Sensational-Adelaide.com

claybro wrote:Yes the various definitions of the words have previously been discussed at length on here, but I do believe the word "freeway" has been deliberately avoided in Adelaide due to its negative connotation in the urban context in Adelaides conservative mindset. The result however of denying it is in fact a freeway, lead people to believe it should be accessible and able to be crossed at all points along the route. It would appear however that they are achieving the miracle of a freeway by stealth, and not before time.

An interesting discussion! Now that I think about it, the word 'motorway' has some kind of quaint English feel to it which conjures up pottering along a road in the countryside in an open top Morgan or something. 'Freeway' on the other hand definitely (in the Adelaide mindset) conjures up associations like 'Los Angeles' and 'MATS plan'.

While there is still much to be done on the NS Corridor, I'm actually amazed this thing is coming together at the speed it is given all the built in barriers to these developments - financial of course but just as much the political. For me it's up there with the desal plant and 'unlimited except for airport limit' building heights in the CBD as things I honestly didn't think Adelaide would see anytime before 2050.

I'm just hoping the planning on the two (expensive and complex) Anzac highway connecting sections is progressing because with the potential tanking of the state, national and global economies it is entirely possible there could be another big round of federal stimulus on the cards - we need as a state to be ready to go with some big plans.

rev wrote:Alright...so from Torrens Road, travelling either East towards the City or West towards the beach, how do we get onto the motorway?
There doesn't seem to be any access...

I cannot see the point of an on-ramp for traffic from Torrens Road travelling North on the freeway. It's only 700m from Torrens Road to Pym Street and that will be on a one-way, two lane road with no traffic lights or cross traffic. Effectively, that will be the the on-ramp. Going south there is a need for an on-ramp which will hopefully be addressed in the detailed design.

mawsonguy wrote:

rev wrote:Alright...so from Torrens Road, travelling either East towards the City or West towards the beach, how do we get onto the motorway?
There doesn't seem to be any access...

I cannot see the point of an on-ramp for traffic from Torrens Road travelling North on the freeway. It's only 700m from Torrens Road to Pym Street and that will be on a one-way, two lane road with no traffic lights or cross traffic. Effectively, that will be the the on-ramp. Going south there is a need for an on-ramp which will hopefully be addressed in the detailed design.

At this point, there should be on/off ramps in all directions from Torrens Road, allowing for point where someone in the hierachy realises that there's only two intersections between the sections of motorway to be knocked off. Can just see a lot of traffic ducking from Torrens Road into Pym Street to reach the motorway going south - not really a great outcome for anyone who lives along what is effectively a narrow connector road.

rev wrote:Alright...so from Torrens Road, travelling either East towards the City or West towards the beach, how do we get onto the motorway?
There doesn't seem to be any access...

If you are on Torrens Road heading east or west, you could use the surface South Road. It has 2 lanes heading north/south so you would be no worse than currently. The surface South Rd will likely have much less traffic as much of it will be diverted down in to the North-South Motorway.

You can't have every road as on/off or you will just end up with the current slow South Road again.

bits wrote:

rev wrote:Alright...so from Torrens Road, travelling either East towards the City or West towards the beach, how do we get onto the motorway?
There doesn't seem to be any access...

If you are on Torrens Road heading east or west, you could use the surface South Road. It has 2 lanes heading north/south so you would be no worse than currently. The surface South Rd will likely have much less traffic as much of it will be diverted down in to the North-South Motorway.

You can't have every road as on/off or you will just end up with the current slow South Road again.

This is where ramp metering comes in handy!

This is great news, just makes so much sense to go under Torrens Road in this build!
I'd imagine this will continue under Pym St and Regency Road connecting with the Superway, with on/off ramps at Regency Road. Wouldn't surprise me if that's funded sooner rather than later too.

In the plan released about 6 months ago which outlined the construction methods and form of the entire North South Corridor, DPTI spoke about how completed stages would connect with new stages.

According to this report, the aim for each stage is for it to finish at grade with the current South Road, with the drop or rise to lower/raise it above the current grade occuring within the project bounds. This can be seen in the Superway; the road comes back to grade, before continuing and connecting with South Rd.

From the renders released the other day, there appears to be a significant median between the North and South bound sides of the trench between Torrens and Pym. If the plan released by DPTI holds true, we may see the trench returning to grade after Torrens, before dropping again to go under Torrens.

Alternatively, it may be possible that Pym will go under the NS corridor, although I imagine this is somewhat unlikely..

mawsonguy wrote:

rev wrote:Alright...so from Torrens Road, travelling either East towards the City or West towards the beach, how do we get onto the motorway?
There doesn't seem to be any access...

I cannot see the point of an on-ramp for traffic from Torrens Road travelling North on the freeway. It's only 700m from Torrens Road to Pym Street and that will be on a one-way, two lane road with no traffic lights or cross traffic. Effectively, that will be the the on-ramp. Going south there is a need for an on-ramp which will hopefully be addressed in the detailed design.

I never said that though.

What I think it needs is an on ramp heading south and an off ramp heading north.

Pym Street is not suitable to large volumes of traffic.
Nor is the Pym/Days road t junction, nor is the Days/Torrens intersection nor the Days/Regency intersection. There's not much room for expanding these intersections, let alone widening these roads. Not without even more property acquisitions which I think the government will try and avoid because of the backlash it will create. There's a necessity, then there's going over board unnecessarily.

If you look at the Eastern Freeway in Melbourne, from the start on the western side all the way to Springvale Road, there is on/off ramps on a very very regular basis. It doesn't detract from the fact that it is still a freeway.

Peak hours on Torrens road are hectic.
If you force all that traffic onto Torrens Road with no outlet onto the freeway/south road, you will see a situation where the backstreets of Brompton and Bowden which are narrow, congested with park cars, and with a speed limit of 40kmh, become an alternative route used by many thousands of motorists daily.

The extension of the trench under Torrens Road is undoubtedly good news.

The 9 News segment indicates avoiding some of the service relocation costs and better than expected tendering costs. The latter is no doubt related to the broader resource construction slowdown. A number of road projects in Perth have not only undergone extensions due to contract cost savings and on top of that, there's presently unspent savings.

IIRC, the northern expressway cost was heavily impacted by the resource construction boom and tendering costs going sky high as a consequence so perhaps what we're seeing now is a return to normality.

I also note the properties affected by the trench extension have 10 months before they need to move (9 News again). In Perth, land acquisition for both a rail and road project have been controversial (the road project in particular). Here, the basis of settlement is market value plus a premium of 10%.

Back to south Road, I imagine the remaining section from Pym Street to Regency Road would be upgraded as a trench when finally done as it's primarily residential south of Regency road. A less expensive alternative could be at grade with an underpass at Regency Road and the remaining streets across South Road to the south cut and connections provided to/from the service roads either side only.

http://www.365daysofmotoring.com/showon ... ticle/2084

18 Years ago today since the southern expressway opened to traffic

Updated link with plan of new extension.

http://www.t2talliance.com.au/torrens-r ... ouncement/

An even better option would be to drop another $100-200m and just connect the Superway to T2T. There would have to be efficiencies. Save money in the long term.

bdm wrote:An even better option would be to drop another $100-200m and just connect the Superway to T2T. There would have to be efficiencies. Save money in the long term.

How do you know it's only going to cost 100-200 million to do that?

rev wrote:

bdm wrote:An even better option would be to drop another $100-200m and just connect the Superway to T2T. There would have to be efficiencies. Save money in the long term.

How do you know it's only going to cost 100-200 million to do that?

I don't! It's a guess. But my basic point is this--if for only (proportionately) a small amount more, wouldn't it be best to get it done?

bdm wrote:

rev wrote:

bdm wrote:An even better option would be to drop another $100-200m and just connect the Superway to T2T. There would have to be efficiencies. Save money in the long term.

How do you know it's only going to cost 100-200 million to do that?

I don't! It's a guess. But my basic point is this--if for only (proportionately) a small amount more, wouldn't it be best to get it done?

Yeah it's only an extra 3km to tack onto the project, totally doable for $200m.