.
crawf wrote:I would love for a tramline to run along Currie Street --> Henley Beach Road --> Henley Square with a spur line along Airport Road terminating infront of the new terminal.
Henley Beach Road has so much potential for becoming a popular cafe and shopping strip with a few clubs and low/mid rise apartments - It would be a great entrance for visitors traveling on the tram from the airport to the city
A tramline to Henley Square would open up the area more for development and visitors (though don't want to see it turned into another Glenelg)
I agree, plus the new soon to be opened Bakewell Underpass, if the tram could run down and up the pass, that would be awesome.crawf wrote:I would love for a tramline to run along Currie Street --> Henley Beach Road --> Henley Square with a spur line along Airport Road terminating infront of the new terminal.
Henley Beach Road has so much potential for becoming a popular cafe and shopping strip with a few clubs and low/mid rise apartments - It would be a great entrance for visitors traveling on the tram from the airport to the city
A tramline to Henley Square would open up the area more for development and visitors (though don't want to see it turned into another Glenelg)
Welcome Wayno,Wayno wrote:hi all, this is my 1st post. I'm interested in knowing more about the Glenelg Tram line overpass at South Rd....
That would take quite an effort, it's correct Magill has a couple of prestigious cafes and restaurants, but they are located all over the place, the only best location is where the UNISA campus is.Mants wrote:Magill Road, imo, has potential to turn into a retail or cafe precinct if developers and store owners got their act together, same applies to goodwood road.
True, I also seriously think the tram should run to North Adelaide along O'Connell St, plenty of potential there, and from there, it can join up to Prospect.ynotsfables wrote:Prospect road too, all these inner city suburban roads can benefit in this way.
Trams did run through the underpass at Hawthorne on Goodwood Road back in the day so there is no doubt that they COULD run through the Bakewell Underpass. Just need to hope for enough overhead clearance.Edgar wrote: I agree, plus the new soon to be opened Bakewell Underpass, if the tram could run down and up the pass, that would be awesome.
LINK TO YOUTUBE PROFILE.Infact this was the very reason this underpass was built. If it wasnt for the trams we would probably have a level crossing there.Will409 wrote:Trams did run through the underpass at Hawthorne on Goodwood Road back in the day.Edgar wrote: I agree, plus the new soon to be opened Bakewell Underpass, if the tram could run down and up the pass, that would be awesome.
Trams may be s-t-r-e-t-c-h-e-d to beat overcrowding
LAUREN NOVAK, TRANSPORT REPORTER
January 10, 2008 12:10am
THE State Government will consider lengthening Adelaide's trams to accommodate more passengers if consistent overcrowding continues.
Since the tram extension opened last October, patronage has exceeded expectations and many are full to bursting during peak periods.
A plan to extend the trams would involve adding a new section in the middle of the vehicle, as had been done in trams overseas.
Transport Minister Patrick Conlon said the Government was considering alternatives to buying more trams but was yet to make firm decisions.
He said the Government would wait for a couple of months to see if passenger numbers levelled off.
"There are even options for extending the size of the existing trams, which is, we understand, being done in Dublin (Ireland)," he said yesterday.
"It's an option, it's simply an option because we know it's been done overseas.
"What we're going to do is have a look at them when it all settles down."
It was not known how many more seats the extra sections would provide.
In January, 2006, it was revealed the new Bombardier Flexity Classic trams could not be joined together and a single car could seat only half as many passengers as the old H-type trams could when coupled.
When two of the older trams were coupled in peak hour, 128 seats were available, with room for 60 standing passengers.
A single new tram has half the number of seats and 109 standing spots, with six fold-up seats for wheelchairs or prams.
At the time, the State Opposition accused the Government of rushing to buy the trams saying Adelaide could have wider trams better suited to commuter needs.
The Government has not done any cost estimates on the option to lengthen the trams but TransAdelaide general manager Bill Watson said there had been discussions with Bombardier.
If the plan went ahead, Bombardier would build the new sections, which would then be sent to Adelaide to be fitted, Mr Watson said.
He said the idea, which was being investigated in October last year, had been put on hold while "we've been concentrating on getting the new services in place".
"It's too early to know if it is physically possible or economically possible," he said.
It's because a coupled H-set is longer than a Flexity.Shuz wrote:The middle section of the trams is approxiametly the same distance from the back of the trams to the edge of most station platforms, which makes me think they were designed to cater for an expanded model of the Flexitys.
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot], SRW and 4 guests
