News & Discussion: Adelaide Metro Trains

Threads relating to transport, water, etc. within the CBD and Metropolitan area.
claybro
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 2184
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2012 9:16 pm

Re: News & Discussion: Adelaide Metro Trains

Post by claybro »

Agree that before extension to Two Wells, Aldinga or wherever are even contemplated, we should at least have a plan for complete overhaul of all remaining stations, and electrification of OH. Further extending lines encourages lazy poorly designed urban sprawl. Modern integrated stations in higher density zones would be a much better way of spending finite funds.
Spotto
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 376
Joined: Wed May 15, 2019 9:05 pm

Re: News & Discussion: Adelaide Metro Trains

Post by Spotto »

claybro wrote:
Thu Feb 18, 2021 2:51 pm
Agree that before extension to Two Wells, Aldinga or wherever are even contemplated, we should at least have a plan for complete overhaul of all remaining stations, and electrification of OH. Further extending lines encourages lazy poorly designed urban sprawl. Modern integrated stations in higher density zones would be a much better way of spending finite funds.
I don't think OH will be electrified for some years yet what with the money that was spent repowering and refitting the diesels. Sure, the life extension won't keep them running forever but I'm assuming we'll get at minimum another decade or two out of them to get our money's worth out of the refit.

We have an opportunity with the extensions to Aldinga and Concordia, since the station precincts are currently vacant land awaiting development, to encourage medium density living and working in the station precinct and integrate it with public transport. The eastern side of the tracks around St Yves Roseworthy is already locked in as house and land packages, but there's still other surrounding land that could become denser living in the vein of Bowden or Tonsley Village. Aldinga and Concordia might have more freedom since planning is slightly further in the future, and in Aldinga's case the surrounding land is owned by Renewal SA like Bowden was.

These developments are already locked in so rail extensions to these locations should be built. But after that, I agree that urban infill should be the focus.
SBD
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 1779
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 3:49 pm
Location: Blakeview

Re: News & Discussion: Adelaide Metro Trains

Post by SBD »

Spotto wrote:
Thu Feb 18, 2021 4:30 pm
claybro wrote:
Thu Feb 18, 2021 2:51 pm
Agree that before extension to Two Wells, Aldinga or wherever are even contemplated, we should at least have a plan for complete overhaul of all remaining stations, and electrification of OH. Further extending lines encourages lazy poorly designed urban sprawl. Modern integrated stations in higher density zones would be a much better way of spending finite funds.
I don't think OH will be electrified for some years yet what with the money that was spent repowering and refitting the diesels. Sure, the life extension won't keep them running forever but I'm assuming we'll get at minimum another decade or two out of them to get our money's worth out of the refit.

We have an opportunity with the extensions to Aldinga and Concordia, since the station precincts are currently vacant land awaiting development, to encourage medium density living and working in the station precinct and integrate it with public transport. The eastern side of the tracks around St Yves Roseworthy is already locked in as house and land packages, but there's still other surrounding land that could become denser living in the vein of Bowden or Tonsley Village. Aldinga and Concordia might have more freedom since planning is slightly further in the future, and in Aldinga's case the surrounding land is owned by Renewal SA like Bowden was.

These developments are already locked in so rail extensions to these locations should be built. But after that, I agree that urban infill should be the focus.
Unfortunately, an extension of suburban rail services to a new station at Concordia (I assume near where the railway crosses the Barossa Valley Way), the first thing that would need to be built near it will be a multi-storey car park for a park'n'ride unless there is a big shift in car usage models (e.g. everyone uses Uber-style autonomous cars). Concordia would be a far more attractive destination to drive to from the southern Barossa Valley, then use a train to commute to Elizabeth, Salisbury or Adelaide, maybe even to Gawler! Extending electric train service to there would lead to a housing boom in Sandy Creek, Lyndoch, Cockatoo Valley, Williamstown, etc. and at least one person in each new house will want to park at Concordia.
User avatar
PeFe
Legendary Member!
Posts: 1295
Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 9:47 am

Re: News & Discussion: Adelaide Metro Trains

Post by PeFe »

I have never been keen on the Gawler line being extended to Concordia.

I would prefer a bus interchange be be built at either Gawler or Gawler Central allowing bus transport from the Barossa Valley to connect easily with the train.

And small useless train stations like Gawler Oval can be eliminated.
SBD
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 1779
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 3:49 pm
Location: Blakeview

Re: News & Discussion: Adelaide Metro Trains

Post by SBD »

PeFe wrote:
Thu Feb 18, 2021 8:53 pm
I have never been keen on the Gawler line being extended to Concordia.

I would prefer a bus interchange be be built at either Gawler or Gawler Central allowing bus transport from the Barossa Valley to connect easily with the train.

And small useless train stations like Gawler Oval can be eliminated.
"Useless" is relative. When she was younger, my (now) wife used to catch the train to and from Gawler Oval station to practice and play netball.

I don't know who uses Kudla though...
Spotto
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 376
Joined: Wed May 15, 2019 9:05 pm

Re: News & Discussion: Adelaide Metro Trains

Post by Spotto »

SBD wrote:
Thu Feb 18, 2021 8:28 pm
Unfortunately, an extension of suburban rail services to a new station at Concordia (I assume near where the railway crosses the Barossa Valley Way), the first thing that would need to be built near it will be a multi-storey car park for a park'n'ride unless there is a big shift in car usage models (e.g. everyone uses Uber-style autonomous cars). Concordia would be a far more attractive destination to drive to from the southern Barossa Valley, then use a train to commute to Elizabeth, Salisbury or Adelaide, maybe even to Gawler! Extending electric train service to there would lead to a housing boom in Sandy Creek, Lyndoch, Cockatoo Valley, Williamstown, etc. and at least one person in each new house will want to park at Concordia.
Ah, the Australian solution to rail transport: don’t build up a station precinct with medium density living and working to create regular passenger usage to and from the precinct, instead build a large carpark that will help usage only at peak times for citybound workers and have the station dead for most of the day. The only reason to travel to a station that only has a carpark and no nearby living or leisure that you would want to travel to would be to get back to your car to get home. Go to Oaklands station in the middle of the day and the platforms will be empty and I'll admit I was guilty of using it for this purpose on occasion until Flinders opened and I could bus to the station instead.

Concordia being part of the Gawler area which is an outer fringe suburb might give it more flexibility to include more standard low density housing and a sensible station carpark but denser living is what will really drive public transport usage. If demand from the Sandy Creek-Cockatoo Valley-Lyndoch triangle eventuates then rail extensions could potentially be facilitated to those locations too.
SBD
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 1779
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 3:49 pm
Location: Blakeview

Re: News & Discussion: Adelaide Metro Trains

Post by SBD »

Spotto wrote:
Thu Feb 18, 2021 9:39 pm
SBD wrote:
Thu Feb 18, 2021 8:28 pm
Unfortunately, an extension of suburban rail services to a new station at Concordia (I assume near where the railway crosses the Barossa Valley Way), the first thing that would need to be built near it will be a multi-storey car park for a park'n'ride unless there is a big shift in car usage models (e.g. everyone uses Uber-style autonomous cars). Concordia would be a far more attractive destination to drive to from the southern Barossa Valley, then use a train to commute to Elizabeth, Salisbury or Adelaide, maybe even to Gawler! Extending electric train service to there would lead to a housing boom in Sandy Creek, Lyndoch, Cockatoo Valley, Williamstown, etc. and at least one person in each new house will want to park at Concordia.
Ah, the Australian solution to rail transport: don’t build up a station precinct with medium density living and working to create regular passenger usage to and from the precinct, instead build a large carpark that will help usage only at peak times for citybound workers and have the station dead for most of the day. The only reason to travel to a station that only has a carpark and no nearby living or leisure that you would want to travel to would be to get back to your car to get home. Go to Oaklands station in the middle of the day and the platforms will be empty and I'll admit I was guilty of using it for this purpose on occasion until Flinders opened and I could bus to the station instead.

Concordia being part of the Gawler area which is an outer fringe suburb might give it more flexibility to include more standard low density housing and a sensible station carpark but denser living is what will really drive public transport usage. If demand from the Sandy Creek-Cockatoo Valley-Lyndoch triangle eventuates then rail extensions could potentially be facilitated to those locations too.
I said unfortunately.

I don't necessarily think that the very edge of suburbia is the right place for medium density housing. It should be closer to the employment centres to enable more residents to walk or cycle to work, shops etc. without needing cars or public transport for daily life. My main reason for "unfortunately" is the same reason I do not support extending metro rail all the way to Lyndoch, Tanunda and Nuriootpa. The current attraction of the Barossa Valley is that it is not dormitory suburbs of Adelaide. It is a distinct community. Extending the metro railway to Concordia or beyond would encourage "city people" to move to the Barossa to get the benefits they see there on the weekend, without giving up their weekday connection to the city. I'm now a metropolitan person, but I grew up in the (near) country, and the town I lived in has been taken over by improved transport links and is no longer like the place I grew up. I don't want the Barossa townships to suffer the same fate.
rubberman
Legendary Member!
Posts: 1393
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2007 10:32 pm
Location: ADL ex DRW, ASP, MGB

Re: News & Discussion: Adelaide Metro Trains

Post by rubberman »

It seems to me that the extension to Concordia is rather winding. That means slow. In fact, the whole problem is how slow heavy rail is in Adelaide. People simply will not use slow public transport unless there's no alternative, or they are railfans. The causes of the slowness are well known, with the biggest one being too many stations leading to trains lower average speeds. This is easy to solve technically, drastically reduce station numbers and use feeder buses. However, nobody wants to lose "their" station and all hell breaks loose politically if even a small number of stations were to be axed. So, it never happens, and the speeds remain low, and so does the number of passengers, making extensions extremely uneconomic. Small numbers of passengers, slow trains, uneconomic - it's pushing stuff up hill, really.

So. I really agree with the proposal for an overall plan.

That's critical.

That plan needs to set a minimum average speed for heavy rail that will attract enough passengers to make heavy rail economically viable vs light rail, buses, and cars. (I'm not saying PT ever has to cover costs, but at least each mode should be the most efficient for the tasks, and for much of the Adelaide heavy rail system, that is plainly questionable).

Then, that plan needs to set out how those speeds can be achieved. If that's more powerful rollingstock or elimination of stations, so be it.

Then, those plans need public acceptance. If the public won't accept station reduction, or the extra cost of rollingstock, then it cannot happen. In this case, talk of extension to Concordia, Virginia, or extensions past Seaford are simply unrealistic dreaming.

So. Take my vote for a Plan.
SBD
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 1779
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 3:49 pm
Location: Blakeview

Re: News & Discussion: Adelaide Metro Trains

Post by SBD »

rubberman wrote:
Fri Feb 19, 2021 9:21 am
It seems to me that the extension to Concordia is rather winding. That means slow. In fact, the whole problem is how slow heavy rail is in Adelaide. People simply will not use slow public transport unless there's no alternative, or they are railfans. The causes of the slowness are well known, with the biggest one being too many stations leading to trains lower average speeds. This is easy to solve technically, drastically reduce station numbers and use feeder buses. However, nobody wants to lose "their" station and all hell breaks loose politically if even a small number of stations were to be axed. So, it never happens, and the speeds remain low, and so does the number of passengers, making extensions extremely uneconomic. Small numbers of passengers, slow trains, uneconomic - it's pushing stuff up hill, really.

So. I really agree with the proposal for an overall plan.

That's critical.

That plan needs to set a minimum average speed for heavy rail that will attract enough passengers to make heavy rail economically viable vs light rail, buses, and cars. (I'm not saying PT ever has to cover costs, but at least each mode should be the most efficient for the tasks, and for much of the Adelaide heavy rail system, that is plainly questionable).

Then, that plan needs to set out how those speeds can be achieved. If that's more powerful rollingstock or elimination of stations, so be it.

Then, those plans need public acceptance. If the public won't accept station reduction, or the extra cost of rollingstock, then it cannot happen. In this case, talk of extension to Concordia, Virginia, or extensions past Seaford are simply unrealistic dreaming.

So. Take my vote for a Plan.
Extension to Concordia shouldn't be too slow - it's essentially a long sweeping curve to go round a hill that the road goes over to drop vehicles into the middle of the main street. That's why I think a Concordia Park'n'Ride would be far more popular than the current Gawler Central parking.

Perhaps you are right that Gawler Oval station leads to an overall slowdown.
TorrensSA
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 135
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2018 6:45 am

Re: News & Discussion: Adelaide Metro Trains

Post by TorrensSA »

They should have grade seperated Womma and Curtis Roads when electrifying the Gawler make Womma Station an Park and Ride and a simple bus stop for quick transfer, people in Eyre, Davoren Park etc could get off the bus there to get the train rather than Elizabeth. It should have more frequent services. Have a simplified timetable, key stops every ten minutes and smaller stops every 20min during the day. Weekends all stops every 20min 8am to 8pm. So apart from peak times you have only two stopping patterns, all stops or semi express, then you make the 228 terminate at Mawson Lakes which is a 10 min frequency (or it just replaces the 222 and goes to town all stops)
Goodsy
Legendary Member!
Posts: 1034
Joined: Thu Jul 18, 2013 10:39 am

Re: News & Discussion: Adelaide Metro Trains

Post by Goodsy »

TorrensSA wrote:
Fri Feb 19, 2021 12:03 pm
They should have grade seperated Womma and Curtis Roads when electrifying the Gawler make Womma Station an Park and Ride and a simple bus stop for quick transfer, people in Eyre, Davoren Park etc could get off the bus there to get the train rather than Elizabeth. It should have more frequent services. Have a simplified timetable, key stops every ten minutes and smaller stops every 20min during the day. Weekends all stops every 20min 8am to 8pm. So apart from peak times you have only two stopping patterns, all stops or semi express, then you make the 228 terminate at Mawson Lakes which is a 10 min frequency (or it just replaces the 222 and goes to town all stops)
Kings road as well, and removed stations like Greenfields
rubberman
Legendary Member!
Posts: 1393
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2007 10:32 pm
Location: ADL ex DRW, ASP, MGB

Re: News & Discussion: Adelaide Metro Trains

Post by rubberman »

TorrensSA wrote:
Fri Feb 19, 2021 12:03 pm
They should have grade seperated Womma and Curtis Roads when electrifying the Gawler make Womma Station an Park and Ride and a simple bus stop for quick transfer, people in Eyre, Davoren Park etc could get off the bus there to get the train rather than Elizabeth. It should have more frequent services. Have a simplified timetable, key stops every ten minutes and smaller stops every 20min during the day. Weekends all stops every 20min 8am to 8pm. So apart from peak times you have only two stopping patterns, all stops or semi express, then you make the 228 terminate at Mawson Lakes which is a 10 min frequency (or it just replaces the 222 and goes to town all stops)
While all of that sounds ok, those are decisions that need to come after the more basic decisions, such as how fast the system needs to be in order to be viable. For example, if we decide that an average 80kph is required, that will take cars off the road. If we decide on 40kph average, then it won't.

If we decide on 80kph and cars come off the road, then we need more parking. If we decide on 40kph, meh on more parking.

Similarly, if we decide on 80kph, then simple physics means we have a maximum of seven stations between Gawler Central and ARS...and those stations need lots of upgrades. If we decide on 40kph, then we can stop at the same number of stations...and maybe only nominal upgrades, since at that speed we aren't going to get more passengers with bus shelters.

There's obviously other basic questions too. But it would be silly to upgrade parking if train speeds aren't going to attract more motorists to that station.
claybro
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 2184
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2012 9:16 pm

Re: News & Discussion: Adelaide Metro Trains

Post by claybro »

I think it will probably end up a combination of the worse aspects of both. Marginal if any speed improvement, some minor tinkering with stations, with maybe 1 or 2 closures if that.. and some extra car parking. Outcome ... same system with new trains and a completely wasted oportunities just like Seaford.
rubberman
Legendary Member!
Posts: 1393
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2007 10:32 pm
Location: ADL ex DRW, ASP, MGB

Re: News & Discussion: Adelaide Metro Trains

Post by rubberman »

claybro wrote:
Mon Feb 22, 2021 2:25 pm
I think it will probably end up a combination of the worse aspects of both. Marginal if any speed improvement, some minor tinkering with stations, with maybe 1 or 2 closures if that.. and some extra car parking. Outcome ... same system with new trains and a completely wasted oportunities just like Seaford.
Yes. I know it sounds harsh, but the Outer Harbour line barely averages 35kph, and almost never gets over 60kph. Replacing it with an O-Bahn or busway would probably cut five minutes off travel time and be way less expensive. Add to that, the extra flexibility of buses being able to branch off at various points, eg to West Lakes, Largs, Semaphore, with zero extra cost, and it becomes a no-brainer. Add to that a tunnel from Adelaide Railway Station to Hindmarsh Square and the O-Bahn, and there'd be a real winner.
User avatar
rev
SA MVP (Most Valued Poster 4000+)
Posts: 4848
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2006 12:14 pm

Re: News & Discussion: Adelaide Metro Trains

Post by rev »

rubberman wrote:
Mon Feb 22, 2021 2:58 pm
claybro wrote:
Mon Feb 22, 2021 2:25 pm
I think it will probably end up a combination of the worse aspects of both. Marginal if any speed improvement, some minor tinkering with stations, with maybe 1 or 2 closures if that.. and some extra car parking. Outcome ... same system with new trains and a completely wasted oportunities just like Seaford.
Yes. I know it sounds harsh, but the Outer Harbour line barely averages 35kph, and almost never gets over 60kph. Replacing it with an O-Bahn or busway would probably cut five minutes off travel time and be way less expensive. Add to that, the extra flexibility of buses being able to branch off at various points, eg to West Lakes, Largs, Semaphore, with zero extra cost, and it becomes a no-brainer. Add to that a tunnel from Adelaide Railway Station to Hindmarsh Square and the O-Bahn, and there'd be a real winner.
How would that affect the rail bridge over the NSM, and other bridges around the Port? Obviously they'd need re-doing..
What about intersections? Would there be boom gates, or would the crossings be removed?
Would there be less stops and a couple interchanges like the current O-bahn?

Where would it branch off from and how? Would the o-bahn track continue or would they come off the o-bahn track and continue along the roads?
Post Reply