[PRO] Ovingham Level Crossing Removal | $231m

Threads relating to transport, water, etc. within the CBD and Metropolitan area.
User avatar
Norman
Donating Member
Donating Member
Posts: 6026
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2007 1:06 pm

[PRO] Re: Ovingham Level Crossing Removal | $231m

Post by Norman »

Anyway, I think the changes are great, but it's still disappointing to not see a station upgrade when Oaklands and Bowden got new stations when nearby roads were grade separated.
Spotto
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 335
Joined: Wed May 15, 2019 9:05 pm

[PRO] Re: Ovingham Level Crossing Removal | $231m

Post by Spotto »

Norman wrote:
Wed Jan 06, 2021 9:44 pm
Anyway, I think the changes are great, but it's still disappointing to not see a station upgrade when Oaklands and Bowden got new stations when nearby roads were grade separated.
I sent an email asking if the station would be upgraded (widened/lengthened platforms, new shelters, direct access from the bridge to eliminate foot crossings) and the response I received was:

In answer to your question regarding the Ovingham Station, any changes to the existing design, including new station access falls outside of the Level Crossing Removal project remit. I will pass your feedback on to the relevant rail team members.

Oaklands and Bowden required new stations because the station was being moved to facilitate the crossing removal. The likely argument for Ovingham will be that since the road is going over the existing station and the station itself is not moving then that's why they aren't doing it. But it would be cheaper, easier and more logical to do Ovingham all as part of one project.
User avatar
rev
SA MVP (Most Valued Poster 4000+)
Posts: 4709
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2006 12:14 pm

[PRO] Re: Ovingham Level Crossing Removal | $231m

Post by rev »

As true as it is that the station isn't part of this project, the same government department is behind the electrification project of that train line that will be beneath this overpass.

Could it be that I'm right once again (despite the cry babies on this forum), that there is no grand plan, that they're not working from any overall plans, that it's all just made up on the go based on whatever brain fart a politician has? :lol:

Don't worry, they'll eventually close the whole Gawler line, again but this time even longer, rip down near new infrastructure to build a new station or three. It's the SA way.
Spotto
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 335
Joined: Wed May 15, 2019 9:05 pm

[PRO] Re: Ovingham Level Crossing Removal | $231m

Post by Spotto »

rev wrote:
Thu Jan 07, 2021 6:40 am
Don't worry, they'll eventually close the whole Gawler line, again but this time even longer, rip down near new infrastructure to build a new station or three. It's the SA way.
Exactly what happened with Oaklands. Two separate chances to grade separate the station, first with the 2008 rebuild and again with the electrification closures in 2013. Even though it was evident something needed to change back then it took another 5 years to finally be done and the line was closed once again to make it happen. The station was only 10 years old. AND the line will be closed AGAIN when Hove is grade separated.

We need a body like Metronet Perth or Rail Projects Victoria to coordinate projects on a larger scale and come up with a master plan for transport.
Hooligan
Legendary Member!
Posts: 861
Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2009 8:03 pm

[PRO] Re: Ovingham Level Crossing Removal | $231m

Post by Hooligan »

Silly question, but does the overpass need to be high enough to allow double stacking on the freight line?

Code: Select all

Signature removed 
ChillyPhilly
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 1855
Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2008 11:35 pm
Location: Adder-Laid, South Australia.
Contact:

[PRO] Re: [PRO] Re: Ovingham Level Crossing Removal | $231m

Post by ChillyPhilly »

Hooligan wrote:Silly question, but does the overpass need to be high enough to allow double stacking on the freight line?
Double stacking is loaded/unloaded at Kilburn.
Our state, our city, our future.

All views expressed on this forum are my own.
User avatar
Norman
Donating Member
Donating Member
Posts: 6026
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2007 1:06 pm

[PRO] Re: [PRO] Re: Ovingham Level Crossing Removal | $231m

Post by Norman »

Hooligan wrote:Silly question, but does the overpass need to be high enough to allow double stacking on the freight line?
I believe the bridge will accommodate double-stacked trains according to the last community meeting.
User avatar
[Shuz]
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 2703
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 5:26 pm

[PRO] Re: Ovingham Level Crossing Removal | $231m

Post by [Shuz] »

Have emailed the project team on the DIT website to encourage them to look at including redevelopment of the Ovingham Station as part of this project as well. Encourage others here to do the same.
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.
PD2/20
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 229
Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 2:32 pm

[PRO] Re: Ovingham Level Crossing Removal | $231m

Post by PD2/20 »

Could it be that the absence of a major rebuild plan for Ovingham be due to the location of the station on a curved section of track, making compliance with modern rail construction standards which preclude curved platforms?
Spotto
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 335
Joined: Wed May 15, 2019 9:05 pm

[PRO] Re: Ovingham Level Crossing Removal | $231m

Post by Spotto »

PD2/20 wrote:
Thu Jan 14, 2021 5:31 pm
Could it be that the absence of a major rebuild plan for Ovingham be due to the location of the station on a curved section of track, making compliance with modern rail construction standards which preclude curved platforms?
The curve at Ovingham is surely very minor, at least compared to a station like Mitchell Park? Doesn’t seem to curve too much more than some of the island platforms would.
ChillyPhilly
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 1855
Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2008 11:35 pm
Location: Adder-Laid, South Australia.
Contact:

[PRO] Re: Ovingham Level Crossing Removal | $231m

Post by ChillyPhilly »

You can leave your feedback to include an upgrade of Ovingham Railway Station here:

https://www.dit.sa.gov.au/infrastructur ... uggestions

Here's what I said:
This project is decades overdue and will no doubt deliver benefits for the local community, particularly with regard to safety.

With the Gawler Line Electrification Project also taking place, the Ovingham Level Crossing Removal project presents a unique opportunity to upgrade Ovingham Railway Station to a modern standard befitting of an upgraded Gawler Line with new trains.

I strongly urge this to be considered as part of the project.
Our state, our city, our future.

All views expressed on this forum are my own.
User avatar
Pistol
Legendary Member!
Posts: 932
Joined: Sat Jul 01, 2006 5:46 pm
Location: Adelaide

[PRO] Re: Ovingham Level Crossing Removal | $231m

Post by Pistol »

To be honest, with the amount of infill occurring in this area, Ovingham, Dudley Park and Islington should all get a makeover.

Compared to the Seaford line, the Gawler line has seriously been neglected.
Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken
ChillyPhilly
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 1855
Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2008 11:35 pm
Location: Adder-Laid, South Australia.
Contact:

[PRO] Re: [PRO] Re: Ovingham Level Crossing Removal | $231m

Post by ChillyPhilly »

Pistol wrote:To be honest, with the amount of infill occurring in this area, Ovingham, Dudley Park and Islington should all get a makeover.

Compared to the Seaford line, the Gawler line has seriously been neglected.
I've thought this every single time I've been past these stations. They're all very under par.
Our state, our city, our future.

All views expressed on this forum are my own.
SBD
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 1683
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 3:49 pm
Location: Blakeview

[PRO] Re: [PRO] Re: Ovingham Level Crossing Removal | $231m

Post by SBD »

ChillyPhilly wrote:
Fri Jan 15, 2021 2:49 pm
Pistol wrote:To be honest, with the amount of infill occurring in this area, Ovingham, Dudley Park and Islington should all get a makeover.

Compared to the Seaford line, the Gawler line has seriously been neglected.
I've thought this every single time I've been past these stations. They're all very under par.
Most of the Gawler line passes through "safe" electorates. There would be no votes in upgrading those stations. I assume electrification is because the diesel rolling stock is wearing out.

This is why the infrastructure pipeline should be removed from government to be prioritised and managed through an independent agency. Maybe that is what Infrastructure SA will give us over time, but so far it seems to be a Government mouthpiece.
PD2/20
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 229
Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 2:32 pm

[PRO] Re: [PRO] Re: Ovingham Level Crossing Removal | $231m

Post by PD2/20 »

SBD wrote:
Fri Jan 15, 2021 4:22 pm
Most of the Gawler line passes through "safe" electorates. There would be no votes in upgrading those stations. I assume electrification is because the diesel rolling stock is wearing out.

This is why the infrastructure pipeline should be removed from government to be prioritised and managed through an independent agency. Maybe that is what Infrastructure SA will give us over time, but so far it seems to be a Government mouthpiece.
The diesel fleet has been refurbished over the past few years including re-engining about 2 years ago for life extension. The main problem has been no spare diesel railcars to increase peak capacity on the Gawler line.
Post Reply