Rail extension to heart of Port Adelaide in doubt due to cost blowout

 
Topic moved from News by bevans on 21 Jun 2019 09:27
  freightgate Minister for Railways

Location: Albury, New South Wales
This extension was to use the existing alignment looking back over threads and google meaning it should be cheaper when compared to cutting new ground.

Rail extension to heart of Port Adelaide in doubt due to cost blowout

Sponsored advertisement

  bevans Site Admin

Location: Melbourne, Australia
South Australia can find billions for roads and trucks but finds it very hard to find $24m for a rail line.
  SinickleBird Chief Train Controller

Location: Qantas Club at Mudgee International Airport
I’m struggling to understand where it would go. National Rail Museum occupies the old Port Dock station and is still linked to the main line.

Move NRM? Resume property? Use the street? Either way, $24m wouldn’t go far.
  62430 Chief Train Controller

Location: Metro Adelaide
I’m struggling to understand where it would go. National Rail Museum occupies the old Port Dock station and is still linked to the main line.

Move NRM? Resume property? Use the street? Either way, $24m wouldn’t go far.
SinickleBird
The NRM occupies the former Port Dock goods yard.  The old passenger station was to the north on the corner of Lipson St and St Vincent St and was redeveloped as the Police Station and Magistrate's Court.  The proposed site for the new station and line was the two sidings on the NRM site adjoining the eastern boundary.  The project was originally costed at $16m and approved by the SA Public Works Committee.  It is now being claimed that the cost would now be $40m.
  justapassenger Chief Commissioner

This was a crap project, I'm glad it has failed.

The only way it would have come remotely close to making sense would have been if the plan was to close the rest of the Outer Harbor line and hand over the land (particularly around the Port Adelaide, Ethelton and Glanville stations) to developers for a song.
  Dangersdan707 Chief Commissioner

Location: On a Thing with Internet
Sad thing is that now the NRM has lost its connection to the Mainline Sad. They were very supportive of this project going as far to loan a loco for display at the new station and demolishing there mainline link to accomodate it.
  justapassenger Chief Commissioner

Sad thing is that now the NRM has lost its connection to the Mainline Sad. They were very supportive of this project going as far to loan a loco for display at the new station and demolishing there mainline link to accomodate it.
Dangersdan707
The connection to the DPTI lines was going to go at some point anyway, as NRM got out of running on the suburban lines about four years ago (before the project announcement) to concentrate on their on-site activities, including not renewing the required accreditation and insurance for the Red Hen cars. The point where the line was cut is as far as they've been able to run for years now.

I'd see the project cancellation as being a net positive outcome for the NRM. They won't get the station next to the museum which would have been good, but neither will they get a period of major disruption and they should be able to keep their lease for the land that the government was going to take back for the project.

If they can raise the funds, there's opportunities for further intentional development as a result - maybe running a track around the corner towards Bedford St or Gray Tce to allow additional running without all the complications of being connected to the DPTI lines.
  DJPeters Assistant Commissioner

I have to admit that this piece of track would most probably have been the most expensive 800 metres or there abouts of track ever put in anywhere really even at the original $16m quote, but then it got worse and went up to $24m and finally to the $40m so some one with good sense canned it.

It is just over a kilometre barely to where the NRM used to run out towards the AM signal and as most of that track is already there so from the aviation musem building to the end of the track might not even be 800 metres. They had grand plans of on the Outer Harbor line of putting in a double track junction at  the Alberton side of the road bridge, but it would go down to single track to get to the platform at Port Dock Station. Why it could not have been a single track all the way to the end and a simple point onto the mainline and then after it a crossover as it is now on the track that is there. All it needs is the Rosewater loop track point removed and replaced with normal track and it could be done that way. You would only get one train in at the platform at one time anyway.

Hopefully though the whole thing will get scrapped entirely and the existing AM track removed or better still left in place but disconnected from the Outer Harbor mainline, this would then allow the NRM to lay a running track around to just before the first level crossing on the Rosewater loop. So it would save AM money on not having to maintain sidings which they hardly ever use these days and give the NRM a decent 3 gauged running line to get a decent run for the punters money on Redhens, Bluebird, Peronne and train and maybe later a standard gauge car behind 515 diesel.

If this was done a point and crossover that already exists at Rosewater on the mainline could stay in place and a point coming from the NRM trackage could allow access to the AM mainline so that AM railcars can still get into the NRM when hired to do so etc. Just saying as it would be better for all that way really. The cross over between AM track and NRM track would need to be controlled by AM from their train control centre though.
  justapassenger Chief Commissioner

You need a reality check. There is no longer a NRM-DPTI connection, it is gone. Neither party wants it so it was removed.

NRM have not been allowed to run anything beyond the network interface with DPTI (at the southern end of the points outside the Aviation Museum) for some years since they relinquished their status as an accredited operator, and the DPTI side of this interface is where the line was cut.

I do agree that DPTI would probably be open to leasing the corridor as far as Russell St (the first level crossing on the Rosewater line) to the NRM for a running track passing under Grand Junction Road without a junction connecting it to the suburban network. Such a proposal would be subject to public consultation, of course, and would require that the remaining parts of the ropey old track be removed and a fresh track laid instead.
  bevans Site Admin

Location: Melbourne, Australia
Hard to understand how this works with clearly google maps showing trackage down to grand junction road?  What national rail museum does not maintain a connection to the network?  

Would the station have made it easier to get to the museum?

Also what is the huge grain terminal located just to the north? on Perkins Drive?  I can see rail tracks around the complex.
  DJPeters Assistant Commissioner

Well it was just a suggestion nothing more but myself I would lease that property and have a separate track that had nothing at all to do with Adelaide Metro if possible. Also I think you will find that even recently they have been allowed to run out towards the signal that controls the exit to the mainline there. As long as the whatever does not go past that signal. From memory it shows up on their board at train control though as that track is circuited but unless there was a AM train going into and out of the actual NRM platform then it was ignored. I know I have been out there and several videoes show it on You Tube as well. This signal is well past the interface of both tracks and was allowed by AM for the NRM to do it as well.

I think that now that the project has been scrubbed that the removed interface track might go back in actually, as with the relaying of the Jacketts sidings again the trips right into Jacketts platform would again be available.  School groups and others hire these mainly from AM. Also there is no big argument between the NRM and AM either the project was going to be a combined effort on both parties so there is not really a them and us atitude at all.
  Nightfire Minister for Railways

Location: Gippsland

Also what is the huge grain terminal located just to the north? on Perkins Drive?  I can see rail tracks around the complex.
bevans
Likely to be a fertilizer factory, the siding would be old disconnected broad gauge tracks (that there are oddles of around Port Adelaide)
  DJPeters Assistant Commissioner


Also what is the huge grain terminal located just to the north? on Perkins Drive?  I can see rail tracks around the complex.Likely to be a fertilizer factory, the siding would be old disconnected broad gauge tracks (that there are oddles of around Port Adelaide)
Nightfire
Like Night fire said probably old redundant BG track as a lot has been left where it was, the Port has a lot of disconnected tracks like this. The main grain terminal is now at Outer Harbor or close to it on the opposite side of the river to the old one. Not sure but I dont think the old one is used anymore but I might be wrong on that, this is the one most probably you can see on Perkins Drive.
  justapassenger Chief Commissioner

Also there is no big argument between the NRM and AM either the project was going to be a combined effort on both parties so there is not really a them and us atitude at all.
DJPeters
It certainly is the case that NRM and DPTI were in full agreement over things. Both parties wanted to get rid of the old connection, so they did.

Probably a good thing that NRM is strategically operating within their means. It would be a shame if the NRM ended up like ARHS ACT, going bust thanks to an ill-advised attempt to continue being both a museum and an operator without enough of a base to sustain either.
  RTT_Rules Dr Beeching

Location: Dubai UAE
This was a crap project, I'm glad it has failed.

The only way it would have come remotely close to making sense would have been if the plan was to close the rest of the Outer Harbor line and hand over the land (particularly around the Port Adelaide, Ethelton and Glanville stations) to developers for a song.
justapassenger
800m is not along way for $24M, at $30k/m that's one of the more expensive railway projects in Oz that is not a mainstream railway.



If you look here there is a 750m elevated walk way from Dubai Mall Metro station to Dubai Mall.
The walk way is elevated above the road way, fully enclosed, A/C with a series of translators to save a walk for those don't walk the full distance. The main elevated bridge has its own branches to other buildings mid-route.

I don't know how much this cost but I'd eat my hat if it cost 1/4 the price $24m, is 5 x more practical and functional to both use and operate than a stud short branch midway on a main railway.

Regards
Shane
  justapassenger Chief Commissioner

This was a crap project, I'm glad it has failed.

The only way it would have come remotely close to making sense would have been if the plan was to close the rest of the Outer Harbor line and hand over the land (particularly around the Port Adelaide, Ethelton and Glanville stations) to developers for a song.
800m is not along way for $24M, at $30k/m that's one of the more expensive railway projects in Oz that is not a mainstream railway.
RTT_Rules
Leaving aside the low utility of the project for now, at the original price of $16M for about 1500m of track (the ropey old track was unsuitable for regular operation and set to be completely replaced, and it was to be a double lead junction) plus all the other associated bits* I think it was reasonably priced.

Keep in mind that we don't actually know that the cost blew out beyond that, we only have a politician saying it did so. It could just be that they decided for their own reasons that the project should be cancelled, just like Labor did with the 2009 attempt at electrification of the Gawler line.

I'll have to take your word that the Arab methods of addressing a cost blowout (the sheik cuts off the manager's hand) and construction delays (slave workforce gets whipped four times an hour instead of three) work over there, but there might be a touch of opposition to introducing those methods here.

* the scope of works included:
- rebuilding the mainline junction
- resignalling of the area
- active level crossing for the pedestrian/cycle path
- new bus interchange
- station facilities including toilets, cycle parking shelter, opposite side platform for the NRM
- redevelopment of the eastern side and north-eastern corner of the NRM
- street works to facilitate changes to bus routes
- new entry/parking facilities for the Aviation Museum
- rebuild and lighting installation for the pedestrian/cycle path
  RTT_Rules Dr Beeching

Location: Dubai UAE
Leaving aside the low utility of the project for now, at the original price of $16M for about 1500m of track (the ropey old track was unsuitable for regular operation and set to be completely replaced, and it was to be a double lead junction) plus all the other associated bits* I think it was reasonably priced.

Keep in mind that we don't actually know that the cost blew out beyond that, we only have a politician saying it did so. It could just be that they decided for their own reasons that the project should be cancelled, just like Labor did with the 2009 attempt at electrification of the Gawler line.

I'll have to take your word that the Arab methods of addressing a cost blowout (the sheik cuts off the manager's hand) and construction delays (slave workforce gets whipped four times an hour instead of three) work over there, but there might be a touch of opposition to introducing those methods here.

* the scope of works included:
- rebuilding the mainline junction
- resignalling of the area
- active level crossing for the pedestrian/cycle path
- new bus interchange
- station facilities including toilets, cycle parking shelter, opposite side platform for the NRM
- redevelopment of the eastern side and north-eastern corner of the NRM
- street works to facilitate changes to bus routes
- new entry/parking facilities for the Aviation Museum
- rebuild and lighting installation for the pedestrian/cycle path
justapassenger
I'm sure you said in jest but, that's not how it works here. Really not alot different to there except when the boss says it will be open on this date, they will work around the clock and do what ever it takes to complete, mostly to prevent being black banned.

The law (which is enforced) has maximum limits the working hours to something not so bad, actually the bureaucracy here is likely worse than Aust in this regard on what you can do.

My point was building a short stub mid way on a branch line with already two branches just seems messy operationally and if you just build a aerial walk way, you could most likely do it for less and convenience of having multiple access points.
  justapassenger Chief Commissioner

My point was building a short stub mid way on a branch line with already two branches just seems messy operationally and if you just build a aerial walk way, you could most likely do it for less and convenience of having multiple access points.
RTT_Rules
It would have been one of the simplest rail projects in SA for some time, and there is already a very nice pedestrian/cycle path at ground level there.

An upgrade to Port Adelaide to enable better station access (install lifts and a new pedestrian crossing of Commercial Road) would be even simpler and produce better outcomes than the Port Dock project - or indeed a white elephant aerial walkway which would only duplicate some of the nicest wide footpaths in the whole Greater Adelaide area.
  DJPeters Assistant Commissioner

The thing that got most people off side with the project was the former Govt saying it would get cars off the road when the development there is finished, one look at a similar development on the old Cheltenham Racecourse now St Clair would tell you otherwise though, at a rough guess I would say every shoe box home there has at least one car and in some cases maybe two as well. So who ever thought that masses were going to travel by train where ever should not smoke what ever they were smoking because it is way too strong for them.

Then comes the further development there of what is now all industrial warehouses some quite recently built as well, The Pirate Brewery is built in one actually that is not that old at all. But these have all been demolished in the artists impressions and housing shoe box style put into them. I could be 50 years or more before that happens if it happens at all.

So after the honeymoon period when everyone wants to go for a ride to say they have been on it how many actual customers would it get and that is most probably just Mr and Mrs Joe Blow and their two kids going to one or maybe all the museums down there it would not be much more though. So in the end at $40m which it is estimated at now you are only going to provide transport for a mere handful of people and those people can get off at the current Port Adelaide and transfer to a bus to take them right into the town centre, the bus stop is right under the railway station bridge actually. It wont cost any more to them to change from train to the bus or if they want to walk it is only a 5 minute walk or two bus stops to be in the centre of Port Adelaide.

But at the moment all the major shops and supermarkets and shopping centres are all crowded around the old station more or less there so shoppers are not going to lug their shopping half way across Port Adelaide in the pouring rain or extreme heat they will use the closest one which is on the bridge at Port Adelaide.  I do think though that installing lifts there would be a good idea though along with those monitors up on the actual platform to tell when the next train arrives etc and where it will stop, they have them at ground level there but not up on the actual platform as at most other stations, it would not be rocket science to duplicate them in both positions though.

Heaven forbid if they built a simple bus interchange under or alongside the old station on one side or the other or maybe both it could be done if required. You could then step out of the train to continue your journey in a very short time. The platform and bridge itself will provide enough shelter from the elements there although some shelters for waiting passengers would still be a good idea though. If it was done on the KISS principle "Keep It Simple Stupid" it would most probably work.

A pedestrian crossing there is also a good idea it should have been installed years ago actually.
  mawsonboii Locomotive Driver

Money has already been spent of this project. so just bloody finish it. otherwise it's just a waste of money, Labor will build it once they are back in power in a few years.

Sponsored advertisement

Subscribers: bevans, Nightfire, RTT_Rules

Display from: