[U/C] M2 North-South Motorway

[Nort]

Trench format for the whole remaining length runs into a few obstacles like Castle Plaza. Can't see them buying that whole property, so if the trench avoids it entirely it might have to curve more deeply into surrounding areas.

I think it's going to end up as a tolled tunnel. Putting a toll on a section of above-ground road (or indeed a trench) running along the former path of South Road would get massive resistance. If they present the tunnel as being necessary to avoid having to acquire many more properties then they might be able to make a better case for a toll to help pay for it, especially since it would effectively be a new road, rather than an upgrade of the existing one.

The trucking industry has said they are in favour of tolled motorways & freeways.
I don't think many people in general would be opposed so long as it was kept at a reasonable cost. This is where the government can be involved to make sure, doing a public-private partnership for construction & operation of the motorway, regardless of how the split is, they could put a clause in the contract that requires the government or a transport ombudsman to approve of any user cost increase and other requirements to ensure the public aren't ripped off by over inflated costs.

A toll-road will happen in SA at some point inevitably, but neither party wants to be the one to do it if they can avoid it. State elections here tend to be so close that even the few people who would be outraged by it could be enough to tip things the other way.

[NTRabbit]

None of the toll road operators wants to do it in Adelaide because there's no profit in it, words to me from a friend involved in the "Is it a bridge, a trench, or a tunnel?" process with DPTI and the government. The reason the transport industry are in favour of tolls is the exact reason why they won't happen - reduced traffic on the motorway.

A Liberal government won't do it without a private operator.

A Labor government will either not do it, or not do it without a private operator, depending on the faction in charge.

I wouldn't expect a toll road to happen for a few decades yet.

[ChillyPhilly]

SA culture demands no toll roads.

It's possible that a toll could be replaced by a congestion tax in future.

[SBD]

Trench format for the whole remaining length runs into a few obstacles like Castle Plaza. Can't see them buying that whole property, so if the trench avoids it entirely it might have to curve more deeply into surrounding areas.

I think it's going to end up as a tolled tunnel. Putting a toll on a section of above-ground road (or indeed a trench) running along the former path of South Road would get massive resistance. If they present the tunnel as being necessary to avoid having to acquire many more properties then they might be able to make a better case for a toll to help pay for it, especially since it would effectively be a new road, rather than an upgrade of the existing one.

The trucking industry has said they are in favour of tolled motorways & freeways.
I don't think many people in general would be opposed so long as it was kept at a reasonable cost. This is where the government can be involved to make sure, doing a public-private partnership for construction & operation of the motorway, regardless of how the split is, they could put a clause in the contract that requires the government or a transport ombudsman to approve of any user cost increase and other requirements to ensure the public aren't ripped off by over inflated costs.

A toll-road will happen in SA at some point inevitably, but neither party wants to be the one to do it if they can avoid it. State elections here tend to be so close that even the few people who would be outraged by it could be enough to tip things the other way.

[This conversation should maybe move to The Pub (now they are open) but I don't know how to shift a thread.]

An alternative perspective would be to completely redo road funding. This would also replace fuel tax, which will dwindle if electric cars become more than a niche market. Every vehicle should have a GPS, and log the amount of use on each class of road. From this, vehicle owners are charged a usage fee, so the cost of leaving my car in the garage is minimal, and the fee structure pushes me to use the freeways not the streets. District/city councils are funded to maintain their roads, and receive statistics to indicate which roads are most in need of upgrades (either to change their fee class, or to facilitate the current traffic).

This effectively makes every road and street a toll road, so pricing can encourage people to choose the most appropriate highway, rather than "If I leave ten minutes earlier, I can use the surface road and save on the toll". It also shifts the bulk of the cost of maintaining council roads from ratepayers to car/truck users.

[rev]

Nine News Adelaide to show a story tonight ( Monday ) on the completion of the Darlington Upgrade Project.
Expected time frame would be as little as 4 weeks which will be welcome news since this project has had many delays.
The Southern Expressway users will have speed reductions lifted on the lowered motorway and people heading south to the Flagstaff Hill, Hallett Cove and Seacliff areas will finally be able to bypass 5 sets of traffic lights.

As the project comes to an end, the final product / design is quite disappointing when it has come to surface roads. Particularly south bound, where there are huge amounts of spare curbed space used as a foot path and gravel (possibly landscaped in future but besides the point).

No bike lanes and the lanes themselves are so tight, with no provision for any room if someone broke down etc. This is especially disappointing considering significant amount of traffic (inc Ambulances / Police) that still use that portion of road to go to Flinders Hospital / Uni, Sturt Police Station, Marion etc. This section could have easily fit 3 lanes. Furthermore the entry lane into flinders hospital has been left as a small turn right until the last minute.

Also 2x bus stops which have ample amount of space to be indented into the curb, but instead will directly block 1 of 2 standard lanes when stopped at.
1. on South Rd Southbound, immediately after the motorway entry point (prior Adrien Brian)
2. Sturt Road, Westbound in front of the vacant lot / flinders overflow parking lot.

I just don’t get why our planners are so stingy in their designs. End rant.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I agree re bus stops. But, what's happened with the surface road around T2T is that traffic has reduced on what is South Road. The majority of traffic is through the area and therefore uses the motorway. Perhaps they've done a traffic study/survey and found a similar thing throughout?

[Vasco]

Nine News Adelaide to show a story tonight ( Monday ) on the completion of the Darlington Upgrade Project.
Expected time frame would be as little as 4 weeks which will be welcome news since this project has had many delays.
The Southern Expressway users will have speed reductions lifted on the lowered motorway and people heading south to the Flagstaff Hill, Hallett Cove and Seacliff areas will finally be able to bypass 5 sets of traffic lights.

As the project comes to an end, the final product / design is quite disappointing when it has come to surface roads. Particularly south bound, where there are huge amounts of spare curbed space used as a foot path and gravel (possibly landscaped in future but besides the point).

No bike lanes and the lanes themselves are so tight, with no provision for any room if someone broke down etc. This is especially disappointing considering significant amount of traffic (inc Ambulances / Police) that still use that portion of road to go to Flinders Hospital / Uni, Sturt Police Station, Marion etc. This section could have easily fit 3 lanes. Furthermore the entry lane into flinders hospital has been left as a small turn right until the last minute.

Also 2x bus stops which have ample amount of space to be indented into the curb, but instead will directly block 1 of 2 standard lanes when stopped at.
1. on South Rd Southbound, immediately after the motorway entry point (prior Adrien Brian)
2. Sturt Road, Westbound in front of the vacant lot / flinders overflow parking lot.

I just don’t get why our planners are so stingy in their designs. End rant.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I agree re bus stops. But, what's happened with the surface road around T2T is that traffic has reduced on what is South Road. The majority of traffic is through the area and therefore uses the motorway. Perhaps they've done a traffic study/survey and found a similar thing throughout?

Flinders Hospital, Flinders Uni, Marion, Sturt Police Station, Ambulance Station. There’s always a decent amount of traffic on surface roads partly to get to those places and if you are using the surface road now, you will be using the surface road when the motorway is complete in a few weeks too.
Not that much of major importance around Port/South besides Hindmarsh stadium which is not in high demand daily use like the others and also has wide throughfares like Grange and Port Roads to support.

Nevertheless I use both surface roads regularly and they just seem so much more crammed on Darlington Southbound compared to Port/South, as if they didn’t have a cm to spare.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Spotto]

I agree re bus stops. But, what's happened with the surface road around T2T is that traffic has reduced on what is South Road. The majority of traffic is through the area and therefore uses the motorway. Perhaps they've done a traffic study/survey and found a similar thing throughout?

Flinders Hospital, Flinders Uni, Marion, Sturt Police Station, Ambulance Station. There’s always a decent amount of traffic on surface roads partly to get to those places and if you are using the surface road now, you will be using the surface road when the motorway is complete in a few weeks too.

Not necessarily, Vasco. Southbound through-traffic travelling the full length of the project from South Road or Ayliffes Road to MSR/Marion Road is still stuck using the southbound surface road. Once the whole project opens they’ll be able to use the lowered motorway and exit just after Flinders Drive. Southbound traffic should ease a lot afterward and mostly be local access traffic only.

It’ll be a learning curve for more people to start using the lowered motorway once it’s no longer a construction site, I still see northbound traffic from Marion Road use the surface road instead of the lowered motorway to access Ayliffes Road. But the surface roads should cope. In the case that they don’t, there might be enough space to add a third lane.

[mattwinter]

No bike lanes and the lanes themselves are so tight, with no provision for any room if someone broke down etc. This is especially disappointing considering significant amount of traffic (inc Ambulances / Police) that still use that portion of road to go to Flinders Hospital / Uni, Sturt Police Station, Marion etc. This section could have easily fit 3 lanes. Furthermore the entry lane into flinders hospital has been left as a small turn right until the last minute.

Also 2x bus stops which have ample amount of space to be indented into the curb, but instead will directly block 1 of 2 standard lanes when stopped at.

Fully agree with the bus stops, there's no reason why they can't be fully indented to keep the traffic lanes clear. But there are bike lanes built into the project (marked in yellow), they're segregated up on the curb and are the bitumen paths running directly next to the concrete footpath. There are missing sections but since they're segregated it's possible to use them for northbound or southbound bikes, which will be necessary to connect to Ayliffes Road (cross the lights at Mimosa/Sutton, south side bike path to Ayliffes. Blue is the existing expressway bikeway.

It's not perfect since there's noticeable missing sections in front of Monroe, Tonsley and the petrol stations that just use traditional roadside bike lanes (marked in red) but it is better and safer than nothing at all.

Darlington_bikes.png

The bike paths also then connect to the bike path that runs along Sturt River and should connect to the new tonsley greenway... idea really is to keep cyclists off south road as much as possible which is wise IMO

[Nort]

The trucking industry has said they are in favour of tolled motorways & freeways.
I don't think many people in general would be opposed so long as it was kept at a reasonable cost. This is where the government can be involved to make sure, doing a public-private partnership for construction & operation of the motorway, regardless of how the split is, they could put a clause in the contract that requires the government or a transport ombudsman to approve of any user cost increase and other requirements to ensure the public aren't ripped off by over inflated costs.

A toll-road will happen in SA at some point inevitably, but neither party wants to be the one to do it if they can avoid it. State elections here tend to be so close that even the few people who would be outraged by it could be enough to tip things the other way.

[This conversation should maybe move to The Pub (now they are open) but I don't know how to shift a thread.]

An alternative perspective would be to completely redo road funding. This would also replace fuel tax, which will dwindle if electric cars become more than a niche market. Every vehicle should have a GPS, and log the amount of use on each class of road. From this, vehicle owners are charged a usage fee, so the cost of leaving my car in the garage is minimal, and the fee structure pushes me to use the freeways not the streets. District/city councils are funded to maintain their roads, and receive statistics to indicate which roads are most in need of upgrades (either to change their fee class, or to facilitate the current traffic).

This effectively makes every road and street a toll road, so pricing can encourage people to choose the most appropriate highway, rather than "If I leave ten minutes earlier, I can use the surface road and save on the toll". It also shifts the bulk of the cost of maintaining council roads from ratepayers to car/truck users.

I don't know about that.

There are some good arguments that could be made about that sort of proposal and the way it would encourage use of public transport and living closer to workplaces. A major downside (and this also applies to fuel tax) is that it puts a lot of the cost for infrastructure onto those who can least afford it. Suburban sprawl is something that should be discouraged, however many of the people who live furthest out do so because that's all they can afford.

There's also the privacy concerns where Australian governments have shown themselves to be terrible at data security, so tracking every vehicle isn't something that would be easily accepted.

[Listy]

There's also the privacy concerns where Australian governments have shown themselves to be terrible at data security, so tracking every vehicle isn't something that would be easily accepted.

You wouldn't need to go to the extreme of GPS tracking vehicles to apply a km based road usage fee. For some time now NZ has used a distance based road user fee for all diesel vehicles. The owner attaches an external odometer onto the hub of one wheel, and pre-purchases the fee (a bit like a pre-paid mobile data allowance). When you pay the fee you get a sticker to display on your windscreen, and as long as the hub-odometer shows less kms than what the sticker says, you're all good. The fee varies from 7c/km to about 40c/km depending on the size & class of vehicle. In any post-2000 car, such a system could be very easily managed by using a bluetooth device that plugs into the car's data port and sends the data to a paired phone app each time you get in the car. The app could recharge your allowance whenever the km's start to run low.

[rev]

Sections of the wall/sound barrier have started going up near Pym street. There's also some pillars or whatever you want to call them that have gone up on either side, I guess they're for the pedestrian bridge.

[rev]

I've just seen that 35-37 South Road Thebarton, next to Pikes Construction is slated for an industrial development. Being developed by Pikes and Leedwell.

[kymbosa]

I've just seen that 35-37 South Road Thebarton, next to Pikes Construction is slated for an industrial development. Being developed by Pikes and Leedwell.

And this right here is the issue; with a government that is yet to come up with a plan or a team developing a plan. Councils are still allowing building and developments through. Each time this happens it will cost the state more and spend more time trying to redefine the road.

The current gov was in opp for 16yrs what did they do with their time? This road should have been at least at pre work by now, by 18mths from a state election and nothing says to me this gov still won’t have a plan.

[claybro]

I've just seen that 35-37 South Road Thebarton, next to Pikes Construction is slated for an industrial development. Being developed by Pikes and Leedwell.

And this right here is the issue; with a government that is yet to come up with a plan or a team developing a plan. Councils are still allowing building and developments through. Each time this happens it will cost the state more and spend more time trying to redefine the road.

The current gov was in opp for 16yrs what did they do with their time? This road should have been at least at pre work by now, by 18mths from a state election and nothing says to me this gov still won’t have a plan.

South road at this point already appears to be 7 lanes wide, with 2 wide footpaths, and significant setback on either side. It will depend what has been approved, or if the council has asked for the new developement to have adequate set back? But if the council have no guidelines, they cannot reject the plans based on an assumption. There would appear to be enough room. The more interesting question is how they plan to deal with that tight bend-right where it has to cross the river, and right where the. cemetary is. This and the HB Rd corner are reLly the most problematic of the remaining g route. This stretch might well might have to be handled by a tunnel commencing where the T2T trench ends, although I believe an elevated section over the river was considered, I can't see how that would work given the rise required from the trench.

[bits]

Nothing needs to happen at the river other than knock over a few buildings and block a side street off. Once the buildings are gone the corner can be eased via the new land.
I imagine the motorway will be pushed to Jervois Ave.
I'm pretty sure there is enough room for 3+3 on the existing bridge.