cardinia Road is a north-south thoroughfare on the western edge of Pakenham, connecting the Princes Highway and crossing the double tracked Pakenham railway line.

Once a two lane country road that served the rural community of Cardinia, in the past decade suburban sprawl has caught up with the paddocks either side of Cardinia Road, driven by the opening of the Pakenham Bypass and associated freeway interchange in 2007.

Public transport was forced to play catch up, with Cardinia Road station being opened to passengers in 2012.

Surrounded by car dependant suburbs, the two lanes of Cardinia Road have been unable to cope with the flood of new residents.

As a result, VicRoads commenced the Cardinia Road duplication project back in 2010.

Cardinia Road is being duplicated to two lanes of traffic in each direction from Princes Highway to Pakenham Bypass. The upgrades include road widening, a new shared use path and a new pedestrian crossing.

This road is an important north south route for the local community. These works will support growing traffic needs and improve safety and access along the route.

We’re ready to start on the final section of duplication on Cardinia Road, from Shearwater Drive to the Pakenham Bypass. Construction will begin in March 2016 on the remaining upgrades for an estimated six months.

The final stage now underway, with the new carriageway taking shape.

But one hand of government has not talked to the other, as VicRoads has decided that duplicating the existing level crossing is an acceptable outcome.

VicRoads claims grade separating the level crossing isn’t their problem, and use weasel words to justify their decision:

The Cardinia Road upgrade will include duplication of the road at the level crossing, and rail signal upgrades.

The removal of the level crossing on Cardinia Road is not included in the scope of this upgrade, however our works will not prevent grade separation of the level crossing taking place in the future. The upgrade will provide immediate and significant benefits for those who use and live near Cardinia Road, including improved traffic flow and travel times.

As part of the Cardinia Road upgrade, the rail signals will be improved to assist in reducing boom gate down time.

Quite a cop out from VicRoads, given the current government focus on removing level crossings.

What about other road projects?

Many previous VicRoads road duplication projects that have resulted in level crossings being grade separated.

Narre Warren – Cranbourne Road at Narre Warren on the Pakenham line is one – in conjunction with duplication of the road, a new underline bridge was jacked into place over a single weekend in 2004.

But a simpler solution is the staged construction of a road over rail bridge. The first example that comes to mind is Somerton Road at the Craigieburn railway line – duplicated and grade separated in 2007.

And another is Kororoit Creek Road on the ‘express’ route to Werribee, duplicated and grade separated in 2011.

Road over rail projects are simple due to the way that the work can be staged:

• Step 1: build a two lane bridge beside the existing level crossing,
• Step 2: transfer traffic to new bridge, close level crossing,
• Step 3: build second two lane bridge on site of level crossing,
• Step 4: transfer traffic onto the new pair of bridges.

Far simpler to build a bridge now, than to rip up Cardinia Road in a few years time, don’t you think?

Meanwhile on the Cranbourne line

Another active road duplication project is Thompsons Road in Cranbourne – VicRoads have this to say on the scope of work:

Thompsons Road is an essential freight and transport route that carries around 26,000 vehicles each day, extending from Mornington Peninsula Freeway, in Patterson Lakes, to Berwick-Cranbourne Road in Clyde North. With this number set to increase, the Victorian Government is going to add two lanes in for 10.7km to improve the connectivity for those who live and work in the region.

This project also happens to involve a level crossing – but this time the message from VicRoads is different.

We found that road over rail is the most appropriate solution for removing the level crossing due to the groundwater challenges in this area. Although the bridge design is yet to be finalised, it is likely to consist of two separate structures, both will feature three traffic lanes and a shared use path. This allows the bridge to be constructed in two stages, minimising disruption to road and rail users during the works.

A curious decision from VicRoads – a road crossing the single track railway to Cranbourne warrants grade separation right now, while a road crossing the double tracked railway to Gippsland doesn’t.

Post retrieved by 35.215.163.46 using

The post Cardinia Road’s new level crossing appeared first on Waking up in Geelong.

Some background

The backstory is long and complicated but I’m going to start in November 2010, when politicians turned the first sod on the project.

Work on the access road to the new station was well underway a few months later.

But with a change of government work stopped, with that road being the only work completed.

Fast forward to 2013, and Regional Rail Link was now the big project in Melbourne’s west. New tracks needed to be built from the Ballarat line at Deer Park to the Geelong line at West Werribee, and these passed to the south of the Caroline Springs station site.

These new tracks severed Riding Boundary Road, cutting off access to the Boral Quarry at Deer Park, so the decision was made to extend Christies Road south from the Western Freeway interchange into the quarry.

A new bridge over the Ballarat railway line was required.

But the task was made easier thanks to the work already done on the access road to Caroline Springs station.

The design was a little odd – concrete retaining walls were used on the approach embankments from both sides.

But work wrapped up quickly, with the Christies Road extension opening to traffic on 16 April 2014.

A good outcome – at least at first glance.

Back to the station

Meanwhile back at Caroline Springs, in November 2014 V/Line invited tenders for the construction of the railway station, with BMD Construction being awarded the contract to build the station in June 2015.

By August 2015 earthworks on the station site were well underway, with piling rigs at work sinking foundations for the station platform.

But for road vehicles, there was no way in – the brand new Christies Road extension made no provision for access to the future station car park, despite the road having originally been built as the “Caroline Springs railway station access road”.

As a result the 18-month old roadway had to be dug up.

The shared path along the eastern side of Christies Road was removed to make room for an additional road lane.

And the western side of the embankment had to be widened, to allow the car park driveway to reach the correct level.

By February 2016 the renovations to Christies Road had been completed, finally providing access to the new railway station car park.

But anyone not in a car is treated as a second class citizen – a narrow path is the only way to access Caroline Springs station on foot.

And thanks to the incomplete shared path, cyclists are forced to share Christies Road with trucks accessing the nearby Boral Quarry.

A road built to serve a railway station became co-opted by another project, just to be altered in such a way that made it useless for the original propose – the lack of planning seen at Caroline Springs is outrageous.

Footnote

The new station at Caroline Springs will have 350 car parking spaces, a secure bike cage, drop-off zones, bus bays and a taxi rank.

With Melbourne’s tradition of piss-poor bus to train connections, incomplete off-road cycle paths, and a narrow footpath leading to the suburb of Caroline Springs, I’m not sure how anyone is supposed to access this new station.

Post retrieved by 35.215.163.46 using

The post The forgotten road to Caroline Springs station appeared first on Waking up in Geelong.

Some background

The St Albans area has a long history of level crossing fatalities.

In 2004 three people died at the Furlong Road level crossing when their car was struck by a train, in 2011 a pedestrian was killed by a train at Ginifer station after running through a closed level crossing, and since 2006 St Albans station has seen two fatalities and 39 near misses involving pedestrians.

So how many level crossings are in the area?

Starting at the Melbourne end we have Furlong Road – four lanes of traffic protected by boom gates, and a pedestrian crossing on the north side protected by automated gates.

At the Melbourne end of Ginifer station is another pedestrian crossing, protected by automated gates.

Next up is Ginifer station.

Between Ginifer and St Albans stations we have the Willis Street pedestrian crossing – it lacks warning devices or pedestrian gates.

We now arrive at St Albans station.

Main Road at St Albans has four lanes of traffic protected by boom gates, and a pedestrian crossing on both sides, each protected by automated gates.

And finally, the Ruth Street pedestrian crossing at the north end of St Albans, protected by automated gates.

History of the project

With such a considerable history of fatalities around St Albans, removing the Main Road level crossing has long been a political football. In February 2013 the Federal and Victorian Governments argued over who should fund the works:

The Federal Transport and Infrastructure Minister, Anthony Albanese, and Maribyrnong MP Bill Shorten today visited the St Albans site.

“We’ve got a level crossing that is notorious,” Mr Shorten said.

“People have been killed, it’s been a neglected issue for decades.”

Mr Shorten says 16 people have been killed at the level crossing in the last few decades.

“The St Albans level crossing should’ve been fixed 20, 30 years ago,” he said.

“We’re still here, forced to watch people almost engaging in Russian roulette.

“The message is very clear, now’s the time for bipartisan, now’s the time for something as important as life and death, to put the State versus Federal Government aside, and fix the most dangerous level crossing in Victoria.”

In April 2014 the two levels of government finally came to an agreement to remove the Main Road crossing.

On Sunday morning, Premier Denis Napthine said the Coalition would remove the Main Road crossing in St Albans after allocating $200 million for the overhaul, $151 million of which will be provided the by the Federal Government, and the rest from the state with savings generated from the Regional Rail Link project.

At the time Transport Minister Terry Mulder said that a rail under road solution was the best option.

“There were a couple options to consider, and one was to put rail over road, and which would have had a significant impact on the community in this area.

“But the community asked for rail under road, the state architect suggested rail under road, and that is a far better outcome for those who live in St Albans.”

The November 2014 state election saw a Daniel Andrews led Labor party win government, with their commitment to remove 50 level crossings around Melbourne.

Construction started soon after at Main Road, but March 2015 saw additional action at St Albans, as the removal of the Furlong Road level crossing was also added to the agenda.

The Furlong Road level crossing in St Albans could be removed at the same time as the Main Road level crossing in a new plan being considered by VicRoads.

“Bundling level-crossing removal projects, where they are in close proximity and located on the same rail line, could result in cost savings and reduce the impacts of construction on local communities and businesses and rail customers,” the VicRoads website says.

State Public Transport Minister Jacinta Allan would not confirm or deny whether the Furlong Road level crossing would be removed in conjunction with the Main Road project.

Turns out the bundling of level crossings removals got the green light, as in June 2015 it was announced that the Furlong Road level crossing would now be part of the new “Furlong Main Level Crossing Removal Project”.

St Albans and Ginifer railway stations will go underground as works start to eliminate two dangerous level crossings in the area.

The state government last week named Leighton Contractors, and Aurecon and Hyder Consulting to design and carry out the crossing works at Main and Furlong roads with the rail line to be lowered under the road.

St Albans and Ginifer stations will be rebuilt with platforms below street level. A time line for each project is not known.

Removing two level crossings at the same time might sound like a good idea, but unfortunately the reality is somewhat lacking.

What is actually getting done

Despite being called the “Furlong Main Level Crossing Removal Project” the removal of the Main Road and Furlong Road level crossings is not a holistic project – work at St Albans station was well underway before it was decided that Ginifer was part of the project scope, resulting in a half-arsed solution.

The Level Crossing Removal Authority website has this to say on the project scope:

Furlong Road, St Albans

This level crossing removal will include:

• lowering the rail line below Furlong Road
• moving Ginifer Station up to the intersection at Furlong Road, with access to the station at Furlong Road and Bond Street
• installing platforms in the rail cutting accessed via lifts, ramp and stairs
• building a walking and cycling path parallel to the rail line, from Furlong Road to Willis Street
• relocating the car park to the east of the rail line, maintaining at least the same number of spaces.

Main Road, St Albans

Removal of the Main Road level crossing will transform the station area into a modern transport interchange. The design includes:

• lowering the rail line below Main Road
• rebuilding St Albans Station
• accessing lowered platforms via lifts, ramps and stairs
• reconstructing the station car park providing the same number of spaces as a minimum
• building a walking and cycling path
• relocating the bus interchange from Alfrieda Street to either side of the station
• a pedestrian overpass at Ruth Street.

The big omission

The interesting bit about the Furlong Main project is what they don’t say online – hence I sent the Level Crossing Removal Authority an email seeking clarification about the project scope.

First off – I asked for technical details and received the answers I wanted:

Q: At the Melbourne end of the works, where do the tracks start heading underground?

A: Approximately 350-400m south of Furlong Road

Q: What track gradient is in place between there and the new platform at Ginifer?

A: 1.96% (horizontal curve compensated)

Q: How far below the surface are the new platforms at Ginifer?

A: Approximately 6.5m below existing surface

Q: How far below the surface are the new platforms at St Albans?

A: Approximately 6.0m below existing

Q: At the Sunbury end of the works, where do the tracks return to ground level?

A: Approximately 1000m north of Main Road

Q: What track gradient will be between there and the new platform at St Albans?

A: 1.95% (horizontal curve compensated)

Q: Where will the pedestrian overpass at Ruth Street, St Albans be built?

A: On the site of the existing pedestrian crossing and approximately 1.5 – 2.0 metres above the existing ground level

And I also asked them about the Willis Street pedestrian crossing, situated between Ginifer and St Albans stations:

The existing Willis Street pedestrian crossing remains at ground level, however, it will be upgraded to active gates from passive gates (automatic closure of gates when the train is detected)

Track grade back up to existing surface between Ginifer Station and Willis Street pedestrian crossing, with the track gradient 1.96% curve compensated. Track grade between Willis St pedestrian crossing and St Albans Station into the cutting is 1.97% curve compensated.

A total of $480 million is being spent to remove four level crossings – Heatherdale Rd in Mitcham, Blackburn Rd in Blackburn, and the neighbouring level crossings at Main and Furlong Roads in St Albans. So it doesn’t seem good enough that a pedestrian crossing with a history of fatalities is being left behind by the government, especially given that it is located next door to two crossings that are being removed.

And inefficiencies as well

The lack of forward planning on the Furlong Main level crossings removal projects will also make train operations on the Sunbury line less efficient. With both Ginifer and St Albans stations below ground except for the short section of track between them, each train will have to do the following:

• hard on the brakes headed downhill into St Albans station,
• accelerate hard out up the grade back out,
• reach Willis Street and coast over the top of the grade,
• slam on the brakes again for the descent in to Ginifer station,
• and finally, accelerate hard out of the station to reach ground level again.

(and vice versa in the other direction)

Compare this with the current situation – a slow climb on the line towards Sunbury, and a slow descent on the way to the city – an extract from the 1989 Grades and Curves diagram book for Victoria.

As a result, the new roller coaster track through St Albans will increase the amount of electricity required to power trains on the Sunbury line, and thanks to the lack of regenerative braking systems on the Melbourne rail network, any momentum built up by trains headed downhill can’t be used to power trains powering uphill – the energy can only be burn off as heat.

Wasteful, isn’t it?

Alternatives

If Furlong Road had have been included in the scope as part of the original Main Road level crossing removal project, and not as an afterthought once construction had already began, other options could have been considered.

From St Albans the existing trench at Main Road could have been continued south all the way to Ginifer station, with the Willis Street pedestrian crossing replaced by a bridge. While this would have resulted in the removal of all level crossings in the area, the “better” option of rail under road would be even more costly than the current roller coaster design, due to the greater amount of excavation and retaining walls required, and would still cut the suburb in two with a massive trench.

Elevated rail would have been the perfect solution – raise the tracks between St Albans and Ginifer onto a viaduct and rebuild new stations on top, and in the process remove the barrier that the railway tracks currently form. The existing railway reservation is wide and paralleled by existing streets, so unlike other parts of Melbourne, overshadowing of nearby residents won’t be an issue.

Yet another example why forward planning for Melbourne’s rail network is so important, and an important lesson for residents along the Dandenong and Frankston lines – a rail under road approach doesn’t guarantee that the government will actually place an entire railway line below ground.

Post retrieved by 35.215.163.46 using

The post Furlong Main and the St Albans roller coaster appeared first on Waking up in Geelong.

Nunawading station is located next to Springvale Road, with the level crossing being grade separated in 2009-10 at a cost of $140 million. A new station was built on the western side of the road.

With brand new tracks passing beneath Springvale Road.

And a cutting on the eastern side, using brand new concrete sleepered track to link it back to the existing ground level tracks.

Meanwhile at Mitcham, the station was rebuilt in 2013-14 as part of the grade separation of the Mitcham Road and Rooks Road level crossings – with total project cost of $192 million. A new station was built at the bottom of a concrete trench.

Mitcham Road passes over the tracks at the eastern end of the station, where the newly built tracks return to ground level.

While new tracks at the bottom of the concrete cutting continue a kilometre west towards Nunawading, where Rooks Road passes over the top.

However penny pinching becomes apparent when you look at the tracks between Rooks Road and Springvale Road. Here a section of life expired timber sleepered railway track still remains, where the ground level track was left untouched by both level crossing removal projects.

However you can’t argue that the section of track was out of scope of both projects – the stanchions that hold up the overhead wires are now modern galvanised structures, which replaced the original rusted steel stanchions erected when the railway line was electrified during the 1920s.

Presumably the short section of timber sleepered track was deemed “good enough” to be left untouched as part of both projects, but the stanchions needed to be moved to new locations because the overhead wires in both directions needed to be realigned.

Yet more evidence that level crossing removals are projects designed to deliver benefits to road users, with any improvements for passengers or railway infrastructure being a bonus.

Footnote

A similar omission is part of the grade separation of Blackburn Road at Blackburn – local residents thought they would get a brand new railway station as part of the project, when the scope of the work only covers relocating the railway tracks to beneath Blackburn Road.

Post retrieved by 35.215.163.46 using

The post Missed a spot – Nunawading and Mitcham level crossing removals appeared first on Waking up in Geelong.