Bridge Rd Richmond re-surfacing

[Mal Rowe]

Bridge Rd Richmond was relayed in January 2021 using the now standard
Melbourne technique of concrete to sleeper height, fill with crushed
rock / crushed concrete to just below rail top and a bitumen top.

By May 2022 the road surface in Bridge Rd looked as shown in the first
two attached photos.

This is the narrow section of roadway between Hoddle St and Church St
where cars and trucks share the roadway with trams.

It seems that the crushed fill was not rolled well enough to provide a
solid foundation for the bitumen. It has broken up and required regular
patching.

Other shared roadways have shown similar problems, but Bridge Rd is the
worst.

The width of the roadway between rails means that a narrow roller of the
type usually used for footpaths was used for compacting the crushed fill.

It seems that this type of roller may be inadequate for the job.

Perhaps they need to borrow the Jelbart roller ex Ballarat that was
designed for just this sort of work. Another pic attached.

This weekend the roadway in the tramway lanes will be resurfaced.

See: https://yarratrams.com.au/projects/bridge-road-resurfacing-works

Mal Rowe hoping for a better outcome in Bridge Rd.

[TP]

Do what every other Australian city now does - get rid of the parking and get the motor vehicles off the tram tracks.

Tony P

[Matthew Geier]

It's just traffic volume.

You should see what the buses to the eastern lanes (former railway) on
the Harbour Bridge - and there is concrete and steel directly under the
asphalt- but because the lanes are narrow and the 'track' of the buses
is constrained. the same part of the road gets repeated loaded, and it
'flows' out. Even full concrete gets ruts in these places - just takes a
bit longer as it's harder.

[Richard Youl]

While I think this tracklaying system is close to perfection, some time ago I reached the conclusion that a second layer of bitumen or a somewhat thicker one would be much more appropriate where heavy road traffic runs there as well.

Richard

> On 8 Apr 2026, at 12:34 pm, Mal Rowe <mal....@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Bridge Rd Richmond was relayed in January 2021 using the now standard Melbourne technique of concrete to sleeper height, fill with crushed rock / crushed concrete to just below rail top and a bitumen top.

> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TramsDownUnder" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to tramsdownunde...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tramsdownunder/6b36ebc5-601a-4d33-a70a-44ec8ad521e8%40gmail.com.
> <3035 BridgeRd_10May2022.JPG>
> <Damage-BridgeRd_10May2022.JPG>
> <Roller_and_11_near_MartinSt_loop_Wendouree Parade.jpg>

[TP]

This is an issue that the old Sydney Tramways had to deal with - maintaining the roads for other road users. Is the roads agency or local council paying to maintain the surface finish that is being damaged by motor vehicles? I bet not. If they won't, then the tram lanes should be separated from general traffic, unless there is a funded agreement for buses to share them. At the rate that legacy European systems are separating their lines from general traffic, Melbourne and Toronto are going to be the only tramways left that tolerate general traffic on tram lines.  It's not the fault of the operators, it's the lack of government support.

Tony P

[Mal Rowe]

On 08/04/2026 12:33, Mal Rowe wrote:
> Bridge Rd Richmond was relayed in January 2021 using the now standard
> Melbourne technique of concrete to sleeper height, fill with crushed
> rock / crushed concrete to just below rail top and a bitumen top.
>

> This weekend the roadway in the tramway lanes will be resurfaced.
>

Here are a couple of pics of the work today.

The old top layer (asphalt) has been lifted and the surface scarified.

A small roller is running to consolidate the crushed rock level. As I
said, it looks a bit light for the job. See first pic.

Second pic shows the top layer of asphalt being applied.

I will be interesting to see how this holds up over the next 12 months
or so.

Mal Rowe - civil engineering voyeur

[Mal Rowe]

On 11/04/2026 16:16, Mal Rowe wrote:
> I will be interesting to see how this holds up over the next 12 months
> or so.
>

Richard Youl provides some interesting commentary - and a video to
illustrate.

He refers to Victoria St in Richmond - a comparable tramway with similar
traffic on a narrow roadway.

====

This Victoria St job was done virtually 10 years ago to the day.

By chance I recorded the 109 in both directions recently so I took a
look at it and would say that 99% of the section done at that time is
still in perfectly good order.

Victoria St Melbourne   New Tram Track
https://youtu.be/i559VzMuSlI

In some stretches little patches have been applied. Overall, if there is
a fault it’s in an area not just a small spot which suggests that, as
you say, the standard of rolling was variable. As this work is done by
contractors, there’s always a possibility that they skimped on bitumen
thickness in Bridge Road.

Actually looking closely at your second photograph and to some degree
the first, the bitumen is the full thickness of the rail height now and
is sitting firmly on the concrete sleeper base which as we both know
certainly was not the case before!
====
Thanks Richard.