Cars & Transportation New Tunnel in Melbourne?

[bradrowe#32]

As long as Vermont South's integrity is maintained, then dig away!

 

[LANGFORDandSON]

There can be only one.

 

[Ice-Wolf]

There is a huge consensus for better public transport within Melbourne. The systems had no major additions since the 1920/30's if i am correct. Melbourne is being built on car dependency and its unsustainable.... unless people want to spend 3-4 hours in a car a day to say they own a house

Last major change was the City Loop in the late 70's/Early 80's (and they only built the first stage of that and half-arsed the connection between Flinders St and Spencer St). They've closed down more lines than they have added /extended.

 

[Papa Juggs]

Car tunnels are expensive and wasteful.

Cities always benefit more from public transport.

Action needs to be taken to stop people driving into CBDs. Private vehicles should be banned or at least slapped with giant congestion charges. Use buses, taxis, horse & cart for those not in a hurry.

Roads should be for the trucks that feed us and keep the economy going. Not for people to clog in single occupancy vehicles.

 

[neroblack]

Car tunnels are expensive and wasteful.

Cities always benefit more from public transport.

Action needs to be taken to stop people driving into CBDs. Private vehicles should be banned or at least slapped with giant congestion charges. Use buses, taxis, horse & cart for those not in a hurry.

Roads should be for the trucks that feed us and keep the economy going. Not for people to clog in single occupancy vehicles.

Pretty much on the money. The unfortunate thing is that people (generally) don't see a direct benefit to themself from improved public transport, at least not as much as they'd see from a road tunnel that means they wont be stuck in gridlock on Punt Road or Alexandra Parade. It doesn't mean that it's a better option at all, just means it's a solid vote getter.

Fully agree re the congestion charge. It's actually interesting how much CBD real estate is occupied by commercial car parking. Some of the car park operators are also developers (parent companies), and effectively use it as a way to pay their holding costs on the land. They also are big contributors to both major political parties. You can probably see where this is going...

Improved freight rail would get some trucks of metro roads, although there'll always be the need for the more local distribution. In the long run, the Port of Melbourne doesn't need to be where it is now..

 

[Papa Juggs]

Darwin moved it's port out of the city.

Was too difficult.

Had plenty of space over the other side of the harbour.

Seems like the bay down there has plenty of room.

Wharfies eh?

 

[Ice-Wolf]

Improved freight rail would get some trucks of metro roads, although there'll always be the need for the more local distribution. In the long run, the Port of Melbourne doesn't need to be where it is now..

In the long run it's moving to the natural deep water Port of Hastings in Westernport Bay. They really should have begun fast-tracking the move instead of dredging the Port Phillip shipping channels.

 

[Tonythetiger]

One thing I would like to see would be a bridge basically linking Geelong to the Mornington Peninsula. I read an article a while back, needs to be a certain height to allow ships to pass.

Would link something like $200 billion worth of infrastructure and would provide easier access to an Airport (Avalon) that would ideally put to bed this 3rd Victorian Airport nonsense.

The East-West tunnel sounds like a great project although it should be a lower priority than public transport upgrades.

Edit: Having just read over the proposal for the bridge (little has been written about it), the project would require a 3.4km suspension bridge to be made, the longest ever constructed, previous longest is 1.9kms in Japan.

 

[00Stinger]

Am I the only one who thinks the money would be better spent on our public transport system?

I mean really, who is a East-West link tunnel going to really be valuable to?

 

[Ice-Wolf]

Am I the only one who thinks the money would be better spent on our public transport system?

I mean really, who is a East-West link tunnel going to really be valuable to?

Nope, pretty much everyone thinks that would be a better use of the money, the only reason the Libs gained power was because almost the entire Frankston line swung to them on the back of them promising to improve public transport and they've done sfa.

 

[00Stinger]

Nope, pretty much everyone thinks that would be a better use of the money, the only reason the Libs gained power was because almost the entire Frankston line swung to them on the back of them promising to improve public transport and they've done sfa.

Yeah, to me an East-west link tunnel is a pointless exercise. We need to stop peak hour traffic, without having statistics in front of me I would assume there isn't a lot of peak hour traffic with people trying to get from the east to the west or vase versa. It would be people trying to commute into the city.
So why not look at investing money into building over or under passes around or near rail crossings where traffic congests?
Or even look at building business hubs out of the city to try and spread most of the jobs out to these hubs rather than have only business hub in the city? Say Werribee, Craigieburn, Ringwood and Frankston.

 

[Ice-Wolf]

Yeah, to me an East-west link tunnel is a pointless exercise. We need to stop peak hour traffic, without having statistics in front of me I would assume there isn't a lot of peak hour traffic with people trying to get from the east to the west or vase versa. It would be people trying to commute into the city.
So why not look at investing money into building over or under passes around or near rail crossings where traffic congests?
Or even look at building business hubs out of the city to try and spread most of the jobs out to these hubs rather than have only business hub in the city? Say Werribee, Craigieburn, Ringwood and Frankston.

For starters they need to rebuild the stations and intersections at Glenhuntly and Gardiner because of the tramlines (along the lines of the existing station on those lines and not like the monstrocity that is Williams landing absolutely horribly designed station that is). Glenhuntly would need the station and tracks elevated, Gardiner would need the station dropped below street level (the tram tracks crossing the train tracks result in the trains having to move extremely slowly). The also would need to raise or bury Clayton (absolute nightmare especially during peak hours). These 3 would probably result in some of the biggest congestion fixes.

My picks would be Glenhuntly, Gardiner & a train line down the center/alongside the eastern as being first.

Other options would be reorganising the connection between Spencer & Flinders streets so that trains can travel at faster speed between them and building the additional level of the city loop and building a trainline out to the airport.

Going forward all new freeways/tollroads should include a dual track rail line down the center.

 

[neroblack]

In the long run it's moving to the natural deep water Port of Hastings in Westernport Bay. They really should have begun fast-tracking the move instead of dredging the Port Phillip shipping channels.

That's right, and someone needs to stop this stupid Point Wilson option that keeps being thrown up. There was a recent report released linking dredging with impacts on some bay beach recently (Portsea front beach I think but can't remember). So whilst there is about 700ha or something set aside at Hastings for the port and related activities, the Port of Melbourne is expanding again...

 

[neroblack]

A bunch of grade separations got funded recently, including Springvale Rd at Springvale Station, Mitcham Road, and I think some others...the thing with those projects is they don't really improve the train service. There's a new station built, but that's about it. Still worthwhile but not an improvement to PT really..

There is a freight rail line planned to be put in the middle of the Western Port Hwy, which will be upgraded to freeway standard for a lot of it. The Eastern Freeway one should happen too..

Other public transport projects that will probably happen soon(ish) are Cranbourne East Station, possibly Pakenham East Station, electrification further out on the Melton line with some new stations, and some additional stations on the regional rail link that's being built now.

 

[Ice-Wolf]

That's right, and someone needs to stop this stupid Point Wilson option that keeps being thrown up. There was a recent report released linking dredging with impacts on some bay beach recently (Portsea front beach I think but can't remember). So whilst there is about 700ha or something set aside at Hastings for the port and related activities, the Port of Melbourne is expanding again...

Port Phillip Bay is no longer suitable for modern freighters and no amount of dredging will ever change that fact.

Instead of spending any money on Port of Melbourne they need to fast track the Port of Hastings and get it up an running, the money would be better spent on that then wasting it on useless port facilities in a port that is too shallow for the future. Port of Melbourne has had a good run but its time is over, if they had it over again they would have built the Port on Westernport Bay in the first place.

First and foremost they need to sort out the rail and road connections leading into the new Port then need to be mapped out with capacity for the future from the start.

I would suggest having rail connection from the Port with a freight terminal in Dandenong, make the proposed rail tunnel a freight line (or at least enough capacity to cater for it) connecting to another freight terminal on the west of the city.

Another thing to be looked at is converting the entire train network to standard gauge, allowing the entire network to be used by any train provided it can be powered (although this is an Australia wide issue).

 

[neroblack]

Port Phillip Bay is no longer suitable for modern freighters and no amount of dredging will ever change that fact.

Instead of spending any money on Port of Melbourne they need to fast track the Port of Hastings and get it up an running, the money would be better spent on that then wasting it on useless port facilities in a port that is too shallow for the future. Port of Melbourne has had a good run but its time is over, if they had it over again they would have built the Port on Westernport Bay in the first place.

First and foremost they need to sort out the rail and road connections leading into the new Port then need to be mapped out with capacity for the future from the start.

I would suggest having rail connection from the Port with a freight terminal in Dandenong, make the proposed rail tunnel a freight line (or at least enough capacity to cater for it) connecting to another freight terminal on the west of the city.

Another thing to be looked at is converting the entire train network to standard gauge, allowing the entire network to be used by any train provided it can be powered (although this is an Australia wide issue).

http://www.salta.com.au/westgate/DATA/application/repository/repo_41.pdf

Also, there is one planned in the north at Beveridge and one in the west too.

 

[Caesar]

The absurdly low population density of Australian cities means that public transport plans tend to be inefficient and cost-ineffective. Doubly so when they centre around heavy rail.

 

[Papa Juggs]

The absurdly low population density of Australian cities means that public transport plans tend to be inefficient and cost-ineffective. Doubly so when they centre around heavy rail.

The point is to cater for future expansion.

The world doesn't stop when you die mate.

 

[neroblack]

The absurdly low population density of Australian cities means that public transport plans tend to be inefficient and cost-ineffective. Doubly so when they centre around heavy rail.

Doesn't help when Local Government in inner city municipalities actively fights against increasing their resident populations. The middle ring municipalities are better, however lower land values make it harder for high density projects to stack up.

 

[Caesar]

That is the big problem. 'Future expansion' in Australia takes the form of further land releases and growth in outer suburbs. The bigger the urban sprawl gets, the less efficient public transport infrastructure becomes. Sydney is the same size as London and has half the population. The maths just doesn't add up.

Until urban planning philosophy changes and Australians get over their obsession with huge homes and yards, roads will continue to be the most effective transport infrastructure for cities.

 

[Seeds]

No, absolutely no right whatsoever. It is farcical that they want to tear down someone's home like it's nothing.

Dude its a growing city. A city needs to accommodate for the increase in population. I'm sure they weren't complaining when their house prices were going through the roof because of their close proximity to the city. Have to take the good with the bad.

 

[neroblack]

That is the big problem. 'Future expansion' in Australia takes the form of further land releases and growth in outer suburbs. The bigger the urban sprawl gets, the less efficient public transport infrastructure becomes. Sydney is the same size as London and has half the population. The maths just doesn't add up.

Until urban planning philosophy changes and Australians get over their obsession with huge homes and yards, roads will continue to be the most effective transport infrastructure for cities.

There is so much that would need to change that it is beyond a quick fix. Housing affordability, for example, is a major issue. You can't solve that through medium/high density development without significant government $$ to make the projects feasible. The cheapest land is on the fringe. That's not saying it's a good thing, but it's another reason that it'll keep happening.

 

[bigange]

I'd love to see improved public transport. You just have to look at countless European/Asian cities to see how good it can be, and come 50 years we will eventually be catering to such a dramatic increase in population to match some of those cities.

 

[Papa Juggs]

Why can't we just build bullet trains?

Why does living on top of one another need to be the solution?

I caught the train to Brisbane not long ago. I couldn't believe how slow it went. When cars move faster than something that's literally on rails you have a problem.

 

[Tonythetiger]

Building bullet trains between our major cities is an extremely costly exercise and something we do not yet have the population to warrant that kind of spend. I read somewhere Melbourne to Sydney to Brisbane would be somewhere in the midst of 150 billion to do.

There are more pressing projects at this time. The continued removal of rail crossings should be a high priority. A train to the Airport is another. I think the East West link is a good project but is not our most pressing need.

One thing I think when up and running has the most potential is the NBN. If we can link employees to their employers via high speed internet and lessen the need to have staff in actual offices, surely that can have a positive impact on peak hour congestion and can provide more employment to regional Victoria.