Sensational-Adelaide.com

AG wrote:

Edgar wrote:It takes a lot in terms of road quality and purpose to implement toll system.

In Asian countries, the government sub-contract the development of these toll highways to private company, who then, build, run, and maintain these highways. In return, they are the ones who collect toll moneys from motorist who uses their highway system. Is it good? Yes, because private company are maintaining these highways to ensure it is in good condition and everything runs smoothly. After a period of time of break-even, it will closes its tolls and the highways are open to motorist for free.

It is a win-win situation, not sure about the toll highway system in Australia though.

There are already tolled freeways that exist in Australia (M7 Westlink in Sydney and the soon to be opened Eastlink in Melbourne) which are operated in the same way as you describe above that work very well, being delivered under Public-Private Partnerships. The one big difference though is that the new piece of infrastructure is operated and maintained by the consortium for a fixed period of time (usually as least 30 years) before ownership is passed back to the government.

muzzamo wrote:These lanes would possibly be open to public transport too.

As someone else mentioned, i just couldn't see the logistics of it working on south road. Its just too much of a mishy mashy road...

monotonehell wrote:

muzzamo wrote:These lanes would possibly be open to public transport too.

As someone else mentioned, i just couldn't see the logistics of it working on south road. Its just too much of a mishy mashy road...

Heh the only way they could add such a promise to South Road would be by building a trestle section above the existing road (is that the right term?). That will go down well with the Nimbys.

Omicron wrote:

monotonehell wrote:

muzzamo wrote:These lanes would possibly be open to public transport too.

As someone else mentioned, i just couldn't see the logistics of it working on south road. Its just too much of a mishy mashy road...

Heh the only way they could add such a promise to South Road would be by building a trestle section above the existing road (is that the right term?). That will go down well with the Nimbys.

The Embarcadero all over again!

monotonehell wrote: Are you referring to San Fran's Embarcadero? I like what they've done there since the earthquake. Or some other one?

Omicron wrote:

monotonehell wrote: Are you referring to San Fran's Embarcadero? I like what they've done there since the earthquake. Or some other one?

Yes! The last thing I want, let alone the NIMBYs, is an awful elevated road like that one was. The waterfront redevelopment since then, as you say, is very good.

monotonehell wrote:

Omicron wrote:

monotonehell wrote: Are you referring to San Fran's Embarcadero? I like what they've done there since the earthquake. Or some other one?

Yes! The last thing I want, let alone the NIMBYs, is an awful elevated road like that one was. The waterfront redevelopment since then, as you say, is very good.

I rather like San Fran, it's one of the few cities in the World where I felt I could live (other than Adelaide).

Toll Roads: RAA position
21-Feb-2008

Letter to Editor
(submitted to The Advertiser on Thursday 21 February 2008)

"The RAA finds it disturbing that the page one article in today’s paper titled “Toll Time” contains a number of blatantly wrong statements with regards to the RAA’s position on toll roads.

Readers should be aware that despite a number of phone calls yesterday with The Advertiser, the RAA considers the content of the published article to be mischievous and highly unprofessional and does not accurately reflect the RAA’s position on tolls.

The RAA is not calling for the introduction or consideration of toll lanes, nor does it offer unqualified support for toll roads generally. The RAA has long held that South Australian motorists more than pay their way already and deserve to have a well maintained and efficient road network without having to pay additional taxes, fees or levies.

RAA members are supportive of an upgraded South Road in order to significantly decrease their overall travel times, however, this does not extend to the imposition of a toll.

RAA agrees with the State Government that Adelaide does not currently have sufficient traffic volumes needed to entertain the notion of building a toll road.

While debate on toll roads is important, inaccurate reporting only serves to confuse the community.

Sharon Hanlon
RAA General Manager Public Affairs"

ReallyBad wrote:I can't believe it, I am amazed, overwhelmed, stuck for words - The Advertiser got it wrong...

Toll Roads: RAA position
21-Feb-2008

Letter to Editor
(submitted to The Advertiser on Thursday 21 February 2008)

"The RAA finds it disturbing that the page one article in today’s paper titled “Toll Time” contains a number of blatantly wrong statements with regards to the RAA’s position on toll roads.

Readers should be aware that despite a number of phone calls yesterday with The Advertiser, the RAA considers the content of the published article to be mischievous and highly unprofessional and does not accurately reflect the RAA’s position on tolls.

The RAA is not calling for the introduction or consideration of toll lanes, nor does it offer unqualified support for toll roads generally. The RAA has long held that South Australian motorists more than pay their way already and deserve to have a well maintained and efficient road network without having to pay additional taxes, fees or levies.

RAA members are supportive of an upgraded South Road in order to significantly decrease their overall travel times, however, this does not extend to the imposition of a toll.

RAA agrees with the State Government that Adelaide does not currently have sufficient traffic volumes needed to entertain the notion of building a toll road.

While debate on toll roads is important, inaccurate reporting only serves to confuse the community.

Sharon Hanlon
RAA General Manager Public Affairs"