Sensational-Adelaide.com

SRW wrote:

Nathan wrote:

Norman wrote: exploring options of integrating residential or commercial development with this project, but really... let's just get the damned thing built!

Disagree. If integration and/or commercial development is a possibility, it should absolutely be explored before moving ahead. It would make a huge difference to the stations effectiveness, and shows some encouraging signs from DPTI that they're prepared to think of the bigger picture for once.

Agreed. Much like Bowden is being developed as a template/showcase for future TODs, an Oaklands redevelopment incorporating mixed-use facilities could provide a model for future station upgrades.

I agree that they should look at the bigger picture and should encourage medium density around the station. The reason I'm saying they should get on with it is that:
- Oaklands is a developed area. It will be a difficult and long term process to change the area to a medium density environment, especially as most of the housing is on private land. Bowden is different as the land was already vacant/disused, and the government purchased the land.
- The traffic congestion around the area is terrible, and I'm not a pro-car guy. It needs to be fixed ASAP. It has a big impact on bus services as well.
- Capacity to increase the Seaford line trains to two sets during peak is constrained because the current platforms can only handle one set (5 cars)
- Both the federal and state governments keep using stalling techniques with this project, and it's getting to me.

Norman wrote: - Capacity to increase the Seaford line trains to two sets during peak is constrained because the current platforms can only handle one set (5 cars)
- Both the federal and state governments keep using stalling techniques with this project, and it's getting to me.

Forgetting the fact it had $6 million spent on it last decade and will soon be demolished.. It's extremely poor planning that newer stations were built to handle only one set of carriages. Same goes with Mawson Lakes, busy station but can only handle 4 carriages. I'm hoping this isn't the case for the new Seaford Line stations? - e.g. Hallett Cove, Seaford, Seaford Meadows.

I hope public transport becomes a major topic in the 2018 state election. Enough is enough.

If the media reports are to be believed, I know lol, then Liberals are in front.
If that's the case then expect very little PT expenditure from 2018.
Not to turn this into a politics discussion, but I've said it before the lesser of two evils is Labor in this state.
Sure they aren't perfect but at least things are being done. The liberal opposition has no plans besides being critical of the government. Last week I counted half a dozen instances where they could have capitalised on the moment and revealed an alternative instead they just whinged and moaned about the governments deficiencies. If that's going to be enough to get them elected in 18 months then this state deserves the shit it will get.

As for the Oaklands crossing, if it's an overpass why wouldn't they cover the entire platform and make it under cover?
An underpass would be better for aesthetic reasons.

rev wrote:If the media reports are to be believed, I know lol, then Liberals are in front.
If that's the case then expect very little PT expenditure from 2018.
Not to turn this into a politics discussion, but I've said it before the lesser of two evils is Labor in this state.
Sure they aren't perfect but at least things are being done. The liberal opposition has no plans besides being critical of the government. Last week I counted half a dozen instances where they could have capitalised on the moment and revealed an alternative instead they just whinged and moaned about the governments deficiencies. If that's going to be enough to get them elected in 18 months then this state deserves the shit it will get.

As for the Oaklands crossing, if it's an overpass why wouldn't they cover the entire platform and make it under cover?
An underpass would be better for aesthetic reasons.

The local liberal member is extremely passitionate about the Oaklands overpass (I've heard him a few times) but don't let that get in the way of your views.

But let's face it, other than a potential incidental increase in platform length, the Oaklands overpass/underpass is nothing really to do with improving PT - just reducing road congestion.

Not that I think it's a bad plan. I'm much more of a PT guy than a roads guy but agree it is a shocking bottleneck.

It concerns me that I've never heard a Liberal polly, either state or federal (other than Turnbull), mention investment in PT. In this day and age it seems like such a no-brainer. Not going to get too worked up over an Advertiser-commissioned poll which puts the Liberals "in front" at this stage though.

If it's such a bottleneck that urgently needs fixing, then why is Google Maps showing mostly green lines on Morphett/Diagonal with a couple of small orange/red lines either side of the train line at 1730 in peak hour?? Adelaide people dont know heavy traffic if they think a 2min delay caused by a couple of traffic lights and a train crossing is a major bottleneck. The M5 in Sydney which at 1755 in peak hour on Google was a red line from the airport (inner city) almost out to Liverpool (outer suburbs), I have been caught on that for upto 30min and that was on a weekend. Or the M1/CityLink in Melbourne, it's all red from Flemington Bridge, all the way out to Derrimut, and heading east its red through to the EastLink. Even in Adelaide, traffic is much worse on Marion Rd, on maps its a red line from Sturt Rd to Anzac Hwy.

I've driven Morphett/Diagonal roads many times and I can say that it's really not that bad, traffic is slow but it still flows once the trains pass, the trains arent there all the time either, Adelaide Metro isn't that good. I think the $200m could be much better spent: rail electrification, trams, bikeways etc..

The Oaklands crossing is a bottleneck, some days it's okay and you only get held up for an extra minute or so other times it's 10min +. The bottle neck is just not the crossing but the complex diagonal / morphett roads intersections. You get stuck turning right from diagonal onto morhett(agnoal) road heading from Sturt Rd (Blackwood direction) towards Glenelg - you have a green light which lasts 45 seconds every 3 mins and there's a queue of cars so only the first two cars can squeeze through, leaving you to sit and wait another 3 mins for another green light, 10mins later your now around the corner and stuck at the boomgates, you could try and go the long way around Westfield but it's all hit and miss, when your stuck your stuck bad, otherwise it's only 2mins extra. The intersection is a mess and will only get worse, it should be the first of many crossing removals across Adelaide.

crawf wrote:

Norman wrote: - Capacity to increase the Seaford line trains to two sets during peak is constrained because the current platforms can only handle one set (5 cars)
- Both the federal and state governments keep using stalling techniques with this project, and it's getting to me.

Forgetting the fact it had $6 million spent on it last decade and will soon be demolished.. It's extremely poor planning that newer stations were built to handle only one set of carriages. Same goes with Mawson Lakes, busy station but can only handle 4 carriages. I'm hoping this isn't the case for the new Seaford Line stations? - e.g. Hallett Cove, Seaford, Seaford Meadows.

I hope public transport becomes a major topic in the 2018 state election. Enough is enough.

Both Oaklands and Mawson Lakes predate the Rail Revitalisation programme and the 3-car fixed formation electric sets. I suspect that the present length of Oaklands may have been constrained by the fact that it was constructed between the level crossing and the old station, which remained fully operational until the new station opened. On the Gawler line prior to the revitalisation work the only station with 150 m (6 car) platforms was Salisbury. The platform length on the Gawler line was 120 m although the new stations at Elizabeth, Munno Para and Broadmeadows are now 150 m.

Not sure if this has been posted before https://www.dpti.sa.gov.au/__data/asset ... y_2016.pdf
Rail crossing incidents are more then double on the Gawler line then any other line and the worse level crossing is........... Tapleys Hill Rd / Trimmer Pde, the Grange line has such a low frequency compared to Gawler and Seaford. Is there an easy fix for the crossing at Seaton Park - it will need to be fixed since it has double the incidents of any other crossing. The key point from the report is this - Grade separate key railway crossing between Brighton and Elizabeth. So Oaklands will be first then what other crossings make up the 5 crossings that should be grade separated first.

I suppose you could add the Brighton Road crossing at Hove. That involves multiple roads and can get a little hectic during peak times.

If they were really smart, they'd grade separate Hove and Oaklands concurrently, only having to close the line once for the works

OlympusAnt wrote:If they were really smart, they'd grade separate Hove and Oaklands concurrently, only having to close the line once for the works

I would think that the trains could still run between Seaford and Brighton, and Tonsley to Adelaide, allowing them to bus commuters between Brighton and Tonsley while construction is underway (for the most part).

The new line in the images seems to be further South than the existing line, so hopefully they won't have to close it long term.

Torrens-To-Torrens plans to put the Outer Harbour line on a bridge in the same alignment between New Years Eve and Australia Day next year. If they succeed, it will demonstrate that the metro lines do not need to be closed for long periods to grade separate an intersection. Then we'll have a company with demonstrated experience to tender for similar work at other crossings such as Emerson and Oaklands.

http://www.dpti.sa.gov.au/infrastructur ... s_crossing
A link to the planning study