• Advertisement

Secret Proposal Leaked To Construct Elevated Rail Line!!!

Melbourne / Victoria Transport Discussion

Moderator: MAN 16.242

Re: Secret Proposal Leaked To Construct Elevated Rail Line!!

Postby Heihachi_73 » Thu Oct 19, 2017 4:26 pm

Poor diddums, they bought a house right next to a train line and expected it to be worth millions! Even without skyrail their house is worth a lot less than a similar house the next street away. The anti-rail (forget anti-skyrail) brigade is the same group complaining about the fact trains sound their horns outside where their house happens to be because a level crossing is nearby!

That's it, who can get the government to force Metro to retrofit X'Trapolis horns to the entire Comeng and Siemens fleet as a safety upgrade? :twisted:
User avatar
Heihachi_73
 
Posts: 432
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2012 6:48 pm
Location: Ringwood
Has thanked: 8 times
Been thanked: 36 times

Re: Secret Proposal Leaked To Construct Elevated Rail Line!!

Postby Roderick Smith » Fri Oct 20, 2017 1:35 pm

What a facile response. Of course the house is worth less than those a few blocks away. However, even adjacent to a railway, over $1m is still quite plausible in inner and formerly-middle suburbs. Yes, they did buy willingly with a railway across the back fence. The point now is that the railway has been shifted sideways to be in line with the back fence, and has been elevated by 6 m. That hadn't happened anywhere else in Melbourne, and was avoided with care by the lying LXRA in all of the 'consultation' meetings, which concentrated on the expected trenching solution (as used elsewhere). Now the government is undervaluing (hardly unexpected), even at lineside prices.
All of the posts (general newspaper and hobby group) justifying elevation from Caulfield to Oakleigh come from people who don't live there or in an equivalent environment. None of Melbourne's previous elevations was to that height, and none was against the boundary fence of residential.
Roderick
Roderick Smith
 
Posts: 1294
Joined: Mon May 28, 2012 8:44 pm
Has thanked: 101 times
Been thanked: 194 times

Re: Secret Proposal Leaked To Construct Elevated Rail Line!!

Postby notch » Sun Oct 22, 2017 11:04 am

Aside from the houses at the rear of the elevated rail section from the up side of Victoria Park to the down side of North Richmond. Which has been there for how long now?
notch
 
Posts: 241
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 12:15 pm
Has thanked: 7 times
Been thanked: 45 times

Re: Secret Proposal Leaked To Construct Elevated Rail Line!!

Postby Roderick Smith » Mon Oct 23, 2017 5:29 am

That isn't a good example to cite: The track isn't against the fenceline, and isn't at the height of the new one. At the time of construction, Collingwood was regarded as a working-class slum. The easement was obtained by demolishing property, including a pub in Victoria St. That's why it kinks. Likewise, Balaclava, Montague and Auburn are irrelevant as examples.

Roderick.
Roderick Smith
 
Posts: 1294
Joined: Mon May 28, 2012 8:44 pm
Has thanked: 101 times
Been thanked: 194 times

Re: Secret Proposal Leaked To Construct Elevated Rail Line!!

Postby B10BLE » Mon Nov 20, 2017 4:08 pm

Was on a rail replacement bus from Noble Park to Clayton on Saturday and saw the new station structure at Noble Park while waiting for it and the transition to ground before Sandown Park station and I must say it looks kinda steep. How would the Maryvale cope up the grade with just two locomotives?

Qube is going to need more than VL356 and a G class for this run. I reckon push pull mode is in order with another G class at the end of the train or Seymour's preserved X31.
#PleaseStandBy
User avatar
B10BLE
 
Posts: 261
Joined: Fri May 06, 2011 4:50 pm
Location: Melbourne
Has thanked: 107 times
Been thanked: 5 times
Favourite Vehicle: NR class or bust

Re: Secret Proposal Leaked To Construct Elevated Rail Line!!

Postby BroadGauge » Tue Nov 21, 2017 12:25 am

B10BLE wrote:I reckon push pull mode is in order with another G class at the end of the train or Seymour's preserved X31.

Why would you need to run it as push/pull for? There is a loop provided for locomotives to run around at the Maryvale siding. This is how the train is currently operated.

The cost of modifying the wagons used on the service to have through cabling to allow for the locomotives at either end of the train to communicate with each other would also be significant, for only an extremely small saving in staffing costs.
User avatar
BroadGauge
 
Posts: 3394
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2005 12:20 pm
Location: Kuta Beach, Bali, Indonesia
Has thanked: 163 times
Been thanked: 179 times
Favourite Vehicle: The Bintang Bus

Re: Not value for money

Postby Roderick Smith » Fri Dec 15, 2017 12:57 pm

Roderick.

December 14 2017 Level crossing removal program poor value for money: Auditor-General Andrew Greaves .
The cost of removing 50 of Melbourne's "most dangerous and congested" level crossings has blown out by at least $2.3 billion compared to Labor's first estimate.
At $8.3 billion, the project is more than 38 per cent more expensive than its initial $5 billion to $6 billion estimated price tag.
More videos What will Carrum's level crossing removals look like?
Animations released by the Victorian Government give a glimpse of what some of the ten level crossing removals between Cheltenham and Frankston on the Frankston line will look like once completed. Vision: Victorian Government.
And it could end up costing even more, Victoria's Auditor-General says.
Contrary to the government's stated objective, many of the 50 crossings on the Andrews government's list are not among the city's most congested or dangerous, according to a new report.
The level crossing removal project has a cost of $8.3 billion ... and rising. Photo: Patrick Scala .
Labor promised from opposition to remove 50 level crossings by 2022 in an eight-year program, and is ahead of its target to remove the first 20 by 2018.
But a report by Auditor-General Andrew Greaves, tabled in State Parliament on Thursday, found the pace of removal, driven by the 2014 election commitment, threatens to erode the project's value for money.
Weaknesses in the business case and a politically driven refusal to assess the merits of the 50 selected sites have also undermined the project's value, the report said.
Just 32 of the crossings chosen featured in the top 50 of a 2008 list by the Department of Transport of the state's most dangerous, and just 28 were prioritised on a 2013 VicRoads removal list.
Ten crossings have been removed to date. Photo: Paul Rovere
"The delivery of the program is ahead of schedule, and [the Level Crossing Removal Authority] expects to surpass its target of removing 20 crossings by 2018," the report states.
"However, this pace presents risks to achieving value for money. These risks are compounded by an inadequate and delayed business case, and poor indicators to measure program benefits."
Other politically driven decisions, such as changing the reference design of crossing removals from rail over to rail under to avoid property acquisitions, have potentially added hundreds of millions of dollars to the project cost.
“This pace presents risks to achieving value for money. These risks are compounded by an inadequate and delayed business case.”
Report by Auditor-General Andrew Greaves
This has been especially so on the Frankston line, where 11 crossings are being removed, the report found.
Public Transport Minister Jacinta Allan defended Labor's selection of 50 crossings, arguing it had been made based on publicly available information while in opposition.
"What we didn't have at that point of time, of course, was the VicRoads report that the then Napthine government had ... and not only did the Liberal government keep this report a secret; they sat on it," Ms Allan said.
But she declined to give a guarantee that the project's $8.3 billion cost will not continue to rise.
The figure includes $1.4 billion for extras including new railway stations, power upgrades and track duplications, Ms Allan said.
"Where we have an opportunity when we're removing a level crossing to do more in those local communities to improve public transport services, we will," she said.
Treasurer Tim Pallas said the report was "an illustration of why governments should probably never talk about the cost of a project until they sign contracts".
Shadow Minister for Public Transport David Davis said level crossing removals had merit, "but that doesn't mean that you have a licence to blow the public's money ... on a poorly run project".
The report is scathing of the performance of Victoria's public service, finding that the Department of Economic Development, Jobs, Transport and Resources has failed to give the Andrews government frank and full advice about potential problems with the project.
The finding by Mr Greaves mirrors a similarly damning assessment of how departmental staff mishandled the former Napthine government's failed East West Link project.
"The role of the public service to provide full and frank advice was not realised in this case," Mr Greaves wrote.
"[The department] should have advised the incoming government that an analysis was needed of the selected sites against the stated program objective of removing 50 of the most dangerous and congested level crossings."
The business case for the level crossing removal program was completed in April, almost two years after the project started.
It was given a benefit-cost ratio of 0.78, based on a total project cost of $7.6 billion, meaning it would return 78 cents for every dollar spent.
The project's current cost, $8.3 billion, would erode the benefit-cost ratio further, Mr Greaves' report said.
Much of the increase has come about from changes to recommended designs, particularly on the Frankston line, the report states.
It also warns that the business case for the project could get even shakier in coming years.
"Given the [level crossing removal project] has only removed 10 crossings to date, with five years still remaining and more complex crossings to remove, there is a real risk of further cost increases," the report said.
The project is largely being funded from the proceeds of the $9.7 billion long-term lease of the Port of Melbourne.
Crossing removals are also meant to bring in new revenue for Victoria by creating property development opportunities in a process called value capture.
However, the Auditor-General found problems with this aspect of the project.
By March, the Level Crossing Removal Authority had identified 26 possible development sites, with an estimated return to state of $153 million.
But so far just one contract has been signed with a developer.
www.theage.com.au/victoria/level-crossi ... 04ed0.html

December 14 2017 Level crossings: We all pay as politicians stick to lavish promises .
In Australia's feral brand of politics there is perhaps nothing more costly than a broken promise.
Hence why the Andrews government has bluntly refused to deviate from a list of 50 level crossings it promised to remove four years ago, even as the project drains billions more from the public purse than Labor said it would.
The Level Crossings Removal project has drained billions more from the public purse than Labor said it would. Photo: Joe Armao, Fairfax Media.
A report by Victoria's Auditor-General has laid bare the misleading spin of Labor's promise to remove Melbourne's 50 "most dangerous and congested" level crossings.
The list was never any such thing: just a grab bag of crossings, some dangerous and congested, others relatively trouble-free, stitched together and sold to the electorate for the unrealistically low cost of $5-$6 billion.
That initial guesstimate has since jumped to $8.3 billion, less than halfway into the eight-year program, and the Auditor-General has warned taxpayers to brace for more likely increases.
Senior ministers in the Andrews government were just a little bit conciliatory about the "most dangerous and congested" claim on Thursday, conceding that the list was devised from opposition where access to information is limited to what's in the public domain.
A crucial 2013 VicRoads' review of Melbourne's highest-priority crossings for removal was not available, for example.
But why not reassess the list once better information is available and it becomes apparent some crossing removals don't stack up?
Jacinta Allan touts station rebuilds and power upgrades as bonus add-ons, rather than integral parts of the project. Photo: Joe Armao, Fairfax Media.
Where is the public value in removing the Camp Road level crossing in Campbellfield, with its six trains an hour, while leaving intact Union Street in Surrey Hills, which is twice as busy and where two people were killed last year?
But government ministers stood their ground on the matter of cost and did not concede the project's $8.3 billion price tag was a "blow-out", framing it instead as a bigger investment in improving the public transport network.
Public Transport Minister Jacinta Allan spoke of station rebuilds and power upgrades as though they were bonus add-ons, rather than essential parts of the project.
Voters might say they're not buying it, but what choice do they have? Their money has already been spent.
The Andrews government has undertaken one of the biggest infrastructure programs Victoria has seen and while this is broadly popular with voters it's reasonable to ask if it is losing control of its spending.
Just this week contracts were signed for the West Gate Tunnel, which suddenly has a price tag of $6.7 billion, not the long-touted $5.5 billion.
The fat pipeline of projects is providing an urgently needed response to Victoria's growing pains and generating thousands of jobs, but that is no excuse for sloppy accounting.
The Opposition will, of course, make mileage out of such a damaging report by the Auditor-General, but there are already signs it is in danger of repeating the same mistakes with its traffic light removal pledge.
It has seen the undeniable popularity of level crossing removals and hatched its own focus group-driven spin-off; a promise to remove 55 congested intersections.
The Coalition have even pinched Labor's slogan, promising to remove "55 of Victoria's most dangerous and congested intersections".
The list is also incomplete, with 20 to be chosen after community consultation, and a vague and unexplained cost range of $4.1 billion to $5.3 billion.
Sound familiar?
Related Articles:
Cost of Andrews' transport projects soars above $45b.
Level crossing removals poor value for money: Auditor-General .
The fake economics cookbook: making bad projects look good .
Summer bus hell awaits for rail commuters.
www.theage.com.au/victoria/level-crossi ... 04sbn.html
Roderick Smith
 
Posts: 1294
Joined: Mon May 28, 2012 8:44 pm
Has thanked: 101 times
Been thanked: 194 times

Elevated Rail

Postby Roderick Smith » Wed Dec 20, 2017 3:23 pm

Works start in Carrum & Seaford in early 2018 with construction partners announced on Tues.19.12.17.
The new Station St road bridge across Patterson River will be open in late 2018 & the Seaford Rd level crossing gone by the end of 2018.
http://levelcrossings.vic.gov.au/media- ... -crossings
Roderick Smith
 
Posts: 1294
Joined: Mon May 28, 2012 8:44 pm
Has thanked: 101 times
Been thanked: 194 times

Previous


  • Advertisement

Return to Discussion - Melbourne / VIC

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests