I remember when the controlled pedestrian gates were being installed either at Oaklands or Hove, a figure of $800,000 was quoted. I think it was in the Messenger press.
I thought it was a bit steep at the time, and imagine the contribution by each SA taxpayer to install these at multiple locations around the metro system.
I would like to see some calculation of the actual costs involved, as opposed to the inflated prices that the suppliers can afford to charge the government.
Still, it's a lot cheaper than the underpass would be, even with the cost-cutting approach of putting it away from the station. I think an active crossing coming at $800,000 (that's 50 cents per head for the state) is a decent amount to pay for wheelchair users to not get their hands covered in urine, for the station to be usable during wet weather and for the security-concious to be catered for.
While I don't hold with PTD's Parkholme argument (are there shops there?) I do give them some credit for considering the all users including the school and for facing the issues with drainage and keeping the under track tunnel open at the ends to encourage proper use and discourage lurking, vandalism and urination. (See the effective underpass at HCB.)
There is a medium-sized shopping centre on the corner of Oaklands Road and Marion Road, built around a large and recently upgraded Coles with a post office and other shops, easily visible from the train overpass above Marion Road. It's 700 metres from the station via the new plans, and 50 metres from the nearest bus stop with a 15 minute service all day. There's a good sponsorship opportunity there though, when it's built and they don't come Coles could sponsor the underpass - down down, station usage is down.
If they were serious about keeping the tunnel ends open for the sake of security, they would have put the underpass at the north-east end of the platform where it is immediately adjacent to T-junctions on the side street which would give it better visibility.
If the design has been produced to minimise the dent on the state's precarious financial resources by not having to relocate services then I for one think that's a good thing.
If minimising the outlay was a priority they would have just gone for one or two active level crossings, if that $800,000 cost quoted above is to be believed it would come to 50c per head of the state's population. I think even Tom Waterhouse would offer you a pretty decent payout if you went and put $1 on the proposed underpass coming in cheaper than that.
The most significant improvement to pedestrian safety that could be made in the area is to add a shared path bridge over Marion Road and Daws Road linked to the northern side of the rail corridor much like the South Road tram overpass.