Page 264 of 304

[U/C] Re: North-South Motorway

Posted: Thu Aug 01, 2019 10:41 am
by rev
Eurostar wrote:
Thu Aug 01, 2019 10:31 am
aceman wrote:
Thu Aug 01, 2019 8:19 am
can't see this happening for another 30 years minimum. once the NS motorway is complete all the trucks coming off the SE freeway will go straight down cross road. no point them going onto portrush road. then we'll have the next major bottleneck especially at the Belair line crossing. make yourself comfortable when the goods train passes.
In my opinion trucks will continue to use A17 (Portrush Road/Hampstead Road) and A16 (Grand Junction Road). On Cross Road there is 2 level crossings, time is money a truck driver can not afford to be held up by freight trains and commuter trains.
The NSM will be used significantly by trucks commuting around the metropolitan area.
If this transport industry proposal is realized, then a lot of the interstate truck traffic would shift from Portrush to this as it would be a more efficient route.

[U/C] Re: North-South Motorway

Posted: Thu Aug 01, 2019 11:34 am
by muzzamo
A couple of photos looking North and South from the Tonsley Boulevard Bridge
IMG_4164.jpg
IMG_4166.jpg

[U/C] Re: North-South Motorway

Posted: Thu Aug 01, 2019 11:34 am
by muzzamo
A couple of photos looking North and South from the Tonsley Boulevard Bridge
IMG_4166.jpg
IMG_4164.jpg

[U/C] North-South Motorway

Posted: Thu Aug 01, 2019 12:18 pm
by Vasco
Obviously money is always going to be a constraint. But I think it’s perplexing / counterproductive & laughable that a plan would be to funnel trucks using Belair/Springbank/Daws to get to NS Motorway. Even more perplexing that the plan is not even coming from Government itself, since they are usually the ones who would come up with such a half baked plan in order to keep costs as low as possible.

A freight tunnel needs to connect directly to the NS Motoway whatever linear route it actually takes and entry point it connects with.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[U/C] Re: North-South Motorway

Posted: Thu Aug 01, 2019 1:25 pm
by SBD
Vasco wrote:
Thu Aug 01, 2019 12:18 pm
Obviously money is always going to be a constraint. But I think it’s perplexing / counterproductive & laughable that a plan would be to funnel trucks using Belair/Springbank/Daws to get to NS Motorway. Even more perplexing that the plan is not even coming from Government itself, since they are usually the ones who would come up with such a half baked plan in order to keep costs as low as possible.

A freight tunnel needs to connect directly to the NS Motoway whatever linear route it actually takes and entry point it connects with.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I doubt the SA freight Council cares too much whether their proposed road bulldozes the houses along Springbank and Daws Roads or tunnels under them. The Advertiser's concept route doesn't replace those roads, it runs on the south side of them. The advantage of going that far south instead of an alignment nearer Grange Road and Edward Terrace is that this alignment puts the hill tunnel under the ridge. the shorter deep tunnel might actually need to bridge over a creek in the middle. If tunnel boring (rather than cut and cover) becomes the solution for the NS motorway, then it would make sense to do the same thing to link to the SE Freeway, even though there is probably a switch of machines needed between the hard ridge and the soft plains.

[U/C] Re: North-South Motorway

Posted: Fri Aug 02, 2019 8:28 pm
by ChillyPhilly
I accidentally drove down the newly opened stretch of Darlington. Huge project. Colourful. Urban design treatment is far better than T2T.

[U/C] Re: North-South Motorway

Posted: Sun Aug 04, 2019 1:00 pm
by NTRabbit
I was on the bus home one day this week and saw them laying down what looked like that purple irrigation hose grid, same as the stuff at Oaklands, on the eastern side of the newly opened on ramp, more or less opposite BP/McDonalds, so I think that's going to be a planted area

[U/C] Re: North-South Motorway

Posted: Mon Aug 05, 2019 4:59 pm
by d3v310per
From Adelaide Now...
Business SA calls for Cross Rd freeway to connect South-Eastern Freeway to North-South Corridor
Last week we revealed the Freight Council wants a massive new tunnel to link the South-Eastern Freeway to South Rd. Business SA has a different idea — and it’s nearly as dramatic.

An East-West freeway along Cross Rd, revived rail to the Riverland and a network of cycle routes through regional South Australia are among projects Business SA wants the state to build.

Business SA’s call is made in a submission to advisory body Infrastructure SA which is developing a 20-year strategic plan.

The submission says Business SA had welcomed the Liberal Party’s “willingness to think outside the square” prior to the last election when the then Opposition proposed the Globelink road-rail-airfreight hub at Monarto and new ring road north around the Adelaide Hills.

“More recently, feedback from a range of members, including transport companies, suggests that an East-West link to the North-South Corridor should be more seriously considered as an alternative to constructing an Adelaide ring-road,” Business SA says.

“We recommend Infrastructure SA consider all variants of an uninterrupted freeway along the path of Cross Road to link the North-South Corridor with the South Eastern Freeway.”

Business SA executive director industry and government Anthony Penney said Business SA was aware Liberal MP for Boothby Nicolle Flint told Federal Parliament she would fight against Cross Rd becoming a trucking route or a tunnel being built under the Hills to link up with Springbank and Daws roads.

“But we need to look at what’s most cost-effective,” he said.

“We’re competing with the rest of the world to sell our food and wine and clean, green produce.

“The cheaper we can get it to market, the more competitive we are and the more jobs we will create.”

Business SA strongly supports completing the North-South Connector but urges caution on the option of a tunnel in the difficult section through the western suburbs.

It says the effect on east-west arterial routes must be considered so businesses in those suburbs also benefit from the connector.

In a similar vein, Business SA wants to look at rail to the Riverland, possibly reviving the Tailem Bend to Loxton line than has been disused since 2015.

In SA, regional rail has been progressively closing in contrast to Victoria where the state is investing in rail.

The Riverland was moving to high value crops such as almonds and pistachios, Mr Penney said.

There was potential to grow this further but already there was “an awful lot” of B-doubles on the road, causing safety concerns and adding to wear and tear and maintenance costs on the roads.

Business SA wants Infrastructure SA to consider “ambitious proposals” to intractable political challenges.

“When Colonel Light first arrived here, he had a vision for what the planned city of Adelaide would look like,” Mr Penney said.

“He thought about how the city would be in 100 years.

“We need governments to be that visionary.

“And there should be bipartisan support; we can’t have every idea being turned into a political football.”

Business SA’s submission is among about 100 expected to be lodged with Infrastructure SA.

In its submission, the Local Government Association of SA says local councils are being financially stretched.

It says over the next 20 years, there will be a major asset renewal phase which “is putting the level of investment required to renew and replace today’s infrastructure beyond the capacity of councils and their ratepayers”.

The LGA wants State Government support to urge the Commonwealth to increase funding.

It notes Federal Financial Assistance Grants to local councils have declined from 1 per cent of Commonwealth taxation in 1996 to 0.55 per cent now.

It also wants support for smart city initiatives to improve traffic and parking, waste management and use of recreational facilities.

The LGA warns of increasing costs of coastal management and extreme weather response because of climate change.

[U/C] Re: North-South Motorway

Posted: Mon Aug 05, 2019 6:03 pm
by claybro
It really surprises me that this Cross Road link keeps cropping up as though it is something new. IA have been begging the SA government for some kind of plan to link the N/S corridor to the SE freeway for nearly a decade now. Freight council plan aside-this Cross Road route has been long considered as it is the most direct, cheapest option. Because of the lack of clear forward planning by various state governments, it leads to unwarranted angst, and speculation, particularly for those along the route. It also leads to people purchasing and constructing on land, speculatively or otherwise- which should already be quarantined. Just get on with making a decision already. Make plans on that decision, ask the feds for the funding (which will be made available) and get on with it.

[U/C] Re: North-South Motorway

Posted: Tue Aug 06, 2019 8:21 am
by muzzamo
claybro wrote:
Mon Aug 05, 2019 6:03 pm
It also leads to people purchasing and constructing on land, speculatively or otherwise- which should already be quarantined.
One thing i've often wondered is whether the government has the power to retrospectively "quarantine" land in this way, without purchasing it or compensating the owners.

Does anyone know?

[U/C] Re: North-South Motorway

Posted: Tue Aug 06, 2019 9:03 am
by ChillyPhilly
Legally, nothing can stop people from developing land earmarked for a different kind of future development. Councils can only assess according to what is physically there.

[U/C] Re: North-South Motorway

Posted: Tue Aug 06, 2019 10:44 am
by claybro
muzzamo wrote:
Tue Aug 06, 2019 8:21 am
claybro wrote:
Mon Aug 05, 2019 6:03 pm
It also leads to people purchasing and constructing on land, speculatively or otherwise- which should already be quarantined.
One thing i've often wondered is whether the government has the power to retrospectively "quarantine" land in this way, without purchasing it or compensating the owners.

Does anyone know?
Compulsory acquisition occurred on a large scale in the 70's while land was being reserved for the MATS plan. Yes the property owners were compensated at the going rate, and at the time, beside the housing trust, that the Transport department of the time was the largest landlord in the state. People compulsorily sold their properties along the relevant corridors, and could then rent them back, or move, and someone else would rent them. We seem to have moved from a position of holding strategic corridors, to only acquiring them when they are needed-adding significantly to the cost. It is a balancing act though, because large tracts of properties earmarked for future demolition, become unloved and derelict, even when tenanted. However a critical link such as the N/S to SE freeway link should already be identified and in planning for construction to start within the decade.

[U/C] Re: North-South Motorway

Posted: Tue Aug 06, 2019 7:27 pm
by 1NEEDS2POST
It is literally called Cross Road. It's got a good name for a connector between the freeways. If it gets built, it should also go a bit further west and connect Anzac Hwy too.

[U/C] Re: North-South Motorway

Posted: Wed Aug 07, 2019 12:41 pm
by dbl96
1NEEDS2POST wrote:
Tue Aug 06, 2019 7:27 pm
It is literally called Cross Road. It's got a good name for a connector between the freeways. If it gets built, it should also go a bit further west and connect Anzac Hwy too.
Another advantage of the Cross road tunnel option is that it could also be easily connected to the Airport. This could potentially reduce the need for the inter-modal air-freight hub proposed for Monarto as part of GlobeLink.
Airport link.jpg

[U/C] Re: North-South Motorway

Posted: Wed Aug 07, 2019 3:18 pm
by claybro
dbl96 wrote:
Wed Aug 07, 2019 12:41 pm
1NEEDS2POST wrote:
Tue Aug 06, 2019 7:27 pm
It is literally called Cross Road. It's got a good name for a connector between the freeways. If it gets built, it should also go a bit further west and connect Anzac Hwy too.
Another advantage of the Cross road tunnel option is that it could also be easily connected to the Airport. This could potentially reduce the need for the inter-modal air-freight hub proposed for Monarto as part of GlobeLink.

Airport link.jpg
The extension west beyond the N/S motorway is just duplicating what will already exist with the N/S motorway being just a few km further to the east. Surely not worth the expense of such a long, additional tunnel? There will already be 2 or 3 options to exit the N/S motorway and head to the airport.