[U/C] M2 North-South Motorway

[HiTouch]

My prediction (have I said this before?) is nothing remotely as grand:

Your prediction isn't grand but it definitely isn't boring. Shuz's suggestion was a lot more boring.

[Listy]

I'm sure there are some big drawbacks, but if you really wanted to save lots of money, the Thebarton stretch of motorway could be realigned 500 hundred meters eastwards to follow Port Rd & then along James Congdon back to South Rd a few hundred meters south of Bradman. There's oodles of width for a surface motorway along most of that whole section (perhaps apart from passing over/under Bradman), and all the residential / heritage concerns (neither party wants to upset their big Catholic factions) are neatly sidestepped. As an added bonus, you could completely avoid having to build a major intersection with HBR as James Congdon already passes overhead.

[rhino]

I'm sure there are some big drawbacks, but if you really wanted to save lots of money, the Thebarton stretch of motorway could be realigned 500 hundred meters eastwards to follow Port Rd & then along James Congdon back to South Rd a few hundred meters south of Bradman. There's oodles of width for a surface motorway along most of that whole section (perhaps apart from passing over/under Bradman), and all the residential / heritage concerns (neither party wants to upset their big Catholic factions) are neatly sidestepped. As an added bonus, you could completely avoid having to build a major intersection with HBR as James Congdon already passes overhead.

A little late for that I think. If that was going to happen, the obvious route would have been to turn the motorway along Port Road, trench down the middle past Hindmarsh, then along the front of Bonython Park to James Congdon Drive. Too late for that now as they've spent squillions continuing along the South Road alignment to south of the Torrens.

A cut-and-cover tunnel 8 lanes wide (three road lanes and an emergency stopping lane in each direction) could be achieved by making the trench along one side, putting the road in it (2 lanes flowing in each direction), then doing the parallel trench, covering it, moving both carriageways up there on to the cover (2 lanes each way), and then covering the first trench.

[rev]

My prediction (have I said this before?) is nothing remotely as grand:

The surface roads/trench configuration will continue south from the end of T2T - West Thebby will go, as will most of the heritage buildings along South Road. There'll be a short cut and cover tunnel under HBR intersection to spare the Thebby and the school, the trench and surface roads will continue south to another cut and cover tunnel at SDB Drive to spare the Hilton and the Electric Supply Co buildings and then all the way to Cross Road. Southwards from there the jury's out as to whether they'd even bother trenching the motorway, or whether they'd leave it all at the surface. Depends on how the cost of all of the commercial property acquisition stacks up I guess.

I'd genuinely be amazed if we end up with any form of bored solution when there are much cheaper/simpler alternatives and, in reality, I can't see any more than a handful of people crying over the West Thebby and a couple of churches etc on South Road.

It depends where the tunnel starts.
If it starts before the Brickworks it may well have to be bored, especially if there’s any form of wildlife near the bridge and environmentalists know about it(just ask Melbournians about why EastLink has a tunnel lol). It was one of the more expensive options too.

[Llessur2002]

My prediction (have I said this before?) is nothing remotely as grand:

The surface roads/trench configuration will continue south from the end of T2T - West Thebby will go, as will most of the heritage buildings along South Road. There'll be a short cut and cover tunnel under HBR intersection to spare the Thebby and the school, the trench and surface roads will continue south to another cut and cover tunnel at SDB Drive to spare the Hilton and the Electric Supply Co buildings and then all the way to Cross Road. Southwards from there the jury's out as to whether they'd even bother trenching the motorway, or whether they'd leave it all at the surface. Depends on how the cost of all of the commercial property acquisition stacks up I guess.

I'd genuinely be amazed if we end up with any form of bored solution when there are much cheaper/simpler alternatives and, in reality, I can't see any more than a handful of people crying over the West Thebby and a couple of churches etc on South Road.

It depends where the tunnel starts.
If it starts before the Brickworks it may well have to be bored, especially if there’s any form of wildlife near the bridge and environmentalists know about it(just ask Melbournians about why EastLink has a tunnel lol). It was one of the more expensive options too.

I reckon the trench will just continue from just south of the Torrens (about where the West Thebby is now) with property acquisitioned on the western side of the road (that will spare a few of the heritage listed places between Brickworks and HBR which are on the eastern side), then the trench will simply be covered for a few hundred metres at HBR - long enough to swing the surface roads back in so that instead of running at the side of the trench they'll run over the top of it - and the same again at SDB. No tunnels per se, just a trench all the way from the end of the current T2T section with extended covered bits at the above two intersections (think exactly what was done at the Port Road intersection but with a much longer 'bridge' section).

Cheap, simple, no boring equipment needed, tried and tested construction methods along the existing T2T project and the HBR and SDB intersection alignments can remain pretty much unchanged meaning the Thebby, Council chambers, school, electricity buildings, Hilton, golf store and BP can remain in situ. On/off ramps (if needed) can be situated away from the intersection as per Port Road.

[bits]

I swear this conversation was done months ago.
Nothing new was announced in my opinion. Tunnels for this remaining section have been part of the motorway plan for many many years.

This is a new government just putting out recycled junk to make it look like they are doing something.

[ml69]

My prediction (have I said this before?) is nothing remotely as grand:

The surface roads/trench configuration will continue south from the end of T2T - West Thebby will go, as will most of the heritage buildings along South Road. There'll be a short cut and cover tunnel under HBR intersection to spare the Thebby and the school, the trench and surface roads will continue south to another cut and cover tunnel at SDB Drive to spare the Hilton and the Electric Supply Co buildings and then all the way to Cross Road. Southwards from there the jury's out as to whether they'd even bother trenching the motorway, or whether they'd leave it all at the surface. Depends on how the cost of all of the commercial property acquisition stacks up I guess.

I'd genuinely be amazed if we end up with any form of bored solution when there are much cheaper/simpler alternatives and, in reality, I can't see any more than a handful of people crying over the West Thebby and a couple of churches etc on South Road.

It depends where the tunnel starts.
If it starts before the Brickworks it may well have to be bored, especially if there’s any form of wildlife near the bridge and environmentalists know about it(just ask Melbournians about why EastLink has a tunnel lol). It was one of the more expensive options too.

I reckon the trench will just continue from just south of the Torrens (about where the West Thebby is now) with property acquisitioned on the western side of the road (that will spare a few of the heritage listed places between Brickworks and HBR which are on the eastern side), then the trench will simply be covered for a few hundred metres at HBR - long enough to swing the surface roads back in so that instead of running at the side of the trench they'll run over the top of it - and the same again at SDB. No tunnels per se, just a trench all the way from the end of the current T2T section with extended covered bits at the above two intersections (think exactly what was done at the Port Road intersection but with a much longer 'bridge' section).

Cheap, simple, no boring equipment needed, tried and tested construction methods along the existing T2T project and the HBR and SDB intersection alignments can remain pretty much unchanged meaning the Thebby, Council chambers, school, electricity buildings, Hilton, golf store and BP can remain in situ. On/off ramps (if needed) can be situated away from the intersection as per Port Road.

Llessur2002 ... that's probably the most logical solution that I've heard yet in relation to this 'trickiest' section of the N-S Motorway. Can't fault your logic.

[rhino]

Llessur2002 ... that's probably the most logical solution that I've heard yet in relation to this 'trickiest' section of the N-S Motorway. Can't fault your logic.

Plus 1 here.

[claybro]

I reckon the trench will just continue from just south of the Torrens (about where the West Thebby is now) with property acquisitioned on the western side of the road (that will spare a few of the heritage listed places between Brickworks and HBR which are on the eastern side), then the trench will simply be covered for a few hundred metres at HBR - long enough to swing the surface roads back in so that instead of running at the side of the trench they'll run over the top of it - and the same again at SDB. No tunnels per se, just a trench all the way from the end of the current T2T section with extended covered bits at the above two intersections (think exactly what was done at the Port Road intersection but with a much longer 'bridge' section).

Cheap, simple, no boring equipment needed, tried and tested construction methods along the existing T2T project and the HBR and SDB intersection alignments can remain pretty much unchanged meaning the Thebby, Council chambers, school, electricity buildings, Hilton, golf store and BP can remain in situ. On/off ramps (if needed) can be situated away from the intersection as per Port Road.

I also agree this is the simplest option. The only question that springs to mind is how to keep the traffic flowing whilst digging the trench, if the trench is to follow the alignment of the current road. wont there need to be significant space required either side of the trench digging, just to keep an operational road, even if the roadway reverts back to its original path on top of the trench when complete?

[SBD]

I reckon the trench will just continue from just south of the Torrens (about where the West Thebby is now) with property acquisitioned on the western side of the road (that will spare a few of the heritage listed places between Brickworks and HBR which are on the eastern side), then the trench will simply be covered for a few hundred metres at HBR - long enough to swing the surface roads back in so that instead of running at the side of the trench they'll run over the top of it - and the same again at SDB. No tunnels per se, just a trench all the way from the end of the current T2T section with extended covered bits at the above two intersections (think exactly what was done at the Port Road intersection but with a much longer 'bridge' section).

Cheap, simple, no boring equipment needed, tried and tested construction methods along the existing T2T project and the HBR and SDB intersection alignments can remain pretty much unchanged meaning the Thebby, Council chambers, school, electricity buildings, Hilton, golf store and BP can remain in situ. On/off ramps (if needed) can be situated away from the intersection as per Port Road.

I also agree this is the simplest option. The only question that springs to mind is how to keep the traffic flowing whilst digging the trench, if the trench is to follow the alignment of the current road. wont there need to be significant space required either side of the trench digging, just to keep an operational road, even if the roadway reverts back to its original path on top of the trench when complete?

Port Road/James Congdon Drive is already authorised for the same size heavy vehicles as South Road. I imagine that would become the bypass for the works at the times when the entire road needs to be closed for that section. Much of the rest might be able to be done with one open lane in each direction. Works like piling and removing stobie poles can possibly be done overnights and weekends (for a fee!) and keep all lanes open for peak hours as often as possible with longer works scheduled in school holiday times which are often less busy. Marion Road can be an alternate route for works further south, I think it has already had some upgrades to ease the worst pressure points. The traffic management people seem to have done an impressive job at keeping traffic flowing around T2T so if the same planning people get the next contracts, they should do just as well. The technique of building bridges at ground level (Port Road, Grange Road, Park Terrace level crossing) seems to minimise the downtime quite effectively.

[Llessur2002]

I reckon the trench will just continue from just south of the Torrens (about where the West Thebby is now) with property acquisitioned on the western side of the road (that will spare a few of the heritage listed places between Brickworks and HBR which are on the eastern side), then the trench will simply be covered for a few hundred metres at HBR - long enough to swing the surface roads back in so that instead of running at the side of the trench they'll run over the top of it - and the same again at SDB. No tunnels per se, just a trench all the way from the end of the current T2T section with extended covered bits at the above two intersections (think exactly what was done at the Port Road intersection but with a much longer 'bridge' section).

Cheap, simple, no boring equipment needed, tried and tested construction methods along the existing T2T project and the HBR and SDB intersection alignments can remain pretty much unchanged meaning the Thebby, Council chambers, school, electricity buildings, Hilton, golf store and BP can remain in situ. On/off ramps (if needed) can be situated away from the intersection as per Port Road.

I also agree this is the simplest option. The only question that springs to mind is how to keep the traffic flowing whilst digging the trench, if the trench is to follow the alignment of the current road. wont there need to be significant space required either side of the trench digging, just to keep an operational road, even if the roadway reverts back to its original path on top of the trench when complete?

That’s a potential issue I guess – although I suspect it could be solved. There would be no problem anywhere there is a standard T2T-style trench and surface road configuration as this has already been shown to allow the road to be left open whilst works are underway through shifting of the open carriageways accordingly. The pinch points would be at the HBR and SDB tunnel sections where carriageway width is far more limited.

However, it’s likely that all of the piling and beam installation for the bridges could be undertaken at night in the same way that was done for the Park Terrace rail underpass – the road remained open throughout. I suspect that with some careful shifting of traffic at least one lane of South Road could be kept open in either direction during excavation beneath the beams (maybe even two) – although it might mean shifting east-west traffic temporarily from HBR onto SDB and vice-versa as a 4-way intersection would make things more complicated.

It probably won’t be 100% smooth running but with enough work done at night and/or over Christmas etc then it could be workable. I guess the question would be whether it would be worth paying so much more for a far more complicated solution just to keep traffic flowing freely.

I would say that with all of the recent infrastructure work which has involved trenches and beamed bridges – T2T, Torrens Junction, Darlington, O-Bahn and Oaklands etc – we should be pretty efficient and fast at this method of construction by the time these sections are due to be constructed.

[Brucetiki]

Just went past the T2T works. Some of the ITS signs were being tested with the 80 km/h speed limit.

Exciting times as we come close to T2T opening.

[EBG]

A quick snap of the ramp for the overpass to Ayliffes Rd. The actual bridge is being assembled on a temporary site in the middle of the road further down towards Sturt rd.

[SBD]

Just went past the T2T works. Some of the ITS signs were being tested with the 80 km/h speed limit.

Exciting times as we come close to T2T opening.

My wife said it would have been easy to drive down the on-ramp north of Port Road tonight as the gate was open and the road seemed to lead that way

[ChillyPhilly]

Just went past the T2T works. Some of the ITS signs were being tested with the 80 km/h speed limit.

Exciting times as we come close to T2T opening.

My wife said it would have been easy to drive down the on-ramp north of Port Road tonight as the gate was open and the road seemed to lead that way

Less chance of getting stuck in a premature T2T than on an O-Bahn that's been around for decades.