Sensational-Adelaide.com

claybro wrote: ↑

Tue Feb 11, 2025 7:46 pm

Llessur2002 wrote: ↑

Tue Feb 11, 2025 4:55 pm

Seems like a weirdly unnecessary loss of a heritage listed building to me. I'm not much of a conspiracy theorist but can't help notice the proximity of the Crows' new dining/bar venue and the convenient removal of the nearest competition for a left turn lane that doesn't really need to exist, and could seemingly be shifted 2 metres north with relative ease.

I also thought that half of the reason Labor insisted on redesigning this section (other than the very welcome removal of the elevated carriageway) was the retention of the West Thebby and Community Centre. Neither of which have apparently been saved.

What a folly that community centre turned out to be. If I was a ratepayer I would not be happy about so much money wasted along what was clearly going to be a motorway. This very case was discussed on here when it was built. I do wonder though if the council is being compensated for the increased value.. and is actually cashing in … in which case it’s the SA taxpayer footing the bill.

If the car park was on the roadside instead of the western side of the building, the building might have been set back far enough to be preserved. To be fair to the council though, as recently as 2020 the DTI development plan provided to West Torrens council still quite clearly states that construction of commercial buildings along that section of South Rd is permitted within 3m of South Rd. Only the section outside the brickworks market is shown as requiring a bigger setback due to future road widening. That 3m setback is why the Bunnings in Edwardstown was allowed to be built so close to the road a few years ago.

Listy wrote: ↑

Fri Feb 14, 2025 8:54 am

claybro wrote: ↑

Tue Feb 11, 2025 7:46 pm

Llessur2002 wrote: ↑

Tue Feb 11, 2025 4:55 pm

Seems like a weirdly unnecessary loss of a heritage listed building to me. I'm not much of a conspiracy theorist but can't help notice the proximity of the Crows' new dining/bar venue and the convenient removal of the nearest competition for a left turn lane that doesn't really need to exist, and could seemingly be shifted 2 metres north with relative ease.

I also thought that half of the reason Labor insisted on redesigning this section (other than the very welcome removal of the elevated carriageway) was the retention of the West Thebby and Community Centre. Neither of which have apparently been saved.

What a folly that community centre turned out to be. If I was a ratepayer I would not be happy about so much money wasted along what was clearly going to be a motorway. This very case was discussed on here when it was built. I do wonder though if the council is being compensated for the increased value.. and is actually cashing in … in which case it’s the SA taxpayer footing the bill.

If the car park was on the roadside instead of the western side of the building, the building might have been set back far enough to be preserved. To be fair to the council though, as recently as 2020 the DTI development plan provided to West Torrens council still quite clearly states that construction of commercial buildings along that section of South Rd is permitted within 3m of South Rd. Only the section outside the brickworks market is shown as requiring a bigger setback due to future road widening. That 3m setback is why the Bunnings in Edwardstown was allowed to be built so close to the road a few years ago.

Also re: Bunnings in Edwardstown, a key part of its siting was the preference for an elevated structure to the east of South Road at the time (as per the Rann-Weatherill Government's Scoping Report), rather than the west.

Correction - Rann Government preference at the time was for an elevated freeway above the Tonsley/Seaford rail lines.

Weatherill wanted to follow the existing South Road corridor.

[Shuz] wrote:Correction - Rann Government preference at the time was for an elevated freeway above the Tonsley/Seaford rail lines.

Weatherill wanted to follow the existing South Road corridor.

That's a throwback! Forgot about that discussion.

Here's the graphic I made years ago of the preferences for the whole corridor from the Scoping Report.

Wow. How times have changed. Not sure it been mentioned here but in the plans the tunnels have been lowered to such a depth under cross road to provide for a future Emerson rail trench.

Looks like that assertion that the water table makes that enviable doesn't hold much water

Listy wrote: ↑

Fri Feb 14, 2025 8:54 am

claybro wrote: ↑

Tue Feb 11, 2025 7:46 pm

Llessur2002 wrote: ↑

Tue Feb 11, 2025 4:55 pm

Seems like a weirdly unnecessary loss of a heritage listed building to me. I'm not much of a conspiracy theorist but can't help notice the proximity of the Crows' new dining/bar venue and the convenient removal of the nearest competition for a left turn lane that doesn't really need to exist, and could seemingly be shifted 2 metres north with relative ease.

I also thought that half of the reason Labor insisted on redesigning this section (other than the very welcome removal of the elevated carriageway) was the retention of the West Thebby and Community Centre. Neither of which have apparently been saved.

What a folly that community centre turned out to be. If I was a ratepayer I would not be happy about so much money wasted along what was clearly going to be a motorway. This very case was discussed on here when it was built. I do wonder though if the council is being compensated for the increased value.. and is actually cashing in … in which case it’s the SA taxpayer footing the bill.

If the car park was on the roadside instead of the western side of the building, the building might have been set back far enough to be preserved. To be fair to the council though, as recently as 2020 the DTI development plan provided to West Torrens council still quite clearly states that construction of commercial buildings along that section of South Rd is permitted within 3m of South Rd. Only the section outside the brickworks market is shown as requiring a bigger setback due to future road widening. That 3m setback is why the Bunnings in Edwardstown was allowed to be built so close to the road a few years ago.

And that just shows how bad our planning has been.
For how many decades had they been talking about a fix for South Road? And yet for all those decades they still allow all sorts of developments to happen right on the corridor.
Even in the last decade as work well and truly started and it was evident that this remaining section of South Road would be fixed, they were still building houses on subdivided blocks in the side streets directly off South Road. Total madness. But still, West Torrens Council should have had some foresight in their planning and realized that their new rate payer funded building may not be standing for long after it's built and found an alternative.
Perhaps if they had done it right from the start with planning, it wouldn't be costing $15 billion for this last section today.
I guess in hindsight though we get the excitement of tunnels with a decent length.

The Regency to Pym and Torrens to Torrens sections should’ve been built as one project, not separately and years apart.

What was the purpose of leaving a tiny 1.8km bit of road with two sections of completed motorway either side? Especially as the Northern Connector was under construction at the same time as T2T.

Spotto wrote: ↑

Sat Feb 15, 2025 10:21 am

The Regency to Pym and Torrens to Torrens sections should’ve been built as one project, not separately and years apart.

What was the purpose of leaving a tiny 1.8km bit of road with two sections of completed motorway either side? Especially as the Northern Connector was under construction at the same time as T2T.

Because at the time it was easier for the government to get the public to swallow the cost pill by doing it in stages.
Now that the northern and southern sections are done, and the southern expressway is duplicated, they can turn around and tell you it's an urgent fix and we have to spend billions.
Because now hundreds of thousands of residents are exhausted with the congestion that having two motorways on either end converge into the south road soup has created, which is worse then it ever worse prior to the NSM works. People just want it sorted now, and will accept the cost.

As I've said before, they play politics with our infrastructure based on whose in government and whose likely to loose which ever relevant seat or what seat they want to win back, and in the end we pay the price for it.

rev wrote: ↑

Sat Feb 15, 2025 11:15 am

Spotto wrote: ↑

Sat Feb 15, 2025 10:21 am

The Regency to Pym and Torrens to Torrens sections should’ve been built as one project, not separately and years apart.

What was the purpose of leaving a tiny 1.8km bit of road with two sections of completed motorway either side? Especially as the Northern Connector was under construction at the same time as T2T.

As I've said before, they play politics with our infrastructure based on whose in government and whose likely to loose which ever relevant seat or what seat they want to win back, and in the end we pay the price for it.

The 2030s are going to be interesting, especially around how they manage traffic (especially heavy vehicles) from the SE Freeway to the NSM along Cross Rd.

rev wrote: ↑

Sat Feb 15, 2025 11:15 am

Spotto wrote: ↑

Sat Feb 15, 2025 10:21 am

The Regency to Pym and Torrens to Torrens sections should’ve been built as one project, not separately and years apart.

What was the purpose of leaving a tiny 1.8km bit of road with two sections of completed motorway either side? Especially as the Northern Connector was under construction at the same time as T2T.

Because at the time it was easier for the government to get the public to swallow the cost pill by doing it in stages.
Now that the northern and southern sections are done, and the southern expressway is duplicated, they can turn around and tell you it's an urgent fix and we have to spend billions.
Because now hundreds of thousands of residents are exhausted with the congestion that having two motorways on either end converge into the south road soup has created, which is worse then it ever worse prior to the NSM works. People just want it sorted now, and will accept the cost.

As I've said before, they play politics with our infrastructure based on whose in government and whose likely to loose which ever relevant seat or what seat they want to win back, and in the end we pay the price for it.

You forget as well that both sides of politics are against toll roads (thank god) which means that we needed to take advantage of federal funding when it was available. Doing the most congested bits including the freight line crossing at the northern end, tram crossing, Grand Junction, Anzac Highway and Tonsley were alot more palatable. Northern connector was a bonus.

Sydney and Melbourne have some fantastic infrastructure (and not so fantastic) and people are paying for it. Should the corridor have been secured years ago? yes Are we going to get an amazing piece of kit? .

Taken yesterday from the tram:

Ursus Maritimus wrote: ↑

Sun Feb 16, 2025 11:51 am

Taken yesterday from the tram:

VideoCapture_20250216-114046.jpg

VideoCapture_20250216-114104.jpg

It strikes me that the extent of property acquisition in Glandore (as pictured) and Clovelly Park is rather greater than along the previous sections of the NSM. Perhaps that explains why the T2D section was scheduled last.

A rather small thing that to me illustrates the sheer scale of the project and length of time that construction will go for, is that the temporary car park for the site offices just south of Anzac Hwy has been bituminised.

I can't think of any construction project in SA where this has occurred. Usually it's just some gravel slapped down, a few small trenches as wheel stops and that's it.

PD2/20 wrote: ↑

Sun Feb 16, 2025 4:24 pm

Ursus Maritimus wrote: ↑

Sun Feb 16, 2025 11:51 am

Taken yesterday from the tram:

VideoCapture_20250216-114046.jpg

VideoCapture_20250216-114104.jpg

It strikes me that the extent of property acquisition in Glandore (as pictured) and Clovelly Park is rather greater than along the previous sections of the NSM. Perhaps that explains why the T2D section was scheduled last.

Due in part to the complex interchange at Glandore that includes the tunnel portal, and the large laydown area for the TBMs at Clovelly Park.

SouthAussie94 wrote:A rather small thing that to me illustrates the sheer scale of the project and length of time that construction will go for, is that the temporary car park for the site offices just south of Anzac Hwy has been bituminised.

I can't think of any construction project in SA where this has occurred. Usually it's just some gravel slapped down, a few small trenches as wheel stops and that's it.

Glandore residents have rightfully been vocal about excessive dust in the area.