Adelaide CBD and Underground Railways

[Ho Really]

I know Aidan is very keen to start a new topic on the city and the possibility of underground railways. I thought maybe some of you would like to join him in this discussion by opening this thread:

From the #PRO: 51 Pirie Street | 27 levels | 115m - Office thread.

I will, as Wayno suggested, start a thread in the Visions and Suggestions section, but it won't be ready until tomorrow, and possibly not for a few days. I will post a link when I've done so, but meanwhile I'll address the issues raised here:

P.S. As for Aidan and his underground railway, forget Pirie Street and Gawler Place. If there ever was going to be any Metro it would have been down King William Street or any of the much wider streets east or west.

A King William Street tunnel would not be as convenient for much of the City, and would be much more difficult to link with the existing railway.

What's next, opposing towers in case cars start flying??

If a city had no airport but needed one and had the land for one available, would you support construction of a skyscraper at the end of the runway?

Aidan, no offence. That's just pathetically wishful thinking, one which would not be realised for decades, yet. And last time I checked, underground means under the ground. If Sydney can build an underground without knocking over a few handfuls of buildings (except those where the stations are to be built) then I'm pretty sure Adelaide can too. Technology is improving consistently as is construction methods, etc.

We need not wait decades, but even if we do, we should safeguard a route.

Sydney is mostly built on rock. Adelaide is mostly built on clay. Therefore we need deeper foundations under tall buildings.

The proliferation of tall buildings has meant that there are not many practical routes for an underground railway left. This building location is over where the line would turn from under Gawler Place towards Victoria Square. I'll explain more when I start a new thread.

Aidan, congrats on your upcoming graduation, but you are absolutely kidding yourself if you think that obtaining an undergraduate degree in civil engineering makes you a transport engineer!

What would you think is required then?

I would be very interested to hear a few more reasons why you believe we need an underground rail system. Im sorry, but just because Adelaide is the biggest city in oz without one just doesn't cut it for me.

Consider the Noarlunga Line, it wastes time going past the City, then all the passengers have to get off at a station that's only near the destination of a few of them.

Do you understand yet?

Aidan, that area of the city is already home to some of the city's tallest towers. The real barrier to getting an underground in Adelaide is the fact that our CBD and inner metro area are no where near dense enough to support such a system. It would never pass the cost-benefit analysis.

I'm not suggesting a completely new line, just an underground extension to the existing railway so that it can better serve the City. In my Investigation Project last year, I calculated that the improved access it gives to the City would increase passenger numbers on the Noarlunga Line by over a third, and they'd increase by almost a third on the Gawler Line too. And considering the reduction in traffic and the reduced need for City parking, the case for it is actually quite good.

Cheers

[Ho Really]

I've added AG's first reply:

Aidan, tunnels are still technically possible even if the surrounding areas are occupied with building foundations. The property is in the hands of the private sector, not the government, so whoever owns it has the right to do what they want with it (within given restrictions of course). It's easy to get lost in the technical detail and forget that there are other economic and social impacts that are also important (I know a few engineers who also think like this).

If you get the chance, search up on what Tokyo's soil profiles are like, and then look at the extensive infrastructure that the city has managed to construct despite the technical difficulties. It's supposedly some of the worst soil to be building on or through in the world, yet there are 13 subway lines successfully squeezed throughout the city centre, including districts crammed with tall buildings.

What would the cost be?

Cheers

[Aidan]

My plan for a railway under the City was developed over several years. I worked out the rough alignment in 2007, and it featured in my Investigation Project last year, but that concentrated on the ridership effects rather than the exact route, and the map I used for that project contains tighter curves than would actually be acceptable, so I've made another one with the more realistic curve radius of 200m. I think this is the same as the line past the Adelaide Gaol - quite tight for a standard gauge line, but the trains can still move at a sensible speed (not fast, but between closely spaced stations it doesn't need to be).

The running tunnels are red, the stations purple. Initial platform length would be 150m, but with provision to double that should demand ever require it.


The northern portal would be near City Sk8 Park, and from there to a new station near the existing one it would run under North Terrace. The station would be double ended, possibly with an entrance to the eastern end from the existing underpass. It is suggested the station tunnels be vertically stacked beneath the northern side of North Terrace, as this would enable the eventual construction of another railway from North Terrace to the eastern suburbs should demand ever be sufficient.

The line would then curve round under Parliament House, the gardens of Government House, one of the buildings on North Terrace and a car park. The second station would be under Gawler Place. This is likely to be the most popular station, so it would have the platforms vertically stacked, and people would be able to board and alight the train from both sides to minimize station dwell times.

Another reason for vertical stacking is to enable the trains to enable the running tunnels south of this station to fit between buildings while maintaining an acceptable curvature. But running under 51 Pirie Street is unavoidable.

The next station would mostly be below Central Market (greatly increasing its customer numbers) with an entrance from Victoria Square. Due to the need to fit between the Hilton and the GHD building, it might be sensible to keep the lines vertically stacked there as well.

The final station would be in the SW corner of the City, greatly improving access to this part of the City.

The line would then join the existing line at Keswick. The map depicts a portal in the parklands, enabling it to join north of Keswick station. Alternatively it could join south of Anzac Highway, but that is likely to cost more to construct.

Further into the future, stage 2 would involve extending the line to Edwardstown, enabling the express trains to bypass a busy section of the line with many level crossings.

[Aidan]

Aidan, tunnels are still technically possible even if the surrounding areas are occupied with building foundations.

Indeed they are. But when the tunnels have to go under the building itself, it's more difficult. It is sometimes possible for a line to fit between the piles of one building. On the Jubilee Line in London, there was a problem because one building had an extra pile that the plans didn't show, and the tunnel ran into it!

The property is in the hands of the private sector, not the government, so whoever owns it has the right to do what they want with it (within given restrictions of course).

Have you been to O'Connell Street Lately?

It's easy to get lost in the technical detail and forget that there are other economic and social impacts that are also important (I know a few engineers who also think like this).

I'm not like that at all - which is why I chose to become a transport engineer not a structural engineer!

It's because of the important economic and social impacts that an underground railway is needed!

If you get the chance, search up on what Tokyo's soil profiles are like, and then look at the extensive infrastructure that the city has managed to construct despite the technical difficulties. It's supposedly some of the worst soil to be building on or through in the world, yet there are 13 subway lines successfully squeezed throughout the city centre, including districts crammed with tall buildings.

Indeed. Sometimes the subway came first. But when the tall buildings come first, a subway route can be safeguarded until it is built. This is what I'm proposing.

It isn't completely incompatible with the development of tall buildings on the site. In some cases the piles can be located away from whether the tunnel will be. Some tall buildings on safeguarded routes even have provision for the tunnels in the basement.

What would the cost be?

Over a billion dollars, but I can't give you a more specific answer. The stations are likely to be the most expensive part.

[Ho Really]

Thank you for the diagram and your answers Aidan, now it is much clearer why you wanted an underground passing under the proposed tower at 51 Pirie Street.

Cheers

[Aidan]

I've put a poll on the plan in the Infrastructure/Transport Development section.

[contractor]

Good to see you raise this topic Aidan it has been on my mind for a long time. This is a must have project that should be on the governments radar but I think a more nimble, lower speed system which linked the whole city including north adelaide would be more desirable. Perhaps a system where suburban buses stopped outside the city at stations i.e. where the o-bahn finishes therefore removing the need for buses in the city (who likes them anyway).

[Ho Really]

...so I've made another one with the more realistic curve radius of 200m. I think this is the same as the line past the Adelaide Gaol - quite tight for a standard gauge line, but the trains can still move at a sensible speed (not fast, but between closely spaced stations it doesn't need to be)...

I've actually put together a graphic using the curve at Adelaide Gaol in various locations in and around the city. On a Google map they all fit fine. I hope it is the same in real life.

Cheers

[Prince George]

Regarding the budget for an underground railway, I can offer you a comparison point here in Seattle. They are underway with the second stage of their light-rail system (hardly just past the ground-breaking stage) which will be a 5km twin-bored underground route joining the downtown to two of the most important population centres in the city (one a crowded medium-density housing area, the other the University of Washington). In all, they are building the tunnel and two stations. Total budget: USD 1.9 billion, or about AUD 2.7 billion.

Project details here

[Ho Really]

I've decided to post the graphic in Poll: Should Adelaide have an underground railway here as well as the other thread is more to do with Aidan's poll.



As you can see there are many options (and probably a few more) where the underground can corner and run under streets, squares or parklands to avoid as much as possible building foundations and pilings. For the curves I've used Aidan's suggestion of the Adelaide Gaol curve (that's 200 metres or so in radius).

Cheers

[peas_and_corn]

What is this underground railway connecting to?

[AG]

What is this underground railway connecting to?

The existing suburban rail system. (i.e. the tunnel emerges above ground at both ends and merges with the existing tracks)

[stumpjumper]

Here's a sma;;er scheme linking local rail, interstate rail, tram and O-Bahn:

The Old Adelaide Gaol becomes the main interstate and metropolitan rail terminal.

SAPOL Thebarton is the bus terminal.

A twin track light rail rapid shuttle goes from the gaol along the north side of North Tce (hospital or not) to the Hyatt and Casino then through a 'cut and shut' tunnel under the wide 'footpath' on the north side of North Tce past Parliament House, under King William St, past Government House, the Art Gallery, universities etc to a new rail/O-Bahn junction near the wine centre. The shuttle service would be free, with cars every five minutes in peak times, perhaps run automatically without drivers.

The project could be staged over many years.

The Franklin St bus depot, btw, could easily be redeveloped as housing.

The cut and shut underground could be the start of a proper metro, with a service south along KW St (ie incorporating the present tram service) and north above ground to the Adelaide Oval. Imagine getting on a train at Marino Rocks or the O-Bahn at Modbury and getting off a light rail service at Adelaide Oval or Victoria Square, travelling on fast, efficient public transport all the way.

[Aidan]

Here's a sma;;er scheme linking local rail, interstate rail, tram and O-Bahn:

The Old Adelaide Gaol becomes the main interstate and metropolitan rail terminal.

SAPOL Thebarton is the bus terminal.

A twin track light rail rapid shuttle goes from the gaol along the north side of North Tce (hospital or not) to the Hyatt and Casino then through a 'cut and shut' tunnel under the wide 'footpath' on the north side of North Tce past Parliament House, under King William St, past Government House, the Art Gallery, universities etc to a new rail/O-Bahn junction near the wine centre. The shuttle service would be free, with cars every five minutes in peak times, perhaps run automatically without drivers.

The project could be staged over many years.

The Franklin St bus depot, btw, could easily be redeveloped as housing.

Are you trolling? Your track record seems to suggest you're not - but why else would you suggest the main local and interstate rail terminal so far away from the CBD, to a historical building which can't be altered much, on a sharply curving 2 track section of railway, without even having easy parking provision?

Likewise with the bus terminal! AN invited the bus companies to join them at Keswick, but the bus companies didn't want to give up going where the passengers wanted to go!

Then there's your light rail proposal, trying to squeeze practically all the rail passengers going to the City onto something that only runs every 5 minutes. It would be dangerously overcrowded, as would the roads.

And any City building could be redeveloped for housing, but there's no particular reason why the bus station should be. And make no mistake, it is a station not a depot.

The cut and shut underground could be the start of a proper metro, with a service south along KW St (ie incorporating the present tram service) and north above ground to the Adelaide Oval. Imagine getting on a train at Marino Rocks or the O-Bahn at Modbury and getting off a light rail service at Adelaide Oval or Victoria Square, travelling on fast, efficient public transport all the way.

Going to Victoria square, you can get there directly down the O-bahn from Modbury (it's on route M44) and with one change (Adelaide station) you can do it from Marino Rocks. It may not be fast and efficient, but nor would your plan. If you want fast and efficient, you're better off with my plan.

And as for Adelaide Oval, you don't need to wreck the City's transport system just to build a light rail line there!

[stumpjumper]

I'm not trolling by the way, Aidan.

I defer to your urban transport expertise.

My idea was driven by my perception of the inefficiency of having the interstate rail terminus at Keswick, the bus terminal in Franklin St and the metropolitan rail terminus at the Adelaide Railway Station, while the old gaol stands more or less unused and the whole thing is tied together by an ad hoc network of buses, trams etc.

I've been in other cities where the local and intercity rail, and the bus terminal, are at the same site.

My idea is just that. It could be completely impractical, and it's certainly uncosted. You're probably right about the logistics of even a fast shuttle, for example. This forum is about debate, and I appreciate your comments.

Do you think it's important to have all the bus and rail termini together?