stumpjumper wrote:There's no doubt that there is a need for better transport capacity to serve the growing southern areas. However, I wonder how much of this growing demand is from commuters rather than road transport?
Obviously some is, but most outer suburban residents work locally.
My point is that if the demand is from commuters, then it seems to make more sense than to extend the rail service to the south - even as far as Victor Harbor, with a double track, before duplicating the Southern Expressway.
Before extending railways further outward (when demand is likely to be low) it makes sense to extend them under the City (where demand is known to be high).
The advantage of the 22km Southern Expressway is that it saves time for people driving to Adelaide. While time saved increases productivity in the commercial transport business, saving time for commuters is a luxury that doesn't much improve productivity.
Once it goes the other way, other advantages will become apparent.
Two disadvantages of the proposal are that 1) it will encourage more cars into the city and metropolitan area, most of which would be parked all day while the occupants were at work
No, that's only a disadvantage of what we have already.
If I'm going from Hallett Cove to Victor Harbor, the Expressway would save a lot of time. But because it only goes one way, it's more likely than not to be useless for the purpose. And there aren't even any signs telling me which way it's running until I actually get there.
and 2) it will reduce to local connector status the existing six and four lane South Road with impacts on thousands of businesses.
Has Grand Junction Road been reduced to
local connector status?
With the increasing dollar and carbon cost of running all the way into the city, wouldn't it make more sense to build the rail extension first, thereby reducing the number of cars coming into the city by providing park and ride stations all the way to Victor Harbor, and only then see if duplicating the southern expressway still made sense?
Why would encouraging more people to commute to the City from there take higher priority than improving non commute transport infrastructure.
The new intersection at Darlington could be built with 'blind alleys' to accommodate a future duplication of the admittedly odd one way expressway, if necessary.
That's not as simple as it may seem, as without the expressway more lanes will be needed for Main South Road.
I have contacted DTEI which advises that the project is driven by the idea that it will be cheaper to build the expressway extension now, in conjunction with the Darlington intersection, to which the magic acronym TOD is applied, than to build it later.
It makes a lot of sense to combine Expressway duplication with Darlington grade separation. The real question is whether it should be now (when federal money is known to be available) or later (when there are no guarantees).
I accept the truth of that, but not the logic. DTEI says it has plans to build the railway extension 'in the future'. I think that the rail extension should be built first, as it has the positive effects of reducing car traffic into the city, and making possible cheap, convenient commuting possible from towns right down the Fleurieu Peninsula.
Normanville would be a better destination than Victor Harbor. It would be better to have the railway complement the freeway system than shadow it.
On the point of the 'orphaning' of the existing South Road and the businesses which depend on its traffic, DTEI's response is that the commercial sections of South Road will become local 'main streets', albeit wide ones, and the businesses that depended on passing trade will presumably close and be replaced by local traders. Again, I question the logic of this concept.
Shops at O'Halloran Hill and Morphett Vale will lose some customers. Therefore the value of the land will fall. Leasing costs will also fall, so where the land is leased, the shops may be able to stay in business.
There are really only four possible outcomes: The shops stay open, the shops close and are replaced by other shops, or the shops close and the land is rezoned. None of these options are too bad, so I''m guessing you're concerned that we might end up with the fourth option: the shops close and remain derelict. But that seems unlikely to me - our state is quite successful at the moment, and demand remains strong. Also, while it would be very controversial, there is the option of subdividing the part of Glenthorne within 5 minutes' walk of O'Halloran Hill shops, boosting local demand.
A commuter train from Victor Harbor to Adelaide, with the present diesel electric rolling stock or ideally an electrified system, and with three or four major park and ride points, would seem to be a far more efficient and economical addition to the southern transport network than an additional roadway for private cars.
A new multi billion dollar railway to the exurbs, catering mainly for commuters who will drive to it... don't you see a problem with it yet?
Buses seem to me to be a much better alternative for this route.
I'm not sure that was seriously considered as an alternative to the appealing but false logic of saving money by duplicating 22kms of expressway while building the Darlington 'TOD'.
Duplicating the expressway makes sense. The same can't be said for a Darlington TOD, a least until the railway's extended.
