Churchill Road expansion to 4 lanes

by **tanner1987** » Mon Jun 04, 2012 3:37 pm

I ran a search, and found bits and pieces here and there, but not a topic covering this:

I think Churchill Road(And Churchill Road North) should be made 4 lanes ie. 2 in each direction, similar to Main North Road. It is a widely used thoroughfare already, but it's very inefficient since is goes from two lanes, to one, to two, to one and back to two.

If it was 2 lanes in both directions for its entirety it would be much more efficient and take some heat off Main North Road.

I would think it would be relatively cheap and easy to do. Thoughts?

by **monotonehell** » Mon Jun 04, 2012 6:36 pm

Not sure how the locals would feel about it, but I'm all for creating a lot of alternative pathways instead of channeling all traffic into one main artery.

by **tanner1987** » Thu Jun 07, 2012 6:05 pm

It would also help alleviate congestion from Gepps Cross intersection. Traffic for Port Wakefield Road from Gepps Cross could be given less priority with the alternate route of Churchill Road available instead.

by **Aidan** » Fri Jun 08, 2012 11:38 pm

tanner1987 wrote:I ran a search, and found bits and pieces here and there, but not a topic covering this:

I think Churchill Road(And Churchill Road North) should be made 4 lanes ie. 2 in each direction, similar to Main North Road. It is a widely used thoroughfare already, but it's very inefficient since is goes from two lanes, to one, to two, to one and back to two.

If it was 2 lanes in both directions for its entirety it would be much more efficient and take some heat off Main North Road.

I would think it would be relatively cheap and easy to do. Thoughts?

There's no reason to widen Churchill Road North, as Cavan Road is already 2+2 lanes.

The current situation isn't as inefficient as it seems. It widens out around traffic lights to prevent them causing a bottleneck - so though it can't handle as many vehicles as 2+2 lanes throughout, it does have a significantly higher capacity than 1+1 lanes throughout.

Is there still the problem of prostitutes on Churchill Road causing traffic congestion?

by **tanner1987** » Sat Jun 09, 2012 6:12 pm

Aidan wrote:There's no reason to widen Churchill Road North, as Cavan Road is already 2+2 lanes.

The reason I mentioned Churchill Road North is because northbound traffic can avoid 1 set of lights travelling via Churchill Road North vice Cavan Road.

by **Omicron** » Sun Jun 10, 2012 7:54 pm

Aidan wrote:
Is there still the problem of prostitutes on Churchill Road causing traffic congestion?

This is my favourite post ever.

by **Hooligan** » Sun Jun 17, 2012 8:23 pm

Omicron wrote:
Aidan wrote:
Is there still the problem of prostitutes on Churchill Road causing traffic congestion?

This is my favourite post ever.

I had to re-read it and then double check that it was actually Aidan who wrote it.

by **Mr Smith** » Mon Jun 25, 2012 3:44 pm

Churchill Road (South) was a missed opportunity as the Prospect Council only recently completed beautification works inc new kerb and guttering. The footpath/verges on both sides of the road are massively wide. The road corridor itself is wide enough between Torrens Rd and Regency rd to sustain 2 + 2. And I think there is only 1 set of lights (pedestrian xing) between Torrens & Regency, in contrats to Main North rd where there are from memory 4 sets of lights between Regency and Park Tce.

by **rev** » Wed Jul 18, 2012 1:18 am

There's plenty of room along the stretch that isn't 2 lanes each way between Regency & Grand Junction.
I actually wish they would hurry up and make it two lanes that entire length because the amount of idiots who cant form into one lane and then veer left when a car in front is indicating to turn right into a side street is staggering.

You get idiots driving all over the road, when they should all be formed into a single lane of traffic. That then makes it next to impossible to veer left and continue the flow of traffic for everyone.
Instead what you get is some bozo who indicates at the last minute and then slams the breaks on, causing the guy behind to slam the breaks on and so on.
Or the guy behind is oblivious to the cars on his left and veers out to the left and nearly causes a pile up.
People really are that dumb that they need lines painted on the road to keep them in a lane.

The rest of Churchill road that's recently been done up has room too.
But along that stretch you have no choice but to be in a single line of traffic.

I think eventually it will all be two lanes each way. Theres too much traffic for it to be single lane each way.
And it needs to be maintained as a main road, because if you don't get off at Main North Road, you then have to get off at South Road. So two already busy main roads become even busier.

by **Eurostar** » Sun Jul 22, 2012 12:05 am

I don't like the idea of the painted median strip they've installed on Churchill Road, a proper median strip needs to be installed so pedestrians can cross safely

by **neoballmon** » Sat Sep 01, 2012 6:28 pm

I would say that Torrens>Regency Road would be a little unneccessary now, given that they have done all their recent kerb and footpath work, as well as the painted medians now removing right-turn-conflicts. 2+2 lanes would be nice, but difficult.
As for Regency>Grand Junction, I am very happy to see that they have widened the southern section with in conjunction with the construction of the new Bunnings and the intersection for the carpark. IIRC, this only leaves the section between here and the top of the former railyards? One would hope that with the construction of the Coles superstore and the rest of the Churchill Centre (where assumibly, they would add another intersection for carpark access?) they would duplicate the road within this project. Then that will make travel to GJR all on 2+2 lanes, and 2+2 lanes on Cavan Road, getting to Port Wakefiled.

Eurostar wrote:I don't like the idea of the painted median strip they've installed on Churchill Road, a proper median strip needs to be installed so pedestrians can cross safely

This just seems to be the new thing of late. I don't mind them, obviously they're cheaper than a raised median, but for a 1+1 road (assuming 1+1 is appropriate to capacity) they make right turns easy into properties and businesses easier, which would otherwise require a u-turn, and it also allows cars to pass someone turning left, or to easily pass a bus at a stop.
I can understand your point of view towards pedestraian safety. It does just require a little additional brain usage by the people driving down the road to not just pull into the median at any loaction, but it is significantly safer than crossing a road with no median of any kind.
These are popping up quite frequently in the south, with Aldinga Beach Road, Seaford Road, Commercial Road, just to name a few.