Sensational-Adelaide.com

Aidan wrote: ↑

Tue Feb 12, 2019 12:03 am

The Sunday Mail report is hollow. The reason DPTI have not released cost estimates is because they've not done cost estimates yet! It's not a detailed plan; just a very vague proposal, possibly fed to the press by the government to gauge public reaction.

Meanwhile I've nearly finished an alternative plan for a PPP including a South Road upgrade. Some tunneling is likely, though probably cut and cover rather than bored. But for commercial reasons I can't say much more about it yet.

You can't talk about it because it's being funded by Transurban and they're proposing a toll road? Is that considered insider trading? maybe I'll put some coin in TCL

The question is if a toll operator funds these proposed tunnels [the last $5bn] would they accept only a toll on this section or would they want tolls on the whole 78km Motorway to help pay for it quicker? I think if its a toll only on the tunnels its acceptable as people will still have a choice to use them or not. The existing completed [or underway] motorway ie 68km has been paid by taxpayers and should always remain toll free.

how good is he wrote: ↑

Tue Feb 12, 2019 10:27 am

The question is if a toll operator funds these proposed tunnels [the last $5bn] would they accept only a toll on this section or would they want tolls on the whole 78km Motorway to help pay for it quicker? I think if its a toll only on the tunnels its acceptable as people will still have a choice to use them or not. The existing completed [or underway] motorway ie 68km has been paid by taxpayers and should always remain toll free.

Building a new freeway to get traffic off of other roads, then putting a toll on the new road is making the price signal go the wrong way. If there has to be a toll road between Clovelly Park and Hindmarsh, the toll should be levied on anyone who travels through both endpoints without using the tunnel.

The suggestion or use of a toll is not about sending the right or wrong message it’s about funding and looking at all options to raise the $5bn + needed. I mean sure we can wait for Govt to do it with no tolls and also to “send the right message” but if that takes 10+ years and we are left paying say $1m-$2m interest A DAY (just comparing it with the NRAH) vs a ppp finishing in the next 5 years at no upfront cost to taxpayers/govt, what is preferable?

SBD wrote: ↑

Tue Feb 12, 2019 12:50 pm

how good is he wrote: ↑

Tue Feb 12, 2019 10:27 am

The question is if a toll operator funds these proposed tunnels [the last $5bn] would they accept only a toll on this section or would they want tolls on the whole 78km Motorway to help pay for it quicker? I think if its a toll only on the tunnels its acceptable as people will still have a choice to use them or not. The existing completed [or underway] motorway ie 68km has been paid by taxpayers and should always remain toll free.

Building a new freeway to get traffic off of other roads, then putting a toll on the new road is making the price signal go the wrong way. If there has to be a toll road between Clovelly Park and Hindmarsh, the toll should be levied on anyone who travels through both endpoints without using the tunnel.

The motorway is not necessarily to get traffic off of other roads. It is to enable more efficient movement mainly of commercial traffic over medium to long distances. Any reduction in traffic on other arterials is a co-incidental benefit and not the main purpose. They also have to be VERY careful not to create induced demand, so that the new road becomes gridlocked defeating its core purpose. Creating a price penalty forcing commuters to use the motorway would render it gridlocked and be extremely difficult to operate as a tollway if it is to be a PPP.

We don't need tolls and these tunnels will not be tolled. It will be funded from existing taxes and levies that were put in place to fund these projects.

Decrease spending in other areas, increase taxes or don't build the road if there isn't enough money.

bits wrote: ↑

Tue Feb 12, 2019 1:52 pm

We don't need tolls and these tunnels will not be tolled. It will be funded from existing taxes and levies that were put in place to fund these projects.

Decrease spending in other areas, increase taxes or don't build the road if there isn't enough money.

Spoken like a true south Australian. So you are content for Adelaide to have a road system that has widely become regarded as a joke nationally, and is an impediment to the states economic growth?

Exactly. The T2T took maybe 20-30 years of talk prior to actually funding & doing it. Here’s the scoop bits, we don’t have enough money.

The traffic volume along South road isn't actually all that high. Between T2T and Darlington, it averages about 45k cars per day, peaking up to about 55k per day in short sections. DPTI have previously said that SA doesn't have the traffic volume to justify tolls. Any induced demand on a freeway which would make tolls viable would be reduced by people wanting to avoid tolls.

Assuming 50k vehicles per day, charging an average of $5 per vehicle, with no overhead costs or company profits, it would take over 50 years to pay for the road.

If the federal government pay for half of it, that would only leave $2.5b to built the last part of the project. If the project is built over 10 years (5 years per section), that would only be $250m per year.

If we really push it, we could have the federal government paying for 80% of the project, leaving only $1b to be spent by the state government.

Goodsy wrote: You can't talk about it because it's being funded by Transurban and they're proposing a toll road? Is that considered insider trading? maybe I'll put some coin in TCL

You may do that if you wish. But Transurban is not the only company in the business and I don't have an agreement with any of them yet. My plan does not involve tolls on South Road, and AFAIK nobody else is currently proposing those.

claybro wrote: Spoken like a true south Australian. So you are content for Adelaide to have a road system that has widely become regarded as a joke nationally, and is an impediment to the states economic growth?

SA gets all kinds of jokes said about it. Fashion, culture, roads, etc.
Driving on Adelaide roads is far easier than Brisbane, Sydney or Melbourne. I have sat in car parks Sydney have signed as freeways while in Adelaide catching a few red lights for a cycle is apparently the nation's joke.

If South Road is holding SA back, which I agree it is, this should be funded by all Australians as a nation building project. Exactly like the rest of the road was funded. A user pay model makes zero sense to something that is holding SA and therefore Australia back.

Why make a few users in SA pay for something that is clearly holding everyone back? Everyone should pay, everyone will benefit.

It is simple stuff.
You even argue yourself that this is a problem for an entire state of Australia, but then drift into some tangent that a couple localised users should wear the entire countries bill.

bits wrote: ↑

Wed Feb 13, 2019 1:07 am

claybro wrote: Spoken like a true south Australian. So you are content for Adelaide to have a road system that has widely become regarded as a joke nationally, and is an impediment to the states economic growth?

SA gets all kinds of jokes said about it. Fashion, culture, roads, etc.
Driving on Adelaide roads is far easier than Brisbane, Sydney or Melbourne. I have sat in car parks Sydney have signed as freeways while in Adelaide catching a few red lights for a cycle is apparently the nation's joke.

If South Road is holding SA back, which I agree it is, this should be funded by all Australians as a nation building project. Exactly like the rest of the road was funded. A user pay model makes zero sense to something that is holding SA and therefore Australia back.

Why make a few users in SA pay for something that is clearly holding everyone back? Everyone should pay, everyone will benefit.

It is simple stuff.
You even argue yourself that this is a problem for an entire state of Australia, but then drift into some tangent that a couple localised users should wear the entire countries bill.

A couple of things bits. Sydney and Melbourne populations are 4-5 time larger than Adelaide with much higher population density, so yes, you would expect to find much greater traffic congestion. If all the other capitals had the same approach as SA and expected the federal and state governments alone to pay for everything, those cities would be at a standstill. Only through tolling and private companies becoming involved in road construction, have Brisbane, Sydney and Melbourne been able to have anything like a functioning road system. Perth, the only notable exception has an excellent and continually expanding freeway system, but this was initially funded by a separate levy on fuel commencing some 50 years ago and so WA motorists in effect have paid for these freeways by a hidden toll anyway. Localised users in every other state have paid for their own world class freeways and tunnels, as has the various federal and state governments, so why do you expect South Australians should escape this? Like I said..a very typical south Aussie attitude.

South Australians should also pay like it has for other sections.
Tolls are not magic money trees. It just allows you to directly charge a user. But directly charging a user only makes sense if they are the only ones to benefit from a service.

Why should people on the east of Adelaide avoid paying for the road that will cause Portrush Rd to not become a freeway. Those using Portrush will benefit from North-South Motorway but get to avoid paying for it? Portrush should have a toll to pay for the road that leads to it not needing major upgrades, same with Brighton/Lonsdale/Tapleys Hill and Marion. If every South Australian is on the hook to pay for this putting tolls up is the least effective way of getting the money.

It is an entire state and country issue and should be funded by all that will benefit. State and Federal Government will have increased tax takes from the benefits of the road.

If payroll taxes and GST are not enough to fund vital all of state/country issues you either have to decrease other spending, increase taxes or not build it.

I think the fairest way to fund the state component of the N-S Motorway upgrade and CBD rail tunnel is a petrol and diesel levy on metropolitan Adelaide motorists (maybe 5c per litre), with funds raised by this levy to go 100% to funding the construction. This would be enshrined by state legislation that these funds cannot be used for any other purpose.

Once these 2 major transport projects are completed (which might be 15-20 years time), the levy would be removed.