Sensational-Adelaide.com

VISION : ADELAIDE METRO TRAIN/TRAM SYSTEM

Here is my vision of a "future Adelaide" with an upgraded train and tram system. Apologies if I have borrowed other people's ideas, I have read many other threads on the same subject and hopefully have added a few ideas of my own. My map making skills are poor so I am counting on your (fertile) imaginations.

1) Gawler-Seaford Heavy Rail Line
An underground link between the Gawler and Seaford train lines through the city. Underground stations at North Terrace (under the
Convention Centre) King William (major interchange under King William Currie Grenfell intersection) and Victoria Square (under the
southern end servicing the southern CBD). The line would continue under King William St south and the southern parklands (cut and cover) to a new underground station on the site of the temporary Showground station-a new Goodwood station with a 3rd platform for Show trains to return to the city. Then underground (cut and cover) along the existing Noarlunga train line to Edwardstown (where the line returns to the surface) eliminating Emerson station and the South Road crossing.
Major advantages-network separation from other train lines operating more like a European metro line, and faster travel times into the city
servicing a larger area of the CBD.
Also interstate and country passenger services could return to North Tce.
At the same time the Tonsley line would be duplicated and extended with a new interchange in the Sturt triangle (bus connections to the suburbs due south) and a new underground station servicing Flinders Medical Centre/Flinders University. This line would be all-stops to the
city allowing the Seaford line to function like an express.

2) Tea Tree Plaza-Outer Harbor/West Lakes/Grange Train-Tram Line
A conversion of the O-Bahn to a train-tram line entering the city via a tunnel just south of the Hackney Bridge (cut and cover) to the East End station(under the corner of Grenfell/Rundle/East Tce) then underground to King William (major interchange under King William Currie Grenfell intersection) and underground to Hindley St station (between Morphett and West Tce) and then underground under North/West Tce to join up with the train line to Outer Harbor.
Major advantages : removal of all O-Bahn buses from the CBD, a new east-west city rail line, potential re-invigoration of the western end of
Hindley St. and a "speeding up" of the train-trams from the north western suburbs no longer having to compete with cars along Port Rd/North Tce.
Turnbacks could be built at East End and Hindley St. stations allowing services to terminate in the city if needed, however I envisage "through" services with a 5 minute interval to TTP meaning a 15 minute interval to Outer Harbor/West Lakes/Grange during the day.
The loss of "through" buses on the O-Bahn would be counter balanced with an increased number of buses able to connect to the train line, and greatly increased capacity along the corridor.

3) Belair Train-Tram Line
Conversion of the Belair heavy rail line to a tram-train line (presuming the freight line is now in the northern suburbs) with a slightly changed entry point to the city.
The tram line would run above ground from Belair to Goodwood (interchange with the new underground train station) following the train tracks north past Keswick (hopefully a booming T.O.D by then) and then enter a cut and cover tunnel north of the cemetery heading east under the west parklands and re-surfacing in Grote St just east of the West Tce. Stops at Morphett St and Central Market then the line joins the Entertainment Centre line at Victoria Square enabling through trams to West Lakes/Grange ( if the network is configured this way)
An alternate city route continues down Wakefield St heading north along Pulteney terminating at Hindmarsh Square (adding a 4th rail route servicing the CBD)

One of the biggest flaws of the MATS 1974 plan was the over-allocation of stations in the CBD for an subway as the stopping distance between Rundle Mall and Victoria Square is about 300m. If you intended on running 6-car train sets, which can be rather long - 150/200m long, you may as well pratically join the two - literally.

great plan, specially option 2.

Isiskii wrote:One of the biggest flaws of the MATS 1974 plan was the over-allocation of stations in the CBD for an subway as the stopping distance between Rundle Mall and Victoria Square is about 300m. If you intended on running 6-car train sets, which can be rather long - 150/200m long, you may as well pratically join the two - literally.

There were many huge flaws in the MATS plan, but that wasn't one of them. Indeed there were also many smaller flaws, but it wasn't one of those either.

Firstly your measurement is out by at least 50%. The nearest end of Victoria Square is about 450m from Rundle Mall. The middle of Victoria Square, slightly over 600m.

Secondly, 6-car train sets are almost 150m long - but I don't think anywhere in the world has 200m long trains of just 6 (non articulated) cars.

And thirdly, even if you had 300m long trains, it would still make sense to have more stops. Having too few would result in long station dwell times and possible overcrowding problems. And even if a single station did serve both Victoria Square and Rundle Mall, it wouldn't be anywhere near as good for passengers wanting to go to destinations such as Adelaide University or Gouger Street.

People can walk.

Isiskii wrote:People can walk.

Indeed they can - but that doesn't mean they will. The further the walk is, the less likely they will walk.

More stations = less far to walk.

Here is an updated version of my future Adelaide train/tram system. Apologies for for my poor map making skills...

Blue Line: Heavy rail line linking Seaford to Gawler. Major central Adelaide station at King William (interchange with Red Line)
Also stations at South Tce (serving southern CBD and expanding city population) and Royal Adelaide Hospital (serving the medical precinct/uni and western CBD)
Underground from Edwardstown to Goodwood to CBD, surfaces into western parklands.

Red Line : Light rail linking Tea Tree Plaza to Outer Harbor/West lakes/Grange. Underground from Hackney Rd to Grenfell/Currie joining
the old Outer Harbor line in western parklands (would travel on parallel tracks to Blue Line for a short time through parklands) Major transfer station to Blue Line at King William and stops at East End and Hindley St. (the western uni entertainment area) Turnback facilities at EE and HS to mange traffic flow.

Green Line : Light rail linking Hindmarsh Square to Belair via Wakefield/Grote Sts. Cut and cover through western parklands to join old heavy rail line to Belair. The freight line now enters the Adelaide metro area through the northern suburbs and is totally separated from the local commuter system. Green line Goodwood station is above Blue line underground station.

Purple Line : existing light rail line btween Glenelg and the Entertainment Centre

Alternative Light Rail Plan : the red line does not exist but the green and purple lines intersect at Victoria Square enabling through trams from the north-west
i.e. Glenelg to semaphore and Belair to West Lakes/Grange.

It seems inevitable that the Belair line will be converted to light rail sooner or later, but I still strongly believe that such a route should run down Pulteney Street/Unley Road and rejoin the Belair line from Mitcham Station onwards to the Belair terminus.

As the Hills freight line is in the planning stages of being diverted away entirely from the metropolitian area via a new route diverting somewhere off the outskirts of Murray Bridge, through the Barossa and into Adelaide via the Northern Connector, the current ARTC line can just be sold to the State and be used to duplicate the line - achievable at an extremely low cost.

It then makes pratical sense for the existing line between Adelaide and Mitcham to be retained as a heavy rail corridor for a new route through to Mount Barker via a tunnel from Mitcham to the Stirling/Crafers/Bridgewater district.

Now, where's a couple of billion dollars?

[Shuz] wrote:It seems inevitable that the Belair line will be converted to light rail sooner or later, but I still strongly believe that such a route should run down Pulteney Street/Unley Road and rejoin the Belair line from Mitcham Station onwards to the Belair terminus.

This seems like a bad idea to me. Currently, the Glenelg tram line takes 56 minutes to travel the 15km from the AEC to Glenelg - and this is in a route completely separated from other vehicles, with the majority as a light rail line with no traffic lights to contend with. At the same speed, it would take about 22.5 minutes to travel the 6km from Hindmarsh Square to Mitcham Station - this is already over 10 minutes longer than the current train timetable, without considering the probably much slower speeds encountered on Unley road due to the many traffic lights and narrow road space/local businesses concerned about loss of parking that would probably lead to the tram sharing with other road traffic.

It then makes pratical sense for the existing line between Adelaide and Mitcham to be retained as a heavy rail corridor for a new route through to Mount Barker via a tunnel from Mitcham to the Stirling/Crafers/Bridgewater district.

Now, where's a couple of billion dollars?

Yeah... no. As the crow flies, it's about 9km from Mitcham to Crafers. It would probably cost upwards of $3b to tunnel that, without even considering the cost of the rest of the route. Take a look at that terrain in google maps - the tunnel would need to be pretty damn deep to get through Brown Hill creek.

Banning right turns and adding a bus lane on Glen Osmond road would probably get a quicker trip time at 1% of the cost.


Still, I quite like the rest of the plan, although if I had things my way I'd probably do it slightly differently. I'd convert the whole lot into tram-train (even the Gawler/Seaford line), and run the Blackwood/Flinders (or maybe even Old Reynella?)/Glenelg/Noarlunga lines through the blue tunnel to the Gawler/Outer Harbor (including a Grange shuttle) lines and a Glanville tram (via Port Road, West Lakes, roughly following the route of the 157, then Semaphore Rd). The red line would go pretty much as yours does, but end in the western parklands, allowing future trams from perhaps Henley Beach/The Parade or even Payenham Road to use it. Finally, a city loop line could cover Grote/Wakefield and North Terrace.

[Shuz] wrote:It seems inevitable that the Belair line will be converted to light rail sooner or later, but I still strongly believe that such a route should run down Pulteney Street/Unley Road and rejoin the Belair line from Mitcham Station onwards to the Belair terminus.

Why? There's a good, reasonably fast railway route that could be joined onto the existing tramway at Goodwod. Any street route would be slower than that, but Unley Road has the additional disadvantage of being congested.

As the Hills freight line is in the planning stages of being diverted away entirely from the metropolitian area via a new route diverting somewhere off the outskirts of Murray Bridge, through the Barossa and into Adelaide via the Northern Connector, the current ARTC line can just be sold to the State and be used to duplicate the line - achievable at an extremely low cost.

Are you sure it's in the planning stages? I thought it was already planned but the government was unconvinced of the need.

It then makes pratical sense for the existing line between Adelaide and Mitcham to be retained as a heavy rail corridor for a new route through to Mount Barker via a tunnel from Mitcham to the Stirling/Crafers/Bridgewater district.

No, that makes no sense at all, as that railway would still be slower than the road.

What I'd like to see after the diversion of the ARTC line is for it to be rebroadened and handed over to Steamranger, but I can't see how an economic case could be made for it.

So the DTEI... I mean the DTIP...I cant even remember what they're called this week... are considering an underground CBD link in the next 30 years...well here are my ideas in this thread...bump

Aidan wrote:

As the Hills freight line is in the planning stages of being diverted away entirely from the metropolitian area via a new route diverting somewhere off the outskirts of Murray Bridge, through the Barossa and into Adelaide via the Northern Connector, the current ARTC line can just be sold to the State and be used to duplicate the line - achievable at an extremely low cost.

Are you sure it's in the planning stages? I thought it was already planned but the government was unconvinced of the need.

That's how I understand it too.