The announcement of a major infrastructure project, in this instance the state government's sky rail proposal, is overshadowed by "angry" protesters (can protesters ever be moderately agitated?), politicking from the opposition and an overarching poverty of imagination. Welcome to Melbourne: where bold ideas are immediately torn down and the selfish and small-minded have right of way.
The government proceeds on its election promise to remove the railway crossings that bring gridlock to suburban streets, cripple the capacity of trains to run more frequently and cost the economy billions. But according to some local petitioners, the plan to replace the level crossings on three sections of line from Caulfield to Cranbourne/Pakenham with elevated rail is an outrage.
According to the objectors, a rail tunnel is the only acceptable option, thus rendering any other option a cynical manoeuvre. I'm yet to hear a convincing argument why the new line must go underground. Admittedly, the government could do a better job explaining why it need not do so — why tunnelling this stretch of line would be too disruptive, expensive or restrictive from an urban planning perspective.
But let's not pretend this would persuade the protesters thundering "No sky rail." Their chant leaves me dubious about suggestions the Andrews government might have prevented this barney with "proper consultation".
Advertisement
Ambitious building projects invariably impact people living closest to the site. These residents should not be permitted to hijack public debate. They are, however, entitled to voice their displeasure. And the No Sky Rail president, who lives one metre from the rail corridor, deserves some sympathy; when frustration and fury overtake us we tend to throw everything at an argument, without sifting the outlandish from the reasonable.
It is reasonable to complain, as she does, that the nine-metre structure will likely block her northern sun. It is outlandish to evoke a hypothetical disaster scenario, such as a derailment causing "80,000 tonnes of fully laden freight" to come crashing down on homes. Yes, and planes can fall from the sky but we still have flight paths above residential areas. And the less said the better about her concerns paedophiles can peer down into her backyard pool when the kids are swimming. (Besides, the government says barriers will be erected on the viaduct to protect the privacy of nearby residents.)
The protesters cluster around the themes of the viaduct devaluing property prices (when arguably proximity to modernised public transport boosts the value of nearby homes) and being an "eyesore" that divides the community and invites undesirables to shelter in "ghettos" underneath. With depressing predictability, the opposition has endorsed their cause. It is what oppositions of all persuasions do — pander to local disaffection, even as it sets them up for charges of betrayal once in government. And even when the cause is less than deserving.
"Eyesore" is a subjective assessment and as in love, beauty in urban structures is in the eye of the beholder; we look admiringly on that which works for us. When Tony Abbott described wind farms as ugly his aesthetic preference reflected his indifference to their function. In my stomping ground, Carlisle Street, Balaclava, the elevated rail bridge carries our beloved emblem of place, the sculpture of the schooner Lady of St Kilda, tossed on a sea of mermaids and starfish.
"Nobody voted for a sky train way up in the air cutting a swathe through densely settled suburbs," said opposition transport spokesman David Davis in comments so dim they offend settled principles of physics. How can a structure "way up in the air" cut a swathe through a suburb on the ground? And don't existing railway lines divide communities? Isn't that why our ancestors referred to undesirables as coming from "the wrong side of the tracks?"
The government says the sky rail frees up "11 MCGs' worth" of public space for public benefit. A seductive propaganda video shows carpets of greenery, car parking spots, netball courts, civic plazas, a 12 kilometre pedestrian and bike path, revamped stations with seamless connections between trains and buses, footpaths sprouting in all directions. Connecting suburbs in other words — not dividing them.
Ian Woodcock, urban design lecturer at RMIT, has emerged as an advocate for a well-executed sky rail. He suggests concentrating our energies on holding the government to its "cutting edge" vision, ensuring the new stations come equipped with the best disability access, multiple entrances, user friendly transport connections, pleasing retail space.
Elevated rail delivers net benefits for communities around the world, he says. In Paris a market thrives under the metro viaduct at the Barbes-Rochechouart station. A project in Miami aims to retrofit the space beneath an elevated metro for public parks. Berlin plans to create a new nine-kilometre cycle route, replete with bike repair workshops, rest stops, cafes and beer gardens, under part of the city's U1 line. The viaduct would give cover, enabling cyclists to use the path all year round. Inspiring, no? Less an eyesore than an eye opener.
And I reckon there are also benefits for rail passengers, assuming they're not all paedophiles. On a recent trip to Bangkok, I travelled from the airport by sky rail, enjoying an expansive view of the city's vibrant chaos, the old districts nudging the gleaming skyscrapers, the jumble of freeways, concrete towers, footpaths bursting with life. It made the metropolis legible and gave me some perspective.
We could use some perspective in Melbourne. The kind that helps us see the big picture.
>nimbys ruining everything for everyone
I'm glad even Australians hate trainguy. Good riddance to bad ideas, what we need to do is register cyclists and make them pay road tax so we can expand the road network for taxpaying Australian motorists.
>>925770
I realise you're trying to generate responses by trolling, but it's obviously not working.
>>922898
>convincing argument why the new line must go underground
Personally I hope they delay the metro tunnel and extend the Alamein line underground to Gardenvale instead. Having these sections elevated just makes that easier. But that's wishful thinking.
>>922910
If you own the business along the proposed stretch, I'd imagine you'd go banana as well
>>922908
Asian countries have few things in their favor:
>fairly recent urbanization
>cheap buildings, even on prime lands
>totalitarian regime
If they want to build a PT, they could do that with lesser resistance than in proper western cities.
>>926023
there is plenty of elevated rail in Europe
>>926023
You forgot the most important element
>started in Japan because of the lack of available space to build roads on
>got copied to some extend until it became needed due to weird urban managment and decisions
>>926068
Very few of those were built recently (as in not >100 years ago) though.
Actually all examples of recent elevated rail here that come to my mind are in commieblock suburbs that were built together with the rail line.
>>926023
If I had a business there, literally the only thing I would give a fuck about would be any lowered customer traffic due to the construction going on.
>>926220
Exactly. Hence the nimby-ism
>>925770
>even australians hate trainguy
Who do you think posted this article?
And the majority of people think these nimbys are dumb whiners
>>926023
>If you own the business along the proposed stretch, I'd imagine you'd go banana as well
Why? The improvement of the railways will mean services can operate more frequenty and safer
And it means no more delays at the level crossings
Both mean more customers
Better public transit infrastructure means greater property value
>>926195
Europeans mostly put theirs in subways because they're denser
This railways in through suburbia
There isn't the sort of requirement for a subway
And an open trench they decided against for some reason lol I dunno why
>>926314
No, it's a minor justification for banana-ism. The nimby-ism detailed by OP is retarded, as even with a tunnel there would still be disruptions to the rail service and to the road when they remove the level crossing.
>>926343
>>926345
Higher customer traffic *once done*. The potential trouble comes from the temporary reduction in customer traffic while it's being built, which will take a while. Any business marginal enough to not be able to take the temporary hit is in trouble. The effect is more pronounced in places where governments build subways with cut and cover methods.
>>926377
Also, the term "a while" may take up to few years, and unless business owners own the shops (instead of renting the space), it would force them to either relocate or close the damn business altogether.
>>926344
>And an open trench they decided against for some reason lol I dunno why
Put a thin cover back on top and you can use that space for lighter-weight purposes. When land is expensive, that makes a shit load of sense.
>>926560
>cover on top
Freight and regional locomotives operate on the line too
You would need complex ventilation systems to ensure people don't die of carbon monoxide poisoning
>>926560
The land will become available with the elevation
>>926578
>[diesel] regional locomotives
It's always bugged me why they don't use electro-diesels for that, so they can use the overhead wires in Melbourne and diesel only in regional areas. Southern Cross station is loud as fuck.
>>926585
That's not how diesel electric works. Diesel is burnt in a generator producing electricity.
>>926710
Electro-diesel, not diesel-electric. Yes, it's confusing.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electro-diesel_locomotive
>>926585
Metro hates everything non Metro as it is. Not a chance they'd let anyone touch their wires
>>926742
Well there goes my hopes and dreams for 25kV AC changeover -> electro-diesel regional locos -> electrification to ballarat/bendigo/geelong/traralgon/seymour. I'll just go put them in the pile with the broken dream of one day getting rid of broad gauge.
The regional trains using this are for the Taralgon line which actually used to be electrified, it was the only regional railway that was
There used to be a lot of accidents on the line because apparently drivers couldn't hear the electric locomotives approaching :/
>>926578
>You would need complex ventilation systems to ensure people don't die of carbon monoxide poisoning
That's doable, and maybe doesn't need to be too complicated. London Underground started out with steam engines running a metro, which is utterly crazy, but people didn't die of carbon monoxide poisoning.
>>927466
this isn't a metro
>>927466
You do realize the London Underground was a hellish nightmare prior to electrification, right?
>>927468
It's still a hellish nightmare.
they could elevate the road instead
space under elevated rail lines can also be used for small business.
monoraaaaaail!
