Sensational-Adelaide.com

Waewick wrote: ↑

Tue Mar 10, 2020 6:36 pm

SBD wrote:Back on this topic, I wonder if anybody did the cost comparison for building a bridge/overpass rather than just a much bigger traffic light intersection, after they had decided that even the traffic lights need so much property acquisition.

It is probably the worst intersection on Magill Road, but is it even the worst intersection on Portrush Road/A17, or simply the easiest to "fix"?

The Greenhill/ Portrush is terrible, but only from a Greenhill perspective. - given Cohen's are expanding BV, it's going to get more expensive (They can't do the other side is council chambers)

Portrush/GlenOsmond - cost a motza, will need Fed funds

Portrush/Parade or Kensington - terrible but only because they are so close especially with 2 x School crossings nearby each main road.

Portrush/ Payneham - probably the same as Kensignton and probably the best of the bunch.

If I was paying, I'd be doing Portrush/Glen Osmond first then Portrush Greenhill Rd (after Magill Rd Of course)

All of the roads crossing Portrush Road experience severe congestion during the peak, because Portrush Road is given such a ridiculous level of traffic light prioritisation.

However, I really don't see how fixing any one of these intersections is really worthwhile if the government has to spend 98 million dollars on it. Sure, the traffic can be bad, but these are hardly the worst intersections in Adelaide.

At any rate, much greater congestion busting could be achieved with very cheap initiatives like bus lanes, permanent clearways and greater emphasis on cycling infrastructure. At the end of the day, the biggest cause of congestion is people's use of single occupant private cars. Cars simply take up a lot space on the road, and if they only have one person inside, they are an incredibly inefficient way of using road space.

Waewick wrote: ↑

Tue Mar 10, 2020 6:36 pm

SBD wrote:Back on this topic, I wonder if anybody did the cost comparison for building a bridge/overpass rather than just a much bigger traffic light intersection, after they had decided that even the traffic lights need so much property acquisition.

It is probably the worst intersection on Magill Road, but is it even the worst intersection on Portrush Road/A17, or simply the easiest to "fix"?

The Greenhill/ Portrush is terrible, but only from a Greenhill perspective. - given Cohen's are expanding BV, it's going to get more expensive (They can't do the other side is council chambers)

Portrush/GlenOsmond - cost a motza, will need Fed funds

Portrush/Parade or Kensington - terrible but only because they are so close especially with 2 x School crossings nearby each main road.

Portrush/ Payneham - probably the same as Kensignton and probably the best of the bunch.

If I was paying, I'd be doing Portrush/Glen Osmond first then Portrush Greenhill Rd (after Magill Rd Of course)

All of the roads crossing Portrush Road experience severe congestion during the peak, because Portrush Road is given such a ridiculous level of traffic light prioritisation. It should be noted that this upgrade doesn't actually widen Magill Road - its all about making it more convenient for trucks to travel through the metro area along Portrush Road. So the approaches to this intersection with the worst delays will not be substantially improved.

I really don't see how fixing any one of these intersections is really worthwhile if the government has to spend 98 million dollars on it. Sure, the traffic can be bad, but these are hardly the worst intersections in Adelaide.

At any rate, much greater congestion busting could be achieved with very cheap initiatives like bus lanes, permanent clearways and greater emphasis on cycling infrastructure. At the end of the day, the biggest cause of congestion is people's use of single occupant private cars. Cars simply take up a lot space on the road, and if they only have one person inside, they are an incredibly inefficient way of using road space.

Waewick wrote: ↑

Tue Mar 10, 2020 6:36 pm

The Greenhill/ Portrush is terrible, but only from a Greenhill perspective. - given Cohen's are expanding BV, it's going to get more expensive (They can't do the other side is council chambers)

Portrush/GlenOsmond - cost a motza, will need Fed funds

Portrush/Parade or Kensington - terrible but only because they are so close especially with 2 x School crossings nearby each main road.

Portrush/ Payneham - probably the same as Kensignton and probably the best of the bunch.

If I was paying, I'd be doing Portrush/Glen Osmond first then Portrush Greenhill Rd (after Magill Rd Of course)

All the intersections mentioned have issues. I think Portrush/Parade is the biggest problem. Very tight. You have two church buildings (one a hall now) and the future Peregrine development. Doubt very much any widening will happen here.

Cheers

dbl96 wrote: ↑

Wed Mar 11, 2020 9:44 pm

All of the roads crossing Portrush Road experience severe congestion during the peak, because Portrush Road is given such a ridiculous level of traffic light prioritisation.

However, I really don't see how fixing any one of these intersections is really worthwhile if the government has to spend 98 million dollars on it. Sure, the traffic can be bad, but these are hardly the worst intersections in Adelaide.

At any rate, much greater congestion busting could be achieved with very cheap initiatives like bus lanes, permanent clearways and greater emphasis on cycling infrastructure. At the end of the day, the biggest cause of congestion is people's use of single occupant private cars. Cars simply take up a lot space on the road, and if they only have one person inside, they are an incredibly inefficient way of using road space.

Single occupant private cars are an issue but wouldn't taking all the heavy truck traffic out first be better?

Cheers

Ho Really wrote:Single occupant private cars are an issue but wouldn't taking all the heavy truck traffic out first be better?

Cheers

Commercial vehicles only make up 4% of traffic on Magill Road and 7.5% of traffic on Portrush Road.

There are not many alternatives for moving freight in suburban areas.

However, there are many alternatives for single occupant cars, such as bikes, walking, public transport and car pooling. Better planning and mixed use developments are solutions in the long term.

Norman wrote: ↑

Thu Mar 12, 2020 8:09 am

Ho Really wrote:Single occupant private cars are an issue but wouldn't taking all the heavy truck traffic out first be better?

Cheers

Commercial vehicles only make up 4% of traffic on Magill Road and 7.5% of traffic on Portrush Road.

There are not many alternatives for moving freight in suburban areas.

However, there are many alternatives for single occupant cars, such as bikes, walking, public transport and car pooling. Better planning and mixed use developments are solutions in the long term.

Completing the North-South Motorway will reduce the truck traffic on Portrush Road. Improvements on Cross Road and/or an alternative (new) route either (Mount Barker-NSM or GlobeLink) would reduce it even further, but it will never reach zero.

Norman wrote: ↑

Thu Mar 12, 2020 8:09 am

Ho Really wrote:Single occupant private cars are an issue but wouldn't taking all the heavy truck traffic out first be better?

Cheers

Commercial vehicles only make up 4% of traffic on Magill Road and 7.5% of traffic on Portrush Road.

There are not many alternatives for moving freight in suburban areas.

However, there are many alternatives for single occupant cars, such as bikes, walking, public transport and car pooling. Better planning and mixed use developments are solutions in the long term.

Although not a high percentage it's the size of trucks, the speed they travel and the braking area they require to stop is what matters. I agree there isn't much of an option for alternative routes in suburban areas. With cars things can be worked out much better as you said.

Having said that they desparately need to find a solution for large intra/interstate trucks passing through the suburbs. Globelink as a central distribution point wasn't a bad idea. Its location wasn't going to solve every freight issue and was dictated more by the airport component. Perhaps they'll look at it again in 30 to 50 years time when Murray Bridge is a larger town (hopefully). In the shorter term Edinburgh would be perfect and a new RAAF base could be built at Globelink. Then only the road/rail component circumventing the hills would be required. Not sure if this was suggested in the Globelink topic, but if anyone wants to continue discussing it, cut and paste my post and quote it in that topic, as I don't want this intersection topic to go off the rails (or off road).

Cheers

Widening roads to ease traffic congestion is like loosening your belt to cure obesity.

ChillyPhilly wrote:Widening roads to ease traffic congestion is like loosening your belt to cure obesity.

Whilst I broadly agree with the sentiment, i think these roads have needed improvements for many years. Unfortunately most of these intersections are in safe seats, so there has been no real drive to fix them.

I would love to see trams etc, but upgrading intersections is still something you need to do.

ChillyPhilly wrote: ↑

Thu Mar 12, 2020 10:55 pm

Widening roads to ease traffic congestion is like loosening your belt to cure obesity.

We aren't at that stage yet. Fixing our roads is like finally buying bigger clothes because we've had a growth spurt, except our growth spurt happened 25 years ago

Ho Really wrote: ↑

Thu Mar 12, 2020 12:24 am

Waewick wrote: ↑

Tue Mar 10, 2020 6:36 pm

The Greenhill/ Portrush is terrible, but only from a Greenhill perspective. - given Cohen's are expanding BV, it's going to get more expensive (They can't do the other side is council chambers)

Portrush/GlenOsmond - cost a motza, will need Fed funds

Portrush/Parade or Kensington - terrible but only because they are so close especially with 2 x School crossings nearby each main road.

Portrush/ Payneham - probably the same as Kensignton and probably the best of the bunch.

If I was paying, I'd be doing Portrush/Glen Osmond first then Portrush Greenhill Rd (after Magill Rd Of course)

All the intersections mentioned have issues. I think Portrush/Parade is the biggest problem. Very tight. You have two church buildings (one a hall now) and the future Peregrine development. Doubt very much any widening will happen here.

Cheers

We have the chance now to fix the Parade/Portrush intersection. Approval for the Peregrine development should be conditional on them leaving a greater distance between the north side of the building and the road reservation. This would allow the Parade to be widened at its narrowest and most congested point. It astounds me that this issue was never considered in the approval process.

At the same point, substantial improvements could be made simply by banning parking and painting a double lane treatment onto the road at least as far back as OTR Kensington. We currently have the riddiculous situation where people are allowed to park right next to the Peregrine building, at the narrowest part of the road, causing massive bottlenecks that can stretch as far east as Pembroke.

News article in which local council pleads government to consider freight bypass: 'Coronavirus not expected to delay Portrush Road upgrade, residents could face 'eviction'' as reported by ABC News

I wonder if anyone has there Homes valued, or like most people these days just assign a value based on what they think, with no actual basis.

One of the biggest thing I've noticed in Adelaide isn't that house values have gone down, they just haven't gone up as much as people expected.

One thing to consider is the owners originally chose to buy on a main road in the first place. The value of their home is naturally quite a bit less than if their same house was located a few streets back. They may be getting offered fair value for their home/property now but when they go into the market to buy a similar house which is not on the main road, they probably will have to pay a lot more or accept an inferior home for a similar price.

how good is he wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 20, 2020 1:35 pm

One thing to consider is the owners originally chose to buy on a main road in the first place. The value of their home is naturally quite a bit less than if their same house was located a few streets back. They may be getting offered fair value for their home/property now but when they go into the market to buy a similar house which is not on the main road, they probably will have to pay a lot more or accept an inferior home for a similar price.

Also when some of them bought in Portrush wasn't as much of a main road as it is now.