Article text (via 12ft.io):
Three train stations in central Brunswick will be closed and replaced with two new stations as part of level-crossing removal works in the rapidly growing inner-north suburb.
Jewell, Brunswick and Anstey stations will shut when a 2.1-kilometre stretch of elevated “sky rail” is built along the Upfield Line between Albion Street and Park Street, in Parkville, by 2030.
Consultation documents show a new “southern station” will be located adjacent to the RMIT campus between Union and Dawson streets – 200 metres north of Jewell Station and 450 metres south of Brunswick Station.
The second “northern station” will be between Hope and West streets, 450 metres north of Brunswick Station and 200 metres south of Anstey.
The loss of one station is likely to be controversial. Merri-bek Council has previously called on the Department of Transport and Planning to keep three stations in the area to maintain the existing level of access for nearby residents.
Jewell and Brunswick stations are also listed on the Victorian Heritage Register
Transport Infrastructure Minister Danny Pearson said the three existing stations were all within 1500 metres of each other, making them the closest stations on the train network.
He said the decision to merge them followed 18 months of technical and engineering assessments that showed it would create more open space.
Removing one stop and delivering new tracks and signalling would also improve reliability and open the door to more frequent services, Pearson said.
Upfield has the worst timetable of any major Metro line, with waits of between 15 and 20 minutes during peak times – but that is because a section of single track between Gowrie and Upfield limits how often trains can operate [paywall bypass and previous aussie.zone discussion here].
“This project will be a game changer for Brunswick and Parkville – it will reduce congestion, deliver two brand new and accessible stations and pave the way for extra trains on the Upfield Line in the future,” Pearson said. But the single-track bottleneck remains.
The new rail bridge will allow the removal of boom gates at eight level crossings, according to state government plans to be released on Thursday. It’s part of a program to take out 110 level crossings across Melbourne by the end of the decade – so far, 84 have been removed.
Brunswick is undergoing rapid growth along the Upfield rail corridor, with new medium-rise apartments built or planned close to the three stations, including some that are likely to be affected by construction of the rail bridge.
Pearson said the two new stations would have entrances on both platform ends for easy access.
Elevating the rail line would also create new open space and allow the popular – but narrow – Upfield bike path to be rebuilt and expanded, he said.
Work is slated to begin in 2028 with the two new stations to be open by 2030.
Level crossings have already been removed further north on the Upfield Line, with a 2.5-kilometre section of elevated rail built between new stations at Bell Street, Coburg, and Moreland Road, Brunswick.
The Allan government previously intended to extend the level-crossing removal work through Brunswick by 2027, but pushed the work back to 2030 in this year’s budget.
So less stations mean more and better service? In an area where the population is booming? I don’t get it, Baku. Why don’t they replicate the rail line between Gowrie and upfield if that’s what’s limiting the service and causing problems? How will it “create more space” when the stations are heritage listed and can’t be removed? Guess I’m not an engineer lol.
Hey @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected]
Sorry for the random pings, but I was wondering if you guys might have any other info, or ideas for fixing the upfield lines timetable issue? I suggested below converting a platform at Gowrie to act as a turn back, as part of a wider plan to extend Craigieburn services to Wallan, and upfield services to Craigieburn, but also as an immediate and probably cheaper option for improving frequencies (once the Sunbury lines moves out of the loop, anyway). Keen to hear if you guys might have some other ideas or further explanation for why the upfield line sucks so much at the moment!
@Baku @PeelerSheila @danielbowen Zero cost change would be running extra trains that terminate at Batman, as there is already a crossover there.
Honestly peeler I don’t know. I know that at the moment the problem isn’t just that the single track section limits frequency, but also because they share a single city loop tunnel with Craigieburn and Sunbury services, they can’t run more anyway. But once the tunnel opens next year, it won’t be as much of an issue, since it’ll just be Craigieburn and upfield sharing the tunnel
I don’t keep up with politics enough to know, but most of the seats the upfield line pass through (besides Brunswick) seem to be fairly strong towards labour. So maybe there’s less incentive to try and please the people living there.
The gold standard would obviously be to duplicate to and build a second platform at upfield, but I think the cheapest option would be to install a set of track crossovers at Gowrie. Then you could use the current platform 2 as a turnback, and platform 1 for trains continuing on to upfield.
That might not make much sense now with upfield not being that much further away (“why not just push the extra K or two and duplicate to upfield?”), but there’s long been talk about sending upfield trains back into Roxburgh Park where they used to go, although that probably needs a 3rd platform to be built at Roxy to make it work efficiently and not delay Craigieburn and the Vlines.
If you pushed it a bit further up to Craigieburn, you could possibly DG the 3rd standard gauge track and use that for trains from upfield to Craigieburn. If you added a crossover at Roxburgh Park, you could also alternate it and chuck that upfield train on either the existing BG, or this new mystical DG track, whichever has capacity when it’s needed.
That would also add some extra capacity if/when electrification is extended to Wallan, and provide a bit more flexibility in case of disruptions. I think working out a way to use that third SG platform at Broady as a turnback would also add even more capacity and flexibility, and would probably be wise to do.
So you’d end up with some trains terminating at Gowrie, others continuing onto Craigieburn, and existing Craigieburn trains either terminating at Craigieburn, Broady, or Wallan
Thankyou for this excellent response. I think it takes someone with a genuine interest in these things to come up with the best plan, not bean counters, bureaucrats and the like.
I wonder what solutions Marcus Wong would come up with, and if anyone has asked him?🤔
I actually thought about tagging him to ask if he knew more about why the upfield line is so cooked. Daniel Bowen and Philip Mallis, too. But I got shy so didn’t. I’ll give it a go now though!
Hey awesome 😎 it didn’t occur to me to message him via this medium.
