News & Discussion: Trams

[Cryptic]

The government and council aren't going to co-ordinate on trams vs councils plan to turn the middle of oconnel into a parkling lot. We're talking a state that routinely repaves roads and footpaths, only for another agency to come along and dig holes in the newly paved road/footpath..that's the level of co-ordination in South Australia.


They want to turn the middle of O'Connell into parking to suck more money out of people.
Otherwise there's plenty of room for a tram down O'Connell.

Yep completely agree with this. Saying a lack of plan for trams in an ACC plan indicates a lack of intent for a tram extension from the state government is putting far too much faith in the cooperation between different levels of government. I think O'Connell is probably first up on the agenda when trams make their way back into the political conversation (which I'm fairly confident they will, eventually). I think we probably see a tram extension up this way some time in the 2030s, regardless of whatever the ACC do.

[[Shuz]]

There literally is a parallel road called LeFevre Terrace that can be used as a thoroughfare for Main North Road traffic, just redirect it into KWS at Brougham Place.

Fun fact: That's the original lights plan. The road was rerouted a long time ago. That way you can have a street for trams and a street for through traffic. Win win.

[Spotto]

Fun fact: That's the original lights plan. The road was rerouted a long time ago. That way you can have a street for trams and a street for through traffic. Win win.

TIL this. Did a quick search and Experience Adelaide has an old aerial photo from 1935 showing the original pre-80s alignment.

https://www.experienceadelaide.com.au/n ... ghts-plan/

[prometheus2704]

Returning LeFevre Terrace to it's original alignment with Main North Road would never happen. Could you imagine the uproar from every single one of the residents living along there? Not to mention the Parklands Preservation Society kicking up a stank about turning parklands over to a road!

[[Shuz]]

The APPA would be hypocrites if they whinged about the realignment of a road back to its original alignment.

East Terrace got realigned with minimal pushback. Obahn Tunnel got built despite the pushback.

[rubberman]

The APPA would be hypocrites if they whinged about the realignment of a road back to its original alignment.

East Terrace got realigned with minimal pushback. Obahn Tunnel got built despite the pushback.

The problem with the original alignment was that the intersection was a traffic nightmare, rather than how much traffic could get down LeFevre. You can still get to Lefevre from two directions in the Northern end. Plus, it's only one lane each way.

Now, that's not to say we couldn't get some more traffic down that way. I suspect that is the way a lot of traffic from lot 88 is going to be forced to go...and which will probably soak up most of LeFevre's capacity anyway.

People want to use their cars, not use public transport and change modes. However, at some point, the road capacity isn't there. At that point people have to decide to use higher capacity public transport, such as trams, with reduced numbers of cars: ie more trams, fewer cars. Or, if they won't accept that, just sit in ever longer traffic jams. Those are the alternatives for O'Connell Street, Goodwood Road, Unley Road, The Parade, and increasingly, Henley Beach and Grange Roads. At the moment, the driving public is choosing the longer traffic delays.

[bits]

Another answer is to not increase the population.
No more people means no more traffic

[whatstheirnamesmom]

I have heard on very good authority that the government are planning on chipping in a substantial sum of money to have the Adelaide Bridge rebuilt as part of the next budget.

As others have said, the current political and infrastructure climates aren't favourable to trams, so I don't think there will be any tram news for the remainder of this term or the majority of the next. But come 2030 – with the bridge rebuilt, 88 O'Connell spurring more North Adelaide high-density development, Aquatic Centre finished, NAGC redeveloped for LIV – it will be ripe for a tram extension.

[ChillyPhilly]

I have heard on very good authority that the government are planning on chipping in a substantial sum of money to have the Adelaide Bridge rebuilt as part of the next budget.

As others have said, the current political and infrastructure climates aren't favourable to trams, so I don't think there will be any tram news for the remainder of this term or the majority of the next. But come 2030 – with the bridge rebuilt, 88 O'Connell spurring more North Adelaide high-density development, Aquatic Centre finished, NAGC redeveloped for LIV – it will be ripe for a tram extension.

I hope what you have heard is correct, because that is a key piece of the future tram puzzle.

[rhino]

The problem with the original alignment was that the intersection was a traffic nightmare, rather than how much traffic could get down LeFevre. You can still get to Lefevre from two directions in the Northern end. Plus, it's only one lane each way.

Now, that's not to say we couldn't get some more traffic down that way. I suspect that is the way a lot of traffic from lot 88 is going to be forced to go...and which will probably soak up most of LeFevre's capacity anyway.

Since the early 1980s, Park, Fitzroy and Robe Terraces have been substantially enlarged to cope with more traffic. Fitzroy and Robe Terraces were built from scratch, with the old existing road becoming a service road for residences. It was also done with Fullarton Road opposite Victoria Park, and with some of Hackney Road. Greenhill Road was substantially widened even earlier. In the northeast Park Tce and Mann Tce have effectively become two parts of one road, each handling traffic in opposing directions. Burbridge Road (now Sir Donald Bradman Drive) was substantially widened in the 1980s when the old Hilton Bridges were replaced with the current ones. There are plenty of precedents for Le Fevre Tce to be completely rebuilt, and the existing roadway turned into a service road for the residences. If O'Connell St becomes primarily a public transport route, it can be extended up what is currently Main North Road (O'Connell Road?) and turned to end in a T at the new Le Fevre Tce, the opposite of what currently happens. Or, that part of the current Main North Road can revert to parkland, and O'Connell St can become Prospect Road, which is where I presume the tram line would extend to.

my

[PD2/20]

A series of short-term weekend closures of the whole tram network between early May and early August have been announced https://www.tgsp.sa.gov.au/news/weekend ... ugust-2025. This will allow a temporary tram storage facility alongside Peacock Road to be established https://www.tgsp.sa.gov.au/projects/ass ... e-facility. Preparations for the 6 month (August - January 2026) closure between South Terrace and Glenelg will also be undertaken.

[SouthAussie94]

Does anyone know what works will be done at Cross/Marion/Morphett during these partial closures?

Are they going as far as doing piling works for the bridges during these periods?

[NTRabbit]

https://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/sou ... 9d02da?amp

Adelaide City Council to reiterate again its desire for tram link to North Adelaide
A push to get the tram to continue on to North Adelaide has been reinvigorated by the relocation of a popular event and business developments. Have your say.

LIV Golf’s move to the city, the new Adelaide Aquatic Centre and Eighty-Eight O’Connell development warrant a tram extension to North Adelaide, Adelaide City Council says.

The council will renew its push for a tram extension down O’Connell St, as Adelaide MP Lucy Hood gauges whether the local community would want one to go ahead.

Councillor Mary Couros received unanimous support at Tuesday night’s meeting for the council to again write to Premier Peter Malinauskas stating its importance for future growth.

It follows a previous letter in 2022 and more recently, the council included the extension as part of its 2036 City Plan to help it double its population from 26,000 to 50,000 people.

Cr Couros told the meeting there was plenty of economic growth in North Adelaide, including the completion of Eighty-Eight O’Connell, making it a “crucial time for discussion”.

Media-link

“In order to have the tram come down to North Adelaide we all know we have to upgrade the bridge…. the state government hasn’t confirmed to us or not if they are going to commit to that,” she told the meeting.

The council estimated a bridge upgrade would cost $60m – but the Essential Services Commission of SA has recently raised concerns the cost could be higher and it was reliant on external funding.

Cr Phil Martin said Adelaide MP Lucy Hood had attended a North Adelaide precinct meeting and had asked about a tram extension which had attendees “wildly enthusiastic”.

It comes as the council consulted local residents on its O’Connell St upgrade, which included a 30km/hr speed limit, new bike lanes and designed to be adaptable for future tram extension.

The $15m main street plan also included on-street parking to be restricted to off-peak, with any shortfall made up by two hour parking spaces at Eighty Eight O’Connell.

The road would remain as two lanes, north and south, during peak hour, but would be reduced to one lane during off-peak to allow for parking and bus stops.

A state government spokesman said they did not comment on council matters or budget deliberations ahead of it being delivered on June 5.

“Our priority is bringing tram operations back into public hands later this year,” the spokesman said.

ACC including the tram extension down O'Connell in writing now

[rev]

What a waste of residents money.
Seriously are they right in the head over there?

"We want trams down occonnel, butwe're also going to spend money upgrading oconnel without a tram track"

How about put their upgrade plans on the back burner, consult with the government on a tram line extension there, and then work around that and any possible time frame for a tram extension?

Or is that too hard for a bunch of people earning 6 figure salaries that are supposedly needed to "attract the best"...

[ChillyPhilly]

What a waste of residents money.
Seriously are they right in the head over there?

"We want trams down occonnel, butwe're also going to spend money upgrading oconnel without a tram track"

How about put their upgrade plans on the back burner, consult with the government on a tram line extension there, and then work around that and any possible time frame for a tram extension?

Or is that too hard for a bunch of people earning 6 figure salaries that are supposedly needed to "attract the best"...

Thankfully, the plan for O'Connell Street has provision for a tram.