[PRO] Torrens Road Grade Separation

Threads relating to transport, water, etc. within the CBD and Metropolitan area.
Message
Author
d3v310per
Sen-Rookie-Sational
Posts: 42
Joined: Fri May 24, 2019 10:52 am
Has thanked: 4 times
Been thanked: 5 times

[PRO] Torrens Road Grade Separation

#1 Post by d3v310per » Mon Jun 17, 2019 4:34 pm

Traffic fix coming to Torrens and Brighton roads rail crossings with $201m from State Government
The annoying wait for trains at Torrens and Brighton roads will soon be a thing of the past, with upgrades coming to both level crossings.

Travel times will be cut and road safety improved after the State Government announced it will include $201 million in Tuesday’s State Budget for new rail crossing projects on Torrens Rd and Brighton Rd.

The Government says the funding will deliver overpasses or underpasses — otherwise known as grade separations — on Torrens Rd at Ovingham and Brighton Rd at Hove.

It comes after the Federal Government also pledged $201 million for the initiatives in its budget in April, bringing the total investment to $402 million.

Transport Minister Stephan Knoll said the grade separations would remove two notorious rail crossings along Adelaide two busiest train lines.

“The Seaford and Gawler train lines are our most heavily patronised train lines and when the boom gates come down, it frustrates motorists on their way to work or home,” he said.

“In fact, we know that during peak periods at the Brighton Rd level crossing, the boom gates are down for about 20 per cent of the time — or about 25 minutes.

“That’s why we are building these grade separations — to bust congestion and cut travel times.”

Both projects are in their design phases and no decisions have been on whether they will take the form of an overpass or an underpass.

Premier Stephen Marshall said the projects would cut travel times and improve safety.

“This massive investment will mean South Australians spend less time stuck in traffic and more time with their loves ones at home,” he said.

“Building this infrastructure will support the population growth we are striving for in South Australia.”

The funding builds on $305 million worth of intersection upgrades to also be jointly funded by the state and federal governments.

These include:

A $98 million upgrade of the Magill and Portrush roads intersection.

A $61 million upgrade of the Cross and Fullarton roads intersection.

A $60 million upgrade of the Goodwood/Springbank/Daws roads intersection.

A $35 million upgrade of the Glen Osmond and Fullarton roads intersection.

A $19 million upgrade of the Main North Road and Nottage Terrace intersection.

A $19 million upgrade of the Grand Junction/Hampstead/Briens roads intersection, and

A $13 million upgrade of the Main North, Kings and McIntyre roads intersection.

User avatar
[Shuz]
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 2598
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 5:26 pm
Has thanked: 1101 times
Been thanked: 264 times

[PRO] Re: News & Discussion: Public Transport Service & Policy

#2 Post by [Shuz] » Mon Jun 17, 2019 5:23 pm

I don’t understand how the Torrens Road level crossing removal will cost $200m given that the land reservation already exists for the road overpass and there would be minimal disruption to both rail and road traffic?

Also obvious Brighton Road will be a rail overpass. Property acquisition for a road overpass or underpass would be costly and the water table would rule out an underpass.
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.

SBD
Legendary Member!
Posts: 1138
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 3:49 pm
Location: Blakeview
Has thanked: 361 times
Been thanked: 84 times

[PRO] Re: News & Discussion: Public Transport Service & Policy

#3 Post by SBD » Mon Jun 17, 2019 7:59 pm

[Shuz] wrote:
Mon Jun 17, 2019 5:23 pm
I don’t understand how the Torrens Road level crossing removal will cost $200m given that the land reservation already exists for the road overpass and there would be minimal disruption to both rail and road traffic?

Also obvious Brighton Road will be a rail overpass. Property acquisition for a road overpass or underpass would be costly and the water table would rule out an underpass.
Torrens Road needs to cross both the suburban track (with electric overheads) and the Standard Gauge track (probably with room for double-stack containers) then get back down to ground level on the downhill side of the crossing. That probably takes quite a long ramp to be at modern grade requirements. The Churchill Road intersection would also need to be involved in the works I expect.

The Magill/Portrush Roads intersection seems to be overpriced compared to the others - what are the special considerations there?

PD2/20
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 177
Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 2:32 pm
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 39 times

[PRO] Re: News & Discussion: Public Transport Service & Policy

#4 Post by PD2/20 » Mon Jun 17, 2019 10:27 pm

SBD wrote:
Mon Jun 17, 2019 7:59 pm
[Shuz] wrote:
Mon Jun 17, 2019 5:23 pm
I don’t understand how the Torrens Road level crossing removal will cost $200m given that the land reservation already exists for the road overpass and there would be minimal disruption to both rail and road traffic?

Also obvious Brighton Road will be a rail overpass. Property acquisition for a road overpass or underpass would be costly and the water table would rule out an underpass.
Torrens Road needs to cross both the suburban track (with electric overheads) and the Standard Gauge track (probably with room for double-stack containers) then get back down to ground level on the downhill side of the crossing. That probably takes quite a long ramp to be at modern grade requirements. The Churchill Road intersection would also need to be involved in the works I expect.

The Magill/Portrush Roads intersection seems to be overpriced compared to the others - what are the special considerations there?
Double-stack containers won't be a consideration as all such traffic starts from Islington Depot and heads north. The tunnels in the Adelaide hills on the Melbourne line preclude running double-stack containers.

There was talk on ABC radio this evening that the Churchill Rd junction would likely be grade separated as well.

Is it property acquisition that is inflating the cost of the road junction projects?

User avatar
[Shuz]
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 2598
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 5:26 pm
Has thanked: 1101 times
Been thanked: 264 times

[PRO] Re: News & Discussion: Public Transport Service & Policy

#5 Post by [Shuz] » Tue Jun 18, 2019 8:28 am

I don’t see why Churchill Road would need to be grade separated as well? The intersection with Torrens Road could still be a standard T junction, but it would require a lot of earthworks to lift it up at least 5 or so metres from its current level in order to provide an appropriate slope for the overpass over the rail tracks. I suspect Ovingham Station will get a rebuild as well and hopefully a straightening of the rail tracks as it has curved platforms currently.
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.

SBD
Legendary Member!
Posts: 1138
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 3:49 pm
Location: Blakeview
Has thanked: 361 times
Been thanked: 84 times

[PRO] Re: News & Discussion: Public Transport Service & Policy

#6 Post by SBD » Tue Jun 18, 2019 9:30 am

[Shuz] wrote:
Tue Jun 18, 2019 8:28 am
I don’t see why Churchill Road would need to be grade separated as well? The intersection with Torrens Road could still be a standard T junction, but it would require a lot of earthworks to lift it up at least 5 or so metres from its current level in order to provide an appropriate slope for the overpass over the rail tracks. I suspect Ovingham Station will get a rebuild as well and hopefully a straightening of the rail tracks as it has curved platforms currently.
I doubt it would need to be grade separated, but it would need to be modified. A civil engineering consideration (not traffic engineering) might relate to how much dirt is needed at which points in the project. For example, if lowering Churchill Road and raising Torrens Road means that no fill needs to be added or removed, that is a significant cost saving compared to bringing in enough fill to raise Churchill Road to the new Torrens Road level or disposing of enough fill to lower the Park Terrace intersection to Churchill Road level.

There could also be considerations relating to lowering or re-routing underground services that could impact on detailed design, and the stability of the ground to support bridge piers. These can all be overcome, but could result in significant cost variations.

aaronjameslange
Gold-Member ;)
Posts: 53
Joined: Mon Apr 06, 2015 6:53 pm
Been thanked: 6 times

[PRO] Re: News & Discussion: Public Transport Service & Policy

#7 Post by aaronjameslange » Tue Jun 18, 2019 1:41 pm

[Shuz] wrote:
Tue Jun 18, 2019 8:28 am
I don’t see why Churchill Road would need to be grade separated as well? The intersection with Torrens Road could still be a standard T junction, but it would require a lot of earthworks to lift it up at least 5 or so metres from its current level in order to provide an appropriate slope for the overpass over the rail tracks. I suspect Ovingham Station will get a rebuild as well and hopefully a straightening of the rail tracks as it has curved platforms currently.
I live in gawler and work in norwood
Once the northern connector (and later the r2p) is finished, i imagine nexy-n/s motorway-torrens road-ring road will be quicker than my current nexy-pt wakefield-main north road route. I imagine a lot more traffic will use torrens road to connect n/s motorway to the city via ring road so seperating churchill road would help

rev
SA MVP (Most Valued Poster 4000+)
Posts: 4005
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2006 12:14 pm
Has thanked: 281 times
Been thanked: 409 times

[PRO] Re: News & Discussion: Public Transport Service & Policy

#8 Post by rev » Tue Jun 18, 2019 3:43 pm

[Shuz] wrote:
Mon Jun 17, 2019 5:23 pm
I don’t understand how the Torrens Road level crossing removal will cost $200m given that the land reservation already exists for the road overpass and there would be minimal disruption to both rail and road traffic?
The ovingham station is right there near the crossing so I doubt any work could be done without impacting it, so maybe the cost includes a new station.
Maybe it includes changes to the Chief street intersection as well.

User avatar
1NEEDS2POST
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 184
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2018 5:01 pm
Has thanked: 32 times
Been thanked: 28 times

[PRO] Re: Torrens Road Grade Separation

#9 Post by 1NEEDS2POST » Tue Jun 18, 2019 8:26 pm

I hope it's paid for by motorists.

User avatar
Pistol
Legendary Member!
Posts: 910
Joined: Sat Jul 01, 2006 5:46 pm
Location: Adelaide
Has thanked: 37 times
Been thanked: 33 times

[PRO] Re: Torrens Road Grade Separation

#10 Post by Pistol » Tue Jun 18, 2019 8:26 pm

Wouldn't you include a grade separation of Hawker Street while you are at it considering it is only 500m away from Torrens Road?
Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken

User avatar
Norman
Donating Member
Donating Member
Posts: 5699
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2007 1:06 pm
Has thanked: 775 times
Been thanked: 1413 times

[PRO] Re: [PRO] Re: Torrens Road Grade Separation

#11 Post by Norman » Tue Jun 18, 2019 9:22 pm

Pistol wrote:Wouldn't you include a grade separation of Hawker Street while you are at it considering it is only 500m away from Torrens Road?
The rail itself doesn't move, Torrens Road will go over the tracks on a bridge, so there is no impact on Hawker Street.

Fun fact, Hawker Street used to have a bridge when the trams were running in the area. It was replaced with a level crossing in the 1950s or so.

User avatar
SouthAussie94
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 347
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2012 10:03 pm
Location: Southern Suburbs
Has thanked: 256 times
Been thanked: 53 times

[PRO] Re: Torrens Road Grade Separation

#12 Post by SouthAussie94 » Tue Jun 18, 2019 9:46 pm

Is there any possibility that the crossing will be grade separated by going rail over/under road? Could Hawker St also be involved?

Removing these two crossings would mean there's only 4 crossings between Adelaide and Salisbury. With electrification of the line coming, less crossings would mean services can run more frequently.

Possible or are we dreaming?
"All we are is bags of bones pushing against a self imposed tide. Just be content with staying alive"

Views and opinions expressed are my own and don't necessarily reflect the views or opinions of any organisation of which I have an affiliation

ml69
Legendary Member!
Posts: 853
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 11:16 pm
Location: Adelaide SA
Has thanked: 92 times
Been thanked: 69 times

[PRO] Re: [PRO] Re: Torrens Road Grade Separation

#13 Post by ml69 » Tue Jun 18, 2019 11:35 pm

Norman wrote:
Tue Jun 18, 2019 9:22 pm
Pistol wrote:Wouldn't you include a grade separation of Hawker Street while you are at it considering it is only 500m away from Torrens Road?
The rail itself doesn't move, Torrens Road will go over the tracks on a bridge, so there is no impact on Hawker Street.

Fun fact, Hawker Street used to have a bridge when the trams were running in the area. It was replaced with a level crossing in the 1950s or so.
Can’t see how the Torrens Road bridge could possibly work. How could you then connect to Churchill Rd unless that was on a bridge too. Then starts getting complicated.

I think the final design will have a long rail underpass stretching from Hawker St to Ovingham station, thereby eliminating 2 level crossings in one go on our busiest rail line.

SBD
Legendary Member!
Posts: 1138
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 3:49 pm
Location: Blakeview
Has thanked: 361 times
Been thanked: 84 times

[PRO] Re: [PRO] Re: Torrens Road Grade Separation

#14 Post by SBD » Tue Jun 18, 2019 11:55 pm

ml69 wrote:
Tue Jun 18, 2019 11:35 pm
I
Norman wrote:
Tue Jun 18, 2019 9:22 pm
Pistol wrote:Wouldn't you include a grade separation of Hawker Street while you are at it considering it is only 500m away from Torrens Road?
The rail itself doesn't move, Torrens Road will go over the tracks on a bridge, so there is no impact on Hawker Street.

Fun fact, Hawker Street used to have a bridge when the trams were running in the area. It was replaced with a level crossing in the 1950s or so.
Can’t see how the Torrens Road bridge could possibly work. How could you then connect to Churchill Rd unless that was on a bridge too. Then starts getting complicated.

I think the final design will have a long rail underpass stretching from Hawker St to Ovingham station, thereby eliminating 2 level crossings in one go on our busiest rail line.
At least until the rail component of GlobeLink is built (and maybe anyway), that crossing carries the standard gauge freight line as well. Considering there is no significant gradient between Adelaide and Port Augusta, any raising or lowering is going to require a very long ramp to ensure that the middle of a train is not lifted off the track in the valley. I suspect that it would be far easier to come up with designs that don't require moving the standard gauge track very far. The only really hard bit would be right turns from Churchill to Torrens.

rev
SA MVP (Most Valued Poster 4000+)
Posts: 4005
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2006 12:14 pm
Has thanked: 281 times
Been thanked: 409 times

[PRO] Re: [PRO] Re: Torrens Road Grade Separation

#15 Post by rev » Wed Jun 19, 2019 9:48 am

SBD wrote:
Tue Jun 18, 2019 11:55 pm
ml69 wrote:
Tue Jun 18, 2019 11:35 pm
I
Norman wrote:
Tue Jun 18, 2019 9:22 pm
The rail itself doesn't move, Torrens Road will go over the tracks on a bridge, so there is no impact on Hawker Street.

Fun fact, Hawker Street used to have a bridge when the trams were running in the area. It was replaced with a level crossing in the 1950s or so.
Can’t see how the Torrens Road bridge could possibly work. How could you then connect to Churchill Rd unless that was on a bridge too. Then starts getting complicated.

I think the final design will have a long rail underpass stretching from Hawker St to Ovingham station, thereby eliminating 2 level crossings in one go on our busiest rail line.
At least until the rail component of GlobeLink is built (and maybe anyway), that crossing carries the standard gauge freight line as well. Considering there is no significant gradient between Adelaide and Port Augusta, any raising or lowering is going to require a very long ramp to ensure that the middle of a train is not lifted off the track in the valley. I suspect that it would be far easier to come up with designs that don't require moving the standard gauge track very far. The only really hard bit would be right turns from Churchill to Torrens.
I think it would be difficult for a bridge. It would need to start further up closer to Park Terrace, the end of Churchill road will need to be raised as well.
The problem is that at that end of Chuchill road there is some properties with a service road. How will that connect?
You then have the Bombay Bicycle Club and bottle shop which will be cut off from Torrens Road as Guthrie street would no longer be accessible. That will severely impact their business. Drayton street and East Street would lose access to Torrens Road as well, and probably Hayman street. That will cut off a number of businesses and properties from Torrens road, as that's where the decline/incline of a bridge would likely start/end.

What are they going to do, build a bridge using the reserves on the northern side to go over the rail lines, and keep a narrower Torrens Road below with the crossing?

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests