Sensational-Adelaide.com

Llessur2002 wrote:And that’s where all road users have to have a mutual respect for one another in order to prevent tragedies like the one discussed above.

jk1237 wrote:I'm completely fed up with you posting constantly in here like a selfish pig Rev, just sayin

rev wrote: But I know what's going on here, with all the random accounts that have barely any posts.

rev wrote: Really?
Because that's basically what I've been saying for a while now, but you and others keep arguing with me.

rev wrote: Apparently only drivers need to share the road and be respectful, mindful and vigilante/aware of their surroundings, and obey road rules/laws, while cyclists can do as they please.

rev wrote:
Now this is nice.
If only Adelaide could get something like this seen in Auckland..

rev wrote:

jk1237 wrote:I'm completely fed up with you posting constantly in here like a selfish pig Rev, just sayin

I'm a selfish pig because I think a large section of cyclists on our roads are arrogant and break the road laws and have no consideration for other road users, and because I think they should be on dedicated bike ways?

rev wrote: You know what my reaction would be if I was put in a situation where my options where, hitting a tree, parked cars, oncoming traffic, stobie pole/light pole, or cyclist clad in his super duper protective shield of lycra in front of me...the cyclist would feel the full force of my 4wd's bullbar.
Why? Because it's going to do the least amount of damage to me physically. My car will still be repairable. My airbags probably wont go off either.
The tree doesn't deserve to get hit. The tree didn't do the wrong thing.
The stobie pole & light pole don't deserve it either.
The people who parked their cars on the side of the road don't deserve it either.
The people in the oncoming cars don't deserve it either.
Not saying the cyclist who did the wrong thing and caused a dangerous situation would deserve it either, but I wouldn't have any sympathy or remorse regardless of how badly injured that cyclist was as a result of him/her being inconsiderate and ignoring road rules and doing the wrong thing.
There's quite a number of them who do the wrong thing every day.

rev wrote:

jk1237 wrote:I'm completely fed up with you posting constantly in here like a selfish pig Rev, just sayin

I'm a selfish pig because I think a large section of cyclists on our roads are arrogant and break the road laws and have no consideration for other road users, and because I think they should be on dedicated bike ways?
Or am I selfish pig because I decided to back up my claims with evidence?
Or am I selfish pig because I have a different opinion/beliefs to you ?
Or is it because unlike most of you I'm not afraid to speak my mind, even if it is against whats "trending" for the sheep?

Sorry, I guess I'll have to work on being more of a politically correct robot like you.

Mr Mullighan said the Government and Port Wakefield Council were considering several options to alleviate holiday traffic congestion ongoing.
One project would see two large roundabouts built at the Yorke and Copper Coast Highway intersection and the Copper Coast and Augusta highways in an attempt to improve traffic flow.

The Department of Transport has also been investigating modifications to the highway through Port Wakefield to benefit traffic flow.

Mr Mullighan said assistance had been offered to create a bypass for the Port Wakefield township.

"That would be an incredibly expensive process with estimates of $150 million to $200 million," he said.

neoballmon wrote:What is the obsession with bypassing Port Wakefield? It's a small town which takes about 3 minutes to pass through, and provides 2 roadhouses to grab a snack or meal, as well as decent priced petrol. It's also almost 2 hours from Adelaide, which provides the perfect "Stop revive survive" stop on long trips, which if bypassed, many travellers will not stop until possibly Port Augusta.

For the $150million needed to bypass the town, they could instead make 2 free flowing overpasses at the mentioned intersections north of the town, and have $100 million left over (based on $18M for McLaren Vale overpass)

GoodSmackUp wrote:

neoballmon wrote:What is the obsession with bypassing Port Wakefield? It's a small town which takes about 3 minutes to pass through, and provides 2 roadhouses to grab a snack or meal, as well as decent priced petrol. It's also almost 2 hours from Adelaide, which provides the perfect "Stop revive survive" stop on long trips, which if bypassed, many travellers will not stop until possibly Port Augusta.

For the $150million needed to bypass the town, they could instead make 2 free flowing overpasses at the mentioned intersections north of the town, and have $100 million left over (based on $18M for McLaren Vale overpass)

the same reason we now bypass Virginia and Two Wells... It's hell during the holiday rush

SouthAussie94 wrote:

GoodSmackUp wrote:

neoballmon wrote:What is the obsession with bypassing Port Wakefield? It's a small town which takes about 3 minutes to pass through, and provides 2 roadhouses to grab a snack or meal, as well as decent priced petrol. It's also almost 2 hours from Adelaide, which provides the perfect "Stop revive survive" stop on long trips, which if bypassed, many travellers will not stop until possibly Port Augusta.

For the $150million needed to bypass the town, they could instead make 2 free flowing overpasses at the mentioned intersections north of the town, and have $100 million left over (based on $18M for McLaren Vale overpass)

the same reason we now bypass Virginia and Two Wells... It's hell during the holiday rush

Isn't the main issue the intersection North of the town? If this were to be grade separated, would the bypass of the town still be necessary?