[PRO] Hove Level Crossing Removal | $171m

[SBD]

A day that I never thought would come, Wingard talking sense while Tom K spouts absolute nonsense.

Preliminary works (Surveying and service locating) for this have occured and to my knowledge, detailed planning is well underway.

Tom really needs to stop with the uninformed media grabs that can easily be proven wrong. It makes him (and his party) look like absolute idiots.

One thing I have never heard from Tom K is "the planning was all done, the government should just let the contract and build it" or even "we have a plan to do it like this, they should stop 'investigating' and do it the way we planned".

R2P is the only thing I can think of that might have been planned by Labor and started since Liberal was elected. I suspect we would be in no better situation if Labor had won the 2018 election - there was no forward plan, just broad wishes.

[AndyWelsh]

The budget for the upgrade of the Brighton Road level crossing at Hove is expected to cost nearly $300 million, up from $171 million that was originally allocated.

The “most feasible” design would cost $290 million and no design could be completed for the original $171 million allocated.

Transport Minister Corey Wingard said “We’ve looked at road over, road under, rail over and rail under – we’ll go back to the community to consult on that but the early indication is that there’s a cost pressure on that project but we want to see that project happen, absolutely”.

Tom Koutsantonis said, “This is a 70 per cent blowout on the estimated cost. Why has this happened?”

Corey Wingard said the Hove project was another example of “undercooked plans.”


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ChillyPhilly]

Hopefully it can be extended to include Jetty Road? That'd be nice.

[ginzahikari]

Has anyone watched this video before? It has been unlisted on DIT's Youtube channel for two weeks already, and shows that they favour the rail over option.

https://youtu.be/PYJ4gLEteGs

[Spotto]

Has anyone watched this video before? It has been unlisted on DIT's Youtube channel for two weeks already, and shows that they favour the rail over option.

https://youtu.be/PYJ4gLEteGs

Since it’s an unlisted video I’m gonna go with no, we haven’t see it before

Nice find though, where did you find it?

[AndyWelsh]

Has anyone watched this video before? It has been unlisted on DIT's Youtube channel for two weeks already, and shows that they favour the rail over option.

https://youtu.be/PYJ4gLEteGs

Thanks for finding and sharing this ginzahikari!

The rail over option seems to make sense considering they’ve found sea water just 5 metres down and the large amount of SA Water infrastructure under Brighton Road. Also great for road and rail users like me, with only a few weeks of disruption expected with most of the new rail bridge constructed off site.

For those living and working near by, I suspect they won’t favour the rail over option, so hopefully a lot can be done to green the structure and surrounds. Maybe the fact that disruption and compulsory purchases will be kept to a minimum will help?

I also couldn’t see any mention on the slides in the video on the cost blowout that was mentioned in the news late last year. I wonder if that has been resolved a little more with the rail over option presumably being the cheapest?

Also worth noting that the video says they’ll retain a station at Hove near the existing location and won’t remove the Jetty Road level crossing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ginzahikari]

Has anyone watched this video before? It has been unlisted on DIT's Youtube channel for two weeks already, and shows that they favour the rail over option.

https://youtu.be/PYJ4gLEteGs

Since it’s an unlisted video I’m gonna go with no, we haven’t see it before

Nice find though, where did you find it?

Apparently it's on the project website itself.
I noticed it since some local residents knew that the government is favouring the rail over option and they're now petitioning the government to stop the project from happening.

[ginzahikari]

Has anyone watched this video before? It has been unlisted on DIT's Youtube channel for two weeks already, and shows that they favour the rail over option.

https://youtu.be/PYJ4gLEteGs

Thanks for finding and sharing this ginzahikari!

The rail over option seems to make sense considering they’ve found sea water just 5 metres down and the large amount of SA Water infrastructure under Brighton Road. Also great for road and rail users like me, with only a few weeks of disruption expected with most of the new rail bridge constructed off site.

For those living and working near by, I suspect they won’t favour the rail over option, so hopefully a lot can be done to green the structure and surrounds. Maybe the fact that disruption and compulsory purchases will be kept to a minimum will help?

I also couldn’t see any mention on the slides in the video on the cost blowout that was mentioned in the news late last year. I wonder if that has been resolved a little more with the rail over option presumably being the cheapest?

Also worth noting that the video says they’ll retain a station at Hove near the existing location and won’t remove the Jetty Road level crossing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I always thought of them putting a new station between Warradale and Hove since Warradale is way too close to Oaklands. But of course this would be a controversial move.

One thing I did notice though is how in both the rail over and under options the viaduct and the trench respectively are quite long, almost reaching 2km in length. I'm pretty sure that Jetty Road would be covered then? Considering the distance between Warradale and Brighton stations is just 2.3km? (from wikipedia)

[AndyWelsh]

The guy mentions somewhere in the video where the bridge would start from and explicitly says they’re leaving Jetty Road as it is.

I’ve registered for updates now, so interesting to see what comes out in the future.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[AndyWelsh]

Says here the rail over is 1.4km long.

There’s also a petition to stop anything happening at all.

https://www.change.org/p/corey-wingard- ... gSuvITpmi4


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Spotto]

The guy mentions somewhere in the video where the bridge would start from and explicitly says they’re leaving Jetty Road as it is.

Near the end the presenter says: Whether it be a rail over or rail under solution we would not be touching the Jetty Road; that would remain as it is at-grade and any solution would start after Jetty Road landing roughly 700m or so the other side of Brighton Road

They're going to the trouble of grade separating Brighton Road and Jetty Road is right there on the edge of the project and they're not touching it. It's not a major arterial, sure but it's still a significant secondary road. They probably figured it would cause too much of a stink with the locals living on the eastern side of the tracks who would have their non-existent seaside views spoiled (land adjacent to the rail corridor at Brighton and Seacliff is mostly flat, there is no view of the sea).

If the people in charge of Melbourne's Level Crossing Removal Authority (which DIT consulted with) were doing this project they'd be running a skyrail from Brighton Road all the way through to Pine Avenue eliminating six level crossings in one go. From Ascot Park all the way to Seaford there would be only 2 level crossings left (technically one, since the other is only an access road to the desalination plant), and only 7 between Adelaide and Ascot Park.

[Norman]

If they elevated the rail to Jetty Road they would also need to lift Brighton Station, which would be more complex due to its layout. It would also increase the ongoing maintenance costs for the elevated station.

[ChillyPhilly]

Let's keep leaving persistent and consistent feedback to include Jetty Road in the project.

[Spotto]

If they elevated the rail to Jetty Road they would also need to lift Brighton Station, which would be more complex due to its layout. It would also increase the ongoing maintenance costs for the elevated station.

I understand the layout at Brighton was previously used for occasional peak services, but based on the new timetable there are currently none. Given its location Brighton is a slightly odd station to start/end services from, the only reason it was done is because the station already has three tracks from the 1976 rebuild.

The logical solution when elevating Brighton would be to turn it back into a normal two track station (and moved back to its original location at Jetty Road), and add an extra track and platform to Marino. It's located away from any future grade separation, is almost in the dead centre of the line, and with all the excess land surrounding the station there's more than enough room to accommodate an extra platform.

[Eurostar]

If they elevated the rail to Jetty Road they would also need to lift Brighton Station, which would be more complex due to its layout. It would also increase the ongoing maintenance costs for the elevated station.

A viaduct will overlook people's and if steel and metal would it not rust.