Sensational-Adelaide.com

Eurostar wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 16, 2018 10:56 am

According to political letter Curtis Road is now State Government owned, the plan is to make it dual lane, underpass/overpass at level crossing and roundabout at the Heaslip Road intersection

Goodsy wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 16, 2018 6:04 pm

Eurostar wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 16, 2018 10:56 am

According to political letter Curtis Road is now State Government owned, the plan is to make it dual lane, underpass/overpass at level crossing and roundabout at the Heaslip Road intersection

Hopefully that roundabout is fast tracked... that intersection is horrific

Nathan wrote: ↑

Mon Mar 19, 2018 1:14 pm

I was really hoping for the Torrens Rd level crossing removal. I know a lot of people get stuck at that one (although probably slightly improved now that the freight trains don't have to slow down and stop for Torrens Junction), but also as someone likely to send their kid to Brompton Primary, it would have given a safe separated pedestrian/bike path to cross Torrens Rd.

SBD wrote: ↑

Mon Mar 19, 2018 6:11 pm

Nathan wrote: ↑

Mon Mar 19, 2018 1:14 pm

I was really hoping for the Torrens Rd level crossing removal. I know a lot of people get stuck at that one (although probably slightly improved now that the freight trains don't have to slow down and stop for Torrens Junction), but also as someone likely to send their kid to Brompton Primary, it would have given a safe separated pedestrian/bike path to cross Torrens Rd.

So what is the appropriate time to maintain "it was the other side's election promise so we won't do it" before it is OK to change the tune to "this is a good idea that will help the state move forwards"? Maybe not this year's budget, but I think it should be OK to start to remove level crossings in the 2019 budget - especially if the new set is not exactly the same as Labor's seven. Victoria is doing 50 in seven years. A project of that scale could include all seven promised by ALP. Even a project of 20 over eight years could include most of them.

ml69 wrote: ↑

Mon Mar 19, 2018 7:11 pm

SBD wrote: ↑

Mon Mar 19, 2018 6:11 pm

Nathan wrote: ↑

Mon Mar 19, 2018 1:14 pm

I was really hoping for the Torrens Rd level crossing removal. I know a lot of people get stuck at that one (although probably slightly improved now that the freight trains don't have to slow down and stop for Torrens Junction), but also as someone likely to send their kid to Brompton Primary, it would have given a safe separated pedestrian/bike path to cross Torrens Rd.

So what is the appropriate time to maintain "it was the other side's election promise so we won't do it" before it is OK to change the tune to "this is a good idea that will help the state move forwards"? Maybe not this year's budget, but I think it should be OK to start to remove level crossings in the 2019 budget - especially if the new set is not exactly the same as Labor's seven. Victoria is doing 50 in seven years. A project of that scale could include all seven promised by ALP. Even a project of 20 over eight years could include most of them.

Why would an elected Liberal government proceed with the political opponent's agenda which clearly wasn't a major vote-winner? Unless it believed strongly in that agenda itself (which I don't think the Libs do), we can pretty much say goodbye level crossing removals.

Having said that, as Torrens Rd and the Salisbury level crossing are on the national freight route, maybe there is some chance that the removal of these level crossings could be federally-funded?

City of Onkaparinga Precinct Traffic Plans – Aberfoyle Park

The City of Onkaparinga is moving away from Local Area Traffic Management plans to Precinct Traffic Plans. To achieve this the Council area was divided into 16 urban traffic precincts and Aberfoyle Park is the first precinct to have a precinct wide traffic study completed.

The presentation will focus on the methodology used for the study including the approach used to identifying and prioritising the Aberfoyle Park precinct as the first study.

Bill Cirocco, Traffic Engineer at the City of Onkaparinga will discuss the development of the precinct traffic plan and present the broader outcomes of the study. This will include the approach to community engagement, the results of the engagement and the approach that has been taken to implement the recommendations in the plan.

5.30pm for refreshments, 6-7pm presentation

rubberman wrote: ↑

Wed May 09, 2018 8:04 pm

Looking at the detail of the Feral Budget, it seems that most of the $1.8bn for SA infrastructure is out past 2022. In other words, not even in the Forward Estimates.

In the meantime, there's $52m for South Road in the next 4 years. There's $50m for Gawler electrification. $60m for the Joy Baluch Bridge.

Looks like we are going to have a quiet time in this forum for the next four years at least.


http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-05-09/f ... ed/9743750

how good is he wrote:SA is getting a higher % of GST revenue than previous years from the Fed. Govt. I know the Marshall/Lib Govt had an election policy to set up Infrastructure SA which is the state equivalent of Infrastructure Australia. It would be an independent body that assesses the business model/plan of infrastructure projects on its merits and cost to benefit return. The good thing is by being independent/not political it removes the risk of “pork barrelling” for votes by Govts big spending in certain electorates. So hypothetically this body and the infrastructure projects (esp. long term ones) could continue from govt to govt un-affected by who was in power.
Obviously the State Govt can also borrow more & increase debt if more infrastructure spending is justified.

how good is he wrote: ↑

Thu May 10, 2018 1:06 am

SA is getting a higher % of GST revenue than previous years from the Fed. Govt. I know the Marshall/Lib Govt had an election policy to set up Infrastructure SA which is the state equivalent of Infrastructure Australia. It would be an independent body that assesses the business model/plan of infrastructure projects on its merits and cost to benefit return. The good thing is by being independent/not political it removes the risk of “pork barrelling” for votes by Govts big spending in certain electorates. So hypothetically this body and the infrastructure projects (esp. long term ones) could continue from govt to govt un-affected by who was in power.
Obviously the State Govt can also borrow more & increase debt if more infrastructure spending is justified.