Sensational-Adelaide.com

claybro wrote: ↑

Sat Oct 31, 2020 10:22 pm

Bob wrote: ↑

Fri Oct 30, 2020 9:57 am

When the NS MW is completed, freight on the Melbourne-Perth freight corridor via Adelaide, (regardless if that freight is stopping in Adelaide or passing through), will take the shortest/fastest/most economical route, and that will be the 6KM stretch of Cross Road joining the SE FW to the new NS MW.

It is then up to the various layers of Government to decide if they will be OK with the increased heavy traffic on Cross Road and the social fallout that comes with it, or if they want to fund a better alternative. In other words, are they comfortable moving the existing heavy freight problem from Portrush & Hampstead Roads to Cross Road? If so fine, if not - then get an alternative on the drawing board quick smart.

SA hasn't thought that far into the future since the 1970's. The logical choice is a major upgrade/ tunnel for Cross Road, but we can't even get agreement on the next stretch of N/S expressway. Infrastructure Australia literally have to beg the SA government for proposals but... crickets.

That's because there's no small plans let alone masterplans. There's nothing. They make it all up as they go along.
Anyone who says otherwise is lying.
Proof is in the pudding. If there were plans, if they had any idea, there'd be movement, we'd see things happening.
All we see though, is statements to the media and spin.

But South Aussies are dumb. That's why we're in this mess ultimately. They voted in these Liberal party clowns. Not that Labor has plans, but at least they would have kept the work going instead of stalling like the Liberals are.

claybro wrote: ↑

Sat Oct 31, 2020 10:22 pm

Bob wrote: ↑

Fri Oct 30, 2020 9:57 am

When the NS MW is completed, freight on the Melbourne-Perth freight corridor via Adelaide, (regardless if that freight is stopping in Adelaide or passing through), will take the shortest/fastest/most economical route, and that will be the 6KM stretch of Cross Road joining the SE FW to the new NS MW.

It is then up to the various layers of Government to decide if they will be OK with the increased heavy traffic on Cross Road and the social fallout that comes with it, or if they want to fund a better alternative. In other words, are they comfortable moving the existing heavy freight problem from Portrush & Hampstead Roads to Cross Road? If so fine, if not - then get an alternative on the drawing board quick smart.

SA hasn't thought that far into the future since the 1970's. The logical choice is a major upgrade/ tunnel for Cross Road, but we can't even get agreement on the next stretch of N/S expressway. Infrastructure Australia literally have to beg the SA government for proposals but... crickets.

A tunnel under Cross Road is not the logical choice as far as I can see. One of the motivations for a change is the number of trucks that arrive at the Glen Osmond traffic lights without the ability to stop. Cross Road slopes up to that intersection, so to put a tunnel under it requires a tight left hand bend and continuing downhill. The consequence will either be a rolled truck on that bend in the tunnel entrance, or the same failure to stop somewhere further down hill if the driver continues to be skilful enough to maintain sufficient control of the truck not to have collided with anything else in the tunnel.

Incidentally, the then-opposition did try to think that far ahead by proposing GlobeLink, maybe the Short South option will be proposed next election by either party, but that will depend on local politics of the seats it would cross. Do the benefits outweigh the local detriments? This seems to be the same problem that completing the N-S Motorway has become bogged in.

SBD wrote: ↑

Sun Nov 01, 2020 8:35 am

A tunnel under Cross Road is not the logical choice as far as I can see. One of the motivations for a change is the number of trucks that arrive at the Glen Osmond traffic lights without the ability to stop. Cross Road slopes up to that intersection, so to put a tunnel under it requires a tight left hand bend and continuing downhill. The consequence will either be a rolled truck on that bend in the tunnel entrance, or the same failure to stop somewhere further down hill if the driver continues to be skilful enough to maintain sufficient control of the truck not to have collided with anything else in the tunnel.

If a tunnel/trench solution for a Cross Road Motorway is used, it could be possible that SEF/Cross Road could have an overpass over the Glen Osmond intersection. Flattens out the final approach starting around the toll gate, passes over the intersection, then once it joins Cross Road the grade down can be made much gentler to join whatever solution is devised.

Spotto wrote: ↑

Sun Nov 01, 2020 11:11 am

SBD wrote: ↑

Sun Nov 01, 2020 8:35 am

A tunnel under Cross Road is not the logical choice as far as I can see. One of the motivations for a change is the number of trucks that arrive at the Glen Osmond traffic lights without the ability to stop. Cross Road slopes up to that intersection, so to put a tunnel under it requires a tight left hand bend and continuing downhill. The consequence will either be a rolled truck on that bend in the tunnel entrance, or the same failure to stop somewhere further down hill if the driver continues to be skilful enough to maintain sufficient control of the truck not to have collided with anything else in the tunnel.

If a tunnel/trench solution for a Cross Road Motorway is used, it could be possible that SEF/Cross Road could have an overpass over the Glen Osmond intersection. Flattens out the final approach starting around the toll gate, passes over the intersection, then once it joins Cross Road the grade down can be made much gentler to join whatever solution is devised.

Interesting idea. It still suffers from the topography though. The Toll gate is at altitude of 163m or so. Emerson railway station is 6.8km away at around 27m There is no natural uphill anywhere from the top of the hill (570m) down to turning on to the North South Motorway.

The engineering required to build an elevated motorway that can handle B-doubles taking that curve regularly and occasionally at well above the posted speed limit without either shaking the towers to pieces nor driving off the edge in an emergency would be fairly heavy going.

So if my maths is right, Toll Gate to Emerson is a gradient of about 2%, much better than the 4.6% from the top to the Toll Gate, but still not really looking great for slowing down a runaway truck if it ever gets round the bend.

The bend near the lower arrestor bed is at about 200m. My suggestion of drilling straight through the hill there might be just as bad, as the intersection of Waite Road and Delamere Avenue is only 140m. Runaways still have to make a turn eventually, and there isn't a lot of space to make a smooth turn into the NS Motorway if the bends are removed before that.

Short South to bypass the top of the hill means the descent doesn't have to start as high, and can be engineered to take account of requirements that aren't met by the existing freeway.

is final surfacing about to commence and run for about a week or so at Darlington? can anyone confirm?

aceman wrote:is final surfacing about to commence and run for about a week or so at Darlington? can anyone confirm?

Yes. Southbound is happening this week.

They just announced tunnel's?

Did anyone see that?

Sent from my SM-A515F using Tapatalk

The SA government also gave the green light to 6.3km of tunnels on a stretch of Adelaide's busiest road, South Road, which will now undergo an $8.9 billion rebuild by 2030 to remove 21 sets of traffic lights for motorists provided extra funding can be secured from the gederal government.

Mr Lucas said the North-South Corridor project would be the biggest in the state's history and the government had now decided on the final design, which included two separate sets of tunnels, lowered motorways and the compulsory acquisition of 400 sites from businesses and households along the road.

A ''full tunnel'' option costing $12 billion was deemed too expensive and would have resulted in the acquisition of 900 premises.

https://www.afr.com/policy/economy/elec ... 109-p56czk

Budget breakdown at InDaily:
https://indaily.com.au/news/2020/11/10/ ... -measures/

The bit relevant to South Road:

The $8.9 billion plan to complete the North-South corridor from Tonsley to the River Torrens has been unveiled by the South Australian Government as the jewel in today’s State Budget.

The 10.5km project will include two tunnels with construction in two stages from 2023 to 2030.

The project includes:

• A 4.3km southern tunnel from Darlington to just south of the Glenelg Tram bridge
• 1km of lowered motorway under the Glenelg Tram line and Anzac Highway
• 2km surface motorway from Anzac Highway to just south of Richmond Road then a lowered motorway under Richmond Road
• A 2km northern tunnel under Sir Donald Bradman Drive ending just south of West Thebarton Road
• 1.1km of lowered motorway under West Thebarton Road until south of the River Torrens and then a surface motorway until the tie-in with the Torrens to Torrens section

The decision to build the northern tunnel will spare landmarks previously under threat including Thebarton Theatre, Queen of Angels Church, Hindmarsh Cemetery and the Hoffman Brick Kiln.

will the tram overpass need to be modified because of the width of the motorway?

will the gallipoli underpass need to be widened? it appears as if the gallipoli underpass will be extended south so it goes under where the current tram line sits.

these were the first two questions that came to mind after reading the finer details.

aceman wrote:will the tram overpass need to be modified because of the width of the motorway?

will the gallipoli underpass need to be widened? it appears as if the gallipoli underpass will be extended south so it goes under where the current tram line sits.

these were the first two questions that came to mind after reading the finer details.

Wondering the same.

There is room to widen the cut of the Gallipoli Underpass to the west. I'd expect a full rebuild though, given the narrower lanes and the road gradient not being suitable for a design speed of 70 km/h.

3 years to get this started?

Brucetiki wrote:3 years to get this started?

The work to move services, acquire property, survey, bore, etc will take a long time. This took a long time for the T2T project because of the age of some services (including water pipes over 100 years old running under Port Road). I suspect actual digging will commence in 2023.

Now we have to hope the Libs don't butcher this and give us two tunnels that are only two lanes wide.

Here's a render from the State Budget Overview.

I'm trying to place that render of the tunnel portal. Does anybody have any ideas on the location?