Sensational-Adelaide.com

SRW wrote: ↑

Sun Sep 08, 2019 8:52 pm

Just on our rolled-gold Botanic Garden extension, the planted medians have already become overgrown with metre-high thistles.

Disappointing if true, but not surprising in Adelaide. Probably arguing over who is responsible to maintain it... or it's been too wet/hot/dry/cold.. It's these small things that really let Adelaide down, for an otherwise beautiful city.

The same can be said for the Elder Park stop, the big garden beds at the end of the tracks have no plants whatsoever and have exposed sprinkler piping... Been this way for weeks.

Ho Really wrote: ↑

Sun Sep 08, 2019 9:18 pm

I don't use the O-Bahn and when I did the tunnel wasn't completed. My wife does though. Regularly. Perhaps not every day as you as she also catches other buses to and from work. She's OK with the outcome, however she doesn't believe the time saved equates to the money spent. We all have our opinions. We can disagree.
Cheers

This is an interesting point. If the time saved daily by your wife is magnified by the number of people who are making this same time saving daily, and remember this is ongoing, I believe the money was well spent.

Just my opinion, and as you say, we can disagree

Ho Really wrote: ↑

Sun Sep 08, 2019 9:18 pm

Yes the tram extension was badly managed, that's where the money was wasted. The tram line itself I am happy with as I've said previously somewhere under this topic or perhaps elsewhere regarding the hospitals. However this tram line should've replaced the O-Bahn. So making the O-Bahn tunnel unnecessary. You would still have had a reliable service. A service that could have taken you from Modbury to Glenelg in its own corridor.

There is nothing about the o-bahn corridor that makes it suitable for light rail. It's a brt, one of the most successful brts in the world, so it's not changing any time soon. You can't call spending money on it a waste just because you personally think that it should be a tram line. In terms of what the tunnel has done for the commute times on the o-bahn it's hard to say it hasn't been a success.

Patrick_27 wrote: ↑

Sun Sep 08, 2019 11:45 pm

The same can be said for the Elder Park stop, the big garden beds at the end of the tracks have no plants whatsoever and have exposed sprinkler piping... Been this way for weeks.

That's just to match the upkeep standard of the rest of the riverbank precinct

claybro wrote: ↑

Sun Sep 08, 2019 10:19 pm

SRW wrote: ↑

Sun Sep 08, 2019 8:52 pm

Just on our rolled-gold Botanic Garden extension, the planted medians have already become overgrown with metre-high thistles.

Disappointing if true, but not surprising in Adelaide. Probably arguing over who is responsible to maintain it... or it's been too wet/hot/dry/cold.. It's these small things that really let Adelaide down, for an otherwise beautiful city.

Patrick_27 wrote: ↑

Sun Sep 08, 2019 11:45 pm

The same can be said for the Elder Park stop, the big garden beds at the end of the tracks have no plants whatsoever and have exposed sprinkler piping... Been this way for weeks.

There has been a fashion over the last decade or so for plantings around new infrastructure projects. I agree that they can look better than grass if they are properly maintained and weeded. But in the case of DPTI projects, this is rarely the case. Everyone can see that the plantings quickly degenerate and look terrible. If this is the case, and DPTI doesn't have the resources to maintain them, why does DPTI insist on continuing with such plantings? There are alternatives.

Ho Really wrote: ↑

Sun Sep 08, 2019 3:22 pm

I’m not sure why you brought up the stereotype comment. I wasn’t commenting on stereotypes and who is the better money manager. They seem to all like to waste our money in one way or another.

My remark was aimed at Labor's waste of money on public transport in general, but specifically the North Terrace extension and the O-Bahn tunnel. The former delayed and over budget, the latter an unnecessary spend to win votes from the north east. Money that could've been spent better. Perhaps on our Emergency Department at the new RAH, etc. But of course many of you here don't see it that way.

As for what the Liberals are spending for upgrades that's not the issue here, none of it has been built yet. Also whether it will cost more than Labor's North Terrace extension that depends on what work has to be done and not because the Liberals want to save or waste money on it.

Will extending trams all over Adelaide be the right thing? At least the Liberals (good or bad) are looking at alternatives. Yes, we all love trams here, including me, but if they are going to cost too much and will not deliver the benefits then why waste time and money on it? So that's the answer to Shuz and ChillyPhilly.

As for the the Liberals' ideology and their lack of spending in the “public sphere”, that too is not factual. It's just they may spend less. On public transport or in this case trams, which is the topic here, they’re hesitant. Their priorities lie with the driving public, private and commercial.

My comment about the stereotype was not specifically related to your comment. It related to the whole previous discussion which seemed premised on the idea that Labor are inherently bad economic managers. It's an idea that a lot of people like to bandy about without really thinking it through, so I thought I would point it out.

I also agree that Labor has made bad spending decisions. Like you mention, the O-bahn tunnel was probably one of them. It's clearly a nice thing to have, and makes the O-bahn function more effectively. But there were surely other higher impact projects that could have been built for less money. The out-of-the-blue decision to build that tunnel was, like you say, clearly political.

If, like you say, the Magill/Portrush intersection project simply costs what it costs, then it is simply a bad spending decision. Yes, it will reduce congestion at the intersection, but not by so much as to justify spending $98 million when there are other projects that are of much more pressing need and with much greater potential for return on investment. It's not even a particularly congested intersection most of the time. Infrastructure Australia has independently identified priority projects like tram extensions, the Truro bypass and a regional bulk commodity port, yet the Liberals choose (in the lead up to the Federal election) to pour an enormous amount of money into a single suburban intersection. Why is this so?

I would argue that the costings for projects in general are not particularly transparent. Why is it that they cost so much? The details should be readily available for public scrutiny. A project might simply cost a certain amount to built, but it is also possible that, as Rubberman suggests, there are lots of unnecessary extras being priced into projects, or even money and perks being siphoned off for no reason related to the project at all.

The lack of transparency around costings also allows politicians on both sides of the house to pull the wool over the eyes of the public for political purposes. Some typical examples of this are the the cancellation of the the Port Dock line, and the tram's right turn into North Terrace. In both cases, a massive "unexpected" increase in the projected cost were used as an excuse to cancel the projects. Now, maybe I'm too cynical, but I find it very strange that after a detailed, lengthy process of investigation they somehow got the cost massively wrong, only to suddenly discover the error when it became politically expedient.

SBD wrote: ↑

Sun Sep 08, 2019 4:26 pm

No property acquisition was required for the North Terrace extensions, and they deliberately did not do enough to require the new depot, so of course it was cheaper than an intersection that will require expensive underground or overhead utility service relocations and possibly property acquisitions.

I have not studied the plans - do they fit in the existing public land footprint (not counting the electricity substation)?

Detailed plans do not appear to be available to the public currently. All we have is a grainy concept image (looks like a regular intersection) and a price-tag. As I discuss above, while the required cost of the intersection seems debatable, I am not necessarily contesting that it need cost as much as it does. Rather I take objection to the fact that such a huge amount of public funds will be spent where it will produce relatively little benefit, when there are so many other important projects crying out for money.

Are you sure no service relocation was required for the North Terrace tram extension?

dbl96 wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 09, 2019 4:34 pm

[...]

If, like you say, the Magill/Portrush intersection project simply costs what it costs, then it is simply a bad spending decision. Yes, it will reduce congestion at the intersection, but not by so much as to justify spending $98 million when there are other projects that are of much more pressing need and with much greater potential for return on investment. It's not even a particularly congested intersection most of the time. Infrastructure Australia has independently identified priority projects like tram extensions, the Truro bypass and a regional bulk commodity port, yet the Liberals choose (in the lead up to the Federal election) to pour an enormous amount of money into a single suburban intersection. Why is this so?

[...]

I suspect this is political. It's in Steven Marshall's electorate. I live in his electorate but I don't know what was campaigned before and during the State Election as I was overseas and couldn't get to a voting booth. The closest was Vienna from where I was and I couldn't get there.

As for the intersection if they could do an overpass or underpass for Portrush Road it would be great. Keep those semis moving. But they would need to acquire plenty of land either side. An expensive affair.

Cheers

Westside wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 09, 2019 12:15 pm

Ho Really wrote: ↑

Sun Sep 08, 2019 9:18 pm

Yes the tram extension was badly managed, that's where the money was wasted. The tram line itself I am happy with as I've said previously somewhere under this topic or perhaps elsewhere regarding the hospitals. However this tram line should've replaced the O-Bahn. So making the O-Bahn tunnel unnecessary. You would still have had a reliable service. A service that could have taken you from Modbury to Glenelg in its own corridor.

There is nothing about the o-bahn corridor that makes it suitable for light rail. It's a brt, one of the most successful brts in the world, so it's not changing any time soon. You can't call spending money on it a waste just because you personally think that it should be a tram line. In terms of what the tunnel has done for the commute times on the o-bahn it's hard to say it hasn't been a success.

Explain why the corridor is not suitable for light rail?

Cheers

rhino wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 09, 2019 12:00 pm

This is an interesting point. If the time saved daily by your wife is magnified by the number of people who are making this same time saving daily, and remember this is ongoing, I believe the money was well spent.

Just my opinion, and as you say, we can disagree

and

Westside wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 09, 2019 12:15 pm

[...]

In terms of what the tunnel has done for the commute times on the o-bahn it's hard to say it hasn't been a success.

Time saved is debatable. So we'll agree to disagree.

Cheers

Ho Really wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 09, 2019 9:51 pm

rhino wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 09, 2019 12:00 pm

This is an interesting point. If the time saved daily by your wife is magnified by the number of people who are making this same time saving daily, and remember this is ongoing, I believe the money was well spent.

Just my opinion, and as you say, we can disagree

and

Westside wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 09, 2019 12:15 pm

[...]

In terms of what the tunnel has done for the commute times on the o-bahn it's hard to say it hasn't been a success.

Time saved is debatable. So we'll agree to disagree.

Cheers

Ho Really, what's with all of your going against the grain of late? Time has been saved by the implementation of the O-Bahn tunnel, whether they needed to spend that much to make that happen is another story but there is no denying it has saved travel time for buses.

Patrick_27 wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 09, 2019 11:46 pm

Ho Really, what's with all of your going against the grain of late? Time has been saved by the implementation of the O-Bahn tunnel, whether they needed to spend that much to make that happen is another story but there is no denying it has saved travel time for buses.

Patrick_27, since day one I've never really been in favour of the tunnel. I think the previous government and many of the past and the one currently aren't looking at the bigger picture regarding public transport infrastructure and this tunnel is one of them. I just don't see the value. We will continue to disagree until Adelaide realises what its priorities are. That day Adelaide will grow up.

Cheers

Ho Really wrote: ↑

Tue Sep 10, 2019 10:54 am

Patrick_27 wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 09, 2019 11:46 pm

Ho Really, what's with all of your going against the grain of late? Time has been saved by the implementation of the O-Bahn tunnel, whether they needed to spend that much to make that happen is another story but there is no denying it has saved travel time for buses.

Patrick_27, since day one I've never really been in favour of the tunnel. I think the previous government and many of the past and the one currently aren't looking at the bigger picture regarding public transport infrastructure and this tunnel is one of them. I just don't see the value. We will continue to disagree until Adelaide realises what its priorities are. That day Adelaide will grow up.

Cheers

I havent been on the obahn in probably 20 years but i drive the hackney road ring route most days. From seeing dozens of busses clogging up the north terrace/hackney road intersection every morning, i now forget that theres a major bus route travelling under there. I cant comment on the project from a obahn users perspective, but as a motorist it has made a huge improvement

Ho Really wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 09, 2019 9:41 pm

Westside wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 09, 2019 12:15 pm

Ho Really wrote: ↑

Sun Sep 08, 2019 9:18 pm

Yes the tram extension was badly managed, that's where the money was wasted. The tram line itself I am happy with as I've said previously somewhere under this topic or perhaps elsewhere regarding the hospitals. However this tram line should've replaced the O-Bahn. So making the O-Bahn tunnel unnecessary. You would still have had a reliable service. A service that could have taken you from Modbury to Glenelg in its own corridor.

There is nothing about the o-bahn corridor that makes it suitable for light rail. It's a brt, one of the most successful brts in the world, so it's not changing any time soon. You can't call spending money on it a waste just because you personally think that it should be a tram line. In terms of what the tunnel has done for the commute times on the o-bahn it's hard to say it hasn't been a success.

Explain why the corridor is not suitable for light rail?

Cheers

Light rail is best when it links many high density stops relatively close together for the length of the line. Ie like pearls on a necklace. The o-bahn is a highly dispersed line travelling through low density suburbs to funnel passengers to outer urban sprawl. It's mainnfunction is getting people from one end to the other with just 2 stops in between. If it's ever going to be turned into a rail line it will be heavy rail. I'm not a fan of brt, but the results speak for themselves, the north eastern suburbs have much higher public transport use than equivalent neighbouring suburbs. And the tunnel saves at least 5 mins per bus in peak. Given how many vehicles and how busy they are in that time, thats a huge saving. What would need to be spent to find 5 mins of time saved on the Gawler line? Because that's a similar comparison.

Ho Really wrote:

Patrick_27 wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 09, 2019 11:46 pm

Ho Really, what's with all of your going against the grain of late? Time has been saved by the implementation of the O-Bahn tunnel, whether they needed to spend that much to make that happen is another story but there is no denying it has saved travel time for buses.

Patrick_27, since day one I've never really been in favour of the tunnel. I think the previous government and many of the past and the one currently aren't looking at the bigger picture regarding public transport infrastructure and this tunnel is one of them. I just don't see the value. We will continue to disagree until Adelaide realises what its priorities are. That day Adelaide will grow up.

Cheers

I think you're confusing "value" with "vision". The project will pay itself off in the short to medium term (value), but what you are talking about is your long-term vision of turning it into a rail corridor.