Just saw this got put up on the DPTI site a pedestrian underpass is to be built under the Marion Station to accommodate safety regulations for electrification because the overpass does not meet them.

http://www.infrastructure.sa.gov.au/RR/rail_revitalisation/marion_station_underpass

Construction work starts on the underpass in August and be operational at the end of October and full works complete by the end of 2013 alternative pedestrian crossing will be provided so it doesn't effect the opening date of the Noarlunga Line reopening from my understanding.

Just saw this got put up on the DPTI site a pedestrian underpass is to be built under the Marion Station to accommodate safety regulations for electrification because the overpass does not meet them.

http://www.infrastructure.sa.gov.au/RR/rail_revitalisation/marion_station_underpass

Construction work starts on the underpass in August and be operational at the end of October and full works complete by the end of 2013 alternative pedestrian crossing will be provided so it doesn't effect the opening date of the Noarlunga Line reopening from my understanding.

The design looks rather bizarre and anti-user to me. Running an underpass ramp off the end of the platform (i.e. not from the middle) means there is no opportunity to include stairs from the platform for those who are able to use them as a shortcut. If there were to be both a ramp and stairs, the entrances could be roughly 1/4 and 3/4 of the way along the platform instead of all users being required to go all the way to one and and then 80 metres beyond that, pointing away from the main trip generator (Westminster College) and the provided parking at that.

I wonder if the reason for the odd design is another case of central design without local knowledge, or just cost cutting? The cynic in me says that putting the ramp off the end is actually about justifying that it's not a modification to the platform and therefore no money needs to be spent bringing the platform up to DDA standards.

Still, at least it's not quite as silly as the stair-only bridge over the ARTC track built at Blackwood to the main station parking last year.

For what it is worth, and I know that is not much, I approve.

By locating it at the up end they can take advantage of the relative rail height to the surrounding area levels.
This makes the underpass more open and less threatening to users much like the underpass at Hallett Cove Beach. Is also more accessible to persons not pax crossing the tracks.

The alternative could have been an active pedestrian crossing but this can be subjected to vandalism and missuse by school kids.

Apparently it was originally an overpass because of the extremely high water table in the area. Since the sturt creek was cemented, probably not so much of an issue any more.

Salisbury could use one of these too, at the moment there is only pedestrian access at the Southern end of the down platform during the day - Not good for crowds!

Let's hope the new Marion underpass is managed properly and doesn't end up smelling like a toilet like many on the Gawler line.

Terrible design - absolutely no consideration for a majority user of the current crossing - Westminster College.

That layout shows the entrance of the proposed tunnel at the eastern end of the platform

The document linked by OP indicates the key benefits of the north eastern location and explains that the area around the existing overpass has underground stormwater infrastructure that prevents an underpass being built at that location.

The document linked by OP indicates the key benefits of the north eastern location ...

No it doesn't. It only demonstrates that the DPTI has a major problem in common with the national cricket team - a lack of quality spin. Note that they only mentioned the shortest possible crossing, not that one of the great hordes using the station from the Park Holme shops* with a pram or trolley will have a journey about 160 metres longer than they do currently with the level crossing.

... and explains that the area around the existing overpass has underground stormwater infrastructure that prevents an underpass being built at that location.

Sounds like you're looking for a cute way to say "short-term cost-cutting" without actually admitting it.

I'm leaning more towards it being a failure of centralised planning without local knowledge. Engaging the same company that was behind the stupid new terminal at Adelaide Airport obviously hasn't helped, they have prior form for anti-user design that involves people needlessly going up and down and round and round.

An underpass at the north-eastern end with the ramp entrance near the centre of the platform and stairs at the end wouldn't have any overlap with the present overpass' footprint. It would also still have the general north-east orientation to increase the accessibility for the tens of thousands of passengers that will now flock to the station on their way to and from the Park Holme shops*, and could even have the exit ramps point north-east instead of south-west for the convenience of users with prams or trolleys.

I hope the level crossing is retained, or replaced with a new one on the opposite end where the current overpass is located. Underpasses are especially foul for wheelchair users (both from the inevitable urine and during wet weather) and could make the station unusable when (not if) the drains get blocked during wet weather. Underpasses are a security risk as well and should be complemented by above-ground access, at least that's what the very same government department said a couple of months ago when justifying new pedestrian signals on Anzac Highway as part of the Kesville station work.


--------

* this would be best categorised as another item in the long-standing South Australian railway tradition of attempting to prove that "build it and they will come" does actually work. What was it they said about trying the same thing repeatedly and expecting different results?

Justapax.

Replacing the overpass with a level crossing will ensure that the Transport Department has blood on its hands and on the front of its nice new trains. (Is that why they have red nose cones?)

School attenders* cross en mass and are often distracted by the kind of activities that school attenders get into. That is the reason the overpass was erected almost 50 years ago. (Is it that long? I can remember it being built) * Many are young adults and to call them all children is demeaning; some are children and more care should be taken.

If a LX is installed it would need to be an active type and be monitored at peak times by the School.

If the LX is a passive type then flashing yellow lights should be installed to require trains to slow; whilst 25 kph is reasonable ('nuther argument) for road vehicles the corresponding train speed would be 5 kph.

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.)


How much more can I wring out of this topic?

Ian

So the school students have to walk a little further, big deal, a slightly further walk for society in general may have some benefit on the obesity front line. As a society we have become LAZY, not everything needs to be designed to minimise public effort. 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.

I'm wondering how much those pedestrian gates used at Oaklands cost? If they could be installed at opposite end where the current overpass is, even if it only goes over the down track.

I'm wondering how much those pedestrian gates used at Oaklands cost? .......

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 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.

I would not be surprised at $800,000 for an active gate system.

I recall that when PRR ran into Pt Augusta the cost of incorporating PRR into existing LXs was almost a show stopper.

Adding in the track circuit modifications, complete with approach control, relaying, power supply, gates, central monitoring to ensure they are working and the like and the sum soon adds up. Not so much a mark-up as an add-up.

Justapax I know there are shops there but they are local in use and train travel to/from would hardly be relevant.

Ian

There was a meeting of concerned people Saturday afternoon in Marion where Pat Conlon, the Department, Vicki Chapman and local party candidates met about 100-120 people dead against the underpass.

People wanted gated crossings at each end of the marion Platform - no underpass.

Mike

There was a meeting of concerned people Saturday afternoon in Marion where Pat Conlon, the Department, Vicki Chapman and local party candidates met about 100-120 people dead against the underpass.

People wanted gated crossings at each end of the marion Platform - no underpass.

Mike

Who pays?

I understood it was DPTI policy to get rid of all pedestrian underpasses. Whilst bridges and lifts are nice to have, I believe the great unwashed would prefer an active pedestrian crossing with cameras to the very long existing ramp or a subway. How many of these go in is driven by use, it sounds like Marion would be a very high priority but it would still need detailed risk assessment.

There was a meeting of concerned people Saturday afternoon in Marion where Pat Conlon, the Department, Vicki Chapman and local party candidates met about 100-120 people dead against the underpass.

People wanted gated crossings at each end of the marion Platform - no underpass.

Mike

Ha concerned people, seriously what are they thinking? gated crossings are a lot more unsafe than a underpass specially when there a school kids. If you use the noarlunga line frequently you would have seen how the hove gates are misused.Now I'm no safety sally but IMO pedestrians and cars should be separated from crossing lines where ever possible.What is it with people here they think and underpass or tunnel etc will equal murder,rape,crime etc.....get a grip!

Who pays?

Hopefully only the 100-120...

There was a meeting of concerned people Saturday afternoon in Marion where Pat Conlon, the Department, Vicki Chapman and local party candidates met about 100-120 people dead against the underpass.

People wanted gated crossings at each end of the marion Platform - no underpass.

Mike

I could be wrong but after several incidents including a woman being stabbed to death in the Hallett Cove underpass I thought the Government ruled out building any more of these due to safety concerns?

I could be wrong but after several incidents including a woman being stabbed to death in the Hallett Cove underpass I thought the Government ruled out building any more of these due to safety concerns?

Yes, it doesn't seem very many years since those island platform stations where the only access was via an underpass had new level crossings installed. Examples include Warradale, Woodland Park, Marino, .....
At least the passengers then had the choice between risking being run down by a train or enduing the stinky, grafitti sprayed, narrow underpasses late at night. I remember the pedestrian subway at the "old" Oaklands was a particular shocker on a dark night, and could not be avoided.

The level crossing at the south end of Lonsdale station has now been fenced off and passengers can only cross via the 1970s-built footbridge - which has steps down to the platform which are too steep to comply with current Building Code.

several incidents including a woman being stabbed to death in the Hallett Cove underpass I thought the Government ruled out building any more of these due to safety concerns?

The rest of us would be pleased if you could actually provide some detail on this event occurring given that I am fairly certain nothing of the type occurred.

The rest of us would be pleased if you could actually provide some detail on this event occurring given that I am fairly certain nothing of the type occurred.

I have lived in the area since 1980 and don't recall a stabbing at Hallett Cove Beach.

I have lived in the area since 1980 and don't recall a stabbing at Hallett Cove Beach.

Probably because there wasn't one, certainly not one involving the death of a woman in a railway underpass. This story has been taken straight from the book of bollocks.

I don't know about being stabbed to death, but I think there may have been a rape/ stabbing in a subway that prompted this move. I cannot recall now but it was something major that happened back then that prompted them to remove nearly all subways from stations and close a lot of underpasses under rail lines as well in places. It was really a knee jerk reaction though to the incident. The subway simply provided the cover for the incident.