COM: Glenelg Tramline Upgrade
New trams on track for service in summer
By MELISSA KING
06dec05
ONE of Adelaide's new trams caused a stir in Victoria Square on its first daytime test run yesterday.
The 10-minute stopover was enough to draw a crowd - and comparisons with the 75-year-old H-class tram parked alongside.
Commuters and tourists were disappointed they could not board the airconditioned tram for a closer look.
But TransAdelaide general manager Bill Watson said the new tram belonged to manufacturer Bombardier until it was accepted and commissioned by the State Government.
The $5.5 million Flexity Classic was driven from TransAdelaide's depot at Glengowrie for the first tests. Later this week, drivers will start training on the new trams, the first of which will go into service in January.
Mr Watson said driver training meant pedestrians and cyclists needed to be more careful because they were not accustomed to the quieter rail cars.
By MELISSA KING
06dec05
ONE of Adelaide's new trams caused a stir in Victoria Square on its first daytime test run yesterday.
The 10-minute stopover was enough to draw a crowd - and comparisons with the 75-year-old H-class tram parked alongside.
Commuters and tourists were disappointed they could not board the airconditioned tram for a closer look.
But TransAdelaide general manager Bill Watson said the new tram belonged to manufacturer Bombardier until it was accepted and commissioned by the State Government.
The $5.5 million Flexity Classic was driven from TransAdelaide's depot at Glengowrie for the first tests. Later this week, drivers will start training on the new trams, the first of which will go into service in January.
Mr Watson said driver training meant pedestrians and cyclists needed to be more careful because they were not accustomed to the quieter rail cars.
-
Tyler_Durden
- High Rise Poster!
- Posts: 333
- Joined: Wed Aug 24, 2005 6:11 pm
Seems a smart and logical suggestion.sam wrote:So the Trams will be free to ride between North Terrace and Victoria Square once the extension is complete, hence replacing the CityFree 99B Beeline.
I think they should take it one step further and make Tram travel free between North Terrace and South Terrace, Any comments?
I would even suggest that they consider making it free to travel on the whole line, anywhere from the City to Glenelg, especially initially. It would certainly encourage larger numbers to use it, opening the way for broader community acceptance and government vindication of this extension and of any future plans.
Noble idea, but I'll only support that if they make the O-Bahn free tooTyler_Durden wrote:I would even suggest that they consider making it free to travel on the whole line.
That said I would back a short term promotion for free travel along the whole line.
(by short term I mean just a few days only.)
A bit of bias towards road improvement here by the RAA.
City tram line plan is 'crazy'
11dec05
THE $21 million plan to extend the Glenelg tramline down King William St to the North Tce railway station has been blasted as "crazy" by the RAA.
The state's peak motorists' body has questioned the planning processes used to approve the controversial extension.
The RAA will receive a private briefing on the cost-benefit analysis of the extension on Friday – three weeks after Parliament passed legislation approving the plan.
RAA managing director John Fotheringham said information provided to date raised grave questions about how the Government decides to spend public money.
"I am assured by Treasury that every project in this state is subject to a rigorous economic analysis, but there has never been any proper economic analysis put forward," Mr Fotheringham said.
"It seems someone thought it was a good idea and now it is policy.
"The existing tram carries 5000 to 6000 people a day and we are spending $21 million to extend it – but it won't increase patronage to any great degree. We are spending $20 million-plus on a tram that will carry the same number of passengers.
"To head up King William St, then turn left down North Tce to go just 200m to the railway station is absolutely crazy.
"We want an economic analysis released. We want proof there will be more passengers and that the strategic plan will pay off – right now, we don't believe it will."
A spokesman for Transport Minister Patrick Conlon said a full feasibility study, including cost-benefit analysis, had been presented to Parliament's Public Works Committee last week.
"Not only has a proper analysis been done, it has been presented to the committee overseeing capital works," he said.
The Government estimates the environmental, transport and safety benefits of the extension are worth almost double the cost.
RAA officials will meet the tram project manager on Friday, armed with a series of questions they want clarified about the economic, social and infrastructure benefits of the plan.
Construction work will start in May, re-routing the tram around Victoria Square, down King William St with stops at the Town Hall and Rundle Mall, then left down North Tce to the railway station.
The new section will be free to ride and will replace the existing free Beeline bus service.
Mr Fotheringham further questioned the state's overall public transport strategy, noting budget figures indicate the plan to double public transport patronage by 2018 would be matched by a simple doubling of spending.
"The Government has been coy about how much they plan to spend to achieve the doubling of public transport patronage," he said.
"If we are just going to do it by doubling the cost, then we have a real problem. The tram plan won't go any way whatsoever towards what the State strategic plan wants to achieve.
"I question whether it is a viable deal."
Mr Fotheringham noted the state had a range of other transport priorities, from upgrades of South Rd and the Victor Harbor Rd through to the Britannia roundabout and a general state road maintenance program.
"Traffic on the Victor Harbor road will double in the next 15 years, so we have to start looking at major improvements," he said.
City tram line plan is 'crazy'
11dec05
THE $21 million plan to extend the Glenelg tramline down King William St to the North Tce railway station has been blasted as "crazy" by the RAA.
The state's peak motorists' body has questioned the planning processes used to approve the controversial extension.
The RAA will receive a private briefing on the cost-benefit analysis of the extension on Friday – three weeks after Parliament passed legislation approving the plan.
RAA managing director John Fotheringham said information provided to date raised grave questions about how the Government decides to spend public money.
"I am assured by Treasury that every project in this state is subject to a rigorous economic analysis, but there has never been any proper economic analysis put forward," Mr Fotheringham said.
"It seems someone thought it was a good idea and now it is policy.
"The existing tram carries 5000 to 6000 people a day and we are spending $21 million to extend it – but it won't increase patronage to any great degree. We are spending $20 million-plus on a tram that will carry the same number of passengers.
"To head up King William St, then turn left down North Tce to go just 200m to the railway station is absolutely crazy.
"We want an economic analysis released. We want proof there will be more passengers and that the strategic plan will pay off – right now, we don't believe it will."
A spokesman for Transport Minister Patrick Conlon said a full feasibility study, including cost-benefit analysis, had been presented to Parliament's Public Works Committee last week.
"Not only has a proper analysis been done, it has been presented to the committee overseeing capital works," he said.
The Government estimates the environmental, transport and safety benefits of the extension are worth almost double the cost.
RAA officials will meet the tram project manager on Friday, armed with a series of questions they want clarified about the economic, social and infrastructure benefits of the plan.
Construction work will start in May, re-routing the tram around Victoria Square, down King William St with stops at the Town Hall and Rundle Mall, then left down North Tce to the railway station.
The new section will be free to ride and will replace the existing free Beeline bus service.
Mr Fotheringham further questioned the state's overall public transport strategy, noting budget figures indicate the plan to double public transport patronage by 2018 would be matched by a simple doubling of spending.
"The Government has been coy about how much they plan to spend to achieve the doubling of public transport patronage," he said.
"If we are just going to do it by doubling the cost, then we have a real problem. The tram plan won't go any way whatsoever towards what the State strategic plan wants to achieve.
"I question whether it is a viable deal."
Mr Fotheringham noted the state had a range of other transport priorities, from upgrades of South Rd and the Victor Harbor Rd through to the Britannia roundabout and a general state road maintenance program.
"Traffic on the Victor Harbor road will double in the next 15 years, so we have to start looking at major improvements," he said.
Check out the nimby attitudes on display in this forum.
By the way, just because the article is a PR wank fest on behalf of the RAA does not mean there's no good arguments raised. For instance I too question the wisdom in investing heavily in the tram line when it does not increase the actual capacity and therefore patronage. That's not to say that I think it's a bad idea overall, but it does mean that if people oppose the development they at least have some justification. Consequently this puts pressure on the government to justify not only the upgrade but future expansion. Here's hoping the government comes up with something.
By the way, just because the article is a PR wank fest on behalf of the RAA does not mean there's no good arguments raised. For instance I too question the wisdom in investing heavily in the tram line when it does not increase the actual capacity and therefore patronage. That's not to say that I think it's a bad idea overall, but it does mean that if people oppose the development they at least have some justification. Consequently this puts pressure on the government to justify not only the upgrade but future expansion. Here's hoping the government comes up with something.
Most people who are against the project are those who only look at the project from the perspective that the only aim of the entire exercise is to make travel into the city by tram easier. It is not the only aim.
The government itself is thinking ahead unlike the residents of the city who are unaware of the Government's vision to extend the network beyond the CBD.
I do have one criticism about the Government's plan for transport. There really isn't one at all. The last time a city wide transport plan was implemented was way back in the 1960s (MATS). The current Government did have a plan for public transport, but that was recently scrapped. Actually quite pathetic since the plan only called for doubling public transport patronage, compared to other cities who have aimed to triple or quadruple theirs. This city cannot succeed without a good transport network, and it cannot have a good transport network without a good city-wide plan for transport. Extending a tram line is a start, but two new train stations and interchanges, and upgrades to a tram line is hardly enough to make a significant difference. Every transport project has some effect on the entire transport system both directly and indirectly.
For example, if the Southern Expressway was planned as part of an overall transport plan, it'd might not be as useless as it is currently since other freeway sections may have been planned in conjuction with the new roadway. The cities that have grown successfully have thought ahead and continuously improved their transport networks, those that haven't have slowed in growth or stagnated.
The government itself is thinking ahead unlike the residents of the city who are unaware of the Government's vision to extend the network beyond the CBD.
I do have one criticism about the Government's plan for transport. There really isn't one at all. The last time a city wide transport plan was implemented was way back in the 1960s (MATS). The current Government did have a plan for public transport, but that was recently scrapped. Actually quite pathetic since the plan only called for doubling public transport patronage, compared to other cities who have aimed to triple or quadruple theirs. This city cannot succeed without a good transport network, and it cannot have a good transport network without a good city-wide plan for transport. Extending a tram line is a start, but two new train stations and interchanges, and upgrades to a tram line is hardly enough to make a significant difference. Every transport project has some effect on the entire transport system both directly and indirectly.
For example, if the Southern Expressway was planned as part of an overall transport plan, it'd might not be as useless as it is currently since other freeway sections may have been planned in conjuction with the new roadway. The cities that have grown successfully have thought ahead and continuously improved their transport networks, those that haven't have slowed in growth or stagnated.
Tram: You say no
18dec05
THE State Government's plan to spend $21 million to extend the Glenelg tramline has aroused strong community feelings with a resounding public rejection of the project.
The report in last week's Sunday Mail explaining the scheme and asking prominent community leaders if the money would be better spent elsewhere found many believed health, education and roads were higher priorities.
Many of the public feel the same – of 447 SMS responses on the issue, 362 rejected the plan while 85 supported it.
Of 96 letters and emails on the issue, 81 rejected it and 15 were in support.
The debate stirred powerful views – many believed there were more important priorities and the extension would benefit only a few people.
A number of older readers pointed out the reason trams were removed from King William St in the first place was due to safety and traffic congestion.
Others noted the existing free Beeline bus service already provides a good service. Those in support of the plan were just as passionate, calling for progress and an end to whingeing.
The great tram debate comes as Adelaide City Councillor Anne Moran revealed Council members initially were lulled into supporting the plan by inaccurate artists' drawings.
"In our first briefing on the trams, the artists' impressions showed the existing median strip, flagpoles and trees would be retained and no overhead power lines," she said.
"We thought the power was going underground so no one really objected.
"Now we find there will be overhead lines and the flagpoles will be gone, the median strip cut, trees lost and the poor old Beeline bus service scrapped.
"It will all be for a lesser service which will basically deliver punters to the casino.
"If it was going to be extended to North Adelaide or the Port it would add to our transport system but at $21 million for just a few hundred metres there is no way it will be extended – it would just be too expensive."
Lord Mayor Michael Harbison supports the tram extension and Council has voted to back the plan but Ms Moran said the vote was split.
She called for the $21 million to be spent as a one-off project to install seat belts in school buses.
"We could get seat belts fitted in school buses immediately, and I think it is child abuse that we don't," she said.
"Children have to wear seat belts in cars, so why not buses?"
A spokesman for Transport Minister Patrick Conlon said the cost of such seatbelts would be considerably more than $21 million.
Tourism and Transport Forum managing director Christopher Brown strongly supported the tram plan, both for transport and for the atmospherics of the city.
"Adelaide is a beautiful city with wide streets which is well suited to tram transport," he said.
"The Glenelg tram has been part of the substance of the place forever, and extending that feel into the city would be a boost for tourism."
_____________________________________________________________
The nutter about a lesser service replacing the Beeline is nonsense. The tram service will run every 7 to 8 minutes in both directions.
There is a lot of small minded arguments against the project, some genuine, most just complete nonsense. The call for seatbelts to be funded for buses should be funded AS well as the tram project, we aren't a poor state and we can afford it. Four trees shouldn't be a genuine reason to stop the project, because in other rail projects dozens and in some cases hundreds of trees are cut down.
Anne Moran obviously doesn't have a clue about the tram line if she thinks the trams get their power supply from under the ground.
18dec05
THE State Government's plan to spend $21 million to extend the Glenelg tramline has aroused strong community feelings with a resounding public rejection of the project.
The report in last week's Sunday Mail explaining the scheme and asking prominent community leaders if the money would be better spent elsewhere found many believed health, education and roads were higher priorities.
Many of the public feel the same – of 447 SMS responses on the issue, 362 rejected the plan while 85 supported it.
Of 96 letters and emails on the issue, 81 rejected it and 15 were in support.
The debate stirred powerful views – many believed there were more important priorities and the extension would benefit only a few people.
A number of older readers pointed out the reason trams were removed from King William St in the first place was due to safety and traffic congestion.
Others noted the existing free Beeline bus service already provides a good service. Those in support of the plan were just as passionate, calling for progress and an end to whingeing.
The great tram debate comes as Adelaide City Councillor Anne Moran revealed Council members initially were lulled into supporting the plan by inaccurate artists' drawings.
"In our first briefing on the trams, the artists' impressions showed the existing median strip, flagpoles and trees would be retained and no overhead power lines," she said.
"We thought the power was going underground so no one really objected.
"Now we find there will be overhead lines and the flagpoles will be gone, the median strip cut, trees lost and the poor old Beeline bus service scrapped.
"It will all be for a lesser service which will basically deliver punters to the casino.
"If it was going to be extended to North Adelaide or the Port it would add to our transport system but at $21 million for just a few hundred metres there is no way it will be extended – it would just be too expensive."
Lord Mayor Michael Harbison supports the tram extension and Council has voted to back the plan but Ms Moran said the vote was split.
She called for the $21 million to be spent as a one-off project to install seat belts in school buses.
"We could get seat belts fitted in school buses immediately, and I think it is child abuse that we don't," she said.
"Children have to wear seat belts in cars, so why not buses?"
A spokesman for Transport Minister Patrick Conlon said the cost of such seatbelts would be considerably more than $21 million.
Tourism and Transport Forum managing director Christopher Brown strongly supported the tram plan, both for transport and for the atmospherics of the city.
"Adelaide is a beautiful city with wide streets which is well suited to tram transport," he said.
"The Glenelg tram has been part of the substance of the place forever, and extending that feel into the city would be a boost for tourism."
_____________________________________________________________
The nutter about a lesser service replacing the Beeline is nonsense. The tram service will run every 7 to 8 minutes in both directions.
There is a lot of small minded arguments against the project, some genuine, most just complete nonsense. The call for seatbelts to be funded for buses should be funded AS well as the tram project, we aren't a poor state and we can afford it. Four trees shouldn't be a genuine reason to stop the project, because in other rail projects dozens and in some cases hundreds of trees are cut down.
Anne Moran obviously doesn't have a clue about the tram line if she thinks the trams get their power supply from under the ground.
Just for those who are wondering, we've been running a front page poll.
Do you support the extension of the Glenelg tram line to North Terrace?
Yes I support it. - 91.7%
No I do not support it - 8.3%
I swear we should've started an sms bombing campaign.... it's crap like this that led to the O'Connell St Makris development knock back.
Do you support the extension of the Glenelg tram line to North Terrace?
Yes I support it. - 91.7%
No I do not support it - 8.3%
I swear we should've started an sms bombing campaign.... it's crap like this that led to the O'Connell St Makris development knock back.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 3 guests