[U/C] M2 North-South Motorway

[Spotto]

So far we've got complaining about bike lanes, now pedestrian footpaths.
All on a project whose primary focus is the rapid non stop movement of freight and motor vehicles.

Would it be pre-empting someone else's post to point out [insert your favourite mode of public transport] hasn't been exclusively catered for?
How about an airport runway or a helipad?

Seriously, even disregarding the benefits that have been discussed, what's the harm in adding pedestrian paths and bikeways to surface roads that are already going to be torn up and rebuilt?

Why so anti-bike rev?

[Llessur2002]

So far we've got complaining about bike lanes, now pedestrian footpaths.
All on a project whose primary focus is the rapid non stop movement of freight and motor vehicles.

Would it be pre-empting someone else's post to point out [insert your favourite mode of public transport] hasn't been exclusively catered for?
How about an airport runway or a helipad?

As I've pointed out before, this thread is for discussion of the N-S motorway project. That project involves the re-working of tens of kilometres of surface-level infrastructure in addition to the motorway such as footpaths, cycling lanes, landscaping etc. It will also have a huge impact on the communities through which it runs which will forever restrict the way that residents can move around their local area. Why is the discussion of those aspects of the project any less relevant than discussion of the motorway?

It would be perfectly feasible for this project to result in a free-flowing motorway along with excellent cycling and pedestrian infrastructure so why shouldn't we aim for just that? I'm sure the cost of putting in world-class cycle paths for the entire stretch of this project between Darlington and Regency Road would be a drop in the ocean compared to the astronomical cost of tunnelling and excavating a multi-lane motorway. It would hardly put a dent in the budget.

[Nort]

So far we've got complaining about bike lanes, now pedestrian footpaths.
All on a project whose primary focus is the rapid non stop movement of freight and motor vehicles.

Would it be pre-empting someone else's post to point out [insert your favourite mode of public transport] hasn't been exclusively catered for?
How about an airport runway or a helipad?

Again, the primary focus of the motorway part of the development might be that, however it is impacting on the existing surface infrastructure.

Let's put it another way, should they announce plans to put the freeway right through the middle of the CBD, with King William Street turned into a motorway with little consideration for how it would impact existing moments
in the city , would you support that?

If not then you understand the principle that something built for one purpose should also have consideration for how it affects other uses of the area, and the discussion shifts to what is appropriate rather than dismissing any other considerations out of hand.

None of this is saying that it shouldn't be built, just that if the considerations aren't made properly before it's built it's going to lead to many decades of negative impacts.

[Listy]

It would be perfectly feasible for this project to result in a free-flowing motorway along with excellent cycling and pedestrian infrastructure so why shouldn't we aim for just that? I'm sure the cost of putting in world-class cycle paths for the entire stretch of this project between Darlington and Regency Road would be a drop in the ocean compared to the astronomical cost of tunnelling and excavating a multi-lane motorway. It would hardly put a dent in the budget.

Looking through council reports a couple of years ago it looked liked a fully serviced (lights, landscaping etc) 3m wide shared use path came to about $500k - $1 million per kilometer. Overpasses / bridges etc obviously will cost more. Even if they were $10 million / km you'd be looking at less than 1% of the total motorway budget. Compared to the overall cost, we really are talking about tiny fractions of cents in the dollar here.

[Llessur2002]

Just joining Nort at 1680 posts

Thanks for the costing info Listy - very interesting.

[rev]

I'm not anti bike. Because I don't think cycling infrastructure should take precedent over everything else, and cars should be banned like some on this forum do, that doesn't make me anti-bike. What I do have a problem with is what I call the lycra brigade, because most of them are just as bad as many motorists.

I've said before, that there should be dedicated infrastructure that separates cyclists from motorists.

But in this case, as I pointed out with the T2T section of the surface road, the motor vehicle traffic has declined substantially on the surface road, and there's bike lanes marked that are barely used. The argument was safety concerns caused by high traffic volumes. Some said those safety concerns were what kept more people from riding a bike, which I disagreed with.
I drive through the area daily, and I see how little the bike lanes are used.

If there was no other alternative to what's being built, that is a dedicate motorway with a separate main arterial road on either side, then sure, like I said in my previous posts absolutely there should be better, dedicated infrastructure built for cycling. But it's not needed in this case, because the motorway that has been built has taken the vast majority of the traffic volume off the surface arterial road.

And as others argued, more people don't cycle because of the safety concern over too much traffic. Most traffic is removed from that main arterial surface road now, so where's the cyclists?
So clearly, the main issue isn't safety concerns.

Which is why I suggested it would be better for the government to start a campaign to get people riding bikes, for their own health as a priority for example, before wasting hundreds of millions on fancy cycling infrastructure that wont see a justified use yet.

The fact is it's not going to benefit the average person, because the average person isn't riding a bike every day, every second day, or even once a year.
The people who want it are the militant almost, lycra people. Those who don't do the right thing to begin with.

[Norman]

According to the project team, most of the Torrens to Darlington corridor will incorporate a shared-use path, especially along the sections where property acquisition is taking place. I also took some photos of the more detailed design, which is still up for consultation and refinement.



Tonsley Boulevard


Emerson
The tunnel veers away from the Emerson Crossing area. The project team assured me that grade separation is still possible even with the tunnels in place.



Keswick Creek
According to the project team, Keswick Creek will run underneath the road bridge and over the motorway, and will accommodate 1-in-1000-year floods.



Richmond Road
The project team will accommodate the airport's plan for a freight access road extending out from Richmond Road. This intersection will be huge!



Anzac Highway
Talking about big things, there will be 6 lanes on the surface road heading south, 3 turning right to Anzac Highway towards Glenelg and 3 south towards the tunnel entrance and the surface roads. I thought it was overkill, but the traffic modellers disagreed with me.



Tram Stop
I didn't have a chance to ask about the tram stop access, but it looks like the stop may be lengthened?



Anzac Highway Bridge
And finally, it looks like the extra lane along Anzac Highway continues until the old LeCornu site.

[Nort]

lycra brigade

lycra brigade

lycra brigade

lycra brigade

God forbid people not want to live in a 1950s mindset.

[VLtom]

Genuine big disappointment about the lack of any bus priority infrastructure, especially low hanging stuff like jump lanes at intersections. Richmond road in particular as an every 15 go zone does more than deserve bus lanes at this monster intersection. There's no reason it should be that wide, but still lack the extremely easy to do bus jump lanes, which for example were implemented when Port Road was separated. Same in my mind applies to the 720 bus, which goes further north than Anzac highway and enters the city on Sir Don Bradman, it runs every 30 minutes and should get jump lanes too. When all road engineers have is a hammer, all they can see is nails, the solution to everything is more lanes, beyond where it clearly makes sense. The Richmond Road intersection is embarrassing, especially given how narrow the rest of the road becomes, that much storage is frankly ridiculous.

[Norman]

Genuine big disappointment about the lack of any bus priority infrastructure, especially low hanging stuff like jump lanes at intersections. Richmond road in particular as an every 15 go zone does more than deserve bus lanes at this monster intersection. There's no reason it should be that wide, but still lack the extremely easy to do bus jump lanes, which for example were implemented when Port Road was separated. Same in my mind applies to the 720 bus, which goes further north than Anzac highway and enters the city on Sir Don Bradman, it runs every 30 minutes and should get jump lanes too. When all road engineers have is a hammer, all they can see is nails, the solution to everything is more lanes, beyond where it clearly makes sense. The Richmond Road intersection is embarrassing, especially given how narrow the rest of the road becomes, that much storage is frankly ridiculous.

Those are some good points, can you please put them to the team as feedback?

[mawsonguy]

The Richmond Road intersection/overpass does look large but remember it is the first opportunity for Southbound traffic to get off the motorway after Port Road, a distance over 4.5km. There's going to be a lot of traffic coming off there which previously used Sir Donald Bradman Drive or Henley Beach Rd to access the southern part of the CBD.

[whatstheirnamesmom]

And as others argued, more people don't cycle because of the safety concern over too much traffic. Most traffic is removed from that main arterial surface road now, so where's the cyclists?
So clearly, the main issue isn't safety concerns.

The main issue, IMO, is safety concerns. You just don’t fully understand them, likely because you yourself don’t regularly immerse yourself in that lived experience. I.e., you don’t get out there and ride a bike in a painted bike lane on 60km/h roads.

That isn’t safe, almost no one wants to ride in conditions like that, and so almost no one does.

If you wouldn’t let a child ride there, it isn’t safe enough infrastructure.

If you want people other than “”the lycra brigade”” to get out of their cars and onto bikes (I.e. less car congestion), a thin gutter bike lane placed next to tonnes of speeding metal with paint for protection is about as inviting as a cold toilet seat

Good to hear they are considering a separated bike path

[rev]

And as others argued, more people don't cycle because of the safety concern over too much traffic. Most traffic is removed from that main arterial surface road now, so where's the cyclists?
So clearly, the main issue isn't safety concerns.

The main issue, IMO, is safety concerns. You just don’t fully understand them, likely because you yourself don’t regularly immerse yourself in that lived experience. I.e., you don’t get out there and ride a bike in a painted bike lane on 60km/h roads.

That isn’t safe, almost no one wants to ride in conditions like that, and so almost no one does.

If you wouldn’t let a child ride there, it isn’t safe enough infrastructure.

If you want people other than “”the lycra brigade”” to get out of their cars and onto bikes (I.e. less car congestion), a thin gutter bike lane placed next to tonnes of speeding metal with paint for protection is about as inviting as a cold toilet seat

Good to hear they are considering a separated bike path

Regular cycling is a niche thing here. Its never going to be a common or popular mode of transport for people everyday outside of that small minority group.
Certainly not without a government funded campaign.

I wouldn't let a child ride there because a child is easily distracted.

I find it hard to take the argument you guys are making serious, when you argue that it's not safe with clearly marked lanes, but every sunny weekend you can go for a drive through the hills on 80kmh roads and come across said lycra cyclists riding more them 2 abreast.

Im all for segregated cycling infrastructure, as a motorist and a pedestrian because the lycra types are almost always complete and utter obnoxious wankers who think everyone should get out of their way.

But I can't see the justification in spending tax payers money so the majority perhaps don't have to put up with the minority.
I think a better way to spend tax payers money would be for more police resources to enforce road rules on the groups of lycra cyclists flouting said road rules, and a general cycling campaign.

We wouldn't be building a motorway if there was a small fraction of the congestion would we.

[Spotto]

Regular cycling is a niche thing here. Its never going to be a common or popular mode of transport for people everyday outside of that small minority group.
Certainly not without a government funded campaign.

I wouldn't let a child ride there because a child is easily distracted.

It’s a niche thing here precisely because we don’t have good cycling infrastructure.

Look a London, which is trying to emulate the success of cycling in the Netherlands. Their approach isn’t perfect, but their bikeways are very popular. Think of all the people that used to be in their cars or crowding public transport who are now using bikes.

Build it and they will come.

But I can't see the justification in spending tax payers money so the majority perhaps don't have to put up with the minority.
I think a better way to spend tax payers money would be for more police resources to enforce road rules on the groups of lycra cyclists flouting said road rules, and a general cycling campaign.

But you can see the justification in wasting taxpayer money on revenue raising instead of using that money to build adequate infrastructure to solve the root problem?

[Nort]

That Richmond road intersection is painful. What is currently a single crossing for pedestrians is going to now involve four road crossings.