Sensational-Adelaide.com

Dont be suprised if a overpass over Brighton rd is also on the cards. This would mean Hove station would go, and Warradale would also go due to the Oaklands overpass. A New station is being considered between these 2 overpasses called 'Hovedale'. Still very early days though.

Hovedale? but if it's elevated, shouldnt it be called Super Hovedale?

With all these overpasses on the Noarlunga Line, why don't they just elevate the whole damn thing!

wouldn't they consider a station above brighton road ala south road tram overpass? Makes for very easy (in fact, ideal) connections to busses underneath.

metro wrote:Hovedale? but if it's elevated, shouldnt it be called Super Hovedale?

Hoverdale...

metro wrote:I had a look thorugh this site and the government's own infrastructure sites collecting info on similar projects. The rail bridge I assume would be a similar project to the tram overpass at south road, that project cost about $30m, but assuming a rail bridge has to be bigger and stronger will cost twice that, so $60m plus the $10m wasted cost of Oaklands station gives us about a $70m figure.

Oh its far worse than double the cost. The standard for bridges over rail lines these days is 8.9m, so that double stacked containers fit underneath. Given this is an over dimension load route, i'd expect something in the 8-9 m range for the road underneath a rail line. Add another meter for the bridge spans, ballast etc to make it 10m.

Anyway maximum grade on the Adelaide metro train network is 1:45. So to get 10m of height you need 450m of ramp, at BOTH ends. The station needs to be on a flat spot and is at least 5 cars long* (25m x 5) = 125m. So say 50m of bridge, the rest is piled up dirt and retaining walls. just over 1km of construction work.

* in reality I suspect given the new trains will be fixed 3 car sets, platform will be made long enough to fit two sets coupled together. Which means 7 cars (1 extra to allow stopping distances) or 175ml.

Its all going to be very very expensive.

fabricator wrote:

metro wrote:I had a look thorugh this site and the government's own infrastructure sites collecting info on similar projects. The rail bridge I assume would be a similar project to the tram overpass at south road, that project cost about $30m, but assuming a rail bridge has to be bigger and stronger will cost twice that, so $60m plus the $10m wasted cost of Oaklands station gives us about a $70m figure.

Oh its far worse than double the cost. The standard for bridges over rail lines these days is 8.9m, so that double stacked containers fit underneath.

That's a inappropriate standard that any competent rail engineer would ignore! Even in the extremely unlikely event that Port Stanvac becomes a container port, there are already so many other low bridges across the railway that making it suitable for double stacked containers would not be sensible.

Given this is an over dimension load route, i'd expect something in the 8-9 m range for the road underneath a rail line. Add another meter for the bridge spans, ballast etc to make it 10m.

I was under the impression that there was a 5m absolute maximum height restriction in Adelaide. If this is not so, what is the policy?

Anyway maximum grade on the Adelaide metro train network is 1:45.

No, that's just the recommended maximum - there's actually a stretch of 1:35 near Marino. Even that's rather shallow for the capabilities of electric suburban trains.

So to get 10m of height you need 450m of ramp, at BOTH ends. The station needs to be on a flat spot and is at least 5 cars long* (25m x 5) = 125m. So say 50m of bridge, the rest is piled up dirt and retaining walls. just over 1km of construction work.

* in reality I suspect given the new trains will be fixed 3 car sets, platform will be made long enough to fit two sets coupled together. Which means 7 cars (1 extra to allow stopping distances) or 175ml.

Do you have a figure for how much construction work it would take to alter the level of the road instead?

Its all going to be very very expensive.

And at Morphett/Diagonal road it might make more sense to add another northbound lane to the road for now and worry about grade separating it later.

Don't the reasons for grade separating the oaklands crossing stack up for Brighton road as well
More trains ,more often and electrified . Is the tonsley line part of the electrification ? What are the timelines
Because on dpti site it's due to finish June 2013 that's only 17 months away

Cross-posted from SSC.

Really, I'm a bit miffed about this project.

When they rebuilt the station back in 2006, DTEI (now DPTI) told the public that the station was built in a way that would avoid it having to be rebuilt again when the Oaklands level crossing was to be eliminated.

Fast forward 6 years, 2012, and now they're telling us it has to be rebuilt because they want the rail to go over the road(s).

This will mean yet another closure of the rail lines for several months, inconviencing Noarlunga line passengers once more, which really isn't fair to those using the service having to put up with nearly 3-5 years of on/off closures.

It is an absurd waste of taxpayers money and proof of absolute neglience and incompetence by those working on the project within DTEI/DPTI. And I mean this quite seriously, because I intend to work for DPTI in the future and I think it's very important for organisations, whether public or private to not only accept criicism externally, but also from within.

I really don't understand why they can't just build an underpass for Morphett Road, and an overpass for Diagonal Road (or vice-versa) and have traffic lights at the end of the underpass/overpasses to allow for traffic movements back onto the other road(s)? I've got an idea of it on my head and did a little scribble on paper, so it's a bit hard to explain, but essentially the train line does not get affected in any way at all. I'll try and upload an image of the scribble I did.

It just beggars belief that they are seriously considering building a rail overpass! It shouldn't even be an option on the table at all!

EDIT: Image uploaded:



So basically, Diagonal Road is an overpass, Morphett Road is an underpass. The red circles are the new traffic lights. The black stripes are houses/businesses which would need to be demolished to make way for the road projects. The dark blue is Oaklands Station, as is, and the black cars are carparks.

EDIT: Image uploaded:



I feel stupider for having looked at this diagram.

The locals who currently drive to Oaklands Station will surely not be very happy with this layout, nor will the residents owning homes that would need to be resumed for this to happen.

The number of signalised intersections proposed seems excessive, some of them don't need to be there. If this is the way of preventing the rebuilding of Oaklands Station, then I see this solution as the equivalent of rotating an entire house around just to unscrew a light bulb.

AG wrote:The locals who currently drive to Oaklands Station will surely not be very happy with this layout, nor will the residents owning homes that would need to be resumed for this to happen.

The number of signalised intersections proposed seems excessive, some of them don't need to be there. If this is the way of preventing the rebuilding of Oaklands Station, then I see this solution as the equivalent of rotating an entire house around just to unscrew a light bulb.

This.

There seems to be a lot of sunk cost fallacy in this thread. If the cheapest and most efficient way of doing things now involves rebuilding the station, then that is the best thing to do. The fact the current station was only built a few years ago is unfortunate, but that just means there should be someone looking into why that rebuild was approved. We don't however have a time machine to go back and change the fact it was built.

My brain hurts now shuz.

Hey dummy's

this will not happen for 10+ years or most likely not at all.

And to be fair, this is a government department we're talking about. Forward-planning consists of booking in flexi-days for the month ahead.

Ok, I'll shush now.