News & Discussion: Trams

[SBD]

Am I missing something here?

How in the hell is this costing $35m?

I can only imagine...

The need to use small equipment because larger machines don't fit past the trees, and the need to prop up an operating tramway while removing the structural integrity provided by the arches?

[SouthAussie94]

Am I missing something here?

How in the hell is this costing $35m?

I can only imagine...

The need to use small equipment because larger machines don't fit past the trees, and the need to prop up an operating tramway while removing the structural integrity provided by the arches?

The tramway will be shut for the Marion/Cross Rd overpasses when they do the works

[PD2/20]

Am I missing something here?

How in the hell is this costing $35m?

I understood the $35m was for the the bike overpass. Has a cost been announced for the scaled back works just announced?

[SRW]

This and the axed Hove railway overpass project are examples of chicken shit government.

The costs are for construction by private enterprise.

For the cost of a bike overpass, the government could house 60-80 families during a housing and rental crisis. It's a bit far fetched to say that a government looking at an outrageous cost and choosing to put its money elsewhere is chicken shit.

How about private enterprise put up a realistic cost instead of what looks like a rort?

I'm not sure I read any indication the government axed this for costs. My inference is that they wanted to appease locals despite wider benefits, similar to the Hove situation. I'd rather governments make the case clear for such projects.

But yes, the costs for even a basic upgrade are astonishing.

[A-Town]

Am I missing something here?

How in the hell is this costing $35m?

I understood the $35m was for the the bike overpass. Has a cost been announced for the scaled back works just announced?

I read that this new junk proposal was going to cost the same as the overpass, somehow.

[SBD]

https://www.indaily.com.au/news/local/2 ... e-concerns

The project cost remains at $35 million, according to the state government, which is splitting the funding 50/50 with the federal government.

“Cyclists will benefit from the $35 million upgrades, such as the archways and underpass, which will make it safer and more user-friendly for riders. The bike community asked for those changes and we’ve listened.”

I'm pretty sure the bike community would have asked for an overpass near the tram line not continuing to use the underpass at the other end of the railway station.

[Spotto]

My inference is that they wanted to appease locals despite wider benefits, similar to the Hove situation. I'd rather governments make the case clear for such projects.

The problem with the anti-Hove mob was that they had almost no valid arguments beyond disruption to the people being relocated.

"A viaduct will divide the community" - Open community space beneath the viaduct will divide more than the current fenced ground-level railway?

"A viaduct will block beach views" - The land is flat near the railway, there are no beach views to be blocked.

"Too many houses will be demolished" - Many more would've been demolished to build the trench underpass that some groups wanted.

"Without the boom gates stopping traffic, you won't be able to turn right from side streets onto Brighton Road." - They're joking right?

[abc]

My inference is that they wanted to appease locals despite wider benefits, similar to the Hove situation. I'd rather governments make the case clear for such projects.

The problem with the anti-Hove mob was that they had almost no valid arguments beyond disruption to the people being relocated.

"A viaduct will divide the community" - Open community space beneath the viaduct will divide more than the current fenced ground-level railway?

"A viaduct will block beach views" - The land is flat near the railway, there are no beach views to be blocked.

"Too many houses will be demolished" - Many more would've been demolished to build the trench underpass that some groups wanted.

"Without the boom gates stopping traffic, you won't be able to turn right from side streets onto Brighton Road." - They're joking right?

why don't they just build an road underpass, like on Goodwood Road?

[[Shuz]]

Can't build a viaduct at Hove, but hey, she'll be right mate with Marion and Cross Roads, where it'll be a lot bigger and more visually impacting.

The same lot of whingers really need to take a long hard look at Melbourne's Level Crossing Removal Projects, which despite initial opposition, has turned into a massive outstanding, vote-winning, almost uniamously supportive success.

Government should just have told the community to go fuck themselves and gone right ahead.

Not like they have an extremely cushy 13 seat majority over the Liberals to contend with, basically all but securing a three term government at least.

[Nathan]

Same mentality kept the level crossing in Croydon too.

[Spotto]

Same mentality kept the level crossing in Croydon too.

IIRC one argument was that it would disrupt the quiet street atmosphere, but it was hard to hear it over the boom gate bells ringing every 5-10 minutes

[Saltwater]

To be fair DIT have initiated a level crossing removal project across SA, but based on the current prioritisation the initial locations are to the north of the city: https://www.dit.sa.gov.au/infrastructur ... ng_Program.

There's also the Marion / Cross Road intersection upgrade, which will remove the crossing, but I take it that is more associated with the NSM works to accommodate traffic volumes during construction.

Granted the level crossing program hasn't been politicised as much as the Victorian effort, which was a huge vote winner and went a long way to keeping traffic moving - it wasn't actually about improving rail services.

Would be good to see the SA version gather steam with a government willing to shut down the NIMBY's and look at some of our problem crossings... Belair line over Cross Road, the tram over Goodwood Road, and revisiting the Hove level crossing

[Llessur2002]

Same mentality kept the level crossing in Croydon too.

I dunno, I'm a Croydon resident and an infrastructure 'enthusiast' (if that's the right term) and I'm very glad the long overpass didn't go ahead. The design and contribution to the relatively historic street was poor to start off with and, given the incredibly dumbed-down and sub-par outcomes in terms of aesthetics and amenity we've seen across the T2T project as a whole (think landscaping, pedestrian connectivity, noise wall, missing promised heritage brickwork street features made from demolished properties etc) I have absolutely no doubt that the outcome of a longer overpass would have been terrible.

If DIT had a remotely good track record of approaching such projects with genuine care and desire to contribute to the area as a whole then I would have been a bit more supportive but they just don't. The overpass we did get has been covered with graffiti from Day 1. It takes around 3 months of hassling DIT to get it cleaned up and then it's back within a couple of weeks. The irrigation to the surrounding landscaped areas on Euston Terrace and Day Terrace is poorly maintained, often damaged by DIT vehicles parking on top of it, and quite a lot of planting has subsequently either died or is just stunted. Promised turfed areas ended up being replaced with crushed gravel which is constantly weed-ridden and a good number of planted trees have died, been quietly removed and never replaced.

The relatively poor state that they've left the South Road surface roads, the complete lack of any shade for pedestrians trying to walk in the area and the incredibly rubbish 'artwork' they've dotted in a few locations just reinforces my feeling that they couldn't give a flying fig about pedestrians and local residents - their only real objective is improving transport flow and they'll repeatedly cut back landscaping to the absolute bare minimum as soon as the bulk of the civil works are completed.

Look at the queues which build up at Hawker Street, Torrens Road, Port Road etc compared to the 2-4 cars which generally have to wait at Queen Street. It's a relatively low priority in the grand scheme of things. I've lived there for nearly 10 years now and have never been aware of an accident on the crossing.

[rev]

Same mentality kept the level crossing in Croydon too.

I dunno, I'm a Croydon resident and an infrastructure 'enthusiast' (if that's the right term) and I'm very glad the long overpass didn't go ahead. The design and contribution to the relatively historic street was poor to start off with and, given the incredibly dumbed-down and sub-par outcomes in terms of aesthetics and amenity we've seen across the T2T project as a whole (think landscaping, pedestrian connectivity, noise wall, missing promised heritage brickwork street features made from demolished properties etc) I have absolutely no doubt that the outcome of a longer overpass would have been terrible.

If DIT had a remotely good track record of approaching such projects with genuine care and desire to contribute to the area as a whole then I would have been a bit more supportive but they just don't. The overpass we did get has been covered with graffiti from Day 1. It takes around 3 months of hassling DIT to get it cleaned up and then it's back within a couple of weeks. The irrigation to the surrounding landscaped areas on Euston Terrace and Day Terrace is poorly maintained, often damaged by DIT vehicles parking on top of it, and quite a lot of planting has subsequently either died or is just stunted. Promised turfed areas ended up being replaced with crushed gravel which is constantly weed-ridden and a good number of planted trees have died, been quietly removed and never replaced.

The relatively poor state that they've left the South Road surface roads, the complete lack of any shade for pedestrians trying to walk in the area and the incredibly rubbish 'artwork' they've dotted in a few locations just reinforces my feeling that they couldn't give a flying fig about pedestrians and local residents - their only real objective is improving transport flow and they'll repeatedly cut back landscaping to the absolute bare minimum as soon as the bulk of the civil works are completed.

Look at the queues which build up at Hawker Street, Torrens Road, Port Road etc compared to the 2-4 cars which generally have to wait at Queen Street. It's a relatively low priority in the grand scheme of things.

If they really wanted to improve things, build higher density (ie the TODS), etc, they'd have just continued the sunken train line from Bowden. Heck they could have even covered the top and built a 20km urban park and cycleway from Outer Harbour to the city.
Instead we get what we always get in Adelaide, a hodgepodge mix of bandaid solutions.

[abc]

why don't they just build an road underpass, like on Goodwood Road?