[U/C] M2 North-South Motorway

[SBD]

Since when was tolls a thing in all of this?

It's not yet, but if I was a betting man I'd say they're going to atleast try it

Tolls will very much be a part of the thinking now. The prohibition on their use was State Labor's; the federal Libs support them, and their state colleagues are naturally inclined to let private money get their hands on public goods. The only barrier will be how pissed off South Australians get, having never had to deal with tolls. For the record, I think tolls are reasonable in specific circumstances. I think the Southern Expressway duplication, as an example, should have been paid for by making it a tollway.

The trouble with putting tolls on main roads is that they create price signals to encourage the wrong behaviour. If I want someone to drive on the freeway instead of on the "surface road" next to it, why would I tell them that they have to pay $7.50 to do what I want them to do, but their rates and taxes cover the cost of them doing exactly what I want to discourage?

Ultimately, we need all cars to be fitted with a logging GPS, and we pay proportionately to the maintenance agency for the roads we actually use - whether they are local council, state government or national highways. Then we don't pay anything at all to leave the car in the garage and catch a bus/train, and the government doesn't lose out on fuel tax because I drive an electric car.

[claybro]

Cross Road doesn't even need to be a consideration, freeway grade city ring route, trench freeway up Glen Osmond Road, problem solved.

That plan still extends the long descent even further, and means that when a truck or bus with failing brakes eventually hits something, it's in a tunnel. Maybe the off-ramp exits can be built with gravel pits next to them as emergency stopping ramps, but that sounds like a challenge to build and maintain, as well as needing more width in a constrained corridor.

The Glen Osmond tunnel/trench idea has come up here before. It will NEVER happen, and is not even in any future consideration. Any freeway style roads in the Adelaide Metro area will only be devised and funded federally with FREIGHT in mind. The Glen Osmond option would be outrageously expensive, disruptive and only serve to worsen commuter traffic into the CBD. The brief is to get heavy freight from the tollgate, to the North South motorway via the cheapest and most direct route possible, and the only idea currently even being looked at is Cross Road. there are some reasonable stretches of open land at the Urbrae end, and the blocks facing Cross road are generally large, so the disruption by land acquisition will be less (fewer landholders to negotiate with.). This should already be under closer consideration and planning, but as usual, the state is looking only to the next sugar hit of a section of South Road. Yes it will require a massive interchange at Emmerson, and a similar interchange at Hindmarsh was instrumental in turning public opinion against MATS. However, times have changed, and I don't believe residents adjacent to the Emerson crossing would hold as much sway now, particularly as it will result in less disruption less congestion and less freight in areas such as Portrush road.

[SBD]

I wonder if there is a significantly different cost (financial and social) in buying up property fronting an existing main road, compared to buying property and building the freeway on a new alignment. A short tunnel from the bend near the lower emergency gravel pit (where the concrete plant used to be) could come out near Waite Institute, then follow an alignment near Unley High School and join South Road near Castle Plaza on what Google Maps presently shows as vacant land (or is that where Bunnings is going?).

I am not familiar with that part of Adelaide, so have no idea who's toes I might be stomping all over in even suggesting this. To anyone reading who is offended, I am sorry, it's just a thought bubble, and still doesn't completely solve the concern about a long ascent/descent.

[Patrick_27]

Cross Road doesn't even need to be a consideration, freeway grade city ring route, trench freeway up Glen Osmond Road, problem solved.

That plan still extends the long descent even further, and means that when a truck or bus with failing brakes eventually hits something, it's in a tunnel. Maybe the off-ramp exits can be built with gravel pits next to them as emergency stopping ramps, but that sounds like a challenge to build and maintain, as well as needing more width in a constrained corridor.

The Glen Osmond tunnel/trench idea has come up here before. It will NEVER happen, and is not even in any future consideration. Any freeway style roads in the Adelaide Metro area will only be devised and funded federally with FREIGHT in mind. The Glen Osmond option would be outrageously expensive, disruptive and only serve to worsen commuter traffic into the CBD. The brief is to get heavy freight from the tollgate, to the North South motorway via the cheapest and most direct route possible, and the only idea currently even being looked at is Cross Road. there are some reasonable stretches of open land at the Urbrae end, and the blocks facing Cross road are generally large, so the disruption by land acquisition will be less (fewer landholders to negotiate with.). This should already be under closer consideration and planning, but as usual, the state is looking only to the next sugar hit of a section of South Road. Yes it will require a massive interchange at Emmerson, and a similar interchange at Hindmarsh was instrumental in turning public opinion against MATS. However, times have changed, and I don't believe residents adjacent to the Emerson crossing would hold as much sway now, particularly as it will result in less disruption less congestion and less freight in areas such as Portrush road.

Who says it's the only option being looked at? The last couple of pages on this thread is the first I've ever heard of it being considered both in an official sense and a general hearsay sense. Further to this, no government will ever gain the right, not even through the means of compulsory acquisition to use land from either Waite of Urrbrae campus' and any attempt will be very much challenged - you might seem to think of these areas as 'open space' ready for use but that is not the case at all.

[claybro]

If the last couple of pages of this site are the first you have heard of the Cross Road option, you are very late on this thread, and very short of connections outside of this forum. If you believe a couple of dozen metres of Waite or Urbrae land would not be allowed to be repurposed, you are being naive. 50 odd meters of whole suburbs have now been bulldozed for the South Road upgrade, and once Adelaideans realise the benefit of travelling across the metro area without traffic lights, train crossings and offset intersections, you will be amazed at the pressure to make this link happen. You do realise that the majority of Adelaides population would not even know what Waite is, or even Urbrae school for that matter.

[fifty]

Someone here once suggested a tunnel from the freeway bend to Brownhill creek then another under Clapham to pop out near top of Daws Rd and then down to South Rd.

I first scoffed at the thought but its starting to grow on me. Expensive with the tunnels but far less land acquisition in much cheaper areas and no Emerson headache....

Sent from my ONEPLUS A5010 using Tapatalk

[Patrick_27]

If the last couple of pages of this site are the first you have heard of the Cross Road option, you are very late on this thread, and very short of connections outside of this forum. If you believe a couple of dozen metres of Waite or Urbrae land would not be allowed to be repurposed, you are being naive. 50 odd meters of whole suburbs have now been bulldozed for the South Road upgrade, and once Adelaideans realise the benefit of travelling across the metro area without traffic lights, train crossings and offset intersections, you will be amazed at the pressure to make this link happen. You do realise that the majority of Adelaides population would not even know what Waite is, or even Urbrae school for that matter.

Since when has what "the majority of Adelaide's population" and what they know ever counted for anything on this forum? Do you think the people of the north really give a shit if a freeway is happening in the inner-southern suburbs?

Speaking as a former Urrbrae student, there are a shitload of protections against the use of both Waite and Urrbrae for anything other than education and research. Furthermore, "a couple of dozen metres" of both would literally see all of Urrbrae's sports, home economics, music and special education facilities go (that's not a light acquisition), not to mention the wetlands which can't merely be reshaped and/or replaced and serve the critical task of catchment for stormwater overflow in the entire Unley/Mitcham area which prevents flooding (a serious and common issue before the wetlands were installed). But this is the problem, you and many others don't know anything about this and as a result you make blanket statements like "Oh yeah, it's only a a couple dozen metres of insignificant land". Now, by all means, if they have to build along that corridor, then that's what they have to do (I'm not saying that I know any better in that regard) but the land you suggested as something easily and readily available is not and therefore despite your comments they will likely have to work around it even if that means taking an entire block north of Cross Road for that section.

[rev]

If the last couple of pages of this site are the first you have heard of the Cross Road option, you are very late on this thread, and very short of connections outside of this forum. If you believe a couple of dozen metres of Waite or Urbrae land would not be allowed to be repurposed, you are being naive. 50 odd meters of whole suburbs have now been bulldozed for the South Road upgrade, and once Adelaideans realise the benefit of travelling across the metro area without traffic lights, train crossings and offset intersections, you will be amazed at the pressure to make this link happen. You do realise that the majority of Adelaides population would not even know what Waite is, or even Urbrae school for that matter.

You'd have to be living under a rock, or 2,700km away, to not know Urbrae.

I do agree though, when the people of Adelaide wake up and realize the convenience of not only a non-stop corridor, but a non-stop network, we will be better off and see some real major work going on. Of course they'd first have to get over the minimal disruption to their daily monotonous lives. Maybe state governments can distract them with something that will induce more whinging then freeways?

[HeapsGood]

Someone here once suggested a tunnel from the freeway bend to Brownhill creek then another under Clapham to pop out near top of Daws Rd and then down to South Rd.

I first scoffed at the thought but its starting to grow on me. Expensive with the tunnels but far less land acquisition in much cheaper areas and no Emerson headache....

Sent from my ONEPLUS A5010 using Tapatalk

I suggested that (or an iteration of it)
viewtopic.php?f=9&t=3172&p=150346#p150346

Although, someone already mentioned this route was in the old MATS plan.

[claybro]

Since when has what "the majority of Adelaide's population" and what they know ever counted for anything on this forum? Do you think the people of the north really give a shit if a freeway is happening in the inner-southern suburbs?

No, the people of the "people of the North" as you put it absolutely wont give a rats....it will be a few self interested residents of Kingswood Unley Park and Kings Park.-kind of my point really.

"Oh yeah, it's only a a couple dozen metres of insignificant land". Now, by all means, if they have to build along that corridor, then that's what they have to do (I'm not saying that I know any better in that regard) but the land you suggested as something easily and readily available is not and therefore despite your comments they will likely have to work around it even if that means taking an entire block north of Cross Road for that section.

It will come from both sides of the road.

[Bob]

Cross Road needs to be the grade separated link between the SE Freeway and the (new) North-South MW.

One of the main reasons why is because the majority of large heavy road freight trucks travelling by road via Adelaide in tonnage terms are on the Adelaide to Melbourne route that begin/ end their journey in Adelaide.

Even if the Hills Road Bypass plan by the Libs goes ahead, those trucks will still go via Portrush Rd if there is no link between SE Freeway & N-S MW. I had the tonnage figures by journey begin/end somewhere a couple of years ago, but am trying to find them, but I do recall this fact.

Also by large heavy vehicle traffic today, I recall Portrush Rd having more movements in total length than South Road between Mile End & Grand Junction Road for example. My emphasis on large heavy vehicles, not 4T or 10T delivery trucks but B Doubles and co.

I really hope the Business Case Study by the Libs on the Hills Road Bypass is transparent and reveals this fact. It would be a long term disaster if the SE Freeway to NS MW link is not included in ANY plan going forward.

Yes there a lot of large heavy vehicles going thru Adelaide from Melbourne to Perth that would benefit from a bypass (maybe) but that number is still considerably less that those starting from or ending in Adelaide to/from Melbourne.

[SBD]

Cross Road needs to be the grade separated link between the SE Freeway and the (new) North-South MW.

One of the main reasons why is because the majority of large heavy road freight trucks travelling by road via Adelaide in tonnage terms are on the Adelaide to Melbourne route that begin/ end their journey in Adelaide.

Even if the Hills Road Bypass plan by the Libs goes ahead, those trucks will still go via Portrush Rd if there is no link between SE Freeway & N-S MW. I had the tonnage figures by journey begin/end somewhere a couple of years ago, but am trying to find them, but I do recall this fact.

Also by large heavy vehicle traffic today, I recall Portrush Rd having more movements in total length than South Road between Mile End & Grand Junction Road for example. My emphasis on large heavy vehicles, not 4T or 10T delivery trucks but B Doubles and co.

I really hope the Business Case Study by the Libs on the Hills Road Bypass is transparent and reveals this fact. It would be a long term disaster if the SE Freeway to NS MW link is not included in ANY plan going forward.

Yes there a lot of large heavy vehicles going thru Adelaide from Melbourne to Perth that would benefit from a bypass (maybe) but that number is still considerably less that those starting from or ending in Adelaide to/from Melbourne.

I thought the east-of-the-hills bypass had potential, but now that I actually sit and play with it in Google Maps, it wouldn't compete with the SE freeway on time, regardless of the route through the suburbs, between Swanport Bridge and Wingfield, even assuming Northern Connector, Truro Bypass, Murray Bridge bypass and a new road between Truro and Murray Bridge.

The similar route might be competitive for rail, as it is competing with the wiggly bits through Belair and Blackwood. I have no idea whether autonomous vehicles would change the net economic effect compared to human-controlled vehicles (either road or rail).

Most heavy traffic currently uses Portrush/Hampstead Roads rather than Cross/South Roads as it is the preferred National Highway route, and is presently marginally shorter time as there have been upgrades to Portrush Road over the last two decades. Once T2T is completed, Cross Road might become slightly more time-competitive, even more so following the Regency Road overpass and especially following Torrens to Anzac. Portrush will continue to carry the bulk of the freight while there are significant construction delays the other way.

[Bob]

Why completing the N-S MW and a new non-stop link between SE FW via Cross Road makes sense -

Removing large heavy freight off Portrush Rd improving safety and reducing noise & pollution with stop/starting at intersections through suburbia.

Reduced travel time and less fuel to Adelaide depots in NW Metro.

Grade Separation under Belair rail line on Cross Rd removing delays.

Cross Road is the path of least resistance and shortest distance for the connection.

Costs versus a Hill Bypass I would imagine be a significant gap, for the better.

Time to build would be much quicker and I would even (controversially I’m sure), propose this be built before the NS MW section between Darlington & Cross Road.

Having a freight module including a remote air depot on the proposed Hills Road Bypass as proposed by the Libs, does not have much support in the freight industry behind closed doors for several reasons.

Agree that a Rail bypass around the Hills is a different matter and definitely requires serious analysis

[claybro]

You are correct that an East of Hiils option was considered, but I believe this is now being quietly killed off as far as road transport. I don't know about rail. Cross Road is currently the only real contender. There is no possible provision for upgrading the Portrush/ hampstead etc route, as the cost and disruption would be monumental, and cut through too much prime real estate. The Glen Osmond tunnel is pure fantasy, that I have only seen discussed seriously on this forum.

[Goodsy]

Acquire Edward street for an interchange/tunnel portal and tunnel the entire length. It would be a bit shorter than the Brisbane airport tunnel