New Adelaide public transport hub

[SRW]

I think it’s a bit of a fancy to desire extensive underground thoroughfares that would then deprive street level (i.e. the urban grain) of much needed life and activity.

[Goodsy]

I think it’s a bit of a fancy to desire extensive underground thoroughfares that would then deprive street level (i.e. the urban grain) of much needed life and activity.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=emgeWSzXNhc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tMtn3QZM6Us

They exist all over the place

[SRW]

I think it’s a bit of a fancy to desire extensive underground thoroughfares that would then deprive street level (i.e. the urban grain) of much needed life and activity.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=emgeWSzXNhc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tMtn3QZM6Us

They exist all over the place

I understand that, but my point is they're not suited nor needed in Adelaide.

Better, though mostly inessential, would be a system of ground level arcades.

[SBD]

I think it’s a bit of a fancy to desire extensive underground thoroughfares that would then deprive street level (i.e. the urban grain) of much needed life and activity.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=emgeWSzXNhc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tMtn3QZM6Us

They exist all over the place

I understand that, but my point is they're not suited nor needed in Adelaide.

Better, though mostly inessential, would be a system of ground level arcades.

I’m not certain it matters whether the connections are “ground level” or “below ground” if they are designed well. The Philadelphia video above looked rather stifling and unpleasant, but the Toronto PATH isn’t that much different than walking through a huge Westfield centre.

Regardless of whether it is at or below ground, once you are inside, you are using the lowest public floor of buildings. Some of them probably have atriums and multiple levels of public space to blend the PATH and street levels, or enough ground slope that one side is at ground level and the other side below ground. To bring back my original comment, I think you would still go up stairs/ramps to go from street level North Terrace to under Hindley Street, just less of them than the current street-level exit. Then go up to a Glass-covered Leigh Street and Currie Street mall (protected from summer heat and winter cold) with the bus stops in a tunnel underneath accessed from both sides.

[SRW]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=emgeWSzXNhc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tMtn3QZM6Us

They exist all over the place

I understand that, but my point is they're not suited nor needed in Adelaide.

Better, though mostly inessential, would be a system of ground level arcades.

I’m not certain it matters whether the connections are “ground level” or “below ground” if they are designed well. The Philadelphia video above looked rather stifling and unpleasant, but the Toronto PATH isn’t that much different than walking through a huge Westfield centre.

Regardless of whether it is at or below ground, once you are inside, you are using the lowest public floor of buildings. Some of them probably have atriums and multiple levels of public space to blend the PATH and street levels, or enough ground slope that one side is at ground level and the other side below ground. To bring back my original comment, I think you would still go up stairs/ramps to go from street level North Terrace to under Hindley Street, just less of them than the current street-level exit. Then go up to a Glass-covered Leigh Street and Currie Street mall (protected from summer heat and winter cold) with the bus stops in a tunnel underneath accessed from both sides.

Yeah, I'm sceptical. Adelaide people aren't well-known for patronising multilevel malls. Look at the Myer Centre or, indeed, the North Terrace underpass. They'll just be walkways, in which case better to have people walking at ground where they can engage with business.

[Ho Really]

There is currently undercover/indoor pedestrian access from stepping off the train to the north side of Hindley Street. Ideally, this should continue under Hindley Street through to an underground/indoor bus station on Currie Street that includes a stop for every route that goes through (is that six stops each side?). Adelaide weather is not as extreme as some cities, but can still be pretty unpleasant in both summer and winter.

A roofed and airconditioned Leigh Street could be part of the plan if there aren't enough available building basements to link up.

The central market to railway station walkway could be put entirely below ground. This will make it faster and more comfortable for pedestrians. When the Victoria Square railway station is built, it could connect with this walkway.

Yes a possibility. Good you are thinking this way.

Cheers

[Ho Really]

I understand that, but my point is they're not suited nor needed in Adelaide.

Better, though mostly inessential, would be a system of ground level arcades.

I’m not certain it matters whether the connections are “ground level” or “below ground” if they are designed well. The Philadelphia video above looked rather stifling and unpleasant, but the Toronto PATH isn’t that much different than walking through a huge Westfield centre.

Regardless of whether it is at or below ground, once you are inside, you are using the lowest public floor of buildings. Some of them probably have atriums and multiple levels of public space to blend the PATH and street levels, or enough ground slope that one side is at ground level and the other side below ground. To bring back my original comment, I think you would still go up stairs/ramps to go from street level North Terrace to under Hindley Street, just less of them than the current street-level exit. Then go up to a Glass-covered Leigh Street and Currie Street mall (protected from summer heat and winter cold) with the bus stops in a tunnel underneath accessed from both sides.

Yeah, I'm sceptical. Adelaide people aren't well-known for patronising multilevel malls. Look at the Myer Centre or, indeed, the North Terrace underpass. They'll just be walkways, in which case better to have people walking at ground where they can engage with business.

I'll bet you they will patronise underground malls. It's only one level down not 5 or 6 up. If they are not malls then just walkways.

Cheers

[ml69]

You can always submit your ideas to Infrastructure SA…

Bear in mind some of the basic parameters I think you will find they are looking at, and unlikely to change in their planning, include:

The proposed CBD underground rail loop that allows through running with the three proposed stations – Adelaide, Hindmarsh Sq and Victoria Sq-Central Mkt, and to address specific future high-volume passenger journey start/stop & transfer points at:
Hindmarsh Sq – rail & O’Bahn
Victoria Sq – rail & tram
Adelaide – rail & tram

Rail lines – keep in mind volumes - descending order in current passenger volumes – Gawler, Seaford, Outer Harbor, Flinders (anticipated volume), Belair, and the lowest usage, the Grange branch line - which may not exist by the time a CBD rail loop is built. To put into perspective, the current O’Bahn weekday passenger trips is approx 35K now, Gawler line >20K and Seaford <20K. The other existing lines combined approx 20K. Extension of Gawler & Seaford lines will happen, just a case of how many years away in their planning. I put volumes forward as they obviously influence planning.

Good thinking ... using future Hindmarsh Square station on the CBD rail loop as a transfer point between Obahn and the rail network.

I agree with your 3 CBD rail loop station locations. That’s where I have them as well. That’s all we need.

[Saltwater]

The underground section through Adelaide CBD should go straight up King William Street, with stations around South Terrace, Victoria Square and near the existing railway station. Plus probably an additional station near the cricket ground / North Adelaide. This does duplicate the existing tram line infrastructure somewhat, but means the Seaford and Gawler lines can be connected for through-running express trains, independent of the rest of the network. It may be possible to use some of the existing tram right of way to get from Goodwood to the parklands, but the good people of Wayville would probably have some ideas about that. Possibly an underground busway could also run east - west through the CBD for buses coming off the Obahn, and link up with one of the northern CBD stations to help distribute people across the city.

Any "loop" around the CBD will be difficult to achieve, given the city itself is not that big by the time turning circles and straight platforms are allowed for, and any curves in the track would significantly add to cost if it could impact existing buildings above. The preference is always to build in straight lines and under roads wherever possible, hence why the KWS option I think would be preferred.

In time the Outer Harbour and Grange lines should be converted to light rail, freeing up another platform or two at Adelaide Railway station. It makes no sense continuing trams up Port Road when there's already a rail line pretty much parallel to it, but the rail and existing tram lines could be linked up, and it would then be easier to extend branches out to Semaphore and into Port Adelaide.

[SRW]

I don't think anyone's suggesting a literal loop -- the weight of opinion is clearly for through-running. 'Loop' is just useful shorthand. But if we're going to go to the expense of undergrounding rail, it makes sense to extend the catchment east as well as south (with stations in the vicinity of Hindmarsh as well as Victoria Square). The maps in the ITLUP indicate DPTI's thinking on this with underground rail rejoining the main line around Mile End.

[Saltwater]

Cheers, I'm new to Adelaide and hadn't seen that plan before.

I still think wherever possible the underground rail should be north-south under King William, and crossed by an east-west busway to take buses off the Obahn. An underground interchange could link the two to help distribute passengers across the cityl. A small element of underground retail could also be included at the interchange - there are never a shortage of phone repair shops or convenience stores that thrive in environments like that. Heading west the busway could provide faster connections to the airport or even connect up with a north-south corridor that has dedicated peak hour bus lanes feeding buses into the CBD.

In any case, none of this leads us back to needing any type of new transport hub west of the existing Adelaide Railway station.

[AG]

I don't think anyone's suggesting a literal loop -- the weight of opinion is clearly for through-running. 'Loop' is just useful shorthand. But if we're going to go to the expense of undergrounding rail, it makes sense to extend the catchment east as well as south (with stations in the vicinity of Hindmarsh as well as Victoria Square). The maps in the ITLUP indicate DPTI's thinking on this with underground rail rejoining the main line around Mile End.
itulpmap.jpg

I was looking at this plan from 2013 last night and was thinking about a number of potential opportunities for implementing a couple of these future rail extensions.

City Underground Rail:
- There already appears to be an easement in place between the two UniSA and Adelaide Uni medical school buildings allowing for an underground rail link from Adelaide Yards and down under North Terrace.
- Adelaide City Council's UPark on Rundle is approaching the end of its useable life. This could potentially be used as one of the sites for constructing an underground cavern for a new station at Hindmarsh Square along with an over station development (with one or two others in the square itself or at Twin Street). May also be an opportunity to build a jointly O-Bahn/train station underground interchange.
- Victoria Square may be an opportunity to build an underground station while simultaneously shutting the east-west road through the centre to discourage through traffic.
- Tunnelling under King William Street would be more disruptive than tunnelling under Pulteney Street, plus the former is already served by light rail.

Prospect Light Rail:
- The plans pretty much always show the light rail line running up the full length of Prospect Road via North Adelaide, which is the exact same route currently followed by the G10 bus route which terminates at Blair Athol.
- There's a missed opportunity to provide better cross town connections, as the proposed light rail doesn't provide any clear interchanges with other bus or train lines.
- Instead of continuing the full length of Prospect Road, the line could run as far as Le Hunte Street in Kilburn, turn west and then cross Churchill Road to a new train/bus/tram interchange at the northern end of Churchill Centre (which would also replace Kilburn station).
- The interchange would also provide an alternative terminating and connection point for Churchill Road (23X routes), Regency Road (300) and Main North Road buses (22X routes). Main North Road between the city and Gepps Cross would still be serviced by some 22X routes. It may also form the starting point of a direct bus shuttle to Port Adelaide and Semaphore via the Port River Expressway, and to TTP via Grand Junction Road.
- Instead of utilising the existing City Bridge to cross the Torrens, the line could move off to the western side of King William Road, cross a new bridge to a new Adelaide Oval stop directly out the front on the western side of King William Road, and then cross back into the median of King William Road around St Peter's Cathedral.

[1NEEDS2POST]

City Underground Rail:
- Adelaide City Council's UPark on Rundle is approaching the end of its useable life. This could potentially be used as one of the sites for constructing an underground cavern for a new station at Hindmarsh Square along with an over station development (with one or two others in the square itself or at Twin Street). May also be an opportunity to build a jointly O-Bahn/train station underground interchange.
- Victoria Square may be an opportunity to build an underground station while simultaneously shutting the east-west road through the centre to discourage through traffic.

Stations make up the bulk of the cost of underground railways, so location is critical. Melbourne Metro's stations will cost $3.1 billion out of the $4.7 billion project (https://www.theage.com.au/national/vict ... 56dva.html). Building stations in the squares will be easiest because the whole excavation can be done from the surface and covered up.

Prospect Light Rail:
- Instead of utilising the existing City Bridge to cross the Torrens, the line could move off to the western side of King William Road, cross a new bridge to a new Adelaide Oval stop directly out the front on the western side of King William Road, and then cross back into the median of King William Road around St Peter's Cathedral.

That would add two sets of traffic lights that the tram would have to wait at. Unless the new bridge goes above the existing bridge. Then it would also cut out the intersections with Victoria Dr and War Memorial Dr.

[AG]

City Underground Rail:
- Adelaide City Council's UPark on Rundle is approaching the end of its useable life. This could potentially be used as one of the sites for constructing an underground cavern for a new station at Hindmarsh Square along with an over station development (with one or two others in the square itself or at Twin Street). May also be an opportunity to build a jointly O-Bahn/train station underground interchange.
- Victoria Square may be an opportunity to build an underground station while simultaneously shutting the east-west road through the centre to discourage through traffic.

Stations make up the bulk of the cost of underground railways, so location is critical. Melbourne Metro's stations will cost $3.1 billion out of the $4,7 billion project (https://www.theage.com.au/national/vict ... 56dva.html). Building stations in the squares will be easiest because the whole excavation can be done from the surface and covered up.

Prospect Light Rail:
- Instead of utilising the existing City Bridge to cross the Torrens, the line could move off to the western side of King William Road, cross a new bridge to a new Adelaide Oval stop directly out the front on the western side of King William Road, and then cross back into the median of King William Road around St Peter's Cathedral.

That would add two sets of traffic lights that the tram would have to wait at. Unless the new bridge goes above the existing bridge. Then it would also cut out the intersections with Victoria Dr and War Memorial Dr.

Good point about the underground excavation, and I agree that building the stations (the main caverns or sration box) under the squares would be cheaper and less disruptive. But I think an additional station entrance near Rundle Street and Rundle Mall would really boost convenient access to a new station as well, particularly from the uni campuses and Lot 14.

On crossing the river on a new Prospect tram line, a new raised bridge could work, it may need the current Festival Plaza stop to be relocated further south to allow a reasonable gradient for the trams to climb though.

[1NEEDS2POST]

Also, your point about an underground O-Bahn interchange in Hindmarsh Square could be joined up with an underground bus tunnel, like in Brisbane. The O-Bahn tunnel was cheap (for a tunnel) at $160 million. A cut and cover bus tunnel under Grenfell and Currie Streets would be a bit more expensive because it would have to be four lanes (so you can have bus stops and other buses can pass). Probably much cheaper than a rail tunnel, the current tunnel entrance in Rymill Park can be returned to the parklands and with multiple entrance/exit ramps, a large number of bus routes could go through the tunnel.