Sensational-Adelaide.com

Learning to drive would be a good first step but in the meantime I suggest the following simple solution which is a variation on other recent posts.
- Close Fullarton Rd north of the roundabout
- Divert that traffic to a signalised intersection with Dequettville Tce via Angas St
- Adjust Kensington Road to align with Wakefield Rd
- Create a standard 4-way signalised intersection
- provide slipways as neccessary and phase all traffic signals
Benefits
- Comparatively low cost
- Priority to ring route and facilitates B-doubles
- Gives pedestrians and cyclists (remember them?) a sporting chance
- No intrusion into Parklands - uses existing footprint
- No interference with Clisal track pattern
I cannot understand why the Government doesn't look at simple solutiion such as this. It could even attract Federal funding.

David

David, you're a councillor, yes?

May I ask what you think of my idea using Dequetiville Terrace as a northbound access road, and Fullarton Road as a southbound access road, using the backstreets adjacent St. Peters College, and re-connecting at the Ring Road (Park Tce/Mann St)? Refer to my post on the previous page for further information.

Cheers, Shuz.

david wrote:Learning to drive would be a good first step but in the meantime I suggest the following simple solution which is a variation on other recent posts.
- Close Fullarton Rd north of the roundabout
- Divert that traffic to a signalised intersection with Dequettville Tce via Angas St
- Adjust Kensington Road to align with Wakefield Rd
- Create a standard 4-way signalised intersection
- provide slipways as neccessary and phase all traffic signals
Benefits
- Comparatively low cost
- Priority to ring route and facilitates B-doubles
- Gives pedestrians and cyclists (remember them?) a sporting chance
- No intrusion into Parklands - uses existing footprint
- No interference with Clisal track pattern
I cannot understand why the Government doesn't look at simple solutiion such as this. It could even attract Federal funding.

David

i like it!

I do too. Thanks David!

Shuz wrote:David, you're a councillor, yes?

May I ask what you think of my idea using Dequetiville Terrace as a northbound access road, and Fullarton Road as a southbound access road, using the backstreets adjacent St. Peters College, and re-connecting at the Ring Road (Park Tce/Mann St)? Refer to my post on the previous page for further information.

Cheers, Shuz.

I am a councillor yes, but Britannia is not actually in our territory but what the heck!

I think your scheme has a lot of merit but is probably too 'visionary' and involving a lot of people and property interests. We are talking about a road that is designed to be the inner city ring route and designed to carry heavy traffic. I doubt that the streets in and around St Peters would be suitable for that kind of traffic. My scheme is far more pragmatic. Actually as an ADelaide City Councillor I would like to see the ring route promoted a lot more in order to take pressure off the CBD streets. I am convinced that a lot of the traffic that uses King William St is going straight through! What stupidity. Drivers avoiding Britannia are probably part of the problem of city congestion.

David

david wrote:Learning to drive would be a good first step but in the meantime I suggest the following simple solution which is a variation on other recent posts.
- Close Fullarton Rd north of the roundabout
- Divert that traffic to a signalised intersection with Dequettville Tce via Angas St
- Adjust Kensington Road to align with Wakefield Rd
- Create a standard 4-way signalised intersection
- provide slipways as neccessary and phase all traffic signals
Benefits
- Comparatively low cost
- Priority to ring route and facilitates B-doubles
- Gives pedestrians and cyclists (remember them?) a sporting chance
- No intrusion into Parklands - uses existing footprint
- No interference with Clisal track pattern
I cannot understand why the Government doesn't look at simple solutiion such as this. It could even attract Federal funding.

David

anyone want to guesstimate the cost of this proposal pls....

Wayno wrote:

david wrote:Learning to drive would be a good first step but in the meantime I suggest the following simple solution which is a variation on other recent posts.
- Close Fullarton Rd north of the roundabout
- Divert that traffic to a signalised intersection with Dequettville Tce via Angas St
- Adjust Kensington Road to align with Wakefield Rd
- Create a standard 4-way signalised intersection
- provide slipways as neccessary and phase all traffic signals
Benefits
- Comparatively low cost
- Priority to ring route and facilitates B-doubles
- Gives pedestrians and cyclists (remember them?) a sporting chance
- No intrusion into Parklands - uses existing footprint
- No interference with Clisal track pattern
I cannot understand why the Government doesn't look at simple solutiion such as this. It could even attract Federal funding.

David

anyone want to guesstimate the cost of this proposal pls....

TWO DOLLARS! Well very little in any case. There's no major roadworks to be performed, other than the removal of the current round about's core. It's mostly the kind of work we see done all over the city on a regular basis. The Federal Road Improvement scheme should be all over it.

It's a good proposal - it's so simple there must be something wrong with it or it would have been done by now?

I agree with David's alteration of the idea I proposed on the front page of this thread. The beauty of the redesign of the intersection is that it would allow for smoother traffic flow around the inner city bypass route without spending large amounts on new infrastructure and widespread changes in traffic flow. Shuz' vision is great in that it makes use of other existing roads, but it would require lots of reworking of existing roads, signage changes and a new bridge.

AG wrote:I agree with David's alteration of the idea I proposed on the front page of this thread. The beauty of the redesign of the intersection is that it would allow for smoother traffic flow around the inner city bypass route without spending large amounts on new infrastructure and widespread changes in traffic flow. Shuz' vision is great in that it makes use of other existing roads, but it would require lots of reworking of existing roads, signage changes and a new bridge.

Not to mention the forced acquisition of over 20 homes in St Peters

monotonehell wrote:

AG wrote:I agree with David's alteration of the idea I proposed on the front page of this thread. The beauty of the redesign of the intersection is that it would allow for smoother traffic flow around the inner city bypass route without spending large amounts on new infrastructure and widespread changes in traffic flow. Shuz' vision is great in that it makes use of other existing roads, but it would require lots of reworking of existing roads, signage changes and a new bridge.

Not to mention the forced acquisition of over 20 homes in St Peters

Huh? St Peters!

Brando wrote:

monotonehell wrote:

AG wrote:I agree with David's alteration of the idea I proposed on the front page of this thread. The beauty of the redesign of the intersection is that it would allow for smoother traffic flow around the inner city bypass route without spending large amounts on new infrastructure and widespread changes in traffic flow. Shuz' vision is great in that it makes use of other existing roads, but it would require lots of reworking of existing roads, signage changes and a new bridge.

Not to mention the forced acquisition of over 20 homes in St Peters

Huh? St Peters!

I was refering to Shuz's vision, which I'd totally do if I were supreme leader for life.

If you look at Shuz's proposal it would have to run along the alignment of Eton Lane and then across a new bridge over the Torrens. (Eton Lane runs along the border of Hackney and College Park in St Peters)

yeah right, bulldoze some of the most nicest old mansions and row cottages in College Park and Hackney for a bloody road. Bugger that. Widen Hackney Rd/Park Tce to 3 lanes eachway, if ya want more bitumen

Actually, my proposal wouldnt involve bulldozing anyones homes! Just a mere acqusition of thier exclusively landscaped front yards and a very insignificant slice of St Peter's College's sporting grounds, just to make way for a 3-lane (3.5m per lane + 4m median (for turning lanes where required) and 2m sidewalk room. Just under 20m wide...

Shuz wrote:Actually, my proposal wouldnt involve bulldozing anyones homes! Just a mere acqusition of thier exclusively landscaped front yards and a very insignificant slice of St Peter's College's sporting grounds, just to make way for a 3-lane (3.5m per lane + 4m median (for turning lanes where required) and 2m sidewalk room. Just under 20m wide...

Heh, have another look at your route on an overhead photograph...
http://www.flashearth.com/?lat=-34.9116 ... =0&src=msl

Those roads aren't straight, nor are they very wide, also there's a lot of buildings that front onto them. I counted around 20 last time I looked.

*starts bulldozer*

Somehow I’ve forgotten about this thread...

Just want to add a couple of replies before getting back to what’s been suggested in the last few days.

urban wrote:The closing or narrowing of non-essential thoroughfares will help make these roads more pedestrian friendly and therefore more vibrant. We will never have a vibrant city while most of the workers in the city go straight from the office to the carpark (much of the time without leaving the one building). Transport decision making needs to change from what is best for cars to what is best for people. Currently road design works by fitting in as many cars as possible then squeezing PT, pedestrians and cyclists in the leftover space. The design process should cater first for pedestrians followed in order by cyclists, PT then finally cars.

I agree with the non-essential thoroughfares and the sequence you mentioned, however I wouldn’t go too far and neglect car traffic on the major thoroughfares such as those I mentioned in earlier posts.

Take for example the side streets between Grenfell St and Wakefield St. This area has a high density of workers but the footpaths are just wide enough to fit one person. A high number of vehicle crossover points primarily servicing car parks make these footpaths unpleasant to walk along. Reducing the number of cars and carparks in the city would allow these footpaths to be widened and perhaps even accommodate outdoor eating. This would encourage workers from this area to walk through to Rundle Mall and North Tce. Peel St and Leigh St off Hindley St should be the minimum standard for side roads in the CBD area.

I agree.

Replacing Rundle Rd through the parklands with a wide cycling and pedestrian track would allow that portion of East Tce to be dramatically narrowed thus improving the connection between Rundle St and the parklands.

Not sure about this. This is also part of the original F1 circuit that will be reopened next year. I have checked monotonehell’s proposal regarding Rundle and Bartels Roads, it’s not bad, but I still have some reservations.

North Tce is a much improved boulevard since it was narrowed. You can not have a beautiful, vibrant city while your transport thinking is dominated by the private car. Perth is a prime example. For many years the car was king there and they had a desolate, uninhabited CBD. Now they have embraced PT and the CBD is coming alive.

Yes, North Terrace is better on the eastern side. It was narrowed, but only marginally. The only issue I can see is that between Frome Street and Pulteney Street the outer westbound lane becomes turn left only for car traffic (buses excepted). Buses also block the lane at stops. Maybe they should have had one or two bays for the buses to stop into. This is only a minor thing though. Boulevardes can also be like the Champs-Elysées, wide!

Adelaide and Perth are not the same, and shouldn’t be compared. Our western cousins have a better rail and freeway system. Over there they don’t need to go through the city as we do here. That’s why we need to keep at least 3 east-west and north-south routes open. The ring road option may work for north-south traffic, but it is not so good for those on east-west routes, they’ll have to travel much further.

AG wrote:Take a look at my diagrams a drew on the first page. I think you've misinterpreted what I wrote, Kensington Road would remain open as would other side streets around it.

No, I didn’t misinterpret your diagrams. I said the side streets may get closed if traffic increases off Kensington and Fullarton Roads. This may happen if people try to cut through sidestreets to save time. Councils’ only option may be to close or use traffic management options.

Cheers