Sensational-Adelaide.com

A number of community sessions and kiosks will be travelling across the city over the next few weeks. Here are the locations:

Kiosks
ADELAIDE CBD
ARNDALE SHOPPING CENTRE
BRICKWORKS
CASTLE PLAZA
COLONNADES
HALLETT COVE SHOPPING CENTRE
THEBARTON THEATRE

Community drop-in sessions
EDWARDSTOWN FOOTBALL CLUB
GLANDORE COMMUNITY CENTRE
TONSLEY POD, INNOVATION CENTRE
WEST ADELAIDE FOOTBALL CLUB

More info: https://dit.sa.gov.au/nsc/torrens_to_da ... n_displays

will there be an airport link?

marbles wrote: ↑

Sat Nov 27, 2021 4:01 pm

will there be an airport link?

Richmond road from what I can gather.

Lots more info on the T2D website now (https://dit.sa.gov.au/nsc/torrens_to_darlington) and the accompanying project map (https://storymaps.arcgis.com/collection ... 25f?item=2).

Here are some renders from the map...

Northern tunnel northern portal looking north. Note surprise elevated northbound carriageway and retained West Thebby Hotel:


Northern tunnel northern portal looking South:


James Congdon Drive and shared path bridge:



Everard Avenue:


North of ANZAC Hwy overpass:


ANZAC Hwy Overpass:


ANZAC Hwy Ramp:


Southern tunnel northern portal:


Southern tunnel southern portal:


Southern tunnel:

Thanks for the renders. Here's also a fly through: https://youtu.be/SpdGEEpFBe0

Genuinely awful blindingly wasteful use of space, The lowered section through the inner west looks like it'll be far worse T2T, maintaining connectivity for cyclists and pedestrians is obviously not a priority, the detours will be annoying as is the unnecessary slip lanes everywhere. The shared use bridge over south road at James Congdon is entirely unnecessary, the extra time for pedestrians and cyclists is entirely unjustified, it should just be lights. More disappointingly is on road bicycle lanes, Darlington style bike paths are more than possible and don't require riding a metre from B-doubles.

Mind you the render even shows a crossing that's literally impossible for pedestrians to cross at Everard Avenue at the moment anyway. T2D serves to make cycling and walking even harder then it currently is and seemingly the worst of all the NSC projects in this regard. In some regard, yes, these renders often show worse cycling outcomes than eventuate in particular but the focus on this project is so heavily on a massive motorway the engineers have forgotten people live along this corridor too. It looks like the most respectful urban design that seems to have happened north of brickworks and even that looks awfully dangerous for anyone that actually wants to use that bridge. It doesn't have to be this awful for urban connectivity and it'll have to improve beyond this for this project to offer remote improvements for those not in a car.

Additionally while this project doesn't make public transport objectively worse, it doesn't seek to actively improve it, no bus priority infrastructure at all and only running time improvements for the 719-722, maybe the 110, (also note it looks like people at Brickworks using the 110 and 112 buses, the closest bus stop will be removed, removing a stop outside a very busy shopping centre on one of the west's only good bus routes? diabolical). Improvement needed DIT.

The bike lanes were my first thought too. Why have these super wide footpaths, when the reality is there will be hardly any pedestrians (despite the depiction in the renders), and then a skinny on road bike lane?

No changes to the South Rd/Cross Rd intersection. The tunnel seemingly sits on the Western Side of South Rd through here. It looks like it would make any further upgrade of this intersection, or even removal of the level crossing in the future very difficult.

Does this all but confirm that the Short South route is the preferred way of connecting the Freeway to South Rd?

There are no exits from the tunnels other than at the ends. One consequence is that traffic traveling from the north or south to the city will have to get off at Port Road/Anzac Highway or use the existing surface road between Port Road and Anzac Highway. This is one of the most heavily congested parts of South Road with multiple traffic lights. It may be that through traffic in the tunnel will reduce congestion on the surface road but I wouldn't bet on it, particularly during peak hours. Also traffic from the south gets a traffic light free exit onto Anzac Highway, via the overpass, and 2 sets of traffic lights to arrive at the CBD whilst traffic from the north has to navigate 10 sets of traffic lights. If this is to be plan, then some effort needs to go into rationalising traffic lights on Port Road e.g. through the use of pedestrian overpasses to replace crossings.

I appreciate that the rationale for the motorway is too improve the flow of commercial traffic but commercial traffic regularly accesses the CBD as well.

This is all a bit of a dog's breakfast. Compromises and roller-coasters and afterthoughts left right and centre.

Call me crazy but I think I would rather the MATS Plan.

I'll be collating some of these concerns and will take them to one of the community meetings. I suggest you all do the same as well, because they're not going to read these forums!

Yeah, this is a mess.

I'll post some more articulated thoughts soon - from a general planning perspective, it leaves a lot to be desired.

I still can't work out why the can't take out the properties on other side opposite the Brickworks. They aren't of any heritage value ie a tyre shop, warehouses/office buildings, a few villas and even the West Thebarton Hotel. To lose an almost new Community centre plus a bowls club which has had a $3m renovation, surely they can explore other options? Plus to build an elevated motorway/bridge there that looks like a rollercoaster ride seems crazy. Further the cost to build this above the tunnels also wouldn't be cheap. Btw, is the paving place finally going in this plan?

how good is he wrote: ↑

Sun Nov 28, 2021 12:15 pm

I still can't work out why the can't take out the properties on other side opposite the Brickworks. They aren't of any heritage value ie a tyre shop, warehouses/office buildings, a few villas and even the West Thebarton Hotel. To lose an almost new Community centre plus a bowls club which has had a $3m renovation, surely they can explore other options? Plus to build an elevated motorway/bridge there that looks like a rollercoaster ride seems crazy. Further the cost to build this above the tunnels also wouldn't be cheap. Btw, is the paving place finally going in this plan?

I think the issue through here is the Shopping Centte and the cemetery. Neither of these can go, hence the need to have what is essentially a double-deck road. This is probably the only way to get the required number of lanes into the width available

mawsonguy wrote: ↑

Sun Nov 28, 2021 11:25 am

If this is to be plan, then some effort needs to go into rationalising traffic lights on Port Road e.g. through the use of pedestrian overpasses to replace crossings.

As someone very local to this section of road, and who uses it frequently as a driver, pedestrian, cyclist and public transport user, I can confidently say that there are very few pedestrian-related causes to the peak hour hold ups on Port Road. The bulk of the traffic backs up from the Chief Street and Park Terrace intersections. The Ent Ctr tram stop pedestrian lights are timed around the red light cycle of the latter so traffic flow isn't disrupted.

The Thebarton and Botanic Park tram stops do stop traffic for pedestrians but the main sticking points here are the Phillips Street and George Street intersections, not the crossings - which I suspect (although I've never looked that closely) are also timed around these intersections. This section is also much freer flowing than the South Road to Ent Ctr section so any changes here would have less of an impact to overall journey time.

I also suspect that introducing pedestrian overpasses instead of surface level crossings would be a nightmare from a DDA perspective - you'd need to fit in three sets of lifts at each crossing as there's not enough space for ramps to the central tram stops - but should a wheelchair user really have to spend 10 minutes crossing an inner city road?

Doing something about the Park Terrace/Port Road intersection would be the only thing that would have a significant effect on reducing queues. However, I can't envisage a solution that wouldn't involve a large overpass directly adjacent to the parklands along Port Road so I'm not sure how palatable this solution would be. I'd certainly not want to see it.