[U/C] M2 North-South Motorway

[Prince George]

Is anyone able to tell me the incline (in degrees or %) of the bridge on south road over cross road, or possibly where i could find the answer?

I *think* that a GPS can give you that answer, have it record your trip while you drive over the bridge. There are certainly cycling computers that can do that (cyclists being rather interested in how long/high/steep the hills that they ride over).

[Omicron]

Or find yourself a 4WD-owning friend with a dash-mounted inclinometer.

[fabricator]

There is a massive warehouse being constructed alongside the Northern part of South Road, am I correct in assuming it will be housing machinery for the Superway Construction?

If you mean the shed being constructed here (http://www.nearmap.com/[email protected],1 ... d=20110303), its the precast factory for Superway

Ah the site where ETSA cast up concrete Stobie Poles, wonder where they are making them now.

[crawf]

India

[ml69]

It’s encouraging that a detailed planning study commenced in Feb-11 to determine the best alignment for the section of South Road between the South Rd Superway and the Gallipoli Underpass.

http://infrastructure.sa.gov.au/south_r ... ac_highway

IMO, the existing South Rd alignment between the Superway and the Gallipoli Underpass could never deliver the goal of a truly free-flowing South Rd. It’s only 4-lanes wide and there’s just too much business and residential located on it. Compulsory acquisition of adjacent properties along the entire length or a South Rd tunnel is likely to be prohibitively expensive.

I propose a new alignment which will link Marion Rd at North Plympton to Port River Expressway at Dry Creek. See below:

South Rd proposed alignment.jpg

In a Nutshell:
• At-grade 6-lane arterial road connecting Marion Rd at North Plympton to Port River Expressway at Dry Creek
• Total length approx. 20km, with only 2 traffic lights
• 60 kmh speed limit, 80 kmh north of Regency Rd
• Grade-separated at major intersections
• Restrict on/off entry points to ensure smoothest traffic flow
• Think of a 6-lane James Congdon Drive type of road from Marion Rd to Port River Expressway

Details:
James Congdon Drive extension:
• From Marion Rd intersection at North Plympton, follow Birdwood Tce and MacArthur Ave to meet with junction of South Rd and James Congdon Dr.
• Underpass/overpass at Richmond Rd
• Grade-separated intersection with South Rd
• Grade-separated intersection with Sir Donald Bradman Dr
• Modification to existing overpass at Bakewell Tunnel (Henley Beach Rd)
• End at Port Rd / East Tce signalised intersection at Thebarton

Northern Arterial Link:
• From Park Tce intersection at Bowden, 600m tunnel section to connect to Exeter Tce and Devonport Tce at Ovingham.
• Exeter Tce becomes a 3-lane Northbound road
• Devonport Tce becomes a 3-lane Southbound road
• Underpass/overpass at Pym Tce
• Grade-separated intersection with Regency Rd
• Grade-separated intersection with Grand Junction Rd
• Grade-separated intersection with Port River Expressway at Dry Creek
• Possible extension to grade-separated intersection with future Northern Connector

Benefits/Pros of proposed alignment:
• Cost-effective:
- Minimal land acquisition required as alignment uses existing road reserve areas or greenfield areas
- Most sections of road will just require lane-widening into existing road reserves
- Road at-grade level with exception of 600m tunnel section between Park Tce, Bowden and Exeter Tce/Devonport Tce, Ovingham
• Only 2 sets of traffic lights between Port Road Expressway at Dry Creek and Marion Road at North Plympton
• Allows uninterrupted travel from the Port River Expressway to the northern edge of the Adelaide parklands, and from Marion Rd at North Plympton to the western edge of the Adelaide parklands
• James Congdon Dr extension to Marion Rd takes some traffic pressure off South Rd
• Easily staged

Limitations/Cons of proposed alignment:
• The biggest limitation is that traffic flow is interrupted by traffic lights at Port Rd/East Tce, Thebarton and Port Rd/Adam St, Hindmarsh. These intersections have the potential to cause significant delay. I don’t have an inexpensive solution to this limitation!

This is my opinion only, and I’m sure there are probably other issues I haven’t thought of. Would appreciate any thoughts/comments on this alignment.

[Pistol]

I live on Exeter Tce so you can understand my thoughts

[Aidan]

It’s encouraging that a detailed planning study commenced in Feb-11 to determine the best alignment for the section of South Road between the South Rd Superway and the Gallipoli Underpass.

http://infrastructure.sa.gov.au/south_r ... ac_highway

IMO, the existing South Rd alignment between the Superway and the Gallipoli Underpass could never deliver the goal of a truly free-flowing South Rd. It’s only 4-lanes wide and there’s just too much business and residential located on it. Compulsory acquisition of adjacent properties along the entire length or a South Rd tunnel is likely to be prohibitively expensive.

I propose a new alignment which will link Marion Rd at North Plympton to Port River Expressway at Dry Creek. See below:

South Rd proposed alignment.jpg

I thought of something similar a few years ago, though my version was entirely grade separated (on viaduct through Thebarton and between Islington and PRExy, mostly in tunnel elsewhere). The green space of the former Glenelg railway alignment is now an important feature of the suburbs it runs through, and blighting residential suburbs with traffic noise is unacceptable.

And now I'm convinced that it's better to concentrate on South Road.

The important thing to keep i mind is that though the South Road upgrade will greatly increase capacity, it is not primarily about capacity. And nor should it be - improving our rail system is the best way to provide capacity.

However, I don't think widening South Road to six lanes is all that difficult. South of the Gallipoli underpass, there's nearly a lane's worth of width in the median which would be freed up once the road's been grade separated - and though some property acquisition would be required to get the rest of the required width, there's unlikely to be much demolition required above what would be used anyway.

The section immediately S of the Superway is different - the road is too narrow to safely serve its purpose, and will need to be widened even if no lanes are added. But improving an existing main road that will feed into the Superway is far more practical than turning two more residential streets into a major highway.

The western section of South Road could be more difficult to widen. But the alternative of encouraging more vehicles to detour via Port Road and James Condong Drive seems a much better solution than trying to turn the detour into the main route.

Upgrading South Road should be enough for decades. And when it does eventually become inadequate, the best solution would be to treat the capacity problem as an opportunity to improve connectivity by building (underground, as a tollway) the missing link in our road grid - initially from Morphett Road to Sir Richard Williams Avenue, but eventually all the way from the Southern Expressway to the Eastern Bypass of Port Adelaide.

[Jim Boukas]

A few comments:

The study is being conducted only up to the Gallipoli underpass, what not to the southern expressway, who approves these investigations seems like only half the job is being done!!

With regards to ML69's proposal is that along the abbandoned tram line off Marion road at the Moringie ave intersection, if so won't there be noise issues for the residence along that route?

An elevated freeway would require aquisition only at the main interesctions such as Henley Beach, Sir Don Drive the rest would be accomodated by the current width of road for the support pillars etc!!

[drsmith]

The construction cost of a free flowing corridor from Regency Road to Anzac Highway I would estimate to be $3bn minmum in current dollar terms.

[[Shuz]]

If the Superway is to cost $900m, on a 2.7km section of South Road which has the most room for expansion of the existing road corridor, the least disruption to adjacent businesses and no property acquisition, I'd hate to think what the cost would be for the rest of the route.

$7b minimum, I'd say.

[Jim Boukas]

If the Superway is to cost $900m, on a 2.7km section of South Road which has the most room for expansion of the existing road corridor, the least disruption to adjacent businesses and no property acquisition, I'd hate to think what the cost would be for the rest of the route.

$7b minimum, I'd say.

I doubt that it extrapolates to a linear $/KM value, however food for thought the new hospital that our illustrious Labour government has signed up for comes with a $250m/yr lease back for the next 30 years which equates to $7.5 Billion, this i dare say would've paid for a new freeway from Regency Park to Darlington and probably a new hospital on the current site, probably not the right forum for this discussion however decisions made on one hand effect others!!!

[AG]

If the Superway is to cost $900m, on a 2.7km section of South Road which has the most room for expansion of the existing road corridor, the least disruption to adjacent businesses and no property acquisition, I'd hate to think what the cost would be for the rest of the route.

$7b minimum, I'd say.

The issue with using cost per length as an estimate is that the South Road Superway project works aren't just on South Road. There's a lot of associated works happening as part of the greater traffic management scheme for the project included in the cost, some of which are over a kilometre from South Road. They include the realigning of existing roads, the construction of new ones and the installation of traffic signals at numerous locations. Also, it's unlikely that an elevated roadway will be constructed along the entire length of South Road and tunnelling is far more expensive than going elevated.

[Nort]

If the Superway is to cost $900m, on a 2.7km section of South Road which has the most room for expansion of the existing road corridor, the least disruption to adjacent businesses and no property acquisition, I'd hate to think what the cost would be for the rest of the route.

$7b minimum, I'd say.

I doubt that it extrapolates to a linear $/KM value, however food for thought the new hospital that our illustrious Labour government has signed up for comes with a $250m/yr lease back for the next 30 years which equates to $7.5 Billion, this i dare say would've paid for a new freeway from Regency Park to Darlington and probably a new hospital on the current site, probably not the right forum for this discussion however decisions made on one hand effect others!!!

Can you please keep that business in its own thread, especially when you are basically coming in here to make claims with no evidence or basis in reality and then trying to wash away any debate by admitting you already know this isn't the place for it.

[Jim Boukas]

Can you please keep that business in its own thread, especially when you are basically coming in here to make claims with no evidence or basis in reality and then trying to wash away any debate by admitting you already know this isn't the place for it.

A party that ran at the last election known as the Fair Tax Party did do its research and did confirm it was true, prehaps we can have this conversaton in a few years time, i'll bring the egg you bring the face.

[Aidan]

Can you please keep that business in its own thread, especially when you are basically coming in here to make claims with no evidence or basis in reality and then trying to wash away any debate by admitting you already know this isn't the place for it.

A party that ran at the last election known as the Fair Tax Party did do its research and did confirm it was true, prehaps we can have this conversaton in a few years time, i'll bring the egg you bring the face.

Though I'm strongly against moving the hospital (on service and land use grounds as well as economic grounds) I think Nort has a good point here. One obscure party's research combined with some rather wild assumptions on the cost of not moving it is not a good basis for any reliable claim.

And unless the actual cost of a new hospital is finalized and then the project is cancelled, we won't have the definitive result in a few years time either. And if you want to continue this conversation, it would be better to do so in The Pub.