[U/C] M2 North-South Motorway

[shiftaling]

Why would you massacre the resi section of Thebarton instead of just using Manton-Port-Congdon?

[Westside]

Here's my visionary prediction on the future of the N-S motorway. It's pretty complex, so I hope I can describe it accurately:

• Use the existing South Road alignment

[monotonehell]

Here's my visionary prediction on the future of the N-S motorway. It's pretty complex, so I hope I can describe it accurately:

• Use the existing South Road alignment

Controversial!

[rhino]

Here's my visionary prediction on the future of the N-S motorway. It's pretty complex, so I hope I can describe it accurately:

• Use the existing South Road alignment

Well said, that man!

[Llessur2002]

My route requires zero property acquisitions.

[bits]

I came up with an alternative to the R4 and R5 sections. Most of the route follows James Congdon Drive from South Road, through to Port Road Thebarton, across diagonally to Cawthorne Tce up to the River Torrens, and again diagonally across with Adam Street to the existing start of the current Torrens to Torrens project.

Regards.
Ray.

What I don't see is what this alternative would offer.
It is longer, twists and turns all over the place, requires far more land and looks to knock out a bunch of heritage listed buildings.
So what positives does it offer? It just looks like "anything that is not the current South Rd alignment".

[Hooligan]

My route requires zero property acquisitions.

That's crazier than my idea. I was going to suggest we build a freeway from Murray Bridge to Truro.

Wait...

[Nort]

Most of those motorways were designed in the 1960s and 1970s, things have chanced since then in terms of city and transport planning.

As I said earlier, most freeways today are designed for freight purposes, not commuting to the city. Look at WestConnex (Airport/Port Botany), Roe8 (Fremantle Port), Western Distributor (Port of Melbourne), Northern Connector (Outer Harbor), etc...

And what's being built in Adelaide is following along a very similar path/plan to what was laid out in the original MATS plan. So what point where you trying to make about their design being from a few decades ago?
We had an extensive tram network once in Adelaide, long before the MATS plan, and now we are trying to rebuild it small piece by small piece. Are you saying we shouldn't, because it's a decades old design/technology or something...?

The flavor of the month may be to try and get more commuters onto public transport, and more freight vehicles off suburban roads and eventually onto motorways, but that doesn't take away from the fact that private commuter vehicles will be the biggest users in terms of numbers of these new motorways/freeways being built.
And as long as there are cars to buy, they will continue being the biggest users of road infrastructure.

The case of motorways/freeways for freight is a separate issue and shouldn't detract from the fact that me, in my personal vehicle, and the tens of thousands of others in their personal vehicles, will outnumber the amount of trucks on these motorways by several times.

However the freight uses are much more important to society overall than the consumer vehicles.

We need highways and free-flowing roads for commuter vehicles certainly, however at some point it isn't worth the cost (especially when you consider that induced demand often over time erases the commuter benefit).

[Ben]

The government are mad if they approve this proposed Bunnings with its boundary right up against the current south road at Edwardstown. This is a perfect opportunity to widen this part as the adjacent car yards are for sale as well.

there is commentry on this in the Castle Plaza thread aswell.

http://dac.sa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_ ... 17_opt.pdf

[crawf]

Agreed 100%. It would be very bad planning.

The Government should of acquired this site.

[rhino]

Agreed 100%. It would be very bad planning.

The Government should have acquired this site.

fixed that for you

[SouthAussie94]

Agreed 100%. It would be very bad planning.

The Government should have acquired this site.

fixed that for you

That was good've you

[[Shuz]]

Surely this is a joke?

I know April's Fools was a month ago, but this is just really, terribly, horrible, bad planning.

The State Government needs to intervene now and save us the time, money and resources. I can only imagine if this gets approved and built, it will mean that in the near future there will be a very ugly and drawn out land acquisition process when the time comes to upgrade the Edwardstown section of South Road. I wouldn't be surprised if Bunnings went so far as to sue for lost earnings and compensation of capital expenditure because the Government didn't plan properly.

[drsmith]

Has it been decided yet along that section as to which side of South Road land would be acquired for the future expressway ?

[ChillyPhilly]

Has it been decided yet along that section as to which side of South Road land would be acquired for the future expressway ?

If that decision has been made, it's not known to the public.

With regards to the proposed Edwardstown Bunnings, the development is on Category 3 level of notification, meaning anyone can make written submissions on the project. You can email the Development Assessment Commission at [email protected]. DAC are taking submissions from today until 17 May.

View the application and a form to download and print for submissions here: http://dac.sa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_ ... 17_opt.pdf