The weird things about Adelaide CBD road

[Nathan]

The one way streets in Portland helps make the city much more walkable. It's much easier as a pedestrian to get a break in the traffic when it's only coming from one direction than waiting for a break both ways. (They also have surprisingly low amount of car traffic around the SW and NW, and extremely courteous drivers). I can't comment on whether it's better from the perspective of a driver, but it was easy enough to understand perched on a bike.

[Waewick]

sorry for not asking earlier....had a weekend to live

1st in relation to your previous answer, do you think that is the right view the council should be having?

Also, you mentioned that our problems are upstream i.e too many cars coming into the city - do you really believe that? do you see no viable options? even ones that would make incremental increases in order to build up bigger success?

I noticed yesterday they have removed right turns off Glen Osmond (at all times) probably the right move. but what are your thoughts on the way Geln Osmond needs to cut through Hutt street? causes a 2 red light scenarios - it is actually worse on GreenHill road.

[Aidan]

1st in relation to your previous answer, do you think that is the right view the council should be having?

I think they're right to give a high priority to pedestrians, but I think they're wrong to dismiss the potential of one way streets so quickly.

Also, you mentioned that our problems are upstream i.e too many cars coming into the city - do you really believe that? do you see no viable options? even ones that would make incremental increases in order to build up bigger success?

There are lots of options to build up bigger success, some of which involve more cars on the road, but it's people not cars that are important, and traffic doesn't equate to success. I've been in Adelaide long enough to remember that the traffic moved significantly faster when there was less of it. What we really need is a railway under the City to link the Gawler and Noarlunga lines, which would make the trains much more convenient for many more people, and if it were up to me this would be our state's top transport priority.

I noticed yesterday they have removed right turns off Glen Osmond (at all times) probably the right move. but what are your thoughts on the way Geln Osmond needs to cut through Hutt street? causes a 2 red light scenarios - it is actually worse on GreenHill road.

I don't think it's a big problem - it gives motorists more ways to enter the City, and that's something that is needed.

[Uncle Monty]

The other end of Glen Osmond Rd (at the Glen Osmond intersection) is just awful in peak hour. I do the trip daily from the Hills (Crafers) down to the city and back and the worst two bottlenecks by far are going in to the city in the mornings turning right on to Pulteney St from Glen Osmond Rd (one turning lane only) and coming out of the city on Glen Osmond Rd as you reach the Glen Osmond intersection in the evenings. I've always thought an overpass here would have the traffic flowing out of the city and on to the freeway much quicker, and could save heaps of time (20 minutes +) per day on an outwards journey.

With population to increase in the Mt Barker / Nairne region as well as commuter numbers increasing to Murray Bridge, I think fixing the flow of traffic out of the city in evening peak hour traffic is as much a problem as the flow in to the city in the mornings.

My overpass idea would have traffic flow straight over the Portrush Rd / Cross Rd intersection and have an uninterupted flow from the bottom of the freeway on to Glen Osmond Rd and vice versa.

[neoballmon]

There are lots of options to build up bigger success, some of which involve more cars on the road, but it's people not cars that are important, and traffic doesn't equate to success. I've been in Adelaide long enough to remember that the traffic moved significantly faster when there was less of it. What we really need is a railway under the City to link the Gawler and Noarlunga lines, which would make the trains much more convenient for many more people, and if it were up to me this would be our state's top transport priority.

I've wondered about this, would patronage on a Seaford to Gawler line be high enough that it could avoid the Adelaide station and just loop around the old gaol, on a train leaving every 90 minutes or so from each end? It would be a lot easier to like the lines here than to do it all underground.
A new stop by the gaol could even provide a linkage to the tram line.

[monotonehell]

There are lots of options to build up bigger success, some of which involve more cars on the road, but it's people not cars that are important, and traffic doesn't equate to success. I've been in Adelaide long enough to remember that the traffic moved significantly faster when there was less of it. What we really need is a railway under the City to link the Gawler and Noarlunga lines, which would make the trains much more convenient for many more people, and if it were up to me this would be our state's top transport priority.

I've wondered about this, would patronage on a Seaford to Gawler line be high enough that it could avoid the Adelaide station and just loop around the old gaol, on a train leaving every 90 minutes or so from each end? It would be a lot easier to like the lines here than to do it all underground.
A new stop by the gaol could even provide a linkage to the tram line.

Aiden's point of undergrounding the railway would be to make it more attractive to people catching the train into various points in the centre of the CBD. Having the railway station at the edge of the CBD is too far away for most people, and even though a lot of people catch the tram for their last leg, passengers HATE changing vehicles. Having to change outside the CBD would mean less passengers not more.

[Waewick]

oh I almost forgot,

what exactly is the point of 2 lanes turning from Morphett onto the smaller Hindley Street?

just a random question, is there any plan for the Richmond/Anzac//Greenhill intersection? given it completely screws up the "ring route" around the city is seems like something that should be addressed.

I assume the rail road underneath will forever stop an underpass going through.

[rhino]

I do the trip daily from the Hills (Crafers) down to the city and back and the worst two bottlenecks by far are going in to the city in the mornings turning right on to Pulteney St from Glen Osmond Rd (one turning lane only)

So avoid it. Use Hutt St instead (of course if you are on a bus this is not really an option).

As I wrote in the Glen Osmond Road thread, I believe Glen Osmond Road should be directed into Hutt Street, with the portion of GORd between Hutt St and South Tce being narrowed to one lane in each direction. Hutt St is a wide street that could easily cope with the extra traffic.

Aidan, with regard to the one-waying of Pirie/Waymouth and Franklin/Flinders, At first I thought I would do them in the opposite directions, having Waymouth/Pirie heading east and Flinders/Franklin heading west, simply because in Australia we drive on the left, and traffic heading in the opposite direction should be on our right. OCD? I would also make Gouger/Angas an eastbound only thoroughfare, and Carrington/Wright westbound only. Then I realised that doing it your way would facilitate circuits of Victoria Square, which makes sense.

Someone mentioned routing Grenfell St into Rundle Road - IMO it would make more sense to route it into Bartells Road, which carries more traffic, currently into and out of the narrow Pirie St, which in my ideal world would become a one-way street.

[rhino]

is there any plan for the Richmond/Anzac//Greenhill intersection? given it completely screws up the "ring route" around the city is seems like something that should be addressed.

The Ring Route currently utilises West Tce (which is plenty big enough to cope), and so doesn't go near the Keswick Bridge junction.

[Waewick]

is there any plan for the Richmond/Anzac//Greenhill intersection? given it completely screws up the "ring route" around the city is seems like something that should be addressed.

The Ring Route currently utilises West Tce (which is plenty big enough to cope), and so doesn't go near the Keswick Bridge junction.

really? that is suprising

I guess I got confused with the "city bypass" - I always thought the ring route around the city was Green hill/Richmond/Railway terrace?Jame Congdon Drive/Port Road/Park Terrace/Robe Terrace/Park Road/Hackney Road/Dequitaville Terrace/Fullarton Road and back onto Greenhill

[Aidan]

There are lots of options to build up bigger success, some of which involve more cars on the road, but it's people not cars that are important, and traffic doesn't equate to success. I've been in Adelaide long enough to remember that the traffic moved significantly faster when there was less of it. What we really need is a railway under the City to link the Gawler and Noarlunga lines, which would make the trains much more convenient for many more people, and if it were up to me this would be our state's top transport priority.

I've wondered about this, would patronage on a Seaford to Gawler line be high enough that it could avoid the Adelaide station and just loop around the old gaol, on a train leaving every 90 minutes or so from each end?

Probably not, and even if it were viable it wouldn't be worthwhile, as running extra trains to Adelaide would bring far greater benefits. A train every 90 minutes is too infrequent to be of much use. Back when I was commuting form Hallett Cove Beach to Mawson Lakes, given the choice of a few direct services or more frequent regular services, the latter would have been far more useful.

It would be a lot easier to like the lines here than to do it all underground.

Though direct cross City services would be a benefit of the tunnel, they wouldn't be the main benefit. The main benefit would be that much more of the City would be within easy walking distance of a train station, and all of the rest would be served by trams/buses from City stations. This would increase rail patronage from the outer suburbs by between a quarter and a third, as well as saving lots of time for existing rail users.

A new stop by the gaol could even provide a linkage to the tram line.

The track there is on a tight curve, not at all well suited to a station.

[Aidan]

oh I almost forgot,

what exactly is the point of 2 lanes turning from Morphett onto the smaller Hindley Street?

One for turning left, one for turning right!

Did you mean to ask something else?

[Waewick]

oh I almost forgot,

what exactly is the point of 2 lanes turning from Morphett onto the smaller Hindley Street?

One for turning left, one for turning right!

Did you mean to ask something else?

Morphett street at that point is 5 lanes wide

2 turning right, 2 going straight and 1 going left.

2 lanes turn right onto Hindley.

[Maximus]

I always thought the ring route around the city was Green hill/Richmond/Railway terrace?Jame Congdon Drive/Port Road/Park Terrace/Robe Terrace/Park Road/Hackney Road/Dequitaville Terrace/Fullarton Road and back onto Greenhill

Yep, that's how it's signposted (last time I checked, anyway). Except it's Richmond/South Rd/James Congdon, etc -- that's why they built that diagonal extension of James Congdon between Sir Don and South Road.

I do agree, though, that Railway Tce makes more sense, and that's the way I use it.

[Maximus]

Morphett street at that point is 5 lanes wide

2 turning right, 2 going straight and 1 going left.

2 lanes turn right onto Hindley.

Assuming you're talking southbound, only 1 turns right. 3 straight ahead and 1 left.