Sensational-Adelaide.com

Something many you Adelaidians would not have seen locally for a long time. A fresh new freeway almost ready for opening.

The images below are from the $700m New Perth-Bunbury Highway due to be opened on September 20.

Can't be Perth, too much traffic.

What is with the huge power pole in that second pic ?
That close to the side of a highway, anyone who hits that at speed is dead on impact.

fabricator wrote:What is with the huge power pole in that second pic ?
That close to the side of a highway, anyone who hits that at speed is dead on impact.

Below is a view from the same location but in the other direction (south). There's another large pole there as well but in this case it's behind a noise wall and a yet to be completed wire rope barrier.

I don't know if the noise wall is to be extended northwards past the pole to which you refer but if it is there was no sign of it as of yesterday (no foundations, bricks etc). The poles for the wire rope barrier can be seen extending towards the pole to which you refer but obviously not past it. With two weeks to go before opening it's possible the wire rope barrier could be extended past that pole.

EDIT:
One would not want to drive into that lonely tree in the central median either.

I remember when they started building this thing (I was living in Perth at the time).

Convenient that I'll be back there when it opens - can't wait to go for a drive on it!

This one has become my PC desktop.

Aidan wrote: Not every busy road has as much traffic as Portrush Road.

Consider Brighton Road. Not as much traffic as Portrush Road, but it's still a busy road. Is it less dangerous for pedestrians? I really don't know, but I remember seeing schoolkids getting off a bus and running across the road (forcing traffic to brake) to catch another bus. I'd expect they'd not have attempted something that dangerous on Portrush Road, though I don't know for sure.

No, I'm pretty sure I've seen several things similar happen on Portrush Road, most of which have been near misses. I know you can't blame the driver if something happens, but wouldn't it be a good idea to divert them away from there altogether?

Aidan wrote:

But let's take a step back. Sorry to bring up an old debate, but from memory, in the... 80s I think it was, there was a plan for the airport to be shifted up North near Two Wells. Combine that with the Northern Connector and "Norwegian Style" Highway (or a tunnel like people said on the Glen Osmond Road Thread) that gets trucks, etc. to Dry Creek, then we've got ourselves a way of getting freight to the airport.

If you were going to Two Wells then it makes sense to totally avoid Adelaide completely, and take the Sturt Highway through the Mount Lofty Ranges.

I agree.

Aidan wrote:

Obviously since the airport is where it is, such a thing won't be necessary for a while since millions were spent on a new terminal, rather than putting that money towards a new airport. But anyway, I don't wish to discuss that here; I am just bringing it up as a response.

Why do you feel the need to respond with red herrings?

Why does Media Mike not listen to the public ? Why did Crows lose last night ? Ah, the mysteries of life.

BTW, drsmith is it true that Bunbury is to Perth what Victor Harbor is to Adelaide?

Finally, here's a little something that I found on Page 27 of The Advertiser yesterday regarding "decisions that Mike Rann and Labor will not make anytime soon". The 3 other were "Introducing an ICAC", "Recalling Parliament" and "Deregulating Shopping Hours". The final was "Freeways or toll roads":

[*]Queensland, Victoria and New South Wales have toll roads. Their freeway and expressway systems are based on toll roads, SA desperately needs a major ring route around the city so that traffic can get from one side of the Metropolitan area to the other without delays at traffic lights. There is also a need to have this route so that heavy traffic can bypass the city -and widening Portrush Road was nothing more than a pitiful stopgap measure.
[*]The Opposition will have the chance at the election to be bold and innovative. It will need to offer something more adventurous to try and make inroads into the Government;s majority. It can count on one thing in the campaign -Mike Rann will be Captain Cautious and will not be making any outlandish promises apart from the usual "no more privatisations".

No I didn't make up this article, it was in the paper.
Sorry to get people's blood boiling again.

It's in The Advertiser, so it MUST be true

adam73837 wrote:No I didn't make up this article, it was in the paper.
Sorry to get people's blood boiling again.

Adam, you need to learn the difference between opinion pieces and actual news reports. Is that why you didn't site the source? Once you've worked out that, then you need to be able to critique a news article. Only then you can confidently site newspapers in discussions.

Adelaide does not need ring roads.

We are a linear city, therefore we need cross-city roads. The provision of a primary north-south corridor is an imperative and absolute priority.

It's either an now or never situation - It will cost money, lots of it, but if we don't invest now, it'll only cost more in the future. With reference to the freeway proposals of the MATS plan, we do critically need the North-South Corridor (Noarlunga and Salisbury Freeways), Modbury Freeway, Dry Creek Expressway and the Foothills Expressway. Of course not in it's exact form as proposed in 1968 - but revised to suit the conditions of today.

Everything but the inner-city section of North-South Corridor, and the inner-city section of the Modbury Freeway is not a hard task to achieve at all.

There is sufficient land provision available for the extension of the Dry Creek Expressway (via Montague Road alignment) to Tea Tree Plaza.

We conquered environmental and geographical complications of the South-Eastern Freeway, the Foothills Expressway - technically the South-Eastern Freeway Extension - can be conquered also.

From Tea Tree Plaza northwards, Modbury Freeway can easily be reinstated along the McIntrye and Main North Road road corridors - with provision for the initial roads themselves.

This connects to the Gawler Bypass, offering choice of route, and primary use - Northern Expressway for freight, and Modbury Freeway for all other traffic.

The outer-suburban extremities of the North-South Corridor - Southern & Northern Expressways (and their respective extensions) are already completed/proposed for construction. Sturt Highway's duplication to the Barossa is nearly completed, and Victor Harbor Road is at some point slated for duplication and modification further down the line. These connections however are the lesser prorities to the development of Greater Adelaide's freeway network.

Shuz wrote:Adelaide does not need ring roads.

We are a linear city, therefore we need cross-city roads. The provision of a primary north-south corridor is an imperative and absolute priority.

We already have cross city roads. We have a primary N-S corridor (known as South Road). The improvement of it is a high priority.

It's either an now or never situation - It will cost money, lots of it, but if we don't invest now, it'll only cost more in the future.

Most infrastructure is likely to cost more in the future than now. That doesn't mean it's a now or never situation. There's nothing that can be built now that can't be built in the future if we plan for it now. But a lot of the stuff from the MATS plan is already in the never category.

With reference to the freeway proposals of the MATS plan, we do critically need the North-South Corridor (Noarlunga and Salisbury Freeways), Modbury Freeway, Dry Creek Expressway and the Foothills Expressway. Of course not in it's exact form as proposed in 1968 - but revised to suit the conditions of today.

Not only the conditions of today, but the still valid conditions that made the MATS plan unnecessary.

Everything but the inner-city section of North-South Corridor, and the inner-city section of the Modbury Freeway is not a hard task to achieve at all.

That depends on what you mean. With a $10bn+ budget and a large tunnel boring machine it's certainly doable, but nowhere near easy!

There is sufficient land provision available for the extension of the Dry Creek Expressway (via Montague Road alignment) to Tea Tree Plaza.

It makes more sense if you look at it the other way: extending Montague Road to the Port River Expressway. It could be grade separated if necessary, but I think that deserves a lower priority.

We conquered environmental and geographical complications of the South-Eastern Freeway, the Foothills Expressway - technically the South-Eastern Freeway Extension - can be conquered also.

Firstly it wouldn't be the SE Freeway Extension, as the SE Freeway has already been extended to Glen Osmond. Secondly, there wasn't a lot of housing on the route of the SE Freeway. The same can not be said for the Foothills Expressway. And thirdly, even if a route could be found, why would you want to build it? There's not much traffic between the hills and southern suburbs. The original Foothills Expressway would've been well used because it connected with the Hills Freeway. But with that firmly consigned to the dustbin of history, why waste the money?

From Tea Tree Plaza northwards, Modbury Freeway can easily be reinstated along the McIntrye and Main North Road road corridors - with provision for the initial roads themselves.

It could be done, but the costs would greatly outweigh the benefits.

This connects to the Gawler Bypass, offering choice of route, and primary use - Northern Expressway for freight, and Modbury Freeway for all other traffic.

Once the Northern Expressway opens we will have the choice of route. The other option won't be a freeway, but there's no reason why it has to be.

The outer-suburban extremities of the North-South Corridor - Southern & Northern Expressways (and their respective extensions) are already completed/proposed for construction. Sturt Highway's duplication to the Barossa is nearly completed, and Victor Harbor Road is at some point slated for duplication and modification further down the line. These connections however are the lesser prorities to the development of Greater Adelaide's freeway network.

Considering the safety benefits they'll bring, I can't agree. But when it comes to improving Adelaide's transport infrastructure, there are more cost effective ways of doing it than with freeways.

monotonehell wrote:

adam73837 wrote:No I didn't make up this article, it was in the paper.
Sorry to get people's blood boiling again.

Adam, you need to learn the difference between opinion pieces and actual news reports. Is that why you didn't site the source?

I am aware that it was an opinion piece not a news article. And I am also aware that many of the writers in The Advertiser are not the best ones; I read The Australian on an occasional basis and you can easily tell the difference in the quality of writing. However, I figured that seeing as it was related to the things discussed on this Forum, it would be an idea to post something written by a journalist at the present time.
Nice "Lady and the Tram" Video BTW.

Norman wrote:It's in The Advertiser, so it MUST be true

No Norman. Even a mere High School Student like myself is aware of the mistakes made in this paper. They themselves sometimes publish on Page 2 mistakes that they have made; when they don't, it's plain obvious where the errors are.

Aidan wrote:

Shuz wrote:The outer-suburban extremities of the North-South Corridor - Southern & Northern Expressways (and their respective extensions) are already completed/proposed for construction. Sturt Highway's duplication to the Barossa is nearly completed, and Victor Harbor Road is at some point slated for duplication and modification further down the line. These connections however are the lesser prorities to the development of Greater Adelaide's freeway network.

Considering the safety benefits they'll bring, I can't agree. But when it comes to improving Adelaide's transport infrastructure, there are more cost effective ways of doing it than with freeways.

Such as building a railway beneath the CBD where the population is only a small percentage of the number of people living in the areas that the freeways of which Shuz talks about would serve?

adam73837 wrote:

Aidan wrote:

Shuz wrote:The outer-suburban extremities of the North-South Corridor - Southern & Northern Expressways (and their respective extensions) are already completed/proposed for construction. Sturt Highway's duplication to the Barossa is nearly completed, and Victor Harbor Road is at some point slated for duplication and modification further down the line. These connections however are the lesser prorities to the development of Greater Adelaide's freeway network.

Considering the safety benefits they'll bring, I can't agree. But when it comes to improving Adelaide's transport infrastructure, there are more cost effective ways of doing it than with freeways.

Such as building a railway beneath the CBD where the population is only a small percentage of the number of people living in the areas that the freeways of which Shuz talks about would serve?

Despite your smiley, the answer is a resounding yes.

Although the proportion of people living in the City is quite low, the number of people working there is much higher - and most suburban residents make non work related trips into the City. But don't make the mistake of assuming that only the people travelling to the City would benefit. Cross City commuting by train is rather awkward - countless times when I commuted from Hallett Cove to Mawson Lakes I missed the connection at Adelaide station because the train arrived late. With direct cross City trains it would be much easier, and rail would become a sensible option for many of the journeys that are currently only practical by car.

But the main point is the effect it would have on non users. A railway beneath the CBD would get lots of traffic off the roads, so congestion would go down everywhere. Whereas freeways would reduce congestion on the roads parallelling them, but increase congestion on the roads leading to them - and congestion in the City would keep worsening.

That doesn't necessarily mean we shouldn't have freeways. A non stop N-S corridor would be advantageous, but its not imperative.

Aidan wrote:

adam73837 wrote: Such as building a railway beneath the CBD where the population is only a small percentage of the number of people living in the areas that the freeways of which Shuz talks about would serve?

Despite your smiley, the answer is a resounding yes.

Although the proportion of people living in the City is quite low, the number of people working there is much higher - and most suburban residents make non work related trips into the City. But don't make the mistake of assuming that only the people travelling to the City would benefit. Cross City commuting by train is rather awkward - countless times when I commuted from Hallett Cove to Mawson Lakes I missed the connection at Adelaide station because the train arrived late. With direct cross City trains it would be much easier, and rail would become a sensible option for many of the journeys that are currently only practical by car.

But the main point is the effect it would have on non users. A railway beneath the CBD would get lots of traffic off the roads, so congestion would go down everywhere. Whereas freeways would reduce congestion on the roads parallelling them, but increase congestion on the roads leading to them - and congestion in the City would keep worsening.

That doesn't necessarily mean we shouldn't have freeways. A non stop N-S corridor would be advantageous, but its not imperative.

I was stirring you Aidan, hence the smiley.