Ad blocker detected: Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors. Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker on our website.
mattwinter wrote:The Indaily article mentions stage 2 of the goodwood upgrade with a pedestrian overpass. Will be interesting to see what that involves.. I always thought that if they ever did a pedestrian overpass with the tramline at Goodwood they'd include a platform and make a train/tram interchange station out of it
They'd have to rebuild the tram-overpass at Goodwood if this were to happen.
What I've always wondered is how they'd configure the line if they added an interchange with the train-lines. The simple answer would be to build a new overpass equipped with a station and have three stations within close proximity (Forestville, Goodwood and Goodwood Road); the costly but more logical answer would be to close the Goodwood Road Station and build a tram bridge starting at Goodwood Road and ending on the other side of the train-lines, situated a replacement station halfway between Goodwood Road and the train-lines with a walkway running along the bridge to stairway/elevator access to the train stations. In my head that all made sense but I'm not sure it does in writing, haha.
The problem with a tram/train interchange at Goodwood, is the low number of people likely to use it.
If I'm in the city, and want to ride a tram then train down south, I can get on a tram to Adelaide Railway Station, likely get a seat to my destination.
If I went to a Goodwood interchange, I'd have no chance of getting a seat, and maybe save a few minutes.
So, even though it looks like a logical interchange point, how many people would use it?
That's the question. Does anyone have the figures?
I don't get the obsession with the Goodwood interchage idea either, especially if it means moving Goodwood road tram stop further away from Goodwood road, as some have proposed. The tram stop is currently perfectly located, the train station however is poorly located tucked away from any commercial district.
I think the theory is that lots of commuters avoid catching the train because the one train station is too far from the southern part of the CBD. You see lots of people catching busses from the Sourh instead of trains and getting off in the southern part of the city.
rubberman wrote:The problem with a tram/train interchange at Goodwood, is the low number of people likely to use it.
If I'm in the city, and want to ride a tram then train down south, I can get on a tram to Adelaide Railway Station, likely get a seat to my destination.
If I went to a Goodwood interchange, I'd have no chance of getting a seat, and maybe save a few minutes.
So, even though it looks like a logical interchange point, how many people would use it?
That's the question. Does anyone have the figures?
The shuttle service currently ending at South Terrace could continue to Goodwood Station, ditto for any future Outer Harbour line, this would provide a lot of empty carriages waiting to be filled.
Having passengers transfer at Goodwood would mean less transferring at North Terrace. A location that with undoubtedly suffer from over full trams heading into the city in the future also.
fishinajar wrote:
The shuttle service currently ending at South Terrace could continue to Goodwood Station, ditto for any future Outer Harbour line, this would provide a lot of empty carriages waiting to be filled.
Having passengers transfer at Goodwood would mean less transferring at North Terrace. A location that with undoubtedly suffer from over full trams heading into the city in the future also.
The city shuttle service no longer exists since the last timetable revision! Every tram now runs the entire length of the line. In any case, if a shuttle was to be introduced somewhere like Goodwood, would have to construct some turnback infrastructure to allow such an operation to be possible.
fishinajar wrote:
The shuttle service currently ending at South Terrace could continue to Goodwood Station, ditto for any future Outer Harbour line, this would provide a lot of empty carriages waiting to be filled.
Having passengers transfer at Goodwood would mean less transferring at North Terrace. A location that with undoubtedly suffer from over full trams heading into the city in the future also.
The city shuttle service no longer exists since the last timetable revision! Every tram now runs the entire length of the line. In any case, if a shuttle was to be introduced somewhere like Goodwood, would have to construct some turnback infrastructure to allow such an operation to be possible.
Yes. I would only advocate this in conjunction with a station upgrade which would benefit from a third turnback platform, such as was built at City West.
Adelaide commuters catching a tram, to change to a train at Goodwood to travel further south.? It would never happen. Adelaide folk would rather be stranded on a bus in peak hour all the way into the city rather than change to a duplicate train rout as it is. Moving Goodwood tram stop away from the shops and services, just to facilitate an upgrade of goodwwod station, with the hope to take some pressure off North terrace? Come on now. How bout just getting serious about the underground loop, and leave Goodwood to bask in its lazy hazy suburban backwater.
claybro wrote:Adelaide commuters catching a tram, to change to a train at Goodwood to travel further south.? It would never happen. Adelaide folk would rather be stranded on a bus in peak hour all the way into the city rather than change to a duplicate train rout as it is. Moving Goodwood tram stop away from the shops and services, just to facilitate an upgrade of goodwwod station, with the hope to take some pressure off North terrace? Come on now. How bout just getting serious about the underground loop, and leave Goodwood to bask in its lazy hazy suburban backwater.
Due to be announced today. A pity that there doesn't look to be any concurrent announcement about funding the Gawler line electrification; I would've thought that if they were to announce investment in Adelaide rail, they'd announce it all together - so perhaps it's off the agenda...
Adelaide train to Flinders University funding pledge expected
13 May 2016, ABC News Online
Funding for a train line to link Adelaide to Flinders University and the Flinders Medical Centre in the city's south is due to be announced by Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull.
The Federal Government will contribute $43 million towards project to extend the Tonsley railway line by 650 metres.
The line will run between the Tonsley Innovation Precinct and the Flinders University campus.
The project will form part of the Coalition's Smart Cities plan to build better transport connections, which was revealed last month by Mr Turnbull.
In a statement last month, he said the plan would "draw on the Commonwealth's coordination capacity and the strength of its balance sheet at a time of historically low interest rates, to get the best infrastructure projects off the ground".
The rail extension is expected to cut travel times from the city to Finders University to just over 20 minutes.
South Australia's Infrastructure Minister Stephen Mulligan said the other half of the $85 million project would be funded by the State Government.
"This will be a huge benefit for Flinders University students and people looking to get to the Flinders Medical Centre," Mr Mulligan said.
"Having a direct line between the city ... a travel time of a little over 20 minutes means it makes absolute sense to leave the car at home and take public transport instead."
Mr Mulligan said the project would create 75 jobs.
"We've already got funds locked away for this so we're looking forward to getting on with appointing a contractor and getting the works underway as quickly as possible," Mr Mulligan said.
The project is in the Liberal-held federal seat of Boothby.
Construction is expected to take about two years to complete.
$85m seems awfully cheap for a 600m electrified train extension, that requires 2 new stations to be built, and the whole rail structure will be on a bridge. Something isn't right with the cost figure.
Any views and opinions expressed are of my own, and do not reflect the views or opinions of any organisation of which I have an affiliation with.
[Shuz] wrote:$85m seems awfully cheap for a 600m electrified train extension, that requires 2 new stations to be built, and the whole rail structure will be on a bridge. Something isn't right with the cost figure.
