Inner Armadale Line Level Crossing Removals

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin Email this link

The ding, ding, ding of level crossings along the Armadale Line is the sound of a safety risk and congestion point on the local road network.

As more trains start running in the future, boom gates will be down more often, increasing congestion around the crossing, and sharpening our focus on community safety and ease of movement.

To address these concerns, the METRONET Level Crossing Removal project will remove up to six vehicle level crossings on the Inner Armadale Line.

Removing the Mint Street, Oats Street, Welshpool Road, Hamilton Street, Wharf Street and William Street level crossings is an opportunity to improve road safety, ease movements in the area, modernise stations and create versatile public spaces for the community.


Following extensive early planning and seeing the success of similar projects in the eastern states, the current preferred solution is to elevate the rail for up to five of these crossings, except at Hamilton Street, where land on either side of the railway has been reserved.

The elevated solutions preferred for this project will result in Carlisle, Oats Street, Beckenham and potentially Queens Park stations being rebuilt. Due to low patronage, Welshpool Station will close, and the new Oats Street Station will service the Welshpool area. Two options for removing the Wharf Street level crossing were initially put forward, elevating the rail or closing the crossing.

Based on initial stakeholder feedback on the Wharf Street options, an additional option is now being considered which would see elevated rail at both Hamilton Street and Wharf Street, including rebuilding Queens Park Station. The option to close the Wharf Street level crossing is not preferred.

To help inform project planning as it continues, we want to know what you think we should consider. Your valuable feedback will be provided to the design team and the two Community Reference Groups.

For more information on the project visit our website.

The survey and community reference group nominations has now closed. We will announce details of the survey and Community Reference Group members by the end of August. The team is also holding community drop-in sessions on August 15 and 22, more details can be found in 'Key Dates'.

The ding, ding, ding of level crossings along the Armadale Line is the sound of a safety risk and congestion point on the local road network.

As more trains start running in the future, boom gates will be down more often, increasing congestion around the crossing, and sharpening our focus on community safety and ease of movement.

To address these concerns, the METRONET Level Crossing Removal project will remove up to six vehicle level crossings on the Inner Armadale Line.

Removing the Mint Street, Oats Street, Welshpool Road, Hamilton Street, Wharf Street and William Street level crossings is an opportunity to improve road safety, ease movements in the area, modernise stations and create versatile public spaces for the community.


Following extensive early planning and seeing the success of similar projects in the eastern states, the current preferred solution is to elevate the rail for up to five of these crossings, except at Hamilton Street, where land on either side of the railway has been reserved.

The elevated solutions preferred for this project will result in Carlisle, Oats Street, Beckenham and potentially Queens Park stations being rebuilt. Due to low patronage, Welshpool Station will close, and the new Oats Street Station will service the Welshpool area. Two options for removing the Wharf Street level crossing were initially put forward, elevating the rail or closing the crossing.

Based on initial stakeholder feedback on the Wharf Street options, an additional option is now being considered which would see elevated rail at both Hamilton Street and Wharf Street, including rebuilding Queens Park Station. The option to close the Wharf Street level crossing is not preferred.

To help inform project planning as it continues, we want to know what you think we should consider. Your valuable feedback will be provided to the design team and the two Community Reference Groups.

For more information on the project visit our website.

The survey and community reference group nominations has now closed. We will announce details of the survey and Community Reference Group members by the end of August. The team is also holding community drop-in sessions on August 15 and 22, more details can be found in 'Key Dates'.

Q&A

Didn't receive confirmation?
Seems like you are already registered, please provide the password. Forgot your password? Create a new one now.
  • Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin Email this link

    Has the government seriously considered rail in tunnel or cut and cover type tunnels and stations (like Subiaco)? We feel that whilst it is really important to remove the level crossings the rail bridge over road options present a bit of an eyesore not to mention these still aren't the best use of the space available. I understand that tunnels or cut and cover are more expensive, but believe this will be a far better solution long term.

    Damian Asked 11 days ago

    The option to lower the rail was considered but not preferred as the trench would have limited ‘capped’ covers to allow connections, and significant fencing along the open areas of the line. This would maintain the rail as a physical and visual barrier that could divide and disrupt the local community in construction and operation. We are now working to carefully consider all options to balance competing requirements for the precincts to ensure we get the best out of the network for all passengers and manage impacts and costs to the broader community.

    In reference to Subiaco, it was a different context in terms of land use and opportunities that are not applicable to this project.

    The preferred elevated solution is still a significant investment in modernising the railway that supports development outcomes and will deliver a range of broader community benefits.

  • Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin Email this link

    How seriously is the rail over road solution being considered for the Hamilton Street crossing? While a underground is benefit and expense, I urge a rail over the Hamilton Street to be seriously considered roads over railway have a number of disadvantages. The Gerard St bridge for example is almost as inconvenient as the waiting for trains at level crossings.

    B Asked 16 days ago

    Following stakeholder feedback and the resulting decision to no longer consider the closing of Wharf Street, elevated rail or road over rail are both considered viable options for the removal of the level crossing at Hamilton Street.

    We are now working to carefully consider all options to balance competing requirements while getting the best out of the network for all passengers and the broader community.

  • Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin Email this link

    One of main points to be considered is flow of vehicles along railway line. The blocking of through traffic at wharf street turned centre street into a major route for through traffic.The council has blocked Hamilton street now to cut accidents at that level crossings caused by drivers ignoring stop sign.These impatient drivers have been added to centre street as the only access to be able to cross railway at Hamilton or wharf street.It is imperative that this traffic is returned to the transport corridor formed by the railway and the streets on either side. The railway could start to lift after leach highway and pass over Hamilton street which could be lowered by more than a metre ,Then continue to raised queen park station for public access and over wharf street to allow for traffic access for increasing population with higher density houseing.

    Traffic flow Asked 23 days ago

    Thank you for your feedback.

    As you may have seen, after stakeholder feedback, closing Wharf Street is no longer an option, with a new option being considered which would see elevated rail for Hamilton, Wharf and William streets. You can find out more in our new fact sheet: www.metronet.wa.gov.au/Portals/31/Project%20Documents/Level%20Crossing%20Removal/Wharf%20Street%20Fact%20Sheet.pdf. We are now working to carefully consider all options to balance competing requirements while get the best out of the network for all passengers and the broader community.

  • Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin Email this link

    How will this affect train services during reconstruction?

    Eileen Whitehead Asked 22 days ago

    Construction methodology will need to be carefully considered when a construction contractor is on board, but there will almost certainly be some level of impact to services. Elevated rail construction does present an opportunity to minimise some of the impacts to existing services. Temporary closure of Carlisle and Oats Street stations may also need to be considered during periods of construction. Any impact to services during construction will be communicated to passengers via Transperth’s channels and you’re encouraged to sign up for updates at www.transperth.wa.gov.au.

  • Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin Email this link

    Hi, I am very interested to know if the simplest idea/option has been explored? Rail over road at William St and then the rail stays at ground level (under Gerard St Bridge and stays at ground level for the rest of the way. The notoriously busy and dangerous Wharf St Crossing gets closed. Queens park Station stays at same level and doesn’t need costly rebuild. Rail line continues at ground level under a newly built Hamilton St bridge. Problem solved - cheaper - only one bridge and the rail stays at the same grade after William St all the way to Oats Street Station. It saves the area from looking like a dogs breakfast with the other proposed options. Can you please let me know if this option has been seriously looked at? It really seems the common sense cost effective approach. The other options have sky rail high in the sky but it still has to come down to ground level to clear Gerard St Bridge, Proposed Hamilton St bridge and Leach Hwy Bridge. It’s going to be like “The Big Dipper” roller coaster ride from hell! It would be up down up down up down. It’s all very unnecessarily involved and complicated! Thanks for taking the time to read this and I look forward to your response after considering this option. From a concerned Queens Park Resident with a common sense option, Tom Jordan

    P Asked 23 days ago

    Thank you for your comments. The option you suggested of elevated rail at William Street, closing Wharf Street and a road bridge at Hamilton Street was one of the options initially released in June 2020. However, stakeholder feedback indicated this was not preferred, and a new option is being considered which would see elevated rail for level crossings. We are now working to carefully consider all options to balance competing requirements while getting the best out of the network for all passengers and the broader community.

  • Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin Email this link

    Is it physically possible to get the train line from being partially sunken at Millers Crossing to being elevated at Archer St? The gradient would be quite steep and affect the cost of powering the train as well as wear and tear. Or is partial sinking of Archer St required?

    Dan75 Asked about 1 month ago

    This has been considered and it is possible to raise the rail to achieve the required clearances at Mint/Archer Street.

  • Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin Email this link

    Is there an opportunity to grade separate the cycle path along the train line from the roads (Archer, Oats, Welshpool) too?

    Dan75 Asked about 1 month ago

    Yes, there is an opportunity to grade separate the Principal Shared Path (PSP) from the existing road crossings. METRONET will work with the Department of Transport during the design development phase to finalise solutions.

  • Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin Email this link

    With the removal of Welshpool train station, will Zone 1 be applicable from Queens Park or from Oats Street Train station?

    Ado Asked about 1 month ago

    The current Transperth zones will remain in place, which sets Oats Street Station as Zone One and Queens Park Station as Zone Two. We are proposing to move Oats Street Station to the east side (or Armadale side) of Oats Street, which will still sit within Zone One.

  • Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin Email this link

    I live in Hubert St in East Victoria Park and I use the Oats St station. Even though Hubert St in on the other side of Shepparton Rd, I can easily hear the trains on the Armadale line from my house. Elevating the train line will make this noise worse. Also the current Oats St Station is woefully unshaded. Please ensure that all redesigned stations have effective and abundant shade.

    No more noise Asked about 1 month ago

    In terms of noise concerns for this project, we need to comply with State Planning Policy 5.4, which includes monitoring current and modelling anticipated noise.

    Noise attenuation can be built into the structure using features such as screening and more work will be undertaken in the design phase and be submitted to the Environmental Protection Authority for approval.

    Note that the noise from warning bells and train horns will be removed once the level crossings are removed.

    Station design details will be developed as the project progresses, including passenger amenities such as shade.

  • Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin Email this link

    "The technical solution of elevated rail is fixed" So why have we been given the ILLUSION of choice??? How was this able to go ahead this far without asking the community first on such a huge construction? I refuse to have the area I live in, in the house where my father and grandmother lived and the station I live directly opposite be changed into a huge over-baring concrete eyesore, that invades resident's privacy, where people can eat, drink, litter, destroy and then defecate in my front yard. The elevated railway is going to cause more problems for everyone involved than solutions to a minor wait at traffic. What an absolute waste.

    celene Asked about 1 month ago

    After extensive early planning, it was evident that elevated rail would provide the best long term outcome and value for money. It would have been misleading to take an option such as underground rail out to the community after it had been ruled out by our project team.