CBD Ideas

[iTouch]

uTouch(Yourself), I'm assuming that you're having a lend because those stops are no where near where people want to go...

wrong.
Theres a hotel and a cemetary near the far south west station. Adelaide's population has a higher then average population of pensioners so that'll get good business.

the Rymill Park station is a good area to take girls on dates. You could capitalize on that

Everyone wants to go to Victoria Square

Everyone wants to go to Adelaide Station

The Port Road station can have an underground carpark thereby reducing traffic in the CBD

The Veale Gardens are at the middle South terrace station, that could be capitalized on and serve as a decent attraction

People live on East Terrace therefore it'll help them get to the railway station

The Hutt road corner station is close to the Himeji Garden which is alright for dates as well.

[Aidan]

Heavy rail to an inner suburb? Wrong mode!

Not necessarily - inner suburbs are where many people would expect heavy rail subways to go. And unlike the trains to the outer suburbs, the trains we currently have to the inner suburbs are generally short. I don't see any big problem with extending the Brighton Line through the City and out the other side - do you?

Heavy rail's running cost is more suited to long distance transfers of large numbers of passengers with infrequent services. As soon as you start adding frequency to heavy rail the costs stop it being as effective. So in a networked transport system there should be heavy rail connecting large centres with limited stops. Light rail servicing at street level, with frequency, many stops and short runs (less than 30minutes). And buses doing the less patronised connections, feeders, as well as sometimes replacing trains as night services where they are more efficient at servicing lower patronage instead of running mostly empty single cars.

It's not that simple. Frequent services are more attractive to passengers, even on heavy rail. And while heavy rail is much better at shifting large numbers of people, one advantage of the mode is that trains can be as short as a single railcar - and with an electric railway and current staffing practices, that's likely to be cheaper to run than an LRV (since only the LRV needs a conductor) though this may be offset by the need for staff at underground stations.

But most importantly, a heavy rail subway can be regarded as an extension of an existing line. And being underground it would avoid the obstacles that light rail would, which makes it faster.

There's also a second factor; penetration. Light rail can have on street running and get to where people want to go. Where as heavy rail carves suburbia in two. Unless you run everything underground it creates barriers (ever heard of the "wrong side of the tracks"?) Not something you'd want to try to force into the leafy suburbs.

Now you've got me wondering which side of the tracks is the wrong one in Clarence Park

Of course running everything underground is the only practical way to do it - residential areas can be blighted by railways in the same way as they can by roads.

[fkj]

excuse my ignorance, but what actually happens for the clipsal in the area nth of bartels road?

[Aidan]

excuse my ignorance, but what actually happens for the clipsal in the area nth of bartels road?

People watch it!