News & Discussion: Level Crossings

Threads relating to transport, water, etc. within the CBD and Metropolitan area.
Message
Author
User avatar
jk1237
Donating Member
Donating Member
Posts: 1741
Joined: Wed Jan 17, 2007 11:22 pm
Location: Adelaide
Has thanked: 7 times
Been thanked: 25 times

Re: Adelaide Level Crossing Removal Thread

#31 Post by jk1237 » Wed Sep 21, 2011 1:59 pm

Aidan wrote:
crawf wrote:Park Terrace in Bowden should be up there as a main priority.
'Twas on AG's list, and DTEI regards it as a priority, but I'm unconvinced. Better signal coordination there would be just as effective IMO.
nup, major intersections that are close to level crossings that result in cars queuing back over the level crossing should be number 1 priority for grade separations. Same as Salisbury. Theres always 1 goose that will queue right over the tracks, like the dimwit bus driver at Salisbury that the Ghan hit

User avatar
[Shuz]
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 2556
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 5:26 pm
Has thanked: 924 times
Been thanked: 252 times

Re: Adelaide Level Crossing Removal Thread

#32 Post by [Shuz] » Wed Sep 21, 2011 2:14 pm

In reply to Aidans post about the trams - wouldn't it just be easier to replace the level crossings with traffic lights instead (think what they did at South Road during the overpass construction works) and tweak the signalling to prioritise the trams right of way on its approach to the intersection?

If you think about it, there's not a lot of difference between the tram's right of way on Port Road compared to the Glenelg corridor, excepting the level crossings.
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.

Aidan
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 2035
Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 3:10 am
Been thanked: 8 times

Re: Adelaide Level Crossing Removal Thread

#33 Post by Aidan » Wed Sep 21, 2011 3:19 pm

jk1237 wrote:
Aidan wrote:
crawf wrote:Park Terrace in Bowden should be up there as a main priority.
'Twas on AG's list, and DTEI regards it as a priority, but I'm unconvinced. Better signal coordination there would be just as effective IMO.
nup, major intersections that are close to level crossings that result in cars queuing back over the level crossing should be number 1 priority for grade separations. Same as Salisbury. Theres always 1 goose that will queue right over the tracks, like the dimwit bus driver at Salisbury that the Ghan hit
The Salisbury crossing now features emergency escape lanes. Couldn't the same thing be done at Bowden?

[Shuz] wrote:In reply to Aidans post about the trams - wouldn't it just be easier to replace the level crossings with traffic lights instead (think what they did at South Road during the overpass construction works) and tweak the signalling to prioritise the trams right of way on its approach to the intersection?

If you think about it, there's not a lot of difference between the tram's right of way on Port Road compared to the Glenelg corridor, excepting the level crossings.
There's one big difference: the trams have absolute priority at the crossings on the Glenelg line. Replacing the crossing with lights would hardly make any difference to road traffic if absolute priority for the trams were retained, but it would increase capacity if the trams sometimes had to stop - which would obviously slow down the schedule. Even so, it's not a bad idea- especially if journey time savings can be made elsewhere on the line.

But don't forget: motorists are more likely to queue across intersections at traffic lights (even where signs and road markings tell them not to) than across tracks at level crossings.
Just build it wrote:Bye Union Hall. I'll see you in another life, when we are both cats.

mattblack
Legendary Member!
Posts: 847
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2008 11:20 am
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 5 times

Re: Adelaide Level Crossing Removal Thread

#34 Post by mattblack » Thu Sep 22, 2011 9:53 am

The whole point with Bowden is that the government want it to be a showpiece as it is the first cab off the rank in terms of a TOD style development for Adelaide. I agree that it is probably not the most pressing intersection to upgrade and if the suburb was going to be more of the same low density garb that we have now the government would even be considering it. If the Gov starts cutting corners on this one it will not make the impression it needs to change the stigma that aAdelaidians have toward high density housing. It will also be part of a package including cylcling routes and bridges into the parklands, it should be seen in context and changing perseptions. Good on them I say, spend the money that it needs and get it right the first time.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: aaronjameslange, Google [Bot], Hooligan and 6 guests