Riverlea (Buckland Park) | 12,000 dwellings | $3b

[SBD]

It's already well established in Adelaide that cities can be suburbs of Adelaide, we have over a dozen "cities" already.

That's true, but not the sense of "city" I thought he meant when he said it will be second behind Adelaide.

The cities of Playford, Charles Sturt, Onkaparinga etc don't claim to be second, fourth whatever cities in SA. Whyalla, Mount Gambier, Port Lincoln etc do. They have a campus of UniSA, people don't generally commute to Adelaide, there are local industries to employ the population etc.

Riverlea park is in a corner of the City of Playford. It has employment closer than Adelaide and isn't too far from Mawson Lakes campus for tertiary study and Lyell McEwin Hospital. It isn't trying to be a "separate city".

[Nort]

It's already well established in Adelaide that cities can be suburbs of Adelaide, we have over a dozen "cities" already.

That's true, but not the sense of "city" I thought he meant when he said it will be second behind Adelaide.

The cities of Playford, Charles Sturt, Onkaparinga etc don't claim to be second, fourth whatever cities in SA. Whyalla, Mount Gambier, Port Lincoln etc do. They have a campus of UniSA, people don't generally commute to Adelaide, there are local industries to employ the population etc.

Riverlea park is in a corner of the City of Playford. It has employment closer than Adelaide and isn't too far from Mawson Lakes campus for tertiary study and Lyell McEwin Hospital. It isn't trying to be a "separate city".

Dan Cregan represents the area and is trying to get more suburban style infrastructure, so he definitely sees it as a city in terms of the other Adelaide suburban cities.

[SBD]

It's already well established in Adelaide that cities can be suburbs of Adelaide, we have over a dozen "cities" already.

That's true, but not the sense of "city" I thought he meant when he said it will be second behind Adelaide.

The cities of Playford, Charles Sturt, Onkaparinga etc don't claim to be second, fourth whatever cities in SA. Whyalla, Mount Gambier, Port Lincoln etc do. They have a campus of UniSA, people don't generally commute to Adelaide, there are local industries to employ the population etc.

Riverlea park is in a corner of the City of Playford. It has employment closer than Adelaide and isn't too far from Mawson Lakes campus for tertiary study and Lyell McEwin Hospital. It isn't trying to be a "separate city".

Dan Cregan represents the area and is trying to get more suburban style infrastructure, so he definitely sees it as a city in terms of the other Adelaide suburban cities.

I don't know what the "City of Onkaparinga" and "City of Playford" get that he thinks the "District Council of Mount Barker", "Town of Gawler" or "Adelaide Hills Council" are missing out on because they are not "cities".

This conversation should possibly be moved to the Beer Garden or state politics forum if it continues away from Riverlea Park.

[Waewick]

So genuine question. But the $90m earmarked for Port dock extension (yes I'm against it, it's pork barrelling at its finest and with no real business case for it, alternatives should be assesed)

Surely that money would be better spend trying to get rail to this development and the surrounding areas?



Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[Goodsy]

So genuine question. But the $90m earmarked for Port dock extension (yes I'm against it, it's pork barrelling at its finest and with no real business case for it, alternatives should be assesed)

Surely that money would be better spend trying to get rail to this development and the surrounding areas?



Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

$90m would pay for the feasibility study.. You'd need to add another 0 on the end to pay for that rail line to be built

[SBD]

So genuine question. But the $90m earmarked for Port dock extension (yes I'm against it, it's pork barrelling at its finest and with no real business case for it, alternatives should be assesed)

Surely that money would be better spend trying to get rail to this development and the surrounding areas?



Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

$90m would pay for the feasibility study.. You'd need to add another 0 on the end to pay for that rail line to be built

What would be the goal of rail to Riverlea Park? If the goal is to encourage more people who want to work in the Adelaide CBD to live that far out? According to Google Maps, it's a 32-minute drive (Sunday evening), 35-65 minutes to arrive by 9am Wednesday.

Broadly, what route should be considered?

• Branch at Salisbury and follow roughly the current standard gauge route? The train is 29 minutes from Salisbury station to Adelaide station, plus however long to get there.
• Branch at Smithfield or Munno Para and run through Angle Vale? Even longer to the city, but goes near three more high schools, a bunch of other housing estates and the Elizabeth employment areas.
• Extend from Le Fevre Peninsula with a new high-level bridge to St Kilda? Provides connectivity to the nearby Osborne employment area and port Adelaide.
• Extend from Port Dock along the east side of the Port River to avoid the need for a high bridge by using Torrens Island and over Barker Inlet, but doesn't link to Osborne, only to Port Adelaide.

We don't seem to encourage public transport for blue collar or non-city workers. If we expect the new suburbs to be full of families who don't work in the Adelaide CBD, then what is the value of making it easy for them to get there? We'd be better to reinstate trains to Edinburgh, Osborne, Wingfield etc. Most of the closed railways in Adelaide used to service employment areas which have either been gentrified or automated.

[Goodsy]

So genuine question. But the $90m earmarked for Port dock extension (yes I'm against it, it's pork barrelling at its finest and with no real business case for it, alternatives should be assesed)

Surely that money would be better spend trying to get rail to this development and the surrounding areas?



Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

$90m would pay for the feasibility study.. You'd need to add another 0 on the end to pay for that rail line to be built

What would be the goal of rail to Riverlea Park? If the goal is to encourage more people who want to work in the Adelaide CBD to live that far out? According to Google Maps, it's a 32-minute drive (Sunday evening), 35-65 minutes to arrive by 9am Wednesday.

Broadly, what route should be considered?

• Branch at Salisbury and follow roughly the current standard gauge route? The train is 29 minutes from Salisbury station to Adelaide station, plus however long to get there.
• Branch at Smithfield or Munno Para and run through Angle Vale? Even longer to the city, but goes near three more high schools, a bunch of other housing estates and the Elizabeth employment areas.
• Extend from Le Fevre Peninsula with a new high-level bridge to St Kilda? Provides connectivity to the nearby Osborne employment area and port Adelaide.
• Extend from Port Dock along the east side of the Port River to avoid the need for a high bridge by using Torrens Island and over Barker Inlet, but doesn't link to Osborne, only to Port Adelaide.

We don't seem to encourage public transport for blue collar or non-city workers. If we expect the new suburbs to be full of families who don't work in the Adelaide CBD, then what is the value of making it easy for them to get there? We'd be better to reinstate trains to Edinburgh, Osborne, Wingfield etc. Most of the closed railways in Adelaide used to service employment areas which have either been gentrified or automated.

Any new lines heading north should be built to emulate the Joondalup line in Perth with the rail line going down the middle of Port Wakefield road

Run it across the salt pans connecting somewhere near Dry Creek and then run a service into Port Dock along the Dry Creek rail line.

Dry Creek station could then be turned into an interchange

[SBD]

$90m would pay for the feasibility study.. You'd need to add another 0 on the end to pay for that rail line to be built

What would be the goal of rail to Riverlea Park? If the goal is to encourage more people who want to work in the Adelaide CBD to live that far out? According to Google Maps, it's a 32-minute drive (Sunday evening), 35-65 minutes to arrive by 9am Wednesday.

Broadly, what route should be considered?

• Branch at Salisbury and follow roughly the current standard gauge route? The train is 29 minutes from Salisbury station to Adelaide station, plus however long to get there.
• Branch at Smithfield or Munno Para and run through Angle Vale? Even longer to the city, but goes near three more high schools, a bunch of other housing estates and the Elizabeth employment areas.
• Extend from Le Fevre Peninsula with a new high-level bridge to St Kilda? Provides connectivity to the nearby Osborne employment area and port Adelaide.
• Extend from Port Dock along the east side of the Port River to avoid the need for a high bridge by using Torrens Island and over Barker Inlet, but doesn't link to Osborne, only to Port Adelaide.

We don't seem to encourage public transport for blue collar or non-city workers. If we expect the new suburbs to be full of families who don't work in the Adelaide CBD, then what is the value of making it easy for them to get there? We'd be better to reinstate trains to Edinburgh, Osborne, Wingfield etc. Most of the closed railways in Adelaide used to service employment areas which have either been gentrified or automated.

Any new lines heading north should be built to emulate the Joondalup line in Perth with the rail line going down the middle of Port Wakefield road

Run it across the salt pans connecting somewhere near Dry Creek and then run a service into Port Dock along the Dry Creek rail line.

Dry Creek station could then be turned into an interchange

I believe the built version of the Northern Connector left a railway reservation on its western side (earlier designs had it in the middle). It's intended for re-routing the interstate line not a new metro line though. I don't know where(or if) an allowance has been made to get it across Port Wakefield Road to the existing line though.

Dry Creek station used to be the interchange and junction station for both the Dry Creek-Port Adelaide line (serving Port Adelaide and industrial areas around Wingfield and Gillman) and the Northfield line (serving the abattoirs and meat works). There were at least two other industrial branches between there and Gawler Junction, but all closed now.

Do we have statistics of how many jobs there are in the Edinburgh, Penfield, Waterloo Corner, Virginia, Two Wells area that is presently not served by public transport? My guess would be there could be enough to employ a lot of the people intended to live in those new residential areas. Even more if I include the southern Elizabeth and Salisbury suburbs.

[rev]

So genuine question. But the $90m earmarked for Port dock extension (yes I'm against it, it's pork barrelling at its finest and with no real business case for it, alternatives should be assesed)

Surely that money would be better spend trying to get rail to this development and the surrounding areas?



Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

$90m would pay for the feasibility study.. You'd need to add another 0 on the end to pay for that rail line to be built

What would be the goal of rail to Riverlea Park? If the goal is to encourage more people who want to work in the Adelaide CBD to live that far out? According to Google Maps, it's a 32-minute drive (Sunday evening), 35-65 minutes to arrive by 9am Wednesday.

Broadly, what route should be considered?

• Branch at Salisbury and follow roughly the current standard gauge route? The train is 29 minutes from Salisbury station to Adelaide station, plus however long to get there.
• Branch at Smithfield or Munno Para and run through Angle Vale? Even longer to the city, but goes near three more high schools, a bunch of other housing estates and the Elizabeth employment areas.
• Extend from Le Fevre Peninsula with a new high-level bridge to St Kilda? Provides connectivity to the nearby Osborne employment area and port Adelaide.
• Extend from Port Dock along the east side of the Port River to avoid the need for a high bridge by using Torrens Island and over Barker Inlet, but doesn't link to Osborne, only to Port Adelaide.

We don't seem to encourage public transport for blue collar or non-city workers. If we expect the new suburbs to be full of families who don't work in the Adelaide CBD, then what is the value of making it easy for them to get there? We'd be better to reinstate trains to Edinburgh, Osborne, Wingfield etc. Most of the closed railways in Adelaide used to service employment areas which have either been gentrified or automated.

35-65 minutes. Today.

Go back to Google Maps, scroll over to Melbourne and select the public transport view.
Four lines that run to the north/north-west/north-east suburbs. And their northern suburbs are growing further out, and they'll extend their train lines further out. There's also about 7 tram lines that head to the inner north, but here in Adelaide we argue about whether a train line should be replaced by trams because trams couldn't possibly run in the same direction separately on another alignment nearby.

Now look at Google Maps the northern suburbs of Adelaide and Buckland Park. One line which makes sense now since most of the suburbs are around that except that north east pocket, Golden Grove, St Agnes etc.
There's nothing between Burton and Buckland Park/Riverlea/Virgina/Penfield/Macdonald Park/Angle Vale. What's not already housing or being developed for housing, will be in that space. Needs a train line. At the very least planned for and a corridor allocated, before it's all a built up urban environment.
There's going to be tens of thousands more commuters. Those travel times are going to increase significantly in the coming decades. Should have been part of the northern connector as originally envisaged.

[Goodsy]

I believe the built version of the Northern Connector left a railway reservation on its western side (earlier designs had it in the middle). It's intended for re-routing the interstate line not a new metro line though. I don't know where(or if) an allowance has been made to get it across Port Wakefield Road to the existing line though.

No, there's no provisions for it to cross Port Wakefield road, infact they left no provisions for it anywhere in the corridor

[SBD]

$90m would pay for the feasibility study.. You'd need to add another 0 on the end to pay for that rail line to be built

What would be the goal of rail to Riverlea Park? If the goal is to encourage more people who want to work in the Adelaide CBD to live that far out? According to Google Maps, it's a 32-minute drive (Sunday evening), 35-65 minutes to arrive by 9am Wednesday.

Broadly, what route should be considered?

• Branch at Salisbury and follow roughly the current standard gauge route? The train is 29 minutes from Salisbury station to Adelaide station, plus however long to get there.
• Branch at Smithfield or Munno Para and run through Angle Vale? Even longer to the city, but goes near three more high schools, a bunch of other housing estates and the Elizabeth employment areas.
• Extend from Le Fevre Peninsula with a new high-level bridge to St Kilda? Provides connectivity to the nearby Osborne employment area and port Adelaide.
• Extend from Port Dock along the east side of the Port River to avoid the need for a high bridge by using Torrens Island and over Barker Inlet, but doesn't link to Osborne, only to Port Adelaide.

We don't seem to encourage public transport for blue collar or non-city workers. If we expect the new suburbs to be full of families who don't work in the Adelaide CBD, then what is the value of making it easy for them to get there? We'd be better to reinstate trains to Edinburgh, Osborne, Wingfield etc. Most of the closed railways in Adelaide used to service employment areas which have either been gentrified or automated.

35-65 minutes. Today.

Go back to Google Maps, scroll over to Melbourne and select the public transport view.
Four lines that run to the north/north-west/north-east suburbs. And their northern suburbs are growing further out, and they'll extend their train lines further out. There's also about 7 tram lines that head to the inner north, but here in Adelaide we argue about whether a train line should be replaced by trams because trams couldn't possibly run in the same direction separately on another alignment nearby.

Now look at Google Maps the northern suburbs of Adelaide and Buckland Park. One line which makes sense now since most of the suburbs are around that except that north east pocket, Golden Grove, St Agnes etc.
There's nothing between Burton and Buckland Park/Riverlea/Virgina/Penfield/Macdonald Park/Angle Vale. What's not already housing or being developed for housing, will be in that space. Needs a train line. At the very least planned for and a corridor allocated, before it's all a built up urban environment.
There's going to be tens of thousands more commuters. Those travel times are going to increase significantly in the coming decades. Should have been part of the northern connector as originally envisaged.

If there are going to be tens of thousands more commuters from those areas to the Adelaide CBD, then some other part of the planning system has failed. The employment should also be decentralised and localised. Experience with COVID-19 means that for more office workers, telecommuting is more practical. Local business hubs can enable working outside of the home, but still in the local area.

We don't expect our primary schools, grocery shops, doctors or hospitals to only be available in one CBD, why should we expect the entire state's employment to be there?

Sometimes people need to commute a long way for a year or two when they change jobs. When they are moving house anyway, we (society) should be enabling them to live relatively close to where they work. If they want to work in the inner city, the system should assist them to live there too. If they want to live in the outer suburbs, the system should provide employment opportunities there too. We don't need to spend billions on making it easier for people to commute long distances. Induced demand will ensure the traffic is as busy as it needs to be on any given size road, railway, cycle path, whatever. People will eventually choose the options that suit them best. There is no societal benefit in making it easy to commute further.

[rev]

What would be the goal of rail to Riverlea Park? If the goal is to encourage more people who want to work in the Adelaide CBD to live that far out? According to Google Maps, it's a 32-minute drive (Sunday evening), 35-65 minutes to arrive by 9am Wednesday.

Broadly, what route should be considered?

• Branch at Salisbury and follow roughly the current standard gauge route? The train is 29 minutes from Salisbury station to Adelaide station, plus however long to get there.
• Branch at Smithfield or Munno Para and run through Angle Vale? Even longer to the city, but goes near three more high schools, a bunch of other housing estates and the Elizabeth employment areas.
• Extend from Le Fevre Peninsula with a new high-level bridge to St Kilda? Provides connectivity to the nearby Osborne employment area and port Adelaide.
• Extend from Port Dock along the east side of the Port River to avoid the need for a high bridge by using Torrens Island and over Barker Inlet, but doesn't link to Osborne, only to Port Adelaide.

We don't seem to encourage public transport for blue collar or non-city workers. If we expect the new suburbs to be full of families who don't work in the Adelaide CBD, then what is the value of making it easy for them to get there? We'd be better to reinstate trains to Edinburgh, Osborne, Wingfield etc. Most of the closed railways in Adelaide used to service employment areas which have either been gentrified or automated.

35-65 minutes. Today.

Go back to Google Maps, scroll over to Melbourne and select the public transport view.
Four lines that run to the north/north-west/north-east suburbs. And their northern suburbs are growing further out, and they'll extend their train lines further out. There's also about 7 tram lines that head to the inner north, but here in Adelaide we argue about whether a train line should be replaced by trams because trams couldn't possibly run in the same direction separately on another alignment nearby.

Now look at Google Maps the northern suburbs of Adelaide and Buckland Park. One line which makes sense now since most of the suburbs are around that except that north east pocket, Golden Grove, St Agnes etc.
There's nothing between Burton and Buckland Park/Riverlea/Virgina/Penfield/Macdonald Park/Angle Vale. What's not already housing or being developed for housing, will be in that space. Needs a train line. At the very least planned for and a corridor allocated, before it's all a built up urban environment.
There's going to be tens of thousands more commuters. Those travel times are going to increase significantly in the coming decades. Should have been part of the northern connector as originally envisaged.

If there are going to be tens of thousands more commuters from those areas to the Adelaide CBD, then some other part of the planning system has failed. The employment should also be decentralised and localised. Experience with COVID-19 means that for more office workers, telecommuting is more practical. Local business hubs can enable working outside of the home, but still in the local area.

We don't expect our primary schools, grocery shops, doctors or hospitals to only be available in one CBD, why should we expect the entire state's employment to be there?

Sometimes people need to commute a long way for a year or two when they change jobs. When they are moving house anyway, we (society) should be enabling them to live relatively close to where they work. If they want to work in the inner city, the system should assist them to live there too. If they want to live in the outer suburbs, the system should provide employment opportunities there too. We don't need to spend billions on making it easier for people to commute long distances. Induced demand will ensure the traffic is as busy as it needs to be on any given size road, railway, cycle path, whatever. People will eventually choose the options that suit them best. There is no societal benefit in making it easy to commute further.

Running with your logic, Melbourne and Sydney should abandon their public transport networks, current expansions, future expansions.
Rip it all up, like Adelaide did to it's extensive tram network.
Melbourne surely doesn't need 4 train lines running into the northern suburbs, along with 7 tram lines into the inner/mid northern suburbs.
There's no need to enable people to move.

No societal benefit? I'll let you think about that one a little longer.

COVID measures were temporary, it's practically back to normal in a lot of offices, some still offering hybrid models, some letting staff work from home if/when they choose.
By the time those areas I mentioned are filled with housing within a few decades, this covid thing and the temporary measures put in place will be a distant memory.
What wont be a distant memory will be the ongoing & worsening congestion the likes of which Adelaide hasn't experienced yet.
Maybe the motorway will cope, maybe it wont. But where are they all going to go when they get off the motorway?

Why learn the lessons from other cities and act before we have to learn the hard way as well? After all we are the city that ripped up an extensive tram network in the CBD and inner suburbs.

[SBD]

I did not suggest ripping up existing infrastructure. I am suggesting we design future development to encourage good outcomes, not to support bad ones.

Adelaide’s “extensive” tram network extended as far north as Regency Road, no further.

Please explain what you see as the benefit to SA society that would come by making it easier for people who work in the Adelaide CBD to build houses at Riverlea Park, Angle Vale, Roseworthy, Gawler East. Also explain the benefit to society of encouraging people who live in those housing estates to needing commute to Adelaide for work rather than being employed in local industries.

You say we should learn from Melbourne and Sydney, but you haven’t expanded on what they have learned about facilitating people working a long way from where they live.

My counter is that society hangs together better as a community if the people you see going for a walk, at school, shops, church, work, etc are the same people rather than each part of our lives having completely disjoint contacts.

[Eurostar]

Virginia should be a city. It has town centre, main street, railway, major highway. As for short term maybe a regular bus route running between Virginia and City or Virginia and Mawson Lakes/Salisbury. Long term a train service between Virginia and Salisbury.

[Jaymz]

Peeps in here seem to be focused on public transport to the CBD for employment only. Surely a big function of it is for the leisure/entertainment factor. People living in the burbs i'd like to think still want to get to the city for the footy, see a show, attend a festival, go for a night out at the Casino or perhaps visit a restaurant and enjoy a few drinks without having to drive.

If areas to the north are to have tens of thousands of extra residents over the coming years, why shouldn't they be able to catch a train to the CBD?