Sensational-Adelaide.com

claybro wrote: ↑

Thu Dec 20, 2018 11:09 am

SBD wrote: ↑

Wed Dec 19, 2018 2:08 pm

rev wrote: ↑

Wed Dec 19, 2018 9:13 am

Spend millions to put a train line under a roadway to reduce congestion, but then go and put up a signalized pedestrian crossing on the same road. Gotta be Adelaide.

I'm not sure why Adelaide any more than anywhere else...?

As someone else suggested, it might be able to synchronise with the preceding intersection in each direction so that in fact through traffic shouldn't be delayed any more. It looks like the path across the median strip and fences to force pedestrians to use it were installed in the first half of 2016 (Google Streetview). Presumably people are already finding gaps in the traffic, so hopefully the lights sync to the same gaps and actually make no difference at all to the moving traffic.

Why Adelaide more so than anywhere else? Because there would have to be more pedestrian operated crossings in Adelaide than anywhere else on the planet. (just my observation). As for synchronising the pedestrian intersection with the adjacent intersection...given synchronisation is not a strong point elsewhere in Adelaide, I would suggest you are dreaming. Like everyone else has said, seems strange to spend millions to remove a level crossing, only the add a set of lights. Build the damn pedestrian overpass if it is such an issue.

I agree that an overpass would be a better outcome. Synchronising lights does happen in other areas. There are some sections that if I drive through one amber light, then the next one will also be amber, and conversely, if I am front car when the light goes green, I will see the next light go green as I approach. That kind of synchronisation is much harder for traffic where intersections have traffic both ways. Assuming the pedestrian crossing has separate walk phases each side, then each one only needs to be synched with the preceding (or following) set of lights in that direction. The difficulty in getting it "right" would be in deciding which phase of the preceding lights to synch with (straight through or left/right turn onto Park Terrace).

If these lights do add significantly to delays (journey time including the intersections both ends), then there will be objective evidence that an overpass would add significant value.

I'm 99% sure it'll be seperate phases for each side, given the split alignment. And if it's anything like any of the pedestrian crossings on Port Rd, they're timed to change only with the seasons.

(The old signalised crossing along the train line pretty much would never change on request during peak traffic times — only ever going green when the boom gates were down.)

EBG wrote: ↑

Thu Dec 20, 2018 9:49 am

I agree with REV and SBD. It is illogical to spend millions to remove to railway crossing to speed up the traffic flow then put a pedestrian crossing on the same section of road. Also why is the new pedestrian crossing over the railway on War Memorial Drive permanently fence off? It was safe to 5 tracks before but now it is unsafe to cross 3 tracks???

I believe they are installing an activated crossing there. No idea why it's taking so long though.

The activated crossings were installed almost a year ago, but still not in action (one right near the junction and one at North Adelaide station). I thought I saw something about a November timeframe, but that’s obviously come and gone.

Elsewhere, I walked around the ground of Park Central this morning and it looks like the three ground tenancies have been set up for offices rather than retail/hospitality. Basic office kitchen style bench and sink at the back of each, and that generic commercial carpet. Office workers will be good for the area, but ground level is not the best place for it. Should be retail ground with offices above. Hmmm.

Norman wrote: ↑

Fri Dec 21, 2018 1:45 am

EBG wrote: ↑

Thu Dec 20, 2018 9:49 am

I agree with REV and SBD. It is illogical to spend millions to remove to railway crossing to speed up the traffic flow then put a pedestrian crossing on the same section of road. Also why is the new pedestrian crossing over the railway on War Memorial Drive permanently fence off? It was safe to 5 tracks before but now it is unsafe to cross 3 tracks???

I believe they are installing an activated crossing there. No idea why it's taking so long though.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought the original concept for the Bowden was for an overpass to connect the developement to the parklands. Now dumbed down to a pedestrian crossing. Same with Bowden station. Original concept called for a coveted underground station, now they have a station in a trench. Surely this project, being a poster child for TOD's requires it to be true to concept with no cheap corner cutting if we are to ever get people to embrace urban living in SA. I fear this is becoming just another Mawson Lakes which will not exactly inspire people to embrace higher density.

claybro wrote:

Norman wrote: ↑

Fri Dec 21, 2018 1:45 am

EBG wrote: ↑

Thu Dec 20, 2018 9:49 am

I agree with REV and SBD. It is illogical to spend millions to remove to railway crossing to speed up the traffic flow then put a pedestrian crossing on the same section of road. Also why is the new pedestrian crossing over the railway on War Memorial Drive permanently fence off? It was safe to 5 tracks before but now it is unsafe to cross 3 tracks???

I believe they are installing an activated crossing there. No idea why it's taking so long though.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought the original concept for the Bowden was for an overpass to connect the developement to the parklands. Now dumbed down to a pedestrian crossing. Same with Bowden station. Original concept called for a coveted underground station, now they have a station in a trench. Surely this project, being a poster child for TOD's requires it to be true to concept with no cheap corner cutting if we are to ever get people to embrace urban living in SA. I fear this is becoming just another Mawson Lakes which will not exactly inspire people to embrace higher density.

Yes. That was the battle between RenewalSA and DPTI. RenewalSA (at least the Bowden team) fought hard for the overpass and underground station as originally proposed. They were left largely in the dark and ultimately it was down to DPTI trying to minimize any expense that wasn’t covered by the federal payment for Torrens Junction. I raised this concern many times with the now defunct Bowden Reference Group. This same battle is continuing with how the bike/pedestrian path interacts with the gas works site.

The new Bowden station is built in such a way that it can be covered in the future if necessary.

Hammer head crane going up at Bowden today 21/1/2019.

Sure its a hammerhead?
Looks like a luffer

Yeh pretty sure I saw it this morning in the darkness and pretty sure I saw that big A frame thing on the back that luffers have..

Btw, why can't they build a pedestrian overpass, something like this, instead of a pedestrian crossing/lights...was this the thread we were talking about that?

rev wrote: ↑

Tue Jan 22, 2019 7:42 am

Yeh pretty sure I saw it this morning in the darkness and pretty sure I saw that big A frame thing on the back that luffers have..

Btw, why can't they build a pedestrian overpass, something like this, instead of a pedestrian crossing/lights...was this the thread we were talking about that?

123123123124124asd.jpg

See also the temporary bridge that goes up every year between Rymill and Victoria Parks, a permanent pedestrian bridge like this would be so much better.

Crane (not hammer head) completed today 22/1/2019 (hot).
Yes it is an electric luffing crane (I was misinformed ).

I agree with Rev and Nort about a pedestrian over pass or they could have made a pedestrian under pass of precast rectangular concrete sections at the same time as they removed the level crossing. Really though I don't see why they need a pedestrian crossing at all within 200m of the station.

EBG wrote: ↑

Tue Jan 22, 2019 3:41 pm

Really though I don't see why they need a pedestrian crossing at all within 200m of the station.

Because 400m is quite a detour for residents wanting to access the park 20m away from their apartments.

Llessur2002 wrote: ↑

Tue Jan 22, 2019 4:01 pm

EBG wrote: ↑

Tue Jan 22, 2019 3:41 pm

Really though I don't see why they need a pedestrian crossing at all within 200m of the station.

Because 400m is quite a detour for residents wanting to access the park 20m away from their apartments.

Yeah, if it's inconvenient enough to go to the Port Road intersection then some people will be crossing here whether or not they are supposed to, so it's just a matter of if you make it safe or not.

I live jut off Greenhill Rd so can I please have a pedestrian crossing so I can go and play in the parklands?