News & Discussion: Other Transport Projects

[ml69]

are they really going to bother with an underground station at Bowden? does anybody even use this station?
it would seem to add quite a deal of expense to the project

maybe easier to move it a couple of hundred metres down the line

The Bowden TOD is being built with Bowden station as its centerpiece, it's the whole reason for the TOD development ....

The area will have thousands of people living and working within 300m walk of the station about a decade from now.

[rhino]

Aidan, ARTC spent a lot of money studying the viability of the bypass, and came to the conclusion that it would not be beneficial to build it, and that the current alignment can be adjusted to cope quite well enough with the rail freight task for at least the next quarter century.

I don't know why they bothered spending all that money on the study, when they could have just logged in here and asked for Aidan's advice. For that matter, I don't know why everyone doesn't do that. It would at least save heaps of money on doing the studies, even if the outcomes are the opposite to what the studies conclude.

Over and out.

[AG]

Go do a search for the Adelaide Rail Freight Movements Study and read it. ARTC comissioned well respected engineering consultants GHD to do the work for them.

[Aidan]

Aidan, ARTC spent a lot of money studying the viability of the bypass, and came to the conclusion that it would not be beneficial to build it, and that the current alignment can be adjusted to cope quite well enough with the rail freight task for at least the next quarter century.

I don't know why they bothered spending all that money on the study, when they could have just logged in here and asked for Aidan's advice. For that matter, I don't know why everyone doesn't do that. It would at least save heaps of money on doing the studies, even if the outcomes are the opposite to what the studies conclude.

If all they wanted to know were whethher something should be built, that would be true, though I don't guarantee my advice will always be freely available. But the value of a study extends far beyond Its conclusion on whether something shouold be built - it's also important to know why (and the way changing circumstances could affect the result) and most importantly, how. Knowing how to maximize the costs and minimize the benefits (and the risks) may well be more valuable than actually quantifying them.

Go do a search for the Adelaide Rail Freight Movements Study and read it. ARTC comissioned well respected engineering consultants GHD to do the work for them.

I downloaded it months ago and was unimpressed. GHD are very well respected, but that doesn't mean they're always right. No matter how well respected the engineers are, there are likely to be some things they fail to think of. Indeed discovering that was one of the reasons why I decided to study civil engineering.

GHD's excellent reputation is well deserved, but if all their studies were as shoddy as that one then their reputation would be mud! The main flaw was that it made no attempt to properly calculate noise. Instead their noise costs were based on the length of track. They ignored the effects of curvature, and their differential treatment of noise in urban and rural areas was limited to an assumption that the cost of noise was only ten times higher in built up areas.

Rereading the report, a few other things struck me: Rhino's concerns about travel times are unfounded. The effects of different interest rates seem to be wrongly labelled. They don't appear to have considered whether savings coud be made by utilizing some of the trackbed of the old Cambrai to Monarto line. And the costs of the projects that failing to build it would make necessary appear to have been underestimated.

And there's also the problem of the limited timeframe considered. As I mentioned before, the benefits of constructing the line will rise and keep rising but because land value is a high proportion of the total cost, the cost of constructing it if we do nothing now will also keep rising quickly, especially when we consider the rising population in the Adelaide environs. We really should have constructed this line at the time of standardization (it would have saved a fortune) but building it now is the next best thing.

[mattblack]

I don't know why they bothered spending all that money on the study, when they could have just logged in here and asked for Aidan's advice. For that matter, I don't know why everyone doesn't do that. It would at least save heaps of money on doing the studies, even if the outcomes are the opposite to what the studies conclude.

If all they wanted to know were whethher something should be built, that would be true, though I don't guarantee my advice will always be freely available.

Theres probably a reason to why you aren't getting paid for your advise now.

You obviously dont have to deal with budget constraints, time constraints, access to sensitive information constraints, political constraints, staffing constraints ................. etc in your world. Every study ever written could have probably been better if there were no constraints.

[rubberman]

First of all, while GHD is a reputable firm and does good work, there is no reason in the world why their reports (or that of any other) should not be subject to scrutiny.

If, as has been suggested that the report was done with constraints that made the conclusions less than robust, then that should be stated in the report. If no such constraints were mentioned, then it should be assumed that their report should speak for itself and be able to be defended.

For example, many would now consider the 'expert' reports of transport engineering companies in the fifties and sixties which recommended the abolition of tramways both here and in the US should have been subject to much more rigorous and healthy skepticism.

Next point, it really depends on what the aim of the GHD report was. Was it a bit of a budget scoping study? In which case, let's not take it too seriously other than an idea of relative costs and a discussion of the main issues. OTOH, if it was supposed to be a detailed and forensic assessment of the options on which major decisions should be made, then that is another thing entirely. I haven't seen it, so I can't comment other than to say that any report ought to be able to be criticised and have its own defence contained within.

[Nathan]

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/new-bus-l ... 6364407016

Not sure about leaving the on-street car parking, I'd have thought that it would disrupt the flow. They should really just reduce them to a few loading zones, inset into the footpath.

New bus lane to be put on Grenfell St, Currie St
Political Reporter Lauren Novak
May 23, 2012 11:22AM

A DEDICATED bus lane will be established along Grenfell and Currie streets to cut up to three minutes off travelling times.

The left-hand lane in both directions along the central streets between East and West terraces will be set aside for buses and taxis between 7am and 7pm.

Cars will be able to use the right-hand lane but some right-hand turns and U-turns will be removed to keep traffic flowing.

Most of the car parks on the kerbside lane will remain.

The change, which will be in place by the start of July, will cost about $200,000 and will be offset by about $250,000 recovered in fines to bus operators for late-running.

Transport Services Minister Chloe Fox said the dedicated lane would shave about three minutes off travel times on routes through the city.

Lord Mayor Stephen Yarwood said the move was not about penalising drivers but about making public transport a more attractive option.

Earlier this morning, opposition leader Isobel Redmond , Senator Vicky Chapman and Morialta member John Gardner met with commuters to gather views of public transport users.

The politicians then rode from Paradise to Klemzig via the O-bahn with the ensuing media pack delaying the bus's scheduled departure time and angering some passengers.

Senator Vicky Chapman said public transport in South Australia was in crisis.

"The connectivity of these buses is unacceptable," she said.

Ms Redmond said parking around interchanges was a significant problem and that often buses were unable to pick up passengers because they were full or displaying the `not in service' sign.

"My understanding is that there is significant problems in getting the buses running on time and getting them to their destination."

Morialta member John Gardner said more parking was needed around interchanges to encourage people to use public transport.

"Since October last year the rate of complaints about public transport has gone up hundred-fold," he said.

"We need to have a serious look at the contracts that have been written up and whether they are written in such a way that they do need people to catch two buses to get to town from suburban metropolitan Athelstone.

"It's a ridiculous situation.

"If we are to encourage more people to use public transport we need to make it easier for them."

[crawf]

So only one lane will be allowed for general traffic?, being the far right lanes on both directions. If not then I don't understand what this plan is meant to achieve considering there will still be some carparks. Unless its only just the far western and eastern sections of the road. Need more details

[Nathan]

Video: http://video.adelaidenow.com.au/2238194 ... -bus-lanes

[AdelaideAlive]

woohoo another flyover

[crawf]

Video: http://video.adelaidenow.com.au/2238194 ... -bus-lanes

That actually looks promising!. Thanks

[SRW]

Hardly groundbreaking, but a simple way to improve flow that should have been implemented yonkers ago.

[Waewick]

I put it down to a start..... but I'd still prefer trams...

[rhino]

The western end of Currie Street is going to be interesting, with a dedicated tram lane in the middle and dedicated bus lanes on the outside. I didn't notice any tram lanes in the flythrough.

[Hooligan]

just imagine what you could do with that 3 minutes you save on travel time!!!

The possibilties are endless!