Sensational-Adelaide.com

whatstheirnamesmom wrote:I wonder how NRM will feel, considering they’ve only recently had DIT rip up the rails for the first scuttling of this project. And now they may go back in again!

I think the project is a good idea if executed well. The Port lacks a solid connection and needs one to continue with general revitalisation

ChillyPhilly wrote: ↑

Sun Mar 13, 2022 10:04 pm

whatstheirnamesmom wrote:I wonder how NRM will feel, considering they’ve only recently had DIT rip up the rails for the first scuttling of this project. And now they may go back in again!

I think the project is a good idea if executed well. The Port lacks a solid connection and needs one to continue with general revitalisation

I thought the line was reconnected, but I could be wrong.

Spotto wrote:

ChillyPhilly wrote: ↑

Sun Mar 13, 2022 10:04 pm

whatstheirnamesmom wrote:I wonder how NRM will feel, considering they’ve only recently had DIT rip up the rails for the first scuttling of this project. And now they may go back in again!

I think the project is a good idea if executed well. The Port lacks a solid connection and needs one to continue with general revitalisation

I thought the line was reconnected, but I could be wrong.

"The Port lacks a solid connection" was referring to transport connections, the physical tracks were reconnected when the line was rebuilt after the original project was torn up.

ChillyPhilly wrote: ↑

Sun Mar 13, 2022 10:27 pm

Spotto wrote:

ChillyPhilly wrote: ↑

Sun Mar 13, 2022 10:04 pm

I thought the line was reconnected, but I could be wrong.

"The Port lacks a solid connection" was referring to transport connections, the physical tracks were reconnected when the line was rebuilt after the original project was torn up.

I understood the 'solid connections' part, but was more thinking of the NRM spur. Glad it is still connected for now.

[Shuz] wrote: ↑

Mon Mar 14, 2022 9:07 am

Is the Rosewater corridor still intact between Port Dock and Dry Creek (bar some missing track pieces)?

whatstheirnamesmom wrote: ↑

Sun Mar 13, 2022 4:05 pm

I wonder how NRM will feel, considering they’ve only recently had DIT rip up the rails for the first scuttling of this project. And now they may go back in again!

I think the project is a good idea if executed well. The Port lacks a solid connection and needs one to continue with general revitalisation

Joe, as a public transport planner for almost 40 years, I believe that this proposal to split the Outer Harbor train service prior to the Port Centre goes against sensible public transport planning principles.. You don’t split services prior to major centres, you do so either at or after the centre. The proposal means that train services from the City to Port Adelaide will be split, resulting in a poor level of service to the two stations in the Port.

The proposal will do nothing for people living on the LeFevre Peninsula - the main trade area for the Port Centre.

The ideal solution is, as part of the proposed electrification of the Port Lines, to convert the lines between Bowden and Grand Junction Road to light rail (tram), then to run the new tramline through the Port Centre along Commercial Rd and St Vincent St., rejoining the railway at Glanville Station. This would thus provide good access to the Port Centre both from LeFevre Peninsula as well as from inner suburbs. In the City, the trams could run on city streets on existing tramlines, (from the Entertainment Centre), thus carrying people right into the CBD., rather than dumping them at Adelaide Station which is right on the edge of the CBD.

A number of other cities have carried out such conversions. The St Kilda and Port Melbourne. Railways were converted to tramlines some years ago, vastly improving access into the Melbourne CBD. In Manchester, a large tram network has been developed since the 1990s, with some of the new tramlines replacing old railway lines which terminated on the edge of the City, while the new tramlines run through the CBD. Patronage on those lines increased significantly, just like it would on the Port Lines if they were so converted.

Trams would also be better suited to branch lines from the Outer Harbor Line, e.g: Grange (which could be extended on street to Grange Jetty (like the Glenelg line); West Lakes (along West Lakes Blvd); and Semaphore (along Semaphore Road.)

The above proposal needs to be seriously considered before electrification, and certainly before wasting money on a useless rail branch into Port Dock- a branch line that was always very poorly patronised ever since the main line was diverted over the viaduct in 1916.

[Shuz] wrote: ↑

Tue Mar 15, 2022 7:15 pm

Terrible idea. Trams would run so much slower on the OH line than trains, by upwards of another half an hour on the journey from Port Adelaide beyond. Try selling that to the electoratez, and I would bet good money, despite it being a hard safe Labor electorate that it would very likely turn marginal if not Liberal. People will not stand for it whatsoever. You're better off duplicating the service down Port Road than replacing the train line, as ridiculous as a duplication sounds but at least one would get the best of both worlds.