• Advertisement

Melbourne population growth & transport

Melbourne / Victoria Transport Discussion

Moderator: MAN 16.242

Melbourne population growth & transport

Postby Roderick Smith » Mon Apr 25, 2016 11:34 am

MP Tim Smith says balanced growth key for Melbourne’s future.
April 17, 2016 Progress Leader.
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/leader/inne ... 57c32728ac

Melbourne 2035: Our city of the future.
April 24, 2016 Herald Sun.
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victor ... 72306bd33c

Roderick Smith
Posts: 1232
Joined: Mon May 28, 2012 8:44 pm
Has thanked: 100 times
Been thanked: 193 times

Re: Melbourne growth

Postby Heihachi_73 » Tue Apr 26, 2016 4:03 pm

Yawn, yet another Liberal stuck in the 1950s (Leader article; the Hun news article is paywalled again). If you want leafy streets, buy a McMansion in Mont Albert Rd or move to Belgrave. Actually, the McMansion is probably cheaper than today's shoebox apartments that are appearing everywhere en masse, but that's another story. We need more business districts away from the city, that way less people will be forced to work in Melbourne, thus won't have to keep travelling to and from there every single day. In fact, why don't we abandon the city entirely and start a new, modern, 21st century city 100-200kms out? Melbourne can stay in its 20th century glory just like Sovereign Hill with its 1850s gold rush theme.
User avatar
Posts: 412
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2012 6:48 pm
Location: Ringwood
Has thanked: 7 times
Been thanked: 36 times

Re: House prices & transport / new outer suburbs

Postby Roderick Smith » Mon Mar 06, 2017 10:20 am

Beveridge North West, Beveridge Central, Wollert, Donnybrook/Woodstock to open without roads or schools.
Whittlesea Leader March 6, 2017.
THE State Government will not build schools, services, roads and public transport for new suburbs in Melbourne’s north before people move in.
Four new suburbs have been announced by the government — Beveridge North West, Beveridge Central, Wollert, and Donnybrook/Woodstock. Together they will cater for 80,000 new residents.
Victorian Government spokesman Patrick Lane said 100,000 lots, across 17 new suburbs, in Melbourne’s growth corridors would be rezoned to build new communities.
“But that doesn’t mean our new suburbs won’t take many years to develop,” Mr Lane said.
“Our meticulous planning practices are ensuring that as these suburbs develop over the next
30 years, communities will have access to the schools, services, roads and public transport that make the very cornerstone of great neighbourhoods.”
Beveridge North West precinct structure plan map from the Metropolitan Planning Authority. Picture: Supplied The Government refused to name the roads that would be built and/or upgraded as part of the establishment of the new suburbs in Melbourne’s north.
The ministers for planning and roads also refused to take up residents’ invitation to commute one day, to and from the CBD from Melbourne’s northern suburbs during peak-hour traffic.
Mr Lane said new suburbs would be established across many years and suburbs would not reach capacity overnight.
He said the 100,000 lots would be released strategically across a measured timeline, not all at once.
Leader understands infrastructure and services, including roads, will be funded in part by developer levies.
Planning Minister Richard Wynne said the Government was taking action to boost land supply and cut delays in approvals to make housing more affordable.
A state government map showing where some of the new Melbourne suburbs will be.
“This is all about ensuring there is plenty of new housing coming to market to suit the varied needs of Victorian families, stay ahead of population growth and make new homes as affordable as possible,” Mr Wynne said.
University of Melbourne urban planning expert Associate Professor Alan March, said current infrastructure in the proposed new suburbs would not support young families, who would be the ones moving out to the new suburbs.
Associate Prof March said it would force the young families to travel longer distances for school, child care and other destinations.
He also said it was a false expectation the new suburbs would make housing more affordable in Melbourne and, while houses may cost less on the outer fringe of Melbourne, there would be other costs that would burden those who lived there.
New suburbs Plumpton and Kororoit.
“It is a shift of the costs on to the consumer. There are very great and very long commuting times and with that comes a whole range of negative impacts on health, obesity and family life,” Associate Prof March said.
“Not to mention the carbon output.
“If you live out there you need to invest in cars.”
Some of the new suburbs will flank Mandalay Estate in Beveridge.
On transport:
● Extending the rail line to Mernda
● $395 million upgrade of the Hurstbridge line will remove level crossings ● Investing $100 million in better bus services in growth areas On roads:
● Building a new diamond interchange to connect O’Herns Rd to the Hume Fwy ● Duplicating Yan Yean Rd between Diamond Creek Rd to Kurrak Rd.
● Investing $250,000 for a business case into an upgrade of Craigieburn Rd between Hanson Rd and Aitken Blvd.
● Completed detailed planning studies into the Mickleham Rd and Somerton Rd corridors On education:
● Invested $127.1 million to build and upgrade schools across Thomastown, Yan Yean and Yuroke in the last two budgets — an average of $63.6m per year.
RELATED: Two new suburbs planned for Melbourne’s north.
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/leader/nort ... 8e4c933630
with this map, and detail of Beveridge North-west, built remotely from the railway.
170306M-Melbourne'HeraldSun'-BeveridgeNorthWest.jpg (246.48 KiB) Viewed 2086 times
170306M-Melbourne'HeraldSun'-newsuburbs.jpg (248.82 KiB) Viewed 2086 times
Roderick Smith
Posts: 1232
Joined: Mon May 28, 2012 8:44 pm
Has thanked: 100 times
Been thanked: 193 times

Re: Melbourne to reach 8 million.

Postby Roderick Smith » Tue Mar 14, 2017 3:41 pm

Melbourne transport network must cope with 10 million more trips by 2050. This is total spin. DoI/DoT/PTV have done nothing for capacity. and flatly refuse to offer improved services. All they can deliver is spin, verging into outright lies. Not one figure for the misnamed 'metro' has any validity.
Herald Sun March 13, 2017.
MELBOURNE’S transport network would need to cater for 10 million more trips a day by 2050 — an increase of more than 80 per cent — to ease the city’s growing pains.
The Andrews Government wants commuters to ditch the car in favour of public transport, cycling and walking over the next three decades.
The government’s new planning blueprint — Plan Melbourne 2017-2050 — says Melbourne’s transport system needs the capacity to cope with nearly 23 million trips a day by 2050 — almost double the current figure of 12.5 million trips.
Train patronage would be boosted by the completion of the $10.9 billion Metro Rail Tunnel project in 2026.
By placing three of Melbourne’s busiest train lines under the city, the tunnel would free up space in the City Loop to run more trains in and out of the city.
The Metro Rail project will free up space in the City Loop.
Patronage on the Upfield line is expected to increase by 71 per cent over a two-hour peak period (up 4500 passengers), rise 60 per cent on the Sunbury line (up 11,300 passengers) and increase 48 per cent on the Sandringham line (up 7200 passengers).
The government says it would create a rail system with better timetabling enabling a “turn up and go” frequency to service the needs of a growing population.
More services would allow easy interchange with other train lines as well as trams and buses, whose routes would also be extended to offer Victorians a better integrated transport system.
Public Transport Minister Jacinta Allan claimed the government was investing more in public transport than any government in Victoria’s history.
Metro tunnel digger.
“The Metro Rail Tunnel, 50 level crossing removals, line upgrades and extensions and more than 100 new trams and trains — these massive projects will create space to run more services and carry more people as Victoria grows,” Ms Allan said.
The government says it would investigate changes to the road space allocation to prioritise bus and tram movements in key locations.
It also concedes that many of Melbourne’s outer suburbs need to be better serviced by public transport.
Women, families and school-age children would all be encouraged to take up walking and cycling to turn Melbourne into a low-carbon city designed to cope with the ­effects of climate change.
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victor ... 7fc3155f78
Roderick Smith
Posts: 1232
Joined: Mon May 28, 2012 8:44 pm
Has thanked: 100 times
Been thanked: 193 times

Re: Outer-suburban population growth

Postby Heihachi_73 » Wed Apr 05, 2017 2:57 pm

Well, it's a given that they will build roads. Anything else in Victoria is an optional extra with a ten-figure price tag.
User avatar
Posts: 412
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2012 6:48 pm
Location: Ringwood
Has thanked: 7 times
Been thanked: 36 times

Re: Outer-suburban population growth

Postby Craig » Fri Apr 07, 2017 10:23 am

Heihachi_73 wrote:Well, it's a given that they will build roads. Anything else in Victoria is an optional extra with a ten-figure price tag.

Actually, often the case is that the single-lane roads that once cut through farmland and market gardens suddenly have quadrupedal the amount of the traffic and nothing is done for years, leading to long queues in the peak hour, estates hard to get in or out etc - just ask anyone in places like Mernda or Point Cook if they think the road network handles the traffic that urban sprawl creates.

Even ALP's $1.8B package of upgrading several roads in the outer west won't be completed until late 2021.

Kind Regards

Craig :-)
User avatar
Posts: 4223
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2004 11:26 pm
Location: Edithvale, VIC
Has thanked: 1205 times
Been thanked: 427 times

Re: Outer-suburban population growth

Postby krustyklo » Fri Apr 07, 2017 10:28 pm

Well, it's a given that they will build roads. Anything else in Victoria is an optional extra with a ten-figure price tag.

Much as it would be easy to think that the mere provision of a few bus routes is the only thing that is needed for outer suburban housing estates (and of course there's those who think that anyone choosing to move to an outer suburban housing estate deserves a lack of facilities, but let's save that nonsense for another time), the reality as Craig points out is that roads are needed as much as better PT.

Whilst I am a pariah with some in my office for daring to suggest that East West Link was a waste of money designed in a wasteful hurry more to wedge Labour before the election and show that although the Baillieu / Napthine government were a do-nothing government for their term that they really did have plans for the next term if you just voted them in, I actually think roads in Melbourne need money spent on expansion just as much as PT does.

Unlike many in the PT world, I think the Ring Road needs to be completed by building the North East link. Yes, I readily accept statistics such as Melbourne having the second largest land use (as a percentage) dedicated to roads in the world after Houston, Texas. I couldn't believe it when I lived in Sydney for six months for work how few roads they have compared to Melbourne. Yes, I accept that schemes like widening Hoddle St is not the real answer, not at least until we deal with things like bus priority in the inner city, Melbourne Metro tunnel 1 and 2, etc. The inner city is congested, and any extra lanes or overpasses will be full still from day 1. Land use dedicated to transport in the inner city needs to be more efficient to have a hope of reducing congestion meaningfully, not more road space provided willy nilly - hence why PT is the right answer in the form of 24/7 bus lanes and more railway lines, even expensive ones.

On the other hand, I believe there are justifiable road schemes which will benefit all modes and be genuinely useful, and could be argued to be needed. Craig has already pointed out that 2 lane roads that once led to cows and vegetables now carry a large proportion of residents of new housing estates and could be justifiably expanded, especially when you consider such roads were much further apart than the roads many advocates are used to in middle and inner eastern suburbia where there is a grid of roads every 2 to 3 kilometres at most, with lower density compared to many newer estates (yes, the houses in new estates are bigger but they have tiny backyards). The other unique issue with the North East Link is that from the point where the Yarra turns from north to east, there are crossings at Chandler Hwy, Burke Rd, Banksia St, Fitzsimons Lane, Kangaroo-Warrandyte Rd - 5 in all. Google Maps measuring tool suggests that the distance here is around 20km linking bridge to bridge, or 5km between bridges! The equivalent in middle suburbia (measuring along Springvale Rd from Donvale southwards) would be if the Eastern Fwy, Maroondah Hwy, Burwood Hwy, Waverley Rd, Monash Fwy, Ferntree Gully Rd and Wellington Rd were removed; and the only roads intersecting east-west were Doncaster Rd, Canterbury Rd, High St Rd, Police Rd, and Heatherton Rd. I suspect that anyone who genuinely suggested closing 7 out of 12 east-west roads in eastern middle suburbia would be laughed out of town, yet these are Melbourne's north-south links across the Yarra. I also note that in that list of east-west roads there are 2 high capacity freeways, yet none north-south across the Yarra at all. The problem here is that the resulting peak hour congestion affects the only north-south public transport mode as much as the cars - and the problem with delaying buses crossing the Yarra is that this has flow on effects for users further along the route (especially Smartbuses) who eventually give up on unreliable buses (I have considered buying a car every time I get totally stuffed around by the 901/902 - and I am fairly pro-PT as my posts indicate!), and it increases the cost of running the bus service (how much money did it cost Transdev when they added more time to Smartbus timetables to make them slightly more reliable - a non-trivial amount I suspect given they would have needed extra buses and drivers and this is a recurring expense). Much as it would be desirable and helpful to add a bus lane back to the Main Rd roundabout, it would be financially and politically costly to build a bus only lane over the Yarra.

To take Craig's point further as well, just north of me is the Doreen, Mernda, Mill Park Lakes, and South Morang housing estates. Whilst it is great the South Morang line was built and is now being extended to Mernda, it will only cater for a minority subset of trips along the line through Thomastown, Reservoir, Preston and Clifton Hill to the CBD. If you are a tradey, it doesn't help you. If you catch the bus to your job in Greensborough, it doesn't help you. If you go to school in Doncaster, it doesn't help you (yes these people exist - I know some of them!). On the other hand, expanding Plenty and Yan Yean Rds, including bus priority does help you - and this is what is happening. Sorry PT advocates, the PT being provided to South Morang, Doreen, etc will be comparable in a positive way to much of Melbourne once the Mernda line is completed (train to City, South Morang, Epping and other inner and middle northern activity centres), reasonable bus services (901 Smartbus through South Morang and accessible from the southern parts of Doreen, otherwise reasonably direct services every 20 or even 10 minutes in peak hour 40/20 outside to activity centres such as Greensborough and South Morang including weekends) but roads are still needed, if only because the predominant public transport mode will still be rubber tired - and will still be sitting on the same single lane in Plenty as the hundreds of cars in front of it...

Ultimately both PT and better roads are needed for much of Melbourne, whatever the price tag happens to be. To be fair to the current government, they do seem to be doing something in terms of accelerating level crossing removals (including "place making" stations) and building the Melbourne Metro (actually funding it instead of yet another plan to review the route and create a business case) in terms of spending money on PT, along with less glamorous improvements such as improving bus services (the current Plenty Valley network is actually quite reasonable compared to what went before, and would be significantly more costly to run in both extra routes and much better frequencies, the Meeting Our Transport Challenges upgrades to minimum standards improved things significantly across the board compared to what bus services were like in the early 2000s - go visit Krustylink and look up late 90s / early 2000s bus timetables to see what services were like before then for a reality check on what low profile improvements can do).

[Lest it be thought I'm a political shill based on the previous paragraph, I have voted for both major parties in past elections state and federal, I am not a member of a political party, and tend to be of the view that you know a politician is lying when their lips move. I also acknowledge the Liberal government have made improvements to PT, including previous rants on why the Liberal Party made no mention of their Fitzsimons Lane bus lane during the last election which has benefited me personally and greatly, as well as the level crossing removals that happened during their term of government.]
User avatar
Posts: 2545
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2004 10:12 am
Location: Bundoora, VIC
Has thanked: 174 times
Been thanked: 253 times

Re: Melbourne population growth

Postby Heihachi_73 » Thu Jun 22, 2017 11:35 am

If the comments were on another online news site and not the Hun I would be inclined to reply to some of those on the page itself - anyway...

*1: The Government, depending who is in charge at any given time, doesn't know whether to stop the boats or reel them in with open arms.
*2: You forget the genuinely homeless people and the professional beggars masquerading as homeless people.
*3: What does the CFA have to do with public transport? Granted, the Country Fire Authority probably should be located in the "country" (e.g. regional Victoria) as per the ad, rather than populous middle/outer suburbs like Springvale.
*4: A few years when it comes to public transport and it will be 2100, the rate the government does things. If we had bullet trains, they would be built to the cheapest, nastiest standards and still cost as much as the most expensive, fully featured, high speed train money can buy, and coming off the rails all the time just like a Thomas the Tank Engine story. Early 20th century stream locos such as 4472 Flying Scotsman could also do the 160 km/h our Vlocity fleet are known for, but in those days the speed was called 100 miles per hour - the number 160 just looks bigger on a computer screen so it has to be better!
*5: Because the LibLab government is stuck in the 1950s and still thinks we are rebuilding the country following the end of World War II, which means they want to bring in people by the literal boatload, make them spawn as many kids as humanly possible and sell heaps and heaps of "houses" (a shoebox apartment is not a house) and "cars" (a front-wheel-drive hatchback-on-stilts SUV is not a car).
*6: One Nation follower much? As much as it would be a laugh to have Pauline Hanson as PM for a day.
*7: "Australia is Anglo-Saxon" - I guess this particular commenter has never seen an Australian Aboriginal before. "Incompatible imports" only happens because these people aren't being educated when they arrive here, thus they can barely speak English, not to mention what English they may be taught in their own country might also be lacking e.g. the teachers themselves may also fail to speak English without the local accent/dialect showing through, as opposed to sounding "British" or "American" for example (I honestly wouldn't expect an English teacher from a random country to be speaking Australian English, be it old style, modern style or Steve Irwin English), so the students simply follow the leader and have picked up broken English as a result.
*8: About time someone mentioned rezoning the land all over the state (or the entire country of Australia) instead of just in Melbourne. I just hope rezoning also includes building a number of new Melbourne-sized cities so these people don't have to travel for hours every day.
*9: I honestly don't know what happened to Labor recently, we haven't had a proper Labor party for years, just the Liberals in disguise. It really is Holden vs. Ford for the sheeple come election time.
*10: Melbourne and London are two very different beasts. Australia also is ever so slightly larger than the United Kingdom but poorly managed, thus no-one has actually bothered creating new major cities since forever.
*11: It doesn't matter who you vote for, the end result will be the same, see #9. Politicians only exist to get elected, make millions in the relatively short time they are in the limelight (which usually ends when the next election day arrives), and subsequently retire on taxpayer funds, never to be heard of again except in history lessons. Does anyone remember Kevin Rudd as Prime Minister? I didn't think so. No-one will remember Malcolm Turnbull either, although Tony Abbott will always be infamous for his budgie smugglers and his anti-public-transport "cars needs roads" quote.
User avatar
Posts: 412
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2012 6:48 pm
Location: Ringwood
Has thanked: 7 times
Been thanked: 36 times

Re: Melbourne population growth

Postby Roderick Smith » Sun Jul 09, 2017 4:53 pm

As ever: the link between densification and public transport is emphasised.


July 8 2017 Crammed: Ten ideas for dealing with Melbourne's booming population growth.
Unprecedented population growth is transforming Melbourne from a sleepy regional capital of 3 million people only 20 years ago to a megalopolis of a 8 or even 10 million by 2050 – double our current population.
More videos Melbourne's growth comes at a cost.
Melbourne is growing faster than any capital city in Australia, but at what cost?
Politicians love the growth. As The Age reported last weekend, population is propping up an otherwise sluggish state economy.
But we're adding a city the size of Ballarat each year, a level of growth that's challenging our housing affordability, urban boundaries, infrastructure and patience.
The response from experts and the public has been overwhelming, but the quest for a workable solutions has met with great enthusiasm. Here, we canvass the ideas of some of Melbourne's leading minds in search of a better way forward.
John Daley, chief executive officer, Grattan Institute
We should prioritise further planning reform that encourages more sub-division of middle ring suburbs. Obviously the politics of planning are diabolical. But it's the big lever. Governments have little influence over the location of jobs, which are primarily driven by employers' decisions about which location will lead to the best operation for their business. So for the foreseeable future, my guess is that most additional jobs will continue to be created in the CBD and immediate surrounds. Commuting to these jobs from the city edge is inherently hard. Commuting from the middle ring is more feasible as it is already well-serviced by public transport.
Danni Addison, chief executive (Vic) Urban Development Institute of Australia
The Education Department has to seek capital funds to buy school sites through the annual budget. This slows the delivery of much-needed schools in new suburbs. We need a long-term infrastructure pipeline that takes school purchase out of the annual interdepartmental bunfight. New communities and developers are contributing and will contribute billions of dollars in coming years through the Growth Area Infrastructure Contributions fund and through other development contributions. This money should be used for a long-term strategic pipeline of infrastructure investment, not to prop up government balance sheets.
Bill Forrest, planner and long-time local government executive
We should have a planning policy of 50 per cent of journeys in Melbourne being by public transport, cycling or walking by 2050: 50 by 2050. The biggest issue we face is how to efficiently move ever-increasing numbers of people around. Across the world in functional, livable cities of the scale Melbourne is forecast to grow to, journeys taken by public transport, walking and cycling are around 50 per cent of all journeys – think London, New York, Tokyo. For the alternative – polluted, traffic chaos – think New Delhi, Bangkok, Jakarta. Melbourne planning policy in the recent past has had a target of 20 per cent of journeys by walking, cycling or public transport by 2020. We now need a target of 50 per cent.
The population of Melbourne is set to be more than 8 million by 2050. Photo: Leigh Hennigham
Terry Rawnsley, economist and partner SGS Economics & Planning
The Andrews government's new housing strategy is a good start, but there will have to be more of it. The property industry will go bananas and say government should not be competing with the private housing sector. But the private sector has failed to build enough houses at the right price point in the right location, so the government should intervene. We should also invest in growing jobs in the large-scale employment clusters like Dandenong and activity centres like Box Hill outside of the central city. Labor's big investment in Central Dandenong in the mid-2000s is the template.
Saul Eslake, independent economist
Victoria should get rid of stamp duties altogether and seek to collect the same amount of revenue, over time, from a more broadly-based land tax. Owner-occupiers, in particular, would not be exempt. The government would need to manage the transition from the current system carefully, of course, to avoid "double taxation" of recent purchasers. Another important thing we need is to get transport right. The thing about big cities around the world is they are much more reliant on public transport, not just 20 per cent of the population like here but close to half.
A high-rise in Box Hill, a suburb which has become an activity centre. Photo: Eddie Jim
Peter Tesdorpf, planner and member of Victorian Coalition's population taskforce
Managing Victoria's rapid population growth is Victoria's single biggest challenge. Most of the growth is in Melbourne, with the city becoming dysfunctional and in danger of losing its liveable city reputation. Current planning strategies talk of rebalancing population growth to regional Victoria, but there are no levers or mechanisms in place to make this happen. We need a minimum target for the regions to absorb 2 million additional people instead of the projected 690,000 by 2050. Investing in the regional rail network to reduce travel times is the most powerful tool to achieve decentralisation and spread opportunities to all Victorians.
Rachel Carey, food policy specialist, University of Melbourne
By 2050, Melbourne is likely to need at least 60 per cent more food, but we're paving over the places where our food grows and putting the city's long-term food security at risk. If Melbourne is to remain a liveable city in 2050, we need to start planning for food. Other cities experiencing rapid growth, like Vancouver, are planning for their future food supply alongside other priorities such as affordable housing. It's time to consider stronger planning to protect areas of food production around Melbourne, as they have done around Adelaide. We should also be planning "drought-proof food bowls" close to the city's water treatment plants, where recycled water can be used to grow food during drought.
Traffic congestion is becoming a bigger and bigger problem in Melbourne. Photo: Justin McManus
Michael Bayliss, Victorian president, Sustainable Population Australia
The Victorian state government should lobby the federal government to reconsider economically-driven population growth policies. Australia could maintain a broadly stable population and meet humanitarian obligations without any changes to the current birth rate or the humanitarian program. The skilled migration program is the largest driving force behind Melbourne growing at 100,000 people per annum, which is driven by economic ideology. Future economic population policies should be in keeping with current realities of infrastructure and housing costs and a slowing job market. It is increasingly obvious that Victoria cannot afford the infrastructure budget required to keep up with federal population policies under the current skilled migration program.
Marion Terrill, transport program director, Grattan Institute
There's much new infrastructure under construction but we can't build our way out of congestion. We will find that before long, new roads and trains are just as congested as they are now. We should try a new approach – a 12-month trial of low tolls in the weekday peaks, on all untolled freeways and key arterials like Punt Road and Hoddle Street in the weekday peaks. It shouldn't be a revenue grab – the money raised should be returned to the general community. The scheme would encourage people who have the flexibility to avoid travel in peak hour. At the end of a year we could evaluate how much congestion we are willing to tolerate and whether a small toll makes much difference.
Kerstin Thompson, architect
Australia boasts the largest average house size in the world – around 240 square metres. Architecture can respond by developing new, more compact house types and rethinking existing ones. The bloated single house could be converted to several and thus yield more dwellings within established suburbs, and within existing infrastructure. A quarter acre block with a single, freestanding house in a middle ring suburb could be replaced by a community housing development with four independent, attached units and common support facilities. That would maintain neighbourhood amenity and scale but yield four dwellings from one. Empty-nesters could release some capital to fund extended retirement by selling or renting a portion to a first-time home buyer or extended family.
Related Articles:
Melbourne's population boom masks Victoria's economic woes .
How big is too big for liveable Melbourne? .
www.theage.com.au/victoria/crammed-idea ... x6rw1.html
Roderick Smith
Posts: 1232
Joined: Mon May 28, 2012 8:44 pm
Has thanked: 100 times
Been thanked: 193 times

Re: Melbourne population growth & transport

Postby Roderick Smith » Fri Aug 11, 2017 1:29 pm

Of course Geelong should run to suburban standards. There is nothing magic about any of the outer-suburban dmu commuter routes, and the term 'regional' is misapplied.
Geelong today is like Sunbury, Craigieburn, Werribee and Dandenong were like over earlier decades.


August 9 2017 Regional Rail Link creates more woes for V/Line passengers .
Overcrowding and delays on V/Line trains have become worse since the multibillion-dollar rail extension that was built to fix congestion problems opened two years ago.
Passenger numbers have exploded on V/Line trains from Geelong, since the $3.6 billion Regional Rail Link opened.
Another crowded peak-hour V/Line train heads for Geelong. Photo: Joe Armao .
During peak-hour, Geelong trains are at up to 140 per cent capacity, mainly along the outer-western suburb stations that were added as part of the rail link.
It means 12 of the 16 morning peak trains are more than 100 per cent full, well before they reach Southern Cross Station.
Geelong trains are at up to 140 per cent capacity during peak hour. Photo: Joe Armao .
Across the board, V/Line passengers are enduring delays, cancellations and overcrowding.
Nearly one in three V/Line trains are over capacity and close to 90 per cent are running late, according to a report from the Deputy Auditor General.
The Regional Rail Link effect.
A sharp 18.3 per cent increase in overall passenger numbers between 2014 and 2016 has been largely attributed to the rail link, which was designed to help V/Line services cope with the booming population in the western corridor, in suburbs like Tarneit and Wyndham Vale. The Regional Rail Link, on which Bendigo and Ballarat trains also run, was also intended to ease congestion on tracks shared with Metro Rail trains.
V/Line has not managed this patronage increase well, Deputy Auditor General Dave Barry said.
Seats are a premium on V/Line services. Photo: Joe Armao "V/Line has not successfully dealt with the challenges it has faced over the past decade," he said.
"V/Line was not prepared for the strong growth in patronage and the resulting increase in service demand following the opening of the [Regional Rail Link], which fundamentally changed the nature of its operations."
Mr Barry highlighted a serious asset management problem at V/Line, which has resulted in a maintenance backlog it estimates could cost $534.8 million to manage.
But he said V/Line was starting to turn the situation around.
In a shift that is likely to raise the ire of regional rail commuters, Mr Barry said V/Line was adopting a more "commuter-style" service.
"V/Line is modifying new trains, including increasing seating, and is also preparing for more services with customers standing for part or all of the journey," he said.
"This will require a significant shift in V/Line passengers' expectations, especially for those who have historically experienced adequate seating availability."
V/Line has already added handles to seats on VLocity trains for standing passengers.
Punctuality problems
There is an inability to consistently get V/Line trains to arrive at the metropolitan boundary in time, Mr Barry found. In 2014-15, nearly 90 per cent of V/Line trains reached the city boundary up to three minutes late.
"V/Line advised this is mainly due to congestion in the metropolitan area, which limits the paths available to V/Line services and requires its trains to run at slower speeds," he said.
Factors leading to punctuality problems include: excessive wheel wear in VLocity trains, the failure of VLocity trains to activate boom gates on time, and congestion on the shared metropolitan networks.
Minister for Public Transport Jacinta Allan said the service had shown recent improvements "after years of cuts and neglect from the former Liberal and National government".
"We've added nearly 600 new services, and are getting on with the Regional Rail Revival, which will improve every regional passenger line in the state – allowing more trains, more often, across regional Victoria."
Shadow Minister for Public Transport David Hodgett said under the Labor government, "regional Victoria is treated as second rate compared to Melbourne".
"Under Daniel Andrews, we're seeing $16 billion being spent on metropolitan Melbourne, while regional Victoria is left out."
http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/regio ... xsgcr.html
170809W-Melbourne'Age'-VLine-overcrowding-a.jpg (170.73 KiB) Viewed 787 times
170809W-Melbourne'Age'-VLine-overcrowding-b.jpg (189.79 KiB) Viewed 787 times
Roderick Smith
Posts: 1232
Joined: Mon May 28, 2012 8:44 pm
Has thanked: 100 times
Been thanked: 193 times

Re: Melbourne population growth & transport

Postby Roderick Smith » Thu Sep 07, 2017 3:29 pm


September 6 2017 Mayors of Melbourne's mighty west take their infrastructure wishlist to Canberra .
An airport rail link to help Melbourne prepare for expected population growth will be on a wish-list a delegation of mayors and council chief executives from the city's west will take to Canberra on Wednesday.
Melbourne is predicted to become the nation's biggest city, reaching 8 million by 2051 – and the city's west is expected to grow most quickly, from its current 835,000 residents to 1.8 million.
An airport rail link stopping in Sunshine is on top of a wishlist of infrastructure mayors from Melbourne's west are taking to Canberra. Photo: Paul Jeffers To help accommodate the extra residents, LeadWest – a lobby group for the city's west – is taking a set of projects and policies to Turnbull government ministers, the federal infrastructure department, Opposition leader Bill Shorten and Labor MPs.
Counting among its members six western suburb councils, Victoria University and CityWest Water, the group wants to cut a "city deal" – an agreement for a co-ordinated plan of investment – with the federal government to improve infrastructure.
The mayors want a plan for the redevelopment of Defence land on the Maribyrnong River. Photo: Penny Stephens The group are proposing a CBD-to-airport rail connection which would include at least one stop in the west, along a route that could possibly include a stop at Sunshine.
As the bulk of Melbourne's future population growth will be in the west, the group argues that, the region is a natural funnel-point for regional and interstate public transport services.
A large number of airport workers also live in the west but drive to Tullamarine, and they too would use the rail line, as well as those catching it for travel.
LeadWest's paper on the proposal said it had deliberately not specified a route but would rely on transport planners to decide an alignment based on the maximum number of residents in Melbourne's west who could access the line.
A better freight strategy is also on the wishlist. Photo: Craig Abraham As well as the airport rail link and improved links to Tullamarine, the group wants the Turnbull government to commit to funding:
•Urban redevelopment that includes the Maribyrnong Defence Site, which Canberra has promised to use for housing – but without any concrete timelines •A freight strategy that includes train lines to reduce western Melbourne's reliance on trucks, and that better co-ordinates key rail and road projects •A centre of parenting excellence, built in the west, where around 35 babies are born every day •Energy projects including a solar-powered "mini-grid" in the Sunshine health precinct, and a waste-to-energy facility in Wyndham A solar-powered 'mini-grid' is on the list too Photo: Pat Scala
The group will meet with assistant minister for cities Angus Taylor, energy and environment minister Josh Frydenberg, and others government MPs, as well as Mr Shorten, opposition environment and water spokesman Tony Burke, and infrastructure department secretary Mike Mrdak.
"Our communities are growing rapidly and their needs are changing just as fast," said Sophie Ramsey, the mayor of Melton Council.
"This isn't just about planning for houses, schools and hospitals where there were once paddocks or warehouses," said the mayor of Hobsons Bay Council, Sandra Wilson.
A funding arrangement with Canberra would create a mechanism for all levels of government to give Melbourne's west a better focus, she said.
"With 30,000 to 50,000 people predicted to be moving to our region every year, we cannot afford to delay."
The request for increased federal spending comes as the group also released political polling it commissioned in the federal Labor-held seats of Lalor, Gorton, Maribyrnong, Calwell and Gellibrand.
The polling was done by Lonergan Research.
LeadWest said the polling found that undecided voters in the west were skewing towards conservative minor parties, and among those who would vote for a party other than Labor, the Coalition or the Greens, support was highest for "candidate" parties led by Pauline Hanson and Corey Bernardi.
www.theage.com.au/victoria/mayors-of-me ... yb847.html
Roderick Smith
Posts: 1232
Joined: Mon May 28, 2012 8:44 pm
Has thanked: 100 times
Been thanked: 193 times

10 min headways?

Postby Roderick Smith » Thu Oct 19, 2017 12:50 pm

On existing infrastructure, it is possible to run 10 min headways to Williamstown, Werribee via Altona (returning direct), Sydenham Watergardens (Sunbury, with some VLine trickery), Gowrie (and Upfield breathlessly), South Morang, Greensborough, Mooroolbark, Upper Ferntree Gully, Glen Waverley, Dandenong (and 6 tph Pakenham), Frankston and Sandringham.
The stupidity is that the Mon.-Fri. Ringwood 15 min service uses more trains to provide less service than the weekend timetable, and leaves stations beyond with 30 min headways when they could have 20.

If management wants to bleat 'the patronage isn't there', then run some lines as three-car trains.

Management also shoots itself in the foot by deeming that the capacity of a tunnel is 23 tph, not 24 tph, leaving no way for a set of 10 min headways. It has also announced that will be the capacity of the new overpriced badly-designed misnamed tunnel.

PTUA urges Andrews Government to fund plan for trains every 10 minutes.
Herald Sun October 17, 2017.
THE Andrews Government has been urged to run trains every 10 minutes by an influential public transport lobby group.
Public Transport Users Association has called on the Government to fund the official PTV rail network service plan, which included trains every 10 minutes on most Metro lines by 2016.
The PTV plan, written in 2012, proposed that by 2016 there would be six trains an hour off-peak and on weekends to Sunshine, Craigieburn, South Morang, Macleod, Ringwood, Glen Waverley, Sandringham and Newport in addition to existing services to Frankston and Dandenong.
Three trains would also run every hour off-peak and on weekends to outer suburban stations at Sunbury, Belgrave, and Lilydale.
The Andrews Government has been urged to tun trains every 10 minutes by an influential public transport lobby group.
PTUA spokesman Daniel Bowen said the upgrade would revolutionise train travel around Melbourne by cutting waiting times and crowding outside peak hours, and making more trips viable by public transport, including those requiring a change of service.
“Studies show that waiting time for public transport is often perceived negatively, with passengers believing waiting time is longer than it actually is”, Mr Bowen said.
“This actively discourages people from using infrequent public transport, especially for journeys requiring connections between services.
“Running trains every 10 minutes every day, just as we see already on a few lines, and just as we see in other cities of Melbourne’s size around the world, will get people off the roads.”
Mr Bowen said weekend road traffic was almost as bad as weekdays. He said rail commuters still waited up to 40 minutes between trains on Sunday mornings.
Planning for the network now sits with Transport for Victoria.
“We know from VicRoads figures that there is almost as much travel demand in the middle of the day, and on weekends as there is at traditional peak commuting times”, Mr Bowen said.
“There is plenty of spare fleet and track capacity outside traditional peak times.
“Public transport users should not have to wait another decade until the tunnel opens in 2026 to see better services.”
A Government spokeswoman said it would deliver more train services with each timetable change, with one to metropolitan services already delivered this year.
Ten-minute services operate during the weekday inter-peaks to Dandenong, Frankston, Clifton Hill and Newport and to Ringwood on weekends.
www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victoria/ptua ... d10b1b0ca7
Roderick Smith
Posts: 1232
Joined: Mon May 28, 2012 8:44 pm
Has thanked: 100 times
Been thanked: 193 times

  • Advertisement

Return to Discussion - Melbourne / VIC

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests