Opposition wants to work with government to raise cash to avoid skytrains on the Frankston line
February 22, 2016 9:00am
STATE Opposition Leader Matthew Guy has urged the State Government to work with him to “save Melbourne’s Riviera” from sky trains.
With decisions on the southern part of the Frankston rail corridor yet to be made, Mr Guy said he was “prepared to work with the government” to raise enough money via new Port of Melbourne legislation to run trains underground.
Mr Guy said talk of underground tunnelling difficulties caused by a high water table in the beachside areas was “not an excuse at all.”
“If you can put a man on the moon, you can dip a level crossing on the Frankston line,” he said.
“When they were building the CityLink tunnels, that was in one of the most geologically unsound areas in Melbourne — and yet we have two enormous tunnels which operate just fine and have for the last 15 years.
“There are absolutely no engineering studies that say it is utterly infeasible to do that.”
There are eight level crossings between Cheltenham and Frankston listed for removal, with work due to get underway in 2018.
Shadow Planning Minister David Davis joined Mr Guy at Edithvale Station last week, along with South Eastern Metropolitan Region MP Inga Peulich, Kingston Central Ward councillor Geoff Gledhill and concerned community members, to discuss the crossing removals.
Mr Guy said the opposition’s offer to work with the State Government was the “first time you’ve seen an opposition do this for decades in Victoria”.
He said if the State Government could “present a sensible piece of legislation” on the Port lease, he would “be happy to tie that sale to putting level crossings underground”.
State Treasurer Tim Pallas told Leader that Mr Guy’s comments were being made from “a position of ignorance”, and the State Government has always been honest about there being no “magical one-size-fits-all solution” to the issue.
“Every crossing removal is different,” Mr Pallas said.
“We’re not coming to a solution with a predetermined position, people can’t rewrite history on this.”
Mr Pallas said the local consultation process will begin this week, with a removal method to be decided by mid-2016 and a “design solution” determined by 2018.
“There’s going to be at least two years of extensive consultation before that construction gets underway,” he said.
When asked the price difference between above and below-ground rail options on the Cranbourne-Pakenham line, the treasurer said “it’s not about cost”.
“I don’t believe there’s a great deal in the cost difference between these arrangements,” Mr Pallas said.
He said it’s more important that the project to be guided by “science and imaginative engineering solutions”.
Edithvale local Elsie Bradshaw, who has lived in the area for more than 45 years, said she was worried after seeing other “failed” examples of above-ground rail lines overseas.
“We definitely do not want this to happen,” Ms Bradshaw said.
“We know there’s going to be noise and a lot of disruption — we’re prepared to put up with that, that’s fine — but not with the rails going up nine or more storeys.”
Community advocate Dorothy Booth, who is also the chairwoman of the Friends of Mentone Station and Gardens, said she was concerned there wouldn’t be enough true consultation on the issue.
“One government organisation talking to another government organisation is not consultation — that’s not going to come up with the best outcome for the community,” Ms Booth said.
“If they persist with this here, they won’t be in government to complete it, because the community won’t stand for it.”
There are now several local petitions against the skyrails gaining support, including one from the Carrum and Patterson Lakes Forum and another from the office of Inga Peulich.
Glen Eira Debates 
February 22, 2016 at 6:13 PM
Elevated rail is the most viable, community connecting and cost effective way to grade separate. Matthew Guy, true to form is illustrating his ignorance and inability to separate politics from the best outcome for the majority of the population. I wish we had elevated rail between Ormond and Bentleigh. The trenching will see our gommunity continue to be disconnected. We will NEVER get underground rail in the suburbs- even London doesn’t have this.
Having initially been an elevated rail sceptic, I’m now a fan and see it as the only viable way to grade separate. Yes, those banking onto the tracks will not be happy but the benefits to the greater community far outweigh the downside for these few residents.
February 22, 2016 at 8:34 PM
If you are a fan of an elevated rail system you should sign this petition https://www.change.org/p/no-more-train-trenches and get others to do it.
I agree with you and I wish there would be an elevated rail between Ormond and Caulfield to replace 2 totally congested level crossings in Glen Huntly to improve the shopping strip, increase open space and integrate the separated communities..
The best exposition of this topic and issues is from Daniel Bowen http://www.danielbowen.com/ . You need to scroll down to SkyRail topic.
February 22, 2016 at 8:28 PM
very amusing read. Here is a chinese websites interpretation of the Caulfield Racecourse issue. It is the google translation. I spose it is important as most of the residents of Caulfield Village will be chinese so this will be their park
https://translate.google.com.au/translate?hl=en&sl=zh-CN&u=http://www.meltoday.com/content/1032588&prev=search
February 22, 2016 at 9:56 PM
I like trains. I don’t particularly like cars, or at least not the number of them driving through our activity centres. It is back-to-front to prioritize cars over homes and people, and it is offensive that years of incompetent planning has led to a desire to trash yet more people’s amenity so a privileged elite can travel 5kmh faster. If anybody believes that the residential amenity standards are too generous then they can lobby Council to amend them in the Planning Scheme. Based on the current plans, it appears a height of 10m set back 0.5m and removal of all references to overshadowing should cover it. If people aren’t prepared to accept that for themselves, then don’t expect others to sacrifice their amenity.
February 23, 2016 at 7:55 AM
Clearly, the government is using the Dandenong/Cranbourne sky rail proposal as a test case and it’s also clear that skyrail is now the governments preferred level crossing removal option (and will be applied to future level crossing removals and future construction of new railway lines). This is despite the fact that the Andrews Government has failed to provide any substantive details of the project itself or analysis of the over vs. under options. Considering their election promises and East West Link stance this is disgraceful by any standards.
Now we get the opposition leader (Guy) promising to Save the Day (but only for Melbourne’s Riviera) by arguing that the cost is difference between over and under is marginal.. Like Andrews, he’s pushing his win-the-next-election agenda with lots of catchy sound bites and scant justification.
No matter which way you look at it, both Andrews and Guy are focused on winning the next election rather than the highly significant issue at hand. That issue being what is the best level crossing removal solution for Melbourne (that can also be applied to the future construction of railway lines) and why, then making that information publicly available.
Having pollies that focus on the issue and provide information should not be a pipe dream and it is not too much to ask for.
Oh and by the way, which ever way it goes (over vs. under), there will be residents severely and adversely impacted by the solution. Rather than tossing them on the sacrificial altar for the good of us all (as a lot, including the government, are proposing) they deserve consideration and compensation.
February 23, 2016 at 8:25 AM
Anon you make a lot of sense to me. I would only add to it that Public Transport solutions must be made competitive with Roads solution both in terms of Performance and Cost. For example, it’s high time to built a ‘fast rapid transit system’ in Melbourne and Victoria. Why aren’t our political parties even discussing it?
March 13, 2016 at 7:12 PM
One positive aspect of the Sky rail option is its due to be started in 2018 the same year as the state election. I expect it will result in the loss of seats by labor in response to this eyesore being forced on residence.
There are a number of property’s located on the beach side which is lower than the dune the current rail line is on that have underground car parks so the water table maybe just an excuse by Andrews to go the cheap option.
As a side issue if they continued the Frankston freeway through to South road a lot of traffic would also choose not to use Nepean highway that does now.
Given labor was happy to waste over $1 billion not to build east west link in the hope of winning 4 inner Melbourne green seats (they won 2) I do not hold a lot of hope.