[COM] Torrens Junction Underpass

Threads relating to transport, water, etc. within the CBD and Metropolitan area.
Message
Author
User avatar
[Shuz]
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 2575
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 5:26 pm
Has thanked: 976 times
Been thanked: 257 times

[COM] Re: Torrens Junction Underpass

#211 Post by [Shuz] » Wed Nov 15, 2017 8:44 am

A real shame that they didn't remove the Queen Street level crossing as part of the South Road overpass project, and included the removal of the Coglin Street level crossing as either part of this project or the South Road overpass as well. Could have had six kilometres of uninterrupted right of way for trains / no level crossings on the Outer Harbour line between Adelaide Railway Station and David Terrace. A bit short-sighted IMO.
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
PeFe
Legendary Member!
Posts: 882
Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 9:47 am
Has thanked: 38 times
Been thanked: 109 times

[COM] Re: Torrens Junction Underpass

#212 Post by PeFe » Wed Nov 15, 2017 9:43 am

They really should have gone all the way to Woodville Road with the grade separation.......if there was some sort of proper master plan regarding the train line and the areas around the station, then this piecemeal approach would not be happening.

User avatar
Nathan
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 3105
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2009 1:09 pm
Location: Bowden
Has thanked: 190 times
Been thanked: 607 times
Contact:

[COM] Re: Torrens Junction Underpass

#213 Post by Nathan » Wed Nov 15, 2017 9:47 am

The plan was to remove the Queen Street level crossing, but Croydon residents opposed it.

User avatar
[Shuz]
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 2575
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 5:26 pm
Has thanked: 976 times
Been thanked: 257 times

[COM] Re: Torrens Junction Underpass

#214 Post by [Shuz] » Wed Nov 15, 2017 10:45 am

Nathan wrote:
Wed Nov 15, 2017 9:47 am
The plan was to remove the Queen Street level crossing, but Croydon residents opposed it.
They opposed improved safety!? Is their water contaminated or something?
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
Llessur2002
Legendary Member!
Posts: 1456
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2014 4:59 pm
Location: West Croydon
Has thanked: 423 times
Been thanked: 666 times

[COM] Re: Torrens Junction Underpass

#215 Post by Llessur2002 » Wed Nov 15, 2017 11:07 am

It was before my time as a Croydon resident but I believe they opposed a concrete overpass running through their heritage suburb.

Fair enough in my opinion. Queen Street is not a busy level crossing, nor should it be. In fact, the level crossing likely does a good job of deterring rat-runners from using Queen Street to cut through to South Road from Port Road in peak hour so it probably contributes as much to traffic and pedestrian safety as it detracts. As part of the station upgrade Queen Street is getting an active pedestrian crossing so as far as crossings go it's about as safe as it gets.

Coglin and Queen Streets are both relatively quiet streets - I can think of half a dozen level crossings which would be far more worthy of being removed than these two. Just because something's possible from an engineering perspective it doesn't make it the right economic decision.

rev
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 3869
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2006 12:14 pm
Has thanked: 249 times
Been thanked: 351 times

[COM] Re: Torrens Junction Underpass

#216 Post by rev » Wed Nov 15, 2017 1:41 pm

[Shuz] wrote:
Wed Nov 15, 2017 8:44 am
A real shame that they didn't remove the Queen Street level crossing as part of the South Road overpass project, and included the removal of the Coglin Street level crossing as either part of this project or the South Road overpass as well. Could have had six kilometres of uninterrupted right of way for trains / no level crossings on the Outer Harbour line between Adelaide Railway Station and David Terrace. A bit short-sighted IMO.
LOL trains already have right of way, that's why you, the motorist gets stopped by a boom gate and the train keeps going.

claybro
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 1983
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2012 9:16 pm
Has thanked: 48 times
Been thanked: 213 times

[COM] Re: Torrens Junction Underpass

#217 Post by claybro » Wed Nov 15, 2017 1:41 pm

PeFe wrote:
Wed Nov 15, 2017 9:43 am
They really should have gone all the way to Woodville Road with the grade separation.......if there was some sort of proper master plan regarding the train line and the areas around the station, then this piecemeal approach would not be happening.
This would have been an expensive blight on the inner north western suburbs. The streets that cross the OH line are quiet back streets (except maybe Kilkenny road) and a sky train would absolutely ruin what are really lovely heritage suburbs.

User avatar
PeFe
Legendary Member!
Posts: 882
Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 9:47 am
Has thanked: 38 times
Been thanked: 109 times

[COM] Re: Torrens Junction Underpass

#218 Post by PeFe » Wed Nov 15, 2017 2:33 pm

Grade separation doesn't have to be a "sky train".....it can be an underpass like Park Terrace and the proposal for Oaklands.

I hope the good citizens of Croydon will not complain in the future if train frequencies increase to the point where they will always be waiting at the crossing............only in Adelaide would locals complain of a practice (grade separation) that really does benefit the whole community.

User avatar
Nathan
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 3105
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2009 1:09 pm
Location: Bowden
Has thanked: 190 times
Been thanked: 607 times
Contact:

[COM] Re: Torrens Junction Underpass

#219 Post by Nathan » Wed Nov 15, 2017 2:37 pm

Let's not get into the whole "sky train" label. It's an elevated rail which can be done in a way that's sympathetic to it's location if required. Of course it can be done cheap and with little concern for others (that's the DPTI way), but they can also be done with minimised visual impact, materials that are true to the area, and provide public space underneath (say for pocket parks, car parking, shops, etc.).

User avatar
ChillyPhilly
Legendary Member!
Posts: 1384
Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2008 11:35 pm
Location: Adder-Laid, South Australia.
Has thanked: 258 times
Been thanked: 323 times
Contact:

[COM] Re: Torrens Junction Underpass

#220 Post by ChillyPhilly » Wed Nov 15, 2017 3:49 pm

I feel an overpass over Queen Street would have created a bit of a 'barrier' through the precinct. On the surface, I would side with the idea as space beneath an overpass structure can indeed be put to use, but can see why it has been opposed. Honestly, the best solution that takes care of the biggest number of problems would have been to simply underground the line as far as Cheltenham, or even Alberton.

It's also worth pointing out that many Croydon folk and those who cut through during wet months would have seen the problem that arises at the Rosetta Street underpass: it floods. Massively. I feel that this may have been a pre-conceptual deterrent to a grade separation structure in the area as well.
Our state, our city, our future.

All views expressed on this forum are my own.

User avatar
Llessur2002
Legendary Member!
Posts: 1456
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2014 4:59 pm
Location: West Croydon
Has thanked: 423 times
Been thanked: 666 times

[COM] Re: Torrens Junction Underpass

#221 Post by Llessur2002 » Wed Nov 15, 2017 3:58 pm

Nathan wrote:but they can also be done with minimised visual impact, materials that are true to the area, and provide public space underneath (say for pocket parks, car parking, shops, etc.)
Absolutely. But it's probably a case of better the devil you know.

The overpass originally proposed for Queen Street *could* have been a magnificent structure, dressed in recycled local bricks with arches accommodating boutique shops, art installations and additional community spaces which would really have benefited the area.

or....

The overpass could have started life as a glamorous render showing the above, before being whittled down through a series of subsequent renders to eventuate as a cheap industrial style concrete structure with a few sparse token faux brick embellishments, overbearing metal structures hanging off of the side of the shared pathway (a-la South Road tram overpass) and a bit of half-arsed landscaping with sub-standard irrigation, never to be used or maintained.

There was no guarantee that the overpass would improve the area, and every chance it could have degraded it. Had I lived in the area at the time I also would have been very skeptical of this proposal. As it stands at the moment I'm reserving judgement on the shorter overpass that was built as in its unfinished form it could still turn out to be a bit of a dog's breakfast aesthetically speaking.
PeFe wrote: Grade separation doesn't have to be a "sky train".....it can be an underpass like Park Terrace and the proposal for Oaklands.

I hope the good citizens of Croydon will not complain in the future if train frequencies increase to the point where they will always be waiting at the crossing............only in Adelaide would locals complain of a practice (grade separation) that really does benefit the whole community.
Whilst it works in the non-residential area of Torrens Junction, a double-track underpass the width of that at Bowden which would have turned the quiet leafy corridors of Euston Terrace and Day Terrace into a messy construction site for months and probably resulted in the removal of all of the mature shade trees along this strip. Why would any resident support that?

I doubt the residents of Croydon worry much about vehicle access along Queen Street - there are plenty of routes through the area to Port Road, South Road and Torrens Road without needing to wait at a level crossing. I live a stone's throw from Queen Street and hardly ever drive along it. Rosetta Street is the main north south thoroughfare in the area and this is already grade-separated. Additionally, the new South Road surface carriageways are literally one street away from Queen Street.

Queen Street really shouldn't be seen as a thoroughfare. If it wasn't for the local traders and the general inability for people to use a local service if they can't park within 5m of it then a much better option would be to just close the crossing entirely - $millions saved with minimal impact on how traffic moves through the area.

User avatar
Zills
Gold-Member ;)
Posts: 92
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:59 pm
Has thanked: 14 times

[COM] Re: Torrens Junction Underpass

#222 Post by Zills » Thu Nov 16, 2017 3:03 pm

I lived next to the line during the saga. From memory, i'm pretty sure the biggest concern was about the potential for anti-social activity generated from an elevated Croydon station.

User avatar
Kasey771
Legendary Member!
Posts: 598
Joined: Sun Feb 21, 2010 8:56 am
Has thanked: 193 times
Been thanked: 80 times

[COM] Re: Torrens Junction Underpass

#223 Post by Kasey771 » Thu Nov 16, 2017 8:20 pm

Zills wrote:I lived next to the line during the saga. From memory, i'm pretty sure the biggest concern was about the potential for anti-social activity generated from an elevated Croydon station.
What gives an elevated station a higher chance of attracting anti-social behaviour?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Big infrastructure investments are usually under-valued and & over-criticized while in the planning stage. It's much easier to envision the here and now costs and inconveniences, and far more difficult to imagine fully the eventual benefits.

bits
Legendary Member!
Posts: 559
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2014 9:24 pm
Has thanked: 24 times
Been thanked: 101 times

[COM] Re: [U/C] Re: Torrens Junction Underpass

#224 Post by bits » Thu Nov 16, 2017 9:03 pm


Kasey771 wrote: What gives an elevated station a higher chance of attracting anti-social behaviour?
I just finished laughing after reading about the anti-socials that would hang around an elevated station but not a ground level station. Then I read your reply which pulls up the exac same thing!

Do bad hombres like to walk up 2 flights of stairs before doing drug deals?


Reminds me of The Golden Way landscaping the other year which noted it needed to be done because of anti-social behaviour such as drug deals. Ignore for just a moment that the new plantings are already as big as the previous.
Apparently drug dealers are hiding in the bushes off major roads and making deals.
There's me thinking drug dealers sell drugs from their houses or deliver to someone elses house.

SBD
Legendary Member!
Posts: 1048
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 3:49 pm
Location: Blakeview
Has thanked: 328 times
Been thanked: 79 times

[COM] Re: [U/C] Re: Torrens Junction Underpass

#225 Post by SBD » Thu Nov 16, 2017 9:23 pm

bits wrote:
Thu Nov 16, 2017 9:03 pm
Kasey771 wrote: What gives an elevated station a higher chance of attracting anti-social behaviour?
I just finished laughing after reading about the anti-socials that would hang around an elevated station but not a ground level station. Then I read your reply which pulls up the exac same thing!

Do bad hombres like to walk up 2 flights of stairs before doing drug deals?


Reminds me of The Golden Way landscaping the other year which noted it needed to be done because of anti-social behaviour such as drug deals. Ignore for just a moment that the new plantings are already as big as the previous.
Apparently drug dealers are hiding in the bushes off major roads and making deals.
There's me thinking drug dealers sell drugs from their houses or deliver to someone elses house.
Somewhat off-topic, but being in one of the first houses on a dead-end street at the back of a housing estate certainly got us some of those kinds of undesirable activites. When the houses at the end of the street were built, they each ended up setting up about 4 motion sensor floodlights to try to discourage the activity. Not on the edge of major roads, but not at either the buyer or seller's house, either.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: ginzahikari, Google [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot], rhino and 6 guests