Re: Rowville extention - Two proposed routes.

[Michael Kurkowski <mk@netstra.com.au>]

Hi,

I was going to get to the East Doncaster line in a later post, but here
goes anyway: 

The (politically) most favoured plan for the East Doncaster link is a
light rail service. The light rail would begin at Bourke Street and
Spencer street and continue up along the same route as the #86 tram,
until Alexander Parade where it will turn right. There will be a stop
located at Victoria Park station, with a direct link to the rail station
so tram passengers can transfer to train and vice versa. There will be
stops located at: Chandler Hwy, Belford Rd, Burke Rd, Bulleen Road, and
Doncaster Road, where it will turn off and run along the centre of
Doncaster Road until it reaches Doncaster Shoppingtown. 

There are a couple of issues with this i brought up with the person.
Firstly since there will be new trams constructed in the coming years,
amend the plans to make them capable of 115kph. Regardless of the fact
that cars only do less than 5kph on that freeway during peak times, it
will look more impressive to the people if the trams are capable of
115kph where the cars can only legally do 100kph. It will also be a good
marketing plot. People will instantly assume tram go 80, car go 100, car
go faster than tram, lets take car. 

Secondly, heavy rail is a better option for the long term. It may/will be
faster than a tram service. I have two ideas on how to route the railway.
The second, being a little radical, I don't see how it will work. Idea
one, is to turn off at Victoria Park and follow the eastern freeway. Idea
two is to turn off at Fairfield following the Right of Way of the old
outer circle then meeting up with the freeway. 

The second option is better in regards to congestion between CHL and
Jolimont. You can run services every 20 minutes to fairfield, and
alternate to create a 40 minute through service from the city. The other
20 minute periods would be made up with a shuttle service
terminating/departing Fairfield. There is enough room for another
platform on the down side. 

Example of services would be as follows: 

down. DCA ex. FSS 10:16
Depart FFD 10:28 to DCA

down. ELT ex. FFD 10:30 (formed by an arrival either from DCA or ELT
shuttle) 

down. HBE ex. FSS 10:36
Depart FFD 10:48 to HBE

down. DCA ex. FFD 10:50 (formed by an arrival either from DCA or ELT
shuttle). 

<end example>

A radical plan, but would it work??

Regards
Michael



The voices in my head told me something that Steven Hurst said, I
therefore quote: 

>> ROUTE 2 - Branch the line off, from Huntingdale.
>> ------------------------------------------------
>> ...This route would also service Monash University and have a lower
>> ... 
>
>It would also service Waverly Park, if it was still there, which it more
>than likely wouldn't be.
>
>If this line was built and Waverly was gone, it would be a great shame,
>as this was a major flaw of Waverly.  I think though, for the above
>reason, that the other route would only ever be considered now.
>
>Just another point, why would they build this line and not a line like
>Doncaster East first, surely that would be more viable?!
>
>Thanks,
>
>Steven Hurst
>
>
>