Trains

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
Train riders have to get to stations somehow. This is often referred to as the “first mile” or “last mile” problem. There are many technical solutions to help travellers get from home to the station and back, ranging from cars to electronic scooters, but most people use a much older technology, their feet, to get from A to B. What is seldom considered is access to the train platform itself.
Stations are not points but places. They occupy a large area. A person walking at average speed takes about two minutes to walk from one end of a full-length eight-car train to the other.
Often platforms have a single access point on one side of the station, which makes it more difficult for people on the other side of the station to get to the platform. Passengers may need to almost circumnavigate the station to get to the platform. At an average walking speed, the extra distance they must backtrack adds up to six minutes per trip each way, <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/http://hdl.handle.net/2123/20286" target="_blank">our research</a> has found.
Imagine being so unlucky to have an extra 12 minutes of travel time every day if you take the train. You might be tempted to drive instead.
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/271648/original/file-20190430-194623-13icbq0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=1000&amp;fit=clip"><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/271648/original/file-20190430-194623-13icbq0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;fit=clip" alt=""></a>
In a worst-case scenario, traveller lives west of the station with an east platform and works east of a station with a west platform, adding six minutes of travel each way, 12 minutes per day. Author provided
The table below shows the extra travel time in minutes depending on platform locations and access points for a traveller’s origin and destination. The average time for such a one-sided configuration of train stations is 3.25 minutes each way.
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/271671/original/file-20190430-194616-1d5h24k.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=1000&amp;fit=clip"><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/271671/original/file-20190430-194616-1d5h24k.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;fit=clip" alt=""></a>
Travel times in minutes depending on access to platforms at stations used to get to work and home. Author provided
While this example is hypothetical, it is drawn from experience in Sydney, where 44 of 178 train stations have only a single side entrance.
So what impact will a second entrance have?
We examined those stations and access to their platforms: how many people lived within 5, 10 and 15 minutes of the station platform, considering actual entrance location, and how many jobs were within 5, 10 and 15 minutes of the platform. Using existing ridership data from Opal cards, we estimated a model that related the passenger entry and exit flows at each station to that station’s accessibility.
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/271654/original/file-20190430-194620-1mn9wyq.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=1000&amp;fit=clip"><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/271654/original/file-20190430-194620-1mn9wyq.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;fit=clip" alt=""></a>
Accessibility at train stations across Sydney. Author provided
We sketched a second entrance at those 44 stations and measured accessibility again. It’s now higher, as having two entrances instead of one means more people can reach the platform in the same time. We then estimated the increase in ridership from the model due to the improved accessibility, assuming no change in population or employment.
Over all 44 stations, total morning peak period entries increased by 5%. But some stations benefit a lot, and others not at all, so prioritisation of investments matters.
It will be no surprise to locals that Erskineville station comes out on top with a nearly 35% increase. While many of the new apartment-dwelling residents west of the station make the extra hike every day, even more would catch the train if there were a convenient entrance.
Other top 10 stations include: Bankstown, Newtown, Villawood, Redfern, Burwood, Sydneham, Caringbah, Meadowbank and Penshurst. Planning is already under way to <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/redfern-station-on-track-for-new-lifts-as-part-of-100m-upgrade-20190226-p510ba">improve Redfern station</a>.
While this result considers existing development, adding a second entrance can make new transit-oriented development that much more valuable. This is because it will likely increase activity on the previously less accessible side of the station, as the example of Erskineville shows below.
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/271652/original/file-20190430-194612-17wxfzk.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=1000&amp;fit=clip"><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/271652/original/file-20190430-194612-17wxfzk.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;fit=clip" alt=""></a>
Author provided
Other considerations include accessibility for people who cannot use staircases, as many of the stations are older and will require lifts. The <a href="https://theconversation.com/500m-for-station-car-parks-other-transport-solutions-could-do-much-more-for-the-money-114908" target="_blank">prospects of park-and-ride lots</a>, the costs of construction, the presence of nearby stations, and site feasibility also play into final decisions.
Our formal findings and detailed methods are written up in this report: <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/http://hdl.handle.net/2123/20286" target="_blank">Catchment if you can: The effect of station entrance and exit locations on accessibility</a>.<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/115222/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important; text-shadow: none !important;">
David Levinson, Professor of Transport, University of Sydney
Bahman Lahoorpoor, PhD Candidate, School of Civil Engineering, University of Sydney
This article is republished from <a href="http://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-to-increase-train-use-by-up-to-35-with-one-simple-trick-115222" target="_blank">original article</a>.
Main photo: <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://twitter.com/multimodalism/status/1103401167244017665" target="_blank">Chris Standen, used with permission</a>, <a href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/" target="_blank">CC BY-NC-ND</a>
</body></html>

j.ballantyne1990-6AQqhLzZaK

How to increase train use by up to 35% with one simple trick

<html><body>
Yesterday's budget contained a not-so-insignificant amount allocated to the procurement of more rail vehicles for both the tram network and the regional V/Line network.

$218.1 million has been set aside to order 10 more E-class trams on top of the 20 that were announced and ordered in last year's budget.

The tranche of 50 E-class trams that were from the original order have now all been delivered and Bombardier are now working on the next tranche of 20.

Introducing the E-class trams has seen both the Southbank and Preston depots upgraded and expanded to house the larger vehicles. Budget documents released yesterday mention that the money allocated will also be used to further upgrade existing network infrastructure.

Foreshadowed through the planning and tendering process for the level crossing removal projects, a price tag for the new stabling facility at Kananook has surfaced: $187.4 million.

As part of the Carrum level crossing removal project, which is set to have a new elevated viaduct and station built, the existing train stabling yards have to be removed and will be relocated to Kananook.

<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="350" scrolling="no" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/TB-noYwwlP0" width="100%"></iframe>

On the regional rail network, Bombardier is set to receive another order for more VLocity train sets as the Victorian Government has allocated $311.1 million for 39 new carriages.

First introduced for the regional fast rail project over a decade ago, VLocity trains have evolved over time from being two-carriage trains at the beginning, to now where all new train sets are configured with two power cars and a trailer car.

Each new VLocity train (three carriages) have 220 seats and the 39 new carriages will translate into 13 new train sets, on top of the nine train sets that were funded and ordered in last year's budget.

At present, V/Line trains to Albury operate over the interstate standard gauge network and yesterday's budget has allocated funds to plan for the introduction of new rolling stock for this specific line. No doubt this will be a sub-fleet of VLocity trains, configured for the standard gauge network.

<figure><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/vlo_wong_sx_1.png" rel="gallery-all" title="A VLocity train at Southern Cross. Image Marcus Wong"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="387" src="/sites/urban.melbourne/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/vlo_wong_sx_1.png?itok=jpDM7qDP" title="A VLocity train at Southern Cross. Image Marcus Wong" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>A VLocity train at Southern Cross. Image <a href="https://railgallery.wongm.com/vline-southern-cross/F107_0229.jpg">Marcus Wong</a></figcaption></figure>Planning for the upgrade to the Hurstbridge line beyond the works already announced and budgeted for (tunnel duplication between Heidelberg and Rosanna as well as the Lower Plenty Road level crossing removal) was also allocated $5 million in yesterday's budget. This second upgrade is likely to plan for the works involved in duplicating the rail line beyond Greensborough toward Eltham.

To view more of the initiatives announced yesterday as part of the Treasurer's speech, see the <a href="https://www.budget.vic.gov.au/">budget.vic.gov.au website</a>.

Lead image credit: <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-class_Melbourne_tram">Wikipedia</a>
</body></html>

Alastair Taylor

Victorian budget 2017: more new trams and trains on the way

<html><body>
<h2>Comment</h2>

Casual observers of transport investment in Melbourne could be forgiven for missing the bigger picture with the quick succession of recent announcements by the Minister for Public Transport over the past few weeks.

The series of announcements which began on February 16th dealt many of the technical components required to produce what the Melbourne Metro Tunnel project aims to achieve: a giant high-frequency rail line from two different ends of the city, right through the middle.

To date, the overwhelming majority of projects announced by the Victorian Government have been about shovels in the ground or manufacturing things; the 50 level crossing removal projects and the new dedicated train fleet that will start on the Pakenham/Cranbourne-Sunbury lines are the best examples.

Up until this point as well, the Victorian Government has been happy - and has effectively got away with it - to use quite an array of buzzwords from the rail world. TUAG (Turn Up And Go) services, High Capacity Metro Line (does that mean Metro as in the operator or does metro mean <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paris_M%C3%A9tro">métropolitain</a>?), HCS (High Capacity Signalling) and so on.

What does this mean? Here's my take.

<h2>Connecting some of the dots</h2>

The announcement on 16th of February continued the shovels-in-the-ground theme, stating that platforms on the Pakenham-Cranbourne lines will be extended. I assume that a similar package will be announced at some point closer to the completion of the Metro tunnel (as the Sunbury line stations will need to be configured in the same way as the Pakenham/Cranbourne line is about to be).

Due to the nature of platform screen doors that you find in other metro systems around the world - the doors are in a fixed position and only open when a train is stopped in the right position at a platform - having a dedicated fleet of trains is going to allow the Melbourne Metro Tunnel stations (Arden, Parkville, Melbourne Central, Flinders Street and Domain) to have them.

I put a question to one of the Minister for Public Transport's aides: the Pakenham/Cranbourne line station platforms are set to be lengthened, however what about platform heights? Will platform heights be augmented to allow higher accessibility for wheelchairs/prams regardless of where a passenger is located on a station platform?

Existing platforms that are being extended will retain the same platform height and the new stations that are getting built as part of the level crossing removal projects will be built to the current standard: 1170mm above the rail head.

"The High-Capacity Metro Trains (HCMTs) will be built to a similar height as X'Trapolis trains, but it's worth noting that floor heights of a train vary in operation depending on the number of passengers on board", the Minister's aide said.

The design of the new HCMTs is still, presumably, being finalised - ditto for the platform extensions - however, we may see a more widespread roll out of the wheelchair ramps we see at City Loop stations now.

Pakenham/Cranbourne (and eventually Sunbury) line trains are about to be orphaned from the rest of the network, and despite platform clearances still required to cater for V/Line and Freight trains, there would appear to be a bit of wiggle room for the design of the new station platforms to match up - as best it can - with the new HCMTs, thus making it possible to completely roll out the wheelchair ramps to all stations on the line.

Because if trains are going to be running as frequently as the Victorian Government has said, minimising driver delays will be paramount and providing a uniform experience at each and every station for those who require the use of a wheelchair is the right thing to do.

<figure><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/raised_platform.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="Raised platform for wheelchairs at Melbourne Central. Image © Marcus Wong"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="305" src="/sites/urban.melbourne/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/raised_platform.jpg?itok=YkIV7nHq" title="Raised platform for wheelchairs at Melbourne Central. Image © Marcus Wong" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>Raised platform for wheelchairs at Melbourne Central. Image © <a href="https://railgallery.wongm.com/city-loop/F111_7953.jpg">Marcus Wong</a></figcaption></figure>From the same announcement on the 16th of February, it was stated: "more than 70 kilometres of overhead power lines will be rebuilt, 20 substations will be built or upgraded, and a section of track in South Dandenong will be duplicated to boost reliability and support more services."

New and upgraded substations point to further sectorisation of Melbourne's rail network: it's likely a precursor to a voltage change in the overhead wiring in order to run the new, longer, trains operating on higher frequencies. This was also foreshadowed in the Melbourne Metro Tunnel business case document suite.

Will the Pakenham/Cranbourne-Sunbury line join the Brisbane, Perth and now Adelaide rail networks and switch to alternating current (25kV AC) or will we remain an <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_of_Currents">Edison acolyte</a> and stick with direct current, but at a higher voltage like the networks in Italy and Belgium? (Melbourne &amp; Sydney rail networks operate at 1500V DC; Italian and Belgian mainline networks use 3000V DC).

From a passenger's perspective, the voltage used in the traction system matters little, however it would be a marked, technical, change.

The most recent piece in the enormous jigsaw puzzle that is the Melbourne Metro + Level Crossing Removal + HCMT project was the Minister announcing on Tuesday, via her Facebook page, that bids for the rail systems package have been received.

<iframe allowtransparency="true" frameborder="0" height="500" scrolling="no" src="https://www.facebook.com/plugins/video.php?href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2FJacintaAllanMP%2Fvideos%2F1121614744615681%2F&amp;show_text=1&amp;width=560" style="border:none;overflow:hidden" width="100%"></iframe>

Up until this point, it's all been about physical things: the new trains, the extended platforms, the level crossing removals, the tunnel, the new substations, the new catenary. The rail systems package includes more physical things, however it's the train control and safety system embedded within the HCS - High Capacity Signalling - component where the quantum leap (in context of how we manage rail operations) will occur.

And with a $1 billion pricetag, perhaps now we'll finally get a new network command and control centre. After all, it's been on the cards for <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/the-ball-starts-rolling-on-new-train-control/2005/07/01/1119724809180">years</a> and <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metrol#History">years</a>.

<h2>And some more thoughts</h2>

Maintaining a level of scepticism when jargon is thrown about by government is always healthy, and now two years on, all the components required to take two century-and-a-half year old rail corridors and blitz it into the realm of standard modern rail practice are all pointing in the right direction. Yet there are still some unknowns.

On the new power/traction components: will we start to see the roll out of line-side infrastructure to support storing energy generated by a <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regenerative_brake#Conversion_to_electric_energy:_the_motor_as_a_generator">regenerative braking</a> system on the new trains?

As base-load power supplied to the rail network is predominantly supplied from coal power plants, this type of system is an economic plus as well as an environmental cost saving measure. The savings come from storing energy generated by trains braking on the line which can then be fed back in - less demand for power, in theory, reduces the overall power bill and it follows with less power required to operate the rail network, that's less coal burned - hence the environmental cost saving.

On intermodal integration: an unrelated announcement also recently made by the Minister for Public Transport was that bus operator contracts are-a-changing. Our first 'High Capacity Metro Line' can't just be fed by people parking cars at stations or riding a bike to a station, those people who live further than a comfortable walk away from a station need an alternative to driving to the station.

On the eastern side of this new High Capacity Metro Line, high-frequency bus routes exist in some places which interface well with rail services: the smartbus routes (which are sadly the exception, not the rule). Will we see more of these routes to the east and west of the city connecting with the new metro line and running on better frequencies to create a much wider, true, intermodal network?

How can this fit with an <a href="http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/first-home-owners-in-regional-victoria-get-a-boost-from-state-government-20170302-gupix6">emerging decentralisation agenda</a>? Specifically: the Monash National Employment Cluster is partially serviced by the High Capacity Metro Line (Springvale, Westall, Clayton and Huntingdale stations) but what of the 'last mile' into the precinct? Is the VPA factoring in a major bus route overhaul as part of <a href="https://vpa.vic.gov.au/project/monash-employment-cluster/">its planning work</a>?

On where the network will get its power from in future: back in January the Minister for Energy, Environment and Climate Change (Lily D'Ambrosio) announced, to much surprise, that the Victorian Government will "voluntarily surrender renewable energy certificates matching the amount of electricity used by all of Melbourne's trams". In short, the power required to operate the tram network will come from renewable sources in future.

Is the same thing on the cards for the heavy rail network?
</body></html>

Melbourne's first 'High Capacity Metro Line'

<html><body>
This morning at a media conference in the historic Newport Workshops, the Premier, Minister for Public Transport and Minister for Industry and Employment announced the Evolution Rail consortium was the successful bidder for the contract to supply the next generation of Melbourne's train fleet: High-Capacity Metro Trains (HCMT).

Keen to emphasise the employment opportunities, 15% of the expected 1,100 jobs created through the awarding of this contract will be for apprenticeships, trainees and cadets and transitioning automotive workers.

<blockquote>
We’re guaranteeing more local work than ever with 60 per cent local content, as well as ensuring the inclusion of 15 per cent Victorian apprentices, trainees and cadets, and a partnership with Toyota to help transition workers out of the auto industry.
<cite>Wade Noonan, Minister for Industry and Employment</cite>
</blockquote>

<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="350" scrolling="no" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/imwSqb4wpQE" width="100%"></iframe>

The Evolution Rail consortium comprises Downer Rail (ASX: <a href="http://www.asx.com.au/asx/research/company.do#!/DOW">Downer EDI Limited</a>), CRRC and Plenary. Furthermore, the China Railway Rolling Stock Corporation (CRRC) will set up an Australian regional headquarters and establish "Australia's only bogie manufacturer" in Melbourne, the Victorian Government media release states.

Downer Rail has previously worked with a CRRC subsidiary - Changchun Railway Vehicles - to create the most recent fleet of trains operating on Sydney's rail network, <a href="http://www.sydneytrains.info/about/fleet/a_sets">the A Sets</a>, better known as the Waratah fleet.

The historic Newport workshops will see a $16 million upgrade to allow manufacturing to occur on-site.

<figure><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/new_hcmt_interior.png" rel="gallery-all" title="HCMT interior. Screen capture from media release video"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="304" src="/sites/urban.melbourne/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/new_hcmt_interior.png?itok=H_R4_qAK" title="HCMT interior. Screen capture from media release video" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>HCMT interior. Screen capture from media release video</figcaption></figure>As foreshadowed when the tender was announced, a new dedicated maintenance facility will be built in Pakenham East - as well as a light service facility in Calder Park - and the new fleet will be dedicated to the Pakenham/Cranbourne lines, with the Sunbury line being added to the list once the Melbourne Metro Rail tunnel project connects all three lines.

The first tranche of new trains is set to begin testing in 2018 and they will begin roaming the mainline in 2019 after the Caulfield-Dandenong level crossing removal project has been completed. The entire fleet order of 65 new trains will be operating once the new Melbourne Metro Rail tunnel is complete in 2026.

<figure><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/new_hcmt2.png" rel="gallery-all" title="Victorian Government's message of public transport and manufacturing jobs continues unabated"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="304" src="/sites/urban.melbourne/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/new_hcmt2.png?itok=Y6WP2yr3" title="Victorian Government's message of public transport and manufacturing jobs continues unabated" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>Victorian Government's message of public transport and manufacturing jobs continues unabated</figcaption></figure><blockquote>
These new high capacity trains will do the heavy lifting on the Cranbourne-Pakenham lines, ahead of the opening of the Metro Tunnel, enabling more passengers to travel during the busiest parts of the day.
<cite>Jacinta Allan, Minister for Public Transport</cite>
</blockquote>

The new trains will be formed in seven car consists and passengers will be free to move to any part of the train once aboard. The longer train and internal configuration will purportedly enable 20% more space in each train compared to trains which currently operate on the Melbourne network.

In an ASX media release before market open at 10am on Monday, Downer EDI Limited stated:

<blockquote>
The Evolution Rail consortium will deliver the HCMT project which includes

<ul>
<li>Design, manufacture and commissioning of 65 HCMTs for use on the Cranbourne, Pakenham and Sunbury lines in Melbourne;</li>
	<li>Design and build of two training simulators;</li>
	<li>Design, construction and commissioning of a train maintenance facility and stabling yards at Pakenham East;</li>
	<li>Design, construction and commissioning of a light service facility at Calder Park; and</li>
	<li>Maintenance of the rolling stock fleet for 30 years and also of the train maintenance facility, the light service facility and the simulators.</li>
</ul>
Downer's scope of work includes:

<ul>
<li>Project management services for the HCMT construction;</li>
	<li>Design, construction and commissioning of the train maintenance facility, stabling yards and light service facility; and</li>
	<li>Maintenance and overhaul of the HCMT fleet, train maintenance facility, light service facility and simulators for 30 years</li>
</ul>
<cite>Downer EDI Limited <a href="http://www.asx.com.au/asxpdf/20160912/pdf/43b3gt5bckj1z3.pdf">ASX media release</a></cite>
</blockquote>

<figure><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/new_hcmt_interior2.png" rel="gallery-all" title="HCMT interior. Screen capture from media release video"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="312" src="/sites/urban.melbourne/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/new_hcmt_interior2.png?itok=aK6Lhayz" title="HCMT interior. Screen capture from media release video" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>HCMT interior. Screen capture from media release video</figcaption></figure>The Premier's media centre now has a section dedicated to rail: http://www.premier.vic.gov.au/trains/
</body></html>

Next generation of Melbourne's train fleet unveiled

<html><body>
The Melbourne Metro Rail project will be the catalyst for a big shakeup in the way our rail network operates once it's operational in 2026 and the way we refer to individual rail lines will become meaningless for half the network around the same time.

It's clear that from 2026 after the construction work has been completed for the Melbourne Metro Rail project that there will be not one but two cross-town rail routes: Pakenham/Cranbourne-Sunbury and Werribee/Williamstown/Laverton via Altona to Sandringham.

Say those two groups of rail lines out aloud… "Pakenham Cranbourne Sunbury Line" and "Werribee Williamstown Laverton via Altona Sandringham Line". They're excessively long, convoluted, potentially confusing and would be meaningless to those who are not familiar with the system, from interstate or farther afield.

The "if it isn't broke, why fix it?" crowd might feel their noises are being put out of joint but I think the nomenclature of our rail lines needs an update.

The practice of referring to a rail line by its terminus makes sense if all the services run to the end of the line but increasingly this is not going to be the case as the Melbourne Metro project's 'wider network enhancements' and <a href="https://www.urban.com.au/news/melbourne-metro-rail-what-does-it-mean-for-developers-and-apartment-buyers">proposed service plan</a> paint a picture of a larger amount of services running shorter distances from mid-points along respective rail lines.

<h2>Colours, letters and numbers: the way forward?</h2>

Continental Europe perhaps shows us the best way forward. Take Paris for example, the metro lines which are concentrated around the centre of the city are all numbered and the RER lines which connect Paris with its suburbs are lettered. In fact the letter plus number system of Paris' RER I think is how we should rebrand rail lines.

Like how the Melbourne network will eventually operate, Paris' RER consists of five trunk lines and all of them eventually split into branches. When Melbourne Metro starts operating there will be one long trunk from Sunbury to Dandenong where the trunk will then split into two branches; ditto a trunk from Sandringham to Newport and then three branches to Werribee, Williamstown and Laverton via Altona.

<figure><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/ile-de-france_rer_map.gif" rel="gallery-all" title="The Paris RER Network. Image from www.ratp.fr"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="552" src="/sites/urban.melbourne/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/ile-de-france_rer_map.gif?itok=EWAX8b-I" title="The Paris RER Network. Image from www.ratp.fr" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>The Paris RER Network. Image from www.ratp.fr</figcaption></figure>Every trunk line on Paris' RER network has a distinct colour, letter and a number which corresponds to a terminus on the respective branch line.

The RER A (red) line in the map above has a single trunk through central Paris and then 5 numbered branches beyond; and also note that odd numbers for RER A correspond to branches terminating in the west of the city and even numbers correspond to branches terminating in the east.

<h2>How might this work in Melbourne?</h2>

Passengers will still need to look at the passenger information displays in order to ascertain which train is arriving and whether it is the train they need to jump on. Other big city 'metros' generally do not have branches therefore - for the most part - every train which arrives at the platform you are standing on goes to the same terminus; the passenger's mental effort only has to focus on getting to the correct platform and just hop on the next train.

As there will be timetabled short-running trains operating to and from the new infrastructure to be built as part of the Melbourne Metro project perhaps a way to incorporate this detail into an easily understood identifier is to take the example of the Paris RER trunk/branch numbering and give all the services that will run on the short-stopping lines a letter and number as well.

Pakenham/Cranbourne-Sunbury line would become:

Colour: Red

Letter: A

Numbers (branch/terminus):

West

<ul>
<li>A1 (Sunbury)</li>
	<li>A3 (Watergardens)</li>
	<li>A5 (West Footscray)</li>
	<li>A7 (Melton) - when it is eventually electrified and brought into the metro network</li>
	<li>A9 (Tullamarine Airport) - when it is eventually built</li>
</ul>
East

<ul>
<li>A2 (Pakenham)</li>
	<li>A4 (Cranbourne)</li>
	<li>A6 (Dandenong)</li>
	<li>A8 (Westall)</li>
</ul>
Station signs and platform passenger information displays would be coloured the same as it would be on a map but also list the services that stop on that platform. For example, a station platform sign at Carnegie on platform 1 (westbound) would list A1, A3, A5 and A7 as services which stop at that platform, likewise on the opposite platform 2 (eastbound) A2, A4, A6 and A8 would be listed as services which stop at that platform.

Platform passenger information displays and the equivalent displays located at the front, rear and side of each train would carry the coloured letter + number code along with the familiar destination name (i.e. "A2 Pakenham", "A3 Watergardens") and automated announcements would also prepend the letter + number code to the familiar destination name.

Line maps would list the station name and the letter + number code of the various train services which stop at that station so that when an unfamiliar user is determining their route via a map on a smartphone, a line 'strip' map on the platform or on a network-wide map they can quickly and easily judge which trains will get them to their destination.

Agree? Disagree? What other city rail naming conventions and wayfinding techniques might we use as inspiration?
</body></html>

After Melbourne Metro: should we rebrand the rail network?

<html><body>
On Monday 29th of June, the Minister of Public Transport, Jacinta Allan, and Minister for Industry, Lily D'Ambrosio, called for expressions of interest for the design, construction and maintenance of a 'next generation, high-capacity metro train' (HCMT) for Melbourne.

Foreshadowed in the recent Andrews' Government budget, 37 new trains along with the building of a new maintenance centre in Pakenham East is expected to cost $1.3 billion.

A <a href="http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/traction-rolling-stock/single-view/view/victoria-begins-high-capacity-metro-train-procurement">Railway Gazette</a> article states that on top of the order for 37 new trains for the Pakenham/Cranbourne lines, the State Government seeks to have the right over 25 purchase options for the Melbourne Metro Rail project and a further 38 options to begin phasing out the 1980s era Comeng trains.

<figure><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/sandown_park_platform_length.png" rel="gallery-all" title="Sandown Park station on the Dandenong corridor"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="353" src="/sites/urban.melbourne/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/sandown_park_platform_length.png?itok=fiw8zv5h" title="Sandown Park station on the Dandenong corridor" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>Sandown Park station on the Dandenong corridor</figcaption></figure><h2>Sweating more out of the platform space</h2>

The station platforms on Melbourne's rail network - those on the surface, measurable by Google Maps - are around 160 metres and according to the Railway Gazette article the new high capacity metro trains look set to take full advantage of the existing infrastructure.

Not since the 1970s when the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harris_(train)">Harris trains</a> were primary workhorse of the rail fleet has there been any train marshaled in a configuration of more than 6 carriages. The recently departed <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hitachi_(Australian_train)">Hitachi</a> and the current fleet of <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comeng_(train)">Comeng</a>, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X%27Trapolis_100">X'Trapolis</a> and <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siemens_Nexas">Siemens</a> trains have all been marshaled as 3 or 6 x 23-24m motor and trailer carriage trains measuring a total length of 71-72 metres for 3 car trains or 143-144 metres for 2 x 3 car sets which are now the standard configuration across all lines.

At 160m it would appear the next generation of trains to run exclusively on the Cranbourne/Pakenham lines would likely be marshaled in a 8 x 20m carriage configuration (or 7 x 22-23m configuration as pointed out in <a href="http://www.danielbowen.com/2015/07/01/next-gen-trains/">Daniel Bowen's blog</a>) thus utilising the full length of the existing platforms at stations along those lines.

<h2>Piece by piece</h2>

If there is any communications-related criticism to be levelled at the current State Government, it's that the piecemeal approach they have taken by drip-feeding announcements related to their huge book of Public Transport projects doesn't link back to the overall 'big picture' narrative.

Nevertheless, the table below is an attempt to at least put projects in some logical order and it's based on information that has previously been released as well as some assumptions denoted by an asterisk.

<table border="1" cellpadding="1" cellspacing="1" style="width: 100%;">
<thead><tr>
<th scope="col">Puzzle piece</th>
			<th scope="col">Date</th>
		</tr></thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td>Sunbury line level crossings removed - Main Road and Furlong Road in St Albans</td>
			<td><a href="http://economicdevelopment.vic.gov.au/transport/major-projects/level-crossing-removal-project/current-projects#2">2017</a></td>
		</tr>
<tr>
<td>Dandenong corridor level crossing removal project complete - 9 level crossings and 4 rebuilt stations</td>
			<td>2018*</td>
		</tr>
<tr>
<td>First next generation HCMTs start rolling off the production line</td>
			<td><a href="http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/traction-rolling-stock/single-view/view/victoria-begins-high-capacity-metro-train-procurement">2018</a></td>
		</tr>
<tr>
<td>Melbourne Metro Rail project - start of civil works</td>
			<td><a href="http://mmrailproject.vic.gov.au/about-the-project">2018</a></td>
		</tr>
<tr>
<td>Trial of new signalling system begins on Sandringham Line</td>
			<td>2019-2021*</td>
		</tr>
<tr>
<td>State Government exercises HMCT purchase options for Melbourne Metro Rail</td>
			<td>2020-2021*</td>
		</tr>
<tr>
<td>First batch of HCMTs nears end of production cycle</td>
			<td><a href="http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/traction-rolling-stock/single-view/view/victoria-begins-high-capacity-metro-train-procurement">2022</a></td>
		</tr>
<tr>
<td>Melbourne Metro Rail project - civil works and station construction complete, rail equipment installation and testing begins</td>
			<td>2022-2023*</td>
		</tr>
<tr>
<td>Second batch of HCMTs for the Melbourne Metro Rail / Sunbury line starts production cycle</td>
			<td>2022*</td>
		</tr>
<tr>
<td>Pakenham, Cranbourne and Sunbury lines retrofitted with new signalling system</td>
			<td>2024-2025*</td>
		</tr>
<tr>
<td>Second batch of HCMTs for the Melbourne Metro Rail / Sunbury line nears end of production cycle</td>
			<td>2024-2025*</td>
		</tr>
<tr>
<td>Melbourne Metro Rail project - Pakenham/Cranbourne services begin running through to Sunbury and vice versa</td>
			<td>2024-2025*</td>
		</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<h2>Wouldn't it be nice…</h2>

If the State Government took a leaf out of the NBNCo's book and centralised all public transport project information - big picture and fine detail - in one <a href="http://www.nbnco.com.au/sell-nbn-services/rollout-map">giant map</a>?

Lead image credit: <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X'Trapolis_100">Wikipedia</a>.
</body></html>

Melbourne's train fleet to be expanded

<html><body>
The business end of getting the Dandenong corridor grade separation project moving is nigh, with the month of June set to see the Government receive expressions of interest from interested parties to undertake the work.

The project will seek to remove the nine level crossings that are currently restricting train frequencies between Caulfield and Dandenong stations on the Cranbourne and Pakenham lines, the city's busiest. Similarly Spring Street wishes to have all nine level crossings removed as part of one larger project in order to gain synergies, allow work to be coordinated and have the individual crossings separated sooner according to a media release.

The nine roads to be grade separated are:

<ul>
<li>Grange Road, Carnegie</li>
	<li>Koornang Road, Carnegie</li>
	<li>Murrumbeena Road, Murrumbeena</li>
	<li>Poath Road, Murrumbeena</li>
	<li>Clayton Road, Clayton</li>
	<li>Centre Road, Clayton</li>
	<li>Corrigan Road, Noble Park</li>
	<li>Heatherton Road, Noble Park</li>
	<li>Chandler Road, Noble Park</li>
</ul>
Koornang Road, Murrumbeena Road, Poath Road and Clayton Road are adjacent to Carnegie, Murrumbeena, Hughesdale and Clayton stations respectively and as a result of grade separating the level crossings each of those four stations will also need to be rebuilt.

On June 2, the Level Crossing Removal Authority is hosting an industry briefing and expressions of interest will close toward the end of June. The Public Transport Minister's media release states works will commence in 2016 and be complete by 2018.

<h2>Comment</h2>

Three Frankston Line level crossings and stations, one Glen Waverley Line level crossing and station, five new stations as part of the Melbourne Metro Rail project and now four more stations as part of this Dandenong corridor project; there's currently a lot of design going on around rail stations at present.

In fact, the Pakenham and Cranbourne Lines will become station architectural tour in their own right - from the 1880s era so-called "MATH" (Malvern, Armadale, Toorak, Hawksburn) stations, to 1990s era slap-up-a-platform-and-a-shed stations of Cranbourne and Merinda Park - the two lines are going to be anything by architecturally ordinary when travelling on them from end to end.

It's for this reason - sheer volume of station rebuilds - that when designs are finalised and high-quality renders can be retrieved from the State Government, we're planning to expand our <a href="https://www.urban.com.au/developments">project database</a> to track each individual station through our normal data gathering process. Given the State Government aims to complete 20 level crossing removals in its first term, we're going to be busy.

<h2>Media release</h2>

<iframe class="scribd_iframe_embed" data-aspect-ratio="undefined" data-auto-height="false" frameborder="0" height="600" id="doc_65759" scrolling="no" src="https://www.scribd.com/embeds/266703762/content?start_page=1&amp;view_mode=scroll&amp;show_recommendations=true" width="100%"></iframe>

Lead image credit: <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murrumbeena,_Victoria">Wikipedia</a>.
</body></html>

Spring Street kicks off Dandenong corridor level crossing removal project

<html><body>
Railways are the freeways of the public transport world. They consume enormous amounts of capital during design and construction phases and require regular maintenance once operational. Comparatively speaking, both railways and freeways allow for the fastest journeys to be made and they also have the highest scope for increasing capacity to transport people around cities in their respective purviews.

In isolation both types of transport modes will have varying degrees of usefulness to cities and thanks to the shemozzle that has been the past twelve months in big ticket transport projects in Victoria, at a high level we now know both types of projects have a similar cost to build, especially when tunneling is involved.

East West Link's eastern section was priced around the $1 billion a kilometre mark and the Melbourne Metro Rail (MMR) project is similarly costed around the $1 billion mark. The benefits of the MMR project are to be felt across 100km of railway line between Pakenham/Cranbourne and Sunbury but at a very high level; one that is no doubt easily understood by the wider public, six lanes of freeway in a tunnel is roughly the same price (on a per kilometre basis) as two rail way tracks in tunnels.

If we assume the cost-benefit ratio of the Melbourne Metro Rail project will be similar to that of the same project Infrastructure Australia assessed a few years ago then we know that the Victorian public is going to derive a positive return out of investing in Melbourne Metro Rail as opposed to the East West Link.

But by the same token, we shouldn't gloss over how incredibly expensive expanding our existing rail system to the same specifications as our existing network is.

<h2>Should we continue doing this with newer railways?</h2>

There comes a point where someone has to say - and I'm not the first - new branch lines (Ballieu/Napthine Government studies into <a href="https://www.urban.com.au/new-apartments/rowville-vic">Rowville</a> and <a href="https://www.urban.com.au/new-apartments/doncaster-vic">Doncaster</a>) or entirely new rail lines (such as orbital lines) is going to be prohibitively expensive and inevitably result in long delays between projects.

Yes, we could implement a value-capture regimes around new and improved public transport infrastructure to help recover the cost of building new or expanding railways. We could also raise money by applying specific levies broadly across a geographic area, on businesses or residents. All quite legitimate.

However why raise that money to pay for, all intents and purposes, legacy infrastructure? Targeted value-capture regimes and broad-based levies should be the weapon in the arsenal that allows us to build railway infrastructure in greater volume, not simply be used to pay a high price for an expanded network that would allow interoperability between existing and new railway lines.

<h2>Breaking with tradition</h2>

Sydney has started to break with traditional railways construction with the advent of the North West Rail Link. They're going back to the future and ditching the idea of building a new line that would work with existing rolling stock, signalling systems and rail operations. The line will do away with train drivers altogether and be operated remotely.

The headline price is $8.3 billion dollars yet it includes 22km of new track (15km of which is in tunnels), eight new stations and the conversion of the existing tunnels from <a href="https://www.urban.com.au/new-apartments/epping-vic">Epping</a> to <a href="https://www.urban.com.au/new-apartments/chatswood-nsw">Chatswood</a> to support <a href="http://www.alstom.com/products-services/product-catalogue/rail-systems/trains/products/metropolis/">Alstom's Metropolis</a> class trains and associated signalling and safe working system that will operate the services once construction is complete.

It's a bit unfair to compare directly to the MMR project as the North West Rail Link is located outside Sydney's city centre and the MMR is right in the middle of ours; but the ​freely available data on the different components of the NWRL could prove very useful should any state government re-look at Doncaster and Rowville; both of which I'd argue are very similar projects to the NWRL.

<h2>But wait, there's more</h2>

Back in May 2013, Alstom launched its Axonis 'light-metro' solution. Axonis is the name given to an integrated solution which includes using trains from its Metropolis product suite, a slim profile viaduct / elevated guideway structure designed by Alstom's construction subsidiary Bouygues, a power supply system, a track laying system and Alstom's new 'Urbalis' communications-based train control system.

The <a href="http://www.alstom.com/Global/Transport/Resources/Documents/brochure2014/Axonis%20-%20Brochure%20-%20EN.pdf?epslanguage=en-GB">marketing material for Axonis</a> includes the following figures:

<ul>
<li>Viaduct/guideway is 6.8 metres wide (a little more than the width of two car lanes). To compare to the North West Rail Link, its elevated "<a href="http://nwrail.transport.nsw.gov.au/The-Project/Skytrain#2">skytrain</a>" section is reportedly to have a width of 11 metres.

	<ul>
<li>The difference in width in this scenario can be put down to the design of Axonis: evacuation, if required, will be through the front/read of the trains, not onto a walkway beside the track which will span the length of the viaduct in the NWRL's case.</li>
	</ul>
</li>
	<li>Track is designed to be 10-14 metres above ground in an elevated scenario and the pylons which will support the viaduct have a diameter of 1.6 metres. This could fit in many different arterial road medians around Melbourne.</li>
	<li>Most interestingly the design has a minimum curve radius of 45 metres. It would impact speed and therefore journey time if many of these tiny curves were present along any route but it demonstrates high flexibility when it comes to installing the viaduct in built up areas above road medians.</li>
	<li>The trains are designed to be powered by a third rail system thus reducing the overall visual impact of the viaduct (no overhead catenary protruding above the rail deck); one assumes there's a safety protocol which would shut the power off should evacuation of the trains be required!</li>
	<li>The track configuration is an international standard. We call it standard gauge around these parts and it can run through a tunnel or on the surface if required, on impressive 6% grades as well.</li>
	<li>The Metropolis class trains are 2.7m wide (compared to Melbourne trains: <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siemens_Nexas">Siemens</a> (2.95m), <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X%27Trapolis_100">X'Trapolis</a> and <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comeng_(train)">Comeng</a> (3.05m)) and run in two, three, four or five car lengths. Each car is 18m long (compared to 24m in existing Melbourne trains)
	<ul>
<li>Each car is reportedly able to carry a maximum of 200 passengers with a very squeezy crush capacity of six passengers per square metre.</li>
		<li>A five car train would have a crush capacity of 900-1000 passengers and be a total length of 90m compared to a similar crush capacity across existing trains on Melbourne's train network which measure approximately 145 metres.</li>
		<li>The Urbalis train control system utilised in this type of setup is reported to allow headways of 60 seconds to be achieved.</li>
	</ul>
</li>
	<li>Overall the system is designed to carry between 10,000 passengers per hour per direction in a two car train configuration and up to 45,000 passengers per hour per direction in a five car train configuration.</li>
</ul>
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" scrolling="no" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/j16upiZyO0w" width="100%"></iframe>

One thing that sets this total transit solution apart from many others like it, Alstom offer this on non-proprietary terms, meaning owners of the system are not locked into a specific vendor when they need to extend the track or upgrade, replace or expand the number of train vehicles.

​Although the name is not mentioned, it appears <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riyadh_Metro">Riyadh's new six line, 176km long metro system</a> is to be the first system at least in part built utilising all the components that Alstom brings together under the Axonis brand. In a 2013 <a href="http://www.alstom.com/press-centre/2013/7/alstom-awarded-a-turnkey-metro-project-by-the-city-of-riyadh-in-the-kingdom-of-saudi-arabia/">media release</a>, Alstom announced it had won the contract to equip three of the six lines with its system at a cost of €6 billion.

A <a href="http://www.railway-technology.com/projects/-riyadh-metro-saudi-arabia/">Railway-Technology article</a> provides a little more information on the Riyadh project, key among the features listed is that the tunnels which will be built on the three lines which Alstom is directly involved in will have a diameter of 10m, a single tunnel bore catering for two tracks. Sydney's North West Rail Link will be built with <a href="http://nwrail.transport.nsw.gov.au/The-Project/Tunnelling#2">twin six metre internal diameter tunnels</a>.

Comparing construction costs between Saudi Arabia and Australia is naturally fraught with danger (I recommend reading Alan Davies' <a href="http://blogs.crikey.com.au/theurbanist/2012/02/15/why-do-subways-cost-so-much-to-build-here-than-elsewhere/">thoughts on the comparison of rail construction costs</a>) but it appears everything about the Axonis 'package' is highly targeted at all the cities which don't currently have a traditional heavy rail metro and are looking to cost effective solutions to bringing more rapid transit to the masses. That's us.

All of the above, on paper at least, point to likely lower construction and operational costs compared to our existing rail system given the Axonis (and other systems like it from other vendors) is driverless, light-weight and involves smaller stations compared to the size of stations on Melbourne's existing rail network and the enormous stations that are reportedly to be built for Melbourne Metro Rail.

Employing turn-key rail systems like this to mooted (PTV or otherwise) new rail lines could possibly shift the economics and therefore cost-benefit ratios to an even more positive level.

Is it time to re-think the way we want to expand our rail network?

Lead image credit: Alstom.
</body></html>

New rail technology: Alstom's Axonis light metro

<html><body>
Today's piece is inspired somewhat by <a href="http://www.grantwyeth.com/about/">Grant Wyeth</a>'s (<a href="https://twitter.com/grantwyeth">@grantwyeth</a>) guest post over on Alan Davies' <a href="http://blogs.crikey.com.au/theurbanist/2015/04/07/building-rail-connections-across-the-suburbs/">The Urbanist blog</a> and it centers exclusively on where would an orbital rail line (or set of rail lines) in Melbourne go under the right circumstances.

Is strong projected population growth enough to provide us with the 'right' circumstances in future? What are the 'right' circumstances? How could our 'right' circumstances be different to any other city which has been or is heading down the same path as us?

Back in the sixties when the age of the automobile was beginning to dominate the suburban landscape, the transport boffins of the time appeared to have attempted to answer the same fundamental mobility question. They just answered it with limited-access roads.

If one only focuses on freeway/tollways for a moment, there's a clear missing link in our orbital road network between the end of the Metropolitan Ring Road and the Eastern Freeway/EastLink. However it appears that even in the 60s no-one really thought much of linking the two roads directly either.

<figure><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/0604-freewayplan-large.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="Motorist's paradise of Freeways from the 1969 Victorian Transport Plan. Image from Daniel Bowen's blog"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="471" src="/sites/urban.melbourne/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/0604-freewayplan-large.jpg?itok=agtqVzzd" title="Tradies' paradise of Freeways from the 1969 Victorian Transport Plan. Image from Daniel Bowen's blog" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>Motorist's paradise of Freeways from the 1969 Victorian Transport Plan. Image from <a href="http://www.danielbowen.com/2004/06/04/transport-activist/">Daniel Bowen's blog</a></figcaption></figure>For the cartographically-inclined, you can't go past the sheer beauty of the map above. Every time I see it float to the surface somewhere on the Internet I'm in awe. According to the Wikipedia page, the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1969_Melbourne_Transportation_Plan">1969 Melbourne Transport plan</a> called for 510km of freeways creating an enormous mesh of limited access roads all over the metro area.

Boroondara and Stonnington encircled by freeways? Priceless! Two intersecting freeways in St Kilda? Absolutely! Having the ability to zig-zag across the city from Keilor to Dandenong on nine (or more) different freeways? It's the future!

If you hadn't noticed yet, a fair few of those roads have been built, are in the process of being built or are likely to be built to varying degrees. And this aspect serves as a reminder that no matter how large and lofty ideas may appear to be, the creativeness of people regardless of the era (and no matter how batshit crazy you might think it is) can, and in some cases will, come to fruition.

<h2>Beyond peak car</h2>

Successive decades of suburban development have seen employment clusters grow over time in disparate areas and the vast majority of Melburnians work somewhere other than the centre of the city. The tertiary education sector has expanded in to the suburbs and the primary retail centres serving the metropolitan area are isolated from existing high-capacity public transport modes.

<blockquote>
The band-aid solution for many decades has been an increase in bus services. While buses serve a great purpose of being able to negotiate suburbs in a more intimate fashion than trains, what they lack is a direct and efficient way of connecting major hubs.

There is a psychology of purpose that comes with train travel. It is far more direct and efficient than a bus, and therefore far more enticing to people. Transportation networks are most effective when they increase the speed at which people can access opportunity-laden areas. Buses do not provide this.
<cite>Grant Wyeth, <a href="http://blogs.crikey.com.au/theurbanist/2015/04/07/building-rail-connections-across-the-suburbs/">The Urbanist</a></cite>
</blockquote>

I agree with Grant up to a point, and that is with the exception of smart bus routes which seem to have stopped being rolled out, politicians appear to be petrified at the thought of clawing back existing roadspace (or expanding within existing corridors) for the exclusive use of fast and frequent bus routes.

The smart bus routes around Melbourne are the logical starting point in answering the question of where orbital rail lines might go. Warrigal Road, Springvale Road, Stud Road, Dandenong-Frankston Road, Bell Street, Manningham Road: those roads all serve major retail, education and employment zones throughout the east and north of the city.

The west of the city doesn't have the grid road network to the same degree as the north and east, but it does have substantial land allocated to rail use already.

In an attempt to connect as many retail, education, employment zones and areas currently without a rail service at present, I came up with this.

<iframe frameborder="0" height="480" scrolling="no" src="https://www.google.com/maps/d/embed?mid=zLzjYwjjDBk0.kpxS8U94V8JQ" width="100%"></iframe>

<ul>
<li>Black line(s): the orbitals, in four parts passing the following major nodes:
	<ul>
<li>R = retail centres, E = employment or education areas in the vicinity, NS = new rail service area, I = interchange.</li>
		<li>Sandringham-Doncaster (28km), would need to be almost completely underground.
		<ul>
<li>Areas passed: Sandringham (I), Southland (R, I), Kingston (E, NS), Oakleigh South (NS), Oakleigh (E, R, I), Chadstone (R, E, NS), Holmesglen Institute (E, I), Deakin University (E, NS), Box Hill (R, E, I), Doncaster (R, E, NS)</li>
		</ul>
</li>
		<li>Doncaster-Airport (30km), would have an underground/elevated split of about 60/40 respectively.
		<ul>
<li>Areas passed: Doncaster (R, E, NS), Bulleen (NS), Heidelberg (E, I), Northland (R, E, NS), Thornbury (E, I) Coburg (R, E, I), Pascoe Vale (I), Essendon Fields (E, NS), Airport West (R, E, NS), Melbourne Airport business park (E, NS), Airport Terminals (E, NS)</li>
		</ul>
</li>
		<li>Airport-Newport (19km), entirely elevated (to Airport West, shared with Doncaster-Airport) and at grade on new track in existing corridors:
		<ul>
<li>Areas passed: Airport Terminals (E, NS), Melbourne Airport business park (E, NS), Airport West (R, E, NS), Keilor East (NS), Avondale Heights (NS), Sunshine North (NS), Sunshine (R, E, I), Brooklyn (E, NS), South Kingsville (NS), Newport (I).</li>
		</ul>
</li>
		<li>Frankston-Ringwood (42km), big opportunity to have the line run entirely elevated above current Frankston line and then in Dandenong-Frankston Road median, 2km tunnel from Dandenong station from Dandenong North thereafter elevated in Stud Road's median to a short tunnel at Wantirna then elevated above the Belgrave line from Heathmont into Ringwood.
		<ul>
<li>Areas passed: Frankston (E, R, I), Frankston North (NS), Carrum Downs (E, NS), Dandenong South (E, NS), Dandenong (E, R, I), Dandenong Hospital (E, NS), Dandenong North (NS), Rowville (R, NS), Scoresby (E, NS), Knox (R, E, NS), Wantirna (NS), Heathmont (I), Ringwood (R, E, I).</li>
		</ul>
</li>
	</ul>
</li>
	<li>Red lines: current rail projects, the Regional Rail Link (which PTV have previously planned to have metropolitan services running in the corridor in a decade or two, creating a smaller western orbital) and the Melbourne Metro Rail project.</li>
	<li>Green line: extension of the existing rail network from Ashburton via Chadstone, Oakleigh and out to Rowville, refer to <a href="https://www.urban.com.au/news/fishermans-bend-transport-fast-frequent-and-automated">this earlier piece</a> on the re-purposing the Alamein line.</li>
	<li>Purple lines: other rail ideas that I've previously written about, <a href="https://www.urban.com.au/news/fishermans-bend-transport-fast-frequent-and-automated">in particular Fishermans Bend</a>.</li>
</ul>
Red and Green lines would be the last of the traditional rail lines we all know and understand today. Melbourne Metro Rail Project is going to cost near $1billion per kilometre, that's completely unsustainable and unsuitable for completing an orbital rail network.

Black and Purple lines: completely separate rail technology and system with a focus on proper metro service, smaller vehicles, more frequent services, driverless; a system which will consume a lower amount of capital and operational expenditure compared to our current heavy rail setup. Refer to <a href="https://www.urban.com.au/news/vancouvers-skytrain-network-a-model-for-melbournes-future-rail-lines">this 2013 article</a> on Vancouver's Skytrain network and technology.

Over to you.

Lead image credit: <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada_Line">Wikipedia</a>.
</body></html>

Orbital rail lines in Melbourne: where would they go?

<html><body>
In a series of media releases, Spring Street has announced it has dumped the previous Coalition government's <a href="https://www.urban.com.au/new-apartments/dandenong-vic">Dandenong</a> corridor project - which was originally pitched to them by a private consortium - and have announced their own.

Much noise was made about the PPP/Napthine scheme only removing four level crossings between <a href="https://www.urban.com.au/new-apartments/caulfield-vic">Caulfield</a> and Dandenong as well as a smaller number of trains that were to be ordered to run services on this major route. In one of the media releases, the following table was provided as a comparison between the Napthine/PPP scheme and the Andrews Government vision.

<figure><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/dandenong_corridor_comparison.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="Comparison of project features. Source: State Government media release"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="437" src="/sites/urban.melbourne/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/dandenong_corridor_comparison.jpg?itok=pHQ0j5Yc" title="Comparison of project features. Source: State Government media release" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>Comparison of project features. Source: State Government media release</figcaption></figure>According to one media release, expressions of interest are to be called for the grade separations within months and the Premier has preemptively apologised for the shut down of the entire corridor in the name of progress while individual project areas are worked on.

Fair enough Premier, however could we have more detail please?

Given the relative "out of the blue" nature of the project announcement with not much detail beyond the points listed in the image above, here's a wish list of changes <a href="http://www.urban.com.au">Urban.com.au</a> would like to see happen either in conjunction (priority 1), in the medium term (priority 2) and in the long term (priority 3) with the Dandenong corridor upgrade.

<h2>Priority 1</h2>

Link the infrastructure investment with more intensive land uses adjacent to the rail corridor

This is a golden opportunity to provide more affordable housing in the middle ring suburbs and Spring Street should make inclusionary zoning as mooted by the Planning Minister (or any other policy targeted at increasing the diversity of urban housing stock) apply to all areas adjacent to newly re-built stations as well as throughout any existing or new structure plan in the corridor.

The Government should work with councils to update structure plans within station vicinities, or create new ones where none exist, in order to capture the benefit of the rail investment. The larger number of trains in the Andrews' Government proposal appears to be linked to increased frequencies of service and therefore the major nodes in the corridor scope: Caulfield, <a href="https://www.urban.com.au/new-apartments/oakleigh-vic">Oakleigh</a>, <a href="https://www.urban.com.au/new-apartments/clayton-vic">Clayton</a>, <a href="https://www.urban.com.au/new-apartments/springvale-vic">Springvale</a> and Dandenong should see more intense and inclusive development made possible through the planning scheme.

Plan Melbourne has previously designated these areas as Activity Centres with Caulfield and Dandenong as National Employment Clusters, further reinforcing their importance within the wider network.

Dandenong should be a special case building on the existing revitalising central Dandenong principles. According to the <a href="http://www.planmelbourne.vic.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0019/131347/Fact-Sheet-Southern-Subregion-May-2014.pdf">Southern sub-region growth fact sheet</a> as part of Plan Melbourne, it is predicted that the area will see another 400,000 to 480,000 people living, for the most part, within reach of a Dandenong corridor station by 2031.

Spring Street should take a leaf out of the New South Wales Government's book and further decentralise public sector organisations and further encourage more private sector investment and employment growth in Dandenong like Macquarie Street has with <a href="https://www.urban.com.au/new-apartments/parramatta-nsw">Parramatta</a>.

<figure><iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" scrolling="no" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/kc_224ozYDc" width="100%"></iframe>

<figcaption>Cranbourne-Pakenham Transformation video from the <a href="http://www.premier.vic.gov.au/cranbourne-pakenham-transformation">Premier's website</a>.</figcaption></figure><h2>Priority 2</h2>

Mass reconfiguration of the bus network to feed the upgraded rail line

A public transport network is a failure if users are still dependent on a private vehicle to access it. Public transport is a logical extension of walking and where distances are too great between the point of origin and the mass transit mode, other forms of public transport need to be either created or reconfigured to ensure there is no dependency on private vehicles.

Beyond Caulfield and <a href="https://www.urban.com.au/new-apartments/carnegie-vic">Carnegie</a>, the only other major mode of public transport other than the rail services is the bus network. While a few of the Smart Bus services operate and act as feeder services in the area already, every station - including along the Pakenham and <a href="https://www.urban.com.au/developments/cranbourne-vic">Cranbourne</a> segments - should see less focus on car parking and more on bus service expansion.

Rather than focus on the bells and whistles of a Smart Bus service, bus network/feeder policy should focus on these core principles: frequency, route directness and operating hour expansion. The end-game should be to correct the sheer waste of land at stations like <a href="https://www.urban.com.au/developments/berwick-vic">Berwick</a> which has hectares of parking that should be put to better use, especially in the scenario where VicTrack own the land.

<figure><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/14032766753_f55cb66ca7_c.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="Springvale Station only had two platforms built as part of the recent grade separation project"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="357" src="/sites/urban.melbourne/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/14032766753_f55cb66ca7_c.jpg?itok=nJhxSn93" title="Springvale Station only had two platforms built as part of the recent grade separation project" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>Springvale Station only had two platforms built as part of the recent grade separation project. Source: <a href="http://www.danielbowen.com/2014/04/26/new-springvale-station/">Daniel Bowen's blog</a>.</figcaption></figure><h2>Priority 3</h2>

At the very least keep one eye on corridor expansion and tell the public about it

No mention was made of expanding the track within the existing corridor however the track and station design should take into account that the corridor will be expanded in future. The logical next step would be to quadruplicate the track between Caulfield and Dandenong thus enabling two tiers of service - stopping-all-stations and express - to operate independently over the longer term.

The future track layout around Oakleigh and Clayton stations should cater for four tracks and four platforms, all other stations should cater for four tracks with only two platforms.

The fastest services on the <a href="https://www.urban.com.au/new-apartments/sydney-nsw">Sydney</a> Trains network between Sydney's Central station and Parramatta is 27 minutes. This is achieved through extensive and frequent express services which for the most part run on track which is rated for speeds in the vicinity of 80kph.

A direct Flinders Street service from Dandenong according to the current timetable is 41 minutes.

The City-Dandenong corridor (29km as measured from Flinders Street to South Yarra along the projected alignment of the Melbourne Metro Tunnel project; <a href="https://www.urban.com.au/new-apartments/south-yarra-vic">South Yarra</a> to Dandenong station along the existing corridor) is 6km longer than the Sydney-Parramatta corridor (23km measured from Central station along the existing Main Western Line to Parramatta).

Given the advantage of a straighter alignment thus enabling higher speeds with express services, should track be quadruplicated - perhaps as part of a second stage of the Melbourne Metro Tunnel project - it is within the realms of possibility that a similar CBD to CBD trip, time-wise, could be undertaken in Melbourne. This should have the effect of improving Dandenong's profile as a employment and growth centre for people living 'up' the line toward the city, not just for those who live beyond Dandenong and commute to the city at present.

At the very least this should be the ultimate plan: creating another fast, frequent transport spine that caters for short and longer trips right through South Eastern Melbourne in both directions, not just for the current peak-time commuters.

Lead image credit: recently grade separated Springvale Station, via <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Springvale_railway_station">Wikipedia</a>.
</body></html>

Trains

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News

Trains

Editor's Picks

Receive the latest news stories to your inbox

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News