[COM] Oaklands Crossing | $174m

Threads relating to transport, water, etc. within the CBD and Metropolitan area.
Message
Author
Westside
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 213
Joined: Tue May 12, 2009 4:30 pm
Has thanked: 13 times
Been thanked: 44 times

[COM] Re: PRO: Oaklands Rail Overpass

#571 Post by Westside » Thu Jun 08, 2017 12:05 pm

potsandpans wrote:Great news! But what about removing the lights where Diagonal and Morphett Rd meet? And removing the pedestrian crossing lights? Plus the new design looks like it adds another set of lights for people to turn right onto Morphett Rd heading north, which will actually add congestion. I predict in a few years there will be the same traffic problems as we have now, if those three sets of lights aren't removed.
Ah, what? The new design finally allows motorists travelling North on to Morphett Rd to avoid having to rat-run via Prunus St, so it most definitely will reduce congestion. The idea is not to turn Morphett and Diagonal Rds into freeways - there will still be significant pedestrian movements that need to be catered for, but taking out the rail crossing will improve amenity and safety for all users, not just motorists.

Eurostar
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 495
Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2010 3:44 pm
Has thanked: 7 times
Been thanked: 27 times

[COM] Re: PRO: Oaklands Rail Overpass

#572 Post by Eurostar » Thu Jun 08, 2017 1:40 pm

Ideally if the money was there the line could stay down in the trench and come up after Jetty Road (Brighton). Also have a mini office/apartments/shops and park on top of Oaklands Station.

User avatar
Nathan
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 3139
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2009 1:09 pm
Location: Bowden
Has thanked: 195 times
Been thanked: 619 times
Contact:

[COM] Re: PRO: Oaklands Rail Overpass

#573 Post by Nathan » Thu Jun 08, 2017 2:51 pm

Looks like the actual configuration shown in the initial render/video isn't locked in, and there's a number of options being evaluated.

Here's Option 2, which appears to close off Morphett Rd on the northern side of the line.
18955094_1546806458693889_5690471615488959496_o.jpg
18955094_1546806458693889_5690471615488959496_o.jpg (114.54 KiB) Viewed 2162 times

OlympusAnt
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 307
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2015 7:31 pm
Has thanked: 44 times
Been thanked: 32 times

[COM] Re: PRO: Oaklands Rail Overpass

#574 Post by OlympusAnt » Thu Jun 08, 2017 3:35 pm

I wonder if the upgrade will result in the closure of Warradale
Follow me on Flickr

http://www.flickr.com/photos/135625678@N06/

Westside
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 213
Joined: Tue May 12, 2009 4:30 pm
Has thanked: 13 times
Been thanked: 44 times

[COM] Re: PRO: Oaklands Rail Overpass

#575 Post by Westside » Thu Jun 08, 2017 4:39 pm

Nathan wrote:Looks like the actual configuration shown in the initial render/video isn't locked in, and there's a number of options being evaluated.

Here's Option 2, which appears to close off Morphett Rd on the northern side of the line.
I wouldn't give any credence to 'Option 2'. It appears to me to be an unsolicited plan offered by the Marion City Council and nothing more.

Hopefully they are engaged in the process though, to ensure greater land-use integration around the new station.

Westside
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 213
Joined: Tue May 12, 2009 4:30 pm
Has thanked: 13 times
Been thanked: 44 times

[COM] Re: PRO: Oaklands Rail Overpass

#576 Post by Westside » Thu Jun 08, 2017 4:44 pm

OlympusAnt wrote:I wonder if the upgrade will result in the closure of Warradale
If you have a look at the original master planning documents (I can't find them now - if someone can provide a link that would be great) it mentions that in the original overpass design that Warradale station would need to be demolished in order to meet ideal gradients. They then mentioned the option of rebuilding Warradale in between the current location and Hove station which will allow for the close of Hove station as well in preparation for the eventual removal of the level crossing at Brighton Road. I'm not sure if this will still hold true under the new rail-under-road proposal.

Now, if only I can find that document again to substantiate my comments...

* Edit: Here it is: http://www.dpti.sa.gov.au/infrastructur ... blications
New Railway station between Warradale and Hove
The construction of the overpass would require the demolition of the existing Warradale station.
A new station is proposed to be constructed replacing both Wan-adale and Hove station which
will require extension to accommodate 6 car electric trains from Seaford.
This also has the advantage that if in the long term grade separation of the rail and road level
crossing at Brighton Road was to occur then there would be no requirement at that stage to
rebuild the Hove station.
This was the 2013 Business Case, so who knows if there is still any truth to it.

mawsonguy
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 165
Joined: Fri Dec 20, 2013 8:11 am
Been thanked: 86 times

[COM] Re: PRO: Oaklands Rail Overpass

#577 Post by mawsonguy » Thu Jun 08, 2017 5:44 pm

The plan removes a road choke point but creates a rail choke point. There is no provision for a passing loop at the station which means you will not be able to run highspeed, long distance, non-stop, express services like they do in Sydney. They should, at least, build the tunnel and cutting wide enough so that passing loops can be added in future. It would be a lot cheaper to do it now than in the future. Can you imagine how much more patronage a 22 minute Seaford-City service would receive compared to the current 47 minute "express" service.

User avatar
SouthAussie94
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 347
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2012 10:03 pm
Location: Southern Suburbs
Has thanked: 256 times
Been thanked: 53 times

[COM] Re: PRO: Oaklands Rail Overpass

#578 Post by SouthAussie94 » Thu Jun 08, 2017 6:07 pm

mawsonguy wrote:The plan removes a road choke point but creates a rail choke point. There is no provision for a passing loop at the station which means you will not be able to run highspeed, long distance, non-stop, express services like they do in Sydney. They should, at least, build the tunnel and cutting wide enough so that passing loops can be added in future. It would be a lot cheaper to do it now than in the future. Can you imagine how much more patronage a 22 minute Seaford-City service would receive compared to the current 47 minute "express" service.
The issue with having a short passing loop is that the 'slow' train needs to wait for the express train to pass.

For instance using Brighton as an example;

'Slow' train arrives using centre line through station. Express train is 60-120 seconds behind. Slow train needs to wait for the express train to reach Brighton, waiting an additional 30-90 seconds (assuming a 'standard' stop is 30 seconds). The express train reaches Brighton, continues through, 'Slow' train continues sitting. It must now wait an additional 60-120 seconds for the Express train to clear the next signal block, before the 'Slow' train is able to proceed. Under normal operation, the slow train would lose in the range of 2-4 minutes waiting for the express.

Ideally, any passing loops would be several kilometres long, containing multiple stations. This allows the slow train to leave the main line and continue moving while allowing the express train to use the third line. This ensures that the 'Slow' train doesn't lose additional time waiting for the express to pass.

In an ideal world, you could have three tracks from Oaklands to Brighton. This would give a 3/4 station window in which the express trains could pass the all stopping 'Slow' train. In reality, incorporating additional tracks and therefore width to overpasses and underpasses probably isn't feasible. If third tracks are ever introduced to the Seaford line (or any line for that matter), I'd expect them to be introduced at locations where the widening of under/overpasses could be avoided.
"All we are is bags of bones pushing against a self imposed tide. Just be content with staying alive"

Views and opinions expressed are my own and don't necessarily reflect the views or opinions of any organisation of which I have an affiliation

OlympusAnt
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 307
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2015 7:31 pm
Has thanked: 44 times
Been thanked: 32 times

[COM] Re: PRO: Oaklands Rail Overpass

#579 Post by OlympusAnt » Thu Jun 08, 2017 7:03 pm

Such as the Morrabbin triplication in Melbourne
Follow me on Flickr

http://www.flickr.com/photos/135625678@N06/

potsandpans
Sen-Rookie-Sational
Posts: 22
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2014 6:04 pm
Has thanked: 11 times
Been thanked: 3 times

[COM] Re: PRO: Oaklands Rail Overpass

#580 Post by potsandpans » Thu Jun 08, 2017 10:26 pm

Westside wrote: so it most definitely will reduce congestion. The idea is not to turn Morphett and Diagonal Rds into freeways - there will still be significant pedestrian movements that need to be catered for
I thought the main reason for upgrading the Oaklands crossing was to reduce congestion? It may reduce it in the short-term, but without the removal of traffic lights (and the addition of a right-hand turn traffic light onto Morphett Rd travelling North) I believe congestion will be as bad as it is now, say in 3 years time. Why not think long-term, instead of short-term? It will be a lot cheaper to do it now rather than after this upgrade is completed.

User avatar
Norman
Donating Member
Donating Member
Posts: 5697
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2007 1:06 pm
Has thanked: 775 times
Been thanked: 1413 times

[COM] Re: PRO: Oaklands Rail Overpass

#581 Post by Norman » Thu Jun 08, 2017 11:56 pm

potsandpans wrote:
Westside wrote: so it most definitely will reduce congestion. The idea is not to turn Morphett and Diagonal Rds into freeways - there will still be significant pedestrian movements that need to be catered for
I thought the main reason for upgrading the Oaklands crossing was to reduce congestion? It may reduce it in the short-term, but without the removal of traffic lights (and the addition of a right-hand turn traffic light onto Morphett Rd travelling North) I believe congestion will be as bad as it is now, say in 3 years time. Why not think long-term, instead of short-term? It will be a lot cheaper to do it now rather than after this upgrade is completed.
What sort of intersection upgrade were you thinking of?

Big overpasses are difficult to do in this area given the current residential land use. It needs to be low scale and not block too many pedestrian movements.

If you read the report, it does make mention of a road overpass, but the cost/benefit was much lower than just having a regular intersection and a train overpass/underpass.

Most of the road congestion actually comes from the significant time the boom gates are down in peak hour. If you drive this road during the day and on weekends, it's not too bad, because there are fewer trains, causing fewer movement conflicts.

User avatar
[Shuz]
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 2595
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 5:26 pm
Has thanked: 1094 times
Been thanked: 264 times

[COM] Re: PRO: Oaklands Rail Overpass

#582 Post by [Shuz] » Fri Jun 09, 2017 10:09 am

In an ideal world, I would have done Morphett Road as an overpass, Diagonal Road as an underpass, with the rail line at grade.
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.

User avatar
fishinajar
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 275
Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 12:23 pm
Location: Adelaide
Has thanked: 197 times
Been thanked: 17 times

[COM] Re: PRO: Oaklands Rail Overpass

#583 Post by fishinajar » Fri Jun 09, 2017 10:30 am

[Shuz] wrote:In an ideal world, I would have done Morphett Road as an overpass, Diagonal Road as an underpass, with the rail line at grade.
Ideal? Come on shuz, there are many busy intersections throughout Adelaide and other cities that need to and will remain at grade with traffic lights, we're not trying to build freewaytopia.
IMO all future rail crossing improvement should occur below grade where possible. Eventually whole lines can go below grade and be covered and developed over. Much more ideal :wink:

User avatar
monotonehell
VIP Member
VIP Member
Posts: 5466
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2008 12:10 am
Location: Adelaide, East End.
Has thanked: 192 times
Been thanked: 288 times
Contact:

[COM] Re: PRO: Oaklands Rail Overpass

#584 Post by monotonehell » Fri Jun 09, 2017 11:18 am

fishinajar wrote:IMO all future rail crossing improvement should occur below grade where possible. Eventually whole lines can go below grade and be covered and developed over. Much more ideal :wink:
Come on fishinajar - we aren't trying to build subwaytopia. :lol: jk jk
Exit on the right in the direction of travel.

Archer
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 123
Joined: Mon Jun 09, 2008 11:44 am
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 1 time

[COM] Re: PRO: Oaklands Rail Overpass

#585 Post by Archer » Fri Jun 09, 2017 11:51 am

The fly through shows the station essentially in it's current location. I would have thought it better to center it beneath the road bridges? This would provide built in Shelter from the elements as well as easier & quicker access to both sides of the road which would also help to improve access to the aquatics center and Westfield (shorter distance and one less road to cross). It would likely also negate the need for an additional pedestrian over pass at the northern end of of the station and provide additional space for car parking or other developments.

Is there a particular reason why centralising the station under the bridges would not be done?

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 11 guests