News & Discussion: Other Transport Projects

[neoballmon]

There were a couple of workers on the structure around midday this morning (Sunday 23rd). Could this be operational soon?



Also, I was on Port Wakefield Road yesterday, and the gantry camera's that were between Two Wells and Lower Light have been removed, and the 'Average Speed Cameras' are installed (not yet operational it looked). The distance between the cameras is (according to my Speedo), 53.8km. So should take about 29 minutes for an average speed of 110km/h. (http://www.machinehead-software.co.uk/b ... _calc.html A good place to work out your average speed if you time your trip)

[Westside]

The distance between the cameras is (according to my Speedo), 53.8km. So should take about 29 minutes for an average speed of 110km/h. (http://www.machinehead-software.co.uk/b ... _calc.html A good place to work out your average speed if you time your trip)

You needed a website to calculate time from speed and distance?

[neoballmon]

I'm on the way to Victoria at the moment, they're installing Average Speed Cameras on the Dukes Highway, for the distance of about 13kms, between Ki Ki and Coonalpyn. Strange, as I thought the Port Wakefield Road ones were a trial, and they're not even operating yet.

Also, should this be spilt into a new topic for traffic cameras, it is this fine?

[HeapsGood]

There were a couple of workers on the structure around midday this morning (Sunday 23rd). Could this be operational soon?



Also, I was on Port Wakefield Road yesterday, and the gantry camera's that were between Two Wells and Lower Light have been removed, and the 'Average Speed Cameras' are installed (not yet operational it looked). The distance between the cameras is (according to my Speedo), 53.8km. So should take about 29 minutes for an average speed of 110km/h. (http://www.machinehead-software.co.uk/b ... _calc.html A good place to work out your average speed if you time your trip)

Has it been confirmed what these will be used for?

[The Scooter Guy]

From DPTI:

Sudholz/North East Road intersection upgrade

The 2013-14 State Budget will provide a new $100million fund to improve road safety across South Australia.

A dedicated fund will be created from a contribution provided by the Motor Accident Commission, after unexpectedly strong investment performances this year.

This investment ensures that South Australian motorists, cyclists and pedestrians are the beneficiaries of MAC’s strong performance.

The Government has identified road safety projects totalling $52.4million to be provided from the fund.

The remainder of the funds will be held in a special account which will be invested by the Government in other road safety initiatives.

These initiatives will be determined following the advice of a group of road safety, community and industry representatives, in conjunction with a representative from MAC.

The first projects to be addressed through the fund include:
- $3.2million to upgrade the Britannia roundabout. The Britannia roundabout is the location of more crashes than any other intersection in metropolitan Adelaide. This project is a redesign of the current five-leg roundabout, splitting it into a northern roundabout connecting with Wakefield St and a southern roundabout connecting with Kensington Road.

- $7.7million for the Sudholz and North East Road intersection at Gilles Plains. This intersection is one of the worst in South Australia for casualty crashes. Right turns from North East Road will be removed and right turns on the Sudholz Road approaches are to be fully controlled. The existing right turn from North East Road to Sudholz Road will diverted to Blacks Road with vehicles permitted to turn right onto Sudholz Road using a new signalised T-junction.

- $4million for the Magill and Glynburn Road intersection at Magill.
Improvements include the installation of a separate right turn lane on Magill Road and a separate right turn lane on Glynburn Road into Magill Road, a short left turn lane and a corner island from Magill Road into Glynburn Road
and new traffic signals and upgraded lighting.

- $2.5 million for the Golden Grove and Grenfell Road intersection at Surrey Downs. A new traffic signal scheme has been developed for the intersection to improve the safety of turning left from Grenfell Road east and reduce weaving
across to turn right at Grenfell Road west.

- The $21million ($11.1 in the forward estimates) State contribution to the $106million upgrade of the main access road into the APY Lands. This project will build up, shape and compact a granular pavement to provide a safer road and reduce crashes.

- The $12.5million State contribution to improve safety and traffic flows on the South Eastern freeway. This project will extend the advanced traffic management system to Mt Barker and improve the Crafers and Stirling section of the freeway by enabling the use of road shoulders at peak traffic periods.

- $1.5million for the installation of 10 additional road safety cameras. The cameras will be installed on high-risk metropolitan arterial roads with a history of crashes or speeding.

Separate to the road safety initiatives provided by the new fund, an additional $16.8 million will be allocated in 2013-14 for minor works programs including the State Black Spot program ($6.5million), the Shoulder Sealing program ($5.44
million), the Responsive Road Safety program ($2.94million) and the Rural Road Safety program ($1.9million).

[jase111]

http://www.infrastructureaustralia.gov. ... _Brief.pdf

Interesting reading

[bay transit]

There should also be a plan for tram priority across the CBD from South Terrace to West Terrace.The current traffic light situation in the area traversed by the Glenelg-West Terrace-Entertainment Centre tram adds probably 5 to 8 minutes to peak hour tram journeys.
Surely a system of coordinating lights plus a GPS between tram and Traffic Control Centre would fasten the journey,not only making the journey quicker for passengers,but would better utilize the fleet and would enable improvements to the frequency of the service.

[[Shuz]]

Hi Bay-Transit,

Ive already flagged this with DPTI as an issue of concern, I will let you know once I receive a response.

[bay transit]

Thanks very much-lets keep our fingers crossed for that one to happen

[muzzamo]

There should also be a plan for tram priority across the CBD from South Terrace to West Terrace.The current traffic light situation in the area traversed by the Glenelg-West Terrace-Entertainment Centre tram adds probably 5 to 8 minutes to peak hour tram journeys.
Surely a system of coordinating lights plus a GPS between tram and Traffic Control Centre would fasten the journey,not only making the journey quicker for passengers,but would better utilize the fleet and would enable improvements to the frequency of the service.

I'm not convinced this is actually a good idea.

The tram would represent less than 5% of the public transport load into the CBD, with the bulk being handled by bus. The traffic lights are already sequenced to maximise throughput for both cars (unfortunately) and buses. Any disruption to this would have knockon effects to an already optimized system.

For example, Currie St buses would carry far more passengers per hour than the tram. You wouldn't want a situation where the net gain per passenger for trams is far smaller than the net loss per passenger for buses.

[monotonehell]

If you're so concerned about trams having priority, then don't run them on street. It's a trade off.

I catch the trams out of and into the city every day, the time they spend at lights is minimal. Most of the standing time is waiting for the next section to clear of the previous tram(s).

[Aidan]

If you're so concerned about trams having priority, then don't run them on street. It's a trade off.

I catch the trams out of and into the city every day, the time they spend at lights is minimal. Most of the standing time is waiting for the next section to clear of the previous tram(s).

maybe lack or tram priority is part of the reason for this? Even in the peaks the tram frequency is less than half that at which waiting for the next section to clear should be a problem, which leads me to conclude the trams have a bunching problem - and lack of signal coordination may well be one of the reasons for this.

Trams can have priority on the street, and running them somewhere other than the street is usually far more expensive, so on street running with tram priority should never be overlooked as a solution. And the status quo doesn't seem to me to be particularly good for bus priority. But it's far worse for trams, and I remember when the tram extension first opened to North Terrace the service was far slower than the 99B it replaced. People started complaining the tram service was even slower than walking. And often it still is.

[[Shuz]]

If you're so concerned about trams having priority, then don't run them on street. It's a trade off.

I catch the trams out of and into the city every day, the time they spend at lights is minimal. Most of the standing time is waiting for the next section to clear of the previous tram(s).

Mono, I have to counter that - I catch the tram every day as well, at least 12 times in any given week.

I know for a fact that the trams operate on a 'line of sight' basis, not a sectional/signalling basis. I've recieved advice from one of the heads of rail operations at DPTI that this is the case.

It doesn't happen often, but I've seen instances where you'll see a tram heading southbound (Glenelg) waiting at Angus/Gouger street, with another southbound tram loading/unloading at Victoria Sqaure and another southbound tram waiting on the other side of the Grote/Wakefield street traffic lights. That's three trams heading southbound within a 200m section of track. If they operated on a sectional basis, which requires signalling, they would be much further apart.

The only signalling on the tram network that I'm aware of where trams have to wait to clear a 'section' is at the entry and exit points of the Glengowrie Depot.

Our heavy rail network operates on a signalling/section basis with the minimum clearance between trains being 600m.

The trams do spend quite an extraordinary time at the traffic lights in the CBD - 5-8 minutes waiting time sounds about right on the travel between South Terrace and the Railway Station. Trams should be given on-approach priority at traffic lights.

Also, the situation is further complicated by the fact that, for example, a northbound (Ent. Centre) tram on approach to Pirie Street stop will sometimes wait at the traffic lights for 2-3 minutes, on green light, cross over, stop and wait another 1 minute for loading and unloading, and then do exactly the same thing on approach to the Rundle Mall stop.

The stops should have been designed so that the unloading and loading of passengers happens in conjuction with waiting at traffic lights - this means having two platforms either side of Pirie/Waymouth Street instead of the one island centre platform; with the northbound (Ent. Centre) platform located south of Pirie Street, and the existing southbound (Glenelg) platform located north of Pirie/Waymouth Streets.

[Nathan]

If we're worried about tram priority conflicting with bus priority, remember that Grenfell/Currie is really the only heavily used east/west corridor. You could probably give busses priority at that intersection, but trams at every other set of lights along King William St.

[monotonehell]

If you're so concerned about trams having priority, then don't run them on street. It's a trade off.

I catch the trams out of and into the city every day, the time they spend at lights is minimal. Most of the standing time is waiting for the next section to clear of the previous tram(s).

maybe lack or tram priority is part of the reason for this? Even in the peaks the tram frequency is less than half that at which waiting for the next section to clear should be a problem, which leads me to conclude the trams have a bunching problem - and lack of signal coordination may well be one of the reasons for this.

Trams can have priority on the street, and running them somewhere other than the street is usually far more expensive, so on street running with tram priority should never be overlooked as a solution. And the status quo doesn't seem to me to be particularly good for bus priority. But it's far worse for trams, and I remember when the tram extension first opened to North Terrace the service was far slower than the 99B it replaced. People started complaining the tram service was even slower than walking. And often it still is.

I think you'll find (if you do a literature search) that bunching is more to do with loading than traffic lights. But every little bit helps.

The old trams used to be slower than walking, the new trams are much faster, otherwise I would walk all the way to work. (My home and work are at opposite ends of the city.) Since the crossings at Pirie and Rundle have been upgraded to crosswalks the trams hardly wait at all and the whole thing is actually quite synchronised with the loading time. Only the intersections at Victoria Square and across South Tce & Greenhill Road are hold ups now.

These should be looked at, as well as giving the tram a reserve on the neglected southern part of KWS, as turning vehicles often obstruct the intersections there.

If you're so concerned about trams having priority, then don't run them on street. It's a trade off.

I catch the trams out of and into the city every day, the time they spend at lights is minimal. Most of the standing time is waiting for the next section to clear of the previous tram(s).

Mono, I have to counter that - I catch the tram every day as well, at least 12 times in any given week.

I know for a fact that the trams operate on a 'line of sight' basis, not a sectional/signalling basis. I've recieved advice from one of the heads of rail operations at DPTI that this is the case.

It doesn't happen often, but I've seen instances where you'll see a tram heading southbound (Glenelg) waiting at Angus/Gouger street, with another southbound tram loading/unloading at Victoria Sqaure and another southbound tram waiting on the other side of the Grote/Wakefield street traffic lights. That's three trams heading southbound within a 200m section of track. If they operated on a sectional basis, which requires signalling, they would be much further apart.

The only signalling on the tram network that I'm aware of where trams have to wait to clear a 'section' is at the entry and exit points of the Glengowrie Depot.

Yes I'm aware that the sectioning is line of sight and not signalised. Doesn't change what I said. You cant park two trams on top of each other.