News & Discussion: Roads & Traffic

[stelaras]

your absolutely correct in your response.

It is not that i omitted them or deem such things irrelevant, they are variables that need to be considered. I made a fair few points and established a few questions, i didnt want to over-complicate things by talking about every variable.

Just to correct you on your use of the term "global warming" this term is inaccurate it is infact "climate change" or at least that is the term our esteemed leaders are using

[Prince George]

From the Every-Cloud-Has-A-Silver-Lining Department

Attitudes are so hard to change with appeals to environmental reason or urbanist aesthetics, but are surprisingly pliable in the face of simple economics. Congestion pricing's unpopularity is part of the reason that it works and really does alter enough people's behaviour. There is evidence that our politicians' reticence to apply congestion pricing may become less relevant as external economics do the job for us, as the petrol price explosion earlier this year showed.

The Society of Exploration Geophysicists released the results of a survey (PDF) of members attending a conference last year. On the subject of when peak oil would be reached, 60% said within the next decade, with 11% saying that they thought it had already been reached and complications with gathering international production data was obscuring matters.

Less strong in terms of timeline, but perhaps more compelling in terms of participants, Deloitte interviewed 50 senior energy professionals and found that they expect the end of cheap oil within 50 years:

Deloitte’s Oil & Gas industry group sponsored the study, which was based on in-depth phone interviews with more than 50 oil and gas professionals, most holding C-Suite positions at petroleum companies with annual revenues of $100 million or more.

“Our sampling offers a fascinating view into how a group of senior oil and gas professionals feel about the key issues facing the industry,” said Gary Adams, vice chairman, oil and gas, Deloitte LLP. “Most notably, half of the respondents we interviewed — 53 percent — believe that the U.S. could run out of reasonably priced oil within the next 25 years, and a similar number — 56 percent — think the world will run out of reasonably priced oil in the next 50 years.”

So it seems that the price of driving will rise significantly within our lifetimes whether we want it to or not. I'd just like to see us get ahead of the curve on this one.

[adam73837]

Hi all!
Thought I'd revive this topic again, what with the Anzac Highway Underpass having recently opened, the South-East Queensland Infrastructure Plan underway and Melbourne/ Victoria's Transport Masterplan also underway. Not only that, but the Opposition recently released one of the first visions from the people in power in a long time, which is good to see. Granted it wasn't about transport, but it was a vision nonetheless.

Notice how Victoria and Queensland have premiers that are of the Labor Party? see, I'm not a one-eyed Liberal Supporter. I don't give a f*ck (excuse me ) what party they are; just give me a good government, and I'll support them!

...are you advocating that Public transport should only be there to serve the mass unwashed?

Of course not. The example of the R8 was meant to be a reference to a previous post made by someone somewhere in one of these forums (Lionel Hutz: I probably should have mentioned that earlier ), so I hope none of the posters here took it as being the fulcrum of my argument, because that was not my intention. Sorry Cruise .
As for PT usage, I'm not at all stating that it should be there to serve the mass unwashed; Public Transport is there as an option for people who want to commute on a daily basis to and from the city. Anyone can use it and anyone can't, it's entirely up to the individual. That's what I have been trying to say; people should be given choices on how to commute and/or get around Adelaide, it's entirely up to them how they do so.
Hence, Tollways are there to give people a quick, fast route from the mid to outer suburbs, into the city. If they do not wish to use such a route, they can take the suburban roads. Before anyone jumps down my throat, take a look at the Southern Expressway and the way that it is operated. I remember a few years ago, we were driving down to Victor Harbor and (unfortunately) missed the 'sequence' . As a result we travelled down Main South Road and got caught at one of those sudden changes in speed limits. A few weeks later, we got a nice letter with a $210 fine. Now, think about it, if the Southern Expressway had a toll of about $2.50 per trip (and obviously was two-way), not only would it take time of people's journey's (like other high-speed corridors do), but the revenue coming in to the government from speeding fines would be compensated through tolls. Yesterday we went down to Victor Harbor and it was much quicker to go along the Southern Expressway than go along Main South Road, besides aren't you more likely to hit a pedestrain or have a crash,e tc. on Main South Road?
Seriously though, who wouldn't want to pay a small fee to get to their destination quicker and more efficiently. If we don't want to pay the tolls, but still want to get to our destination quicker, well, we've got Dunstan and the voters of the early 70s who were scared that Adelaide would turn out like LA (don't get me started on how pathetic that it is ) to thank for that. Or people can take the long route: suburbia.

TooFar summed it up perfectly:

What frustrates me is the amount of studies and reports that have looked into the ideal transport system for Adelaide. Generation have gone by and what do we have? A system that has not really changed since the early 70’s. 4 different PT systems with no central terminus. ... a poorly implemented road system where heavy traffic rumbles down residential roads or through the CBD. There comes a time when enough is enough with the studies and just get out and build something. Forget trying to come up with the perfect solution and just copy some other proven processes. I mean look a the Britannia round-a-about, is it really that difficult to come up with a workable solution.

I spent 30 years living in Adelaide reading about new proposal for underground train lines, extended train & tram line, freeways, bridges, tunnels, multi-function-polis (remember that one) ect. Most of these came to naught. Meanwhile the rest of the country developed in leaps and bounds. For me personally, that was enough, so I left. I did not want to live in a city of studies, but a city of solutions. I have lost patience for theories. I wanted to get real life experience as opposed to reading about it in a book.

For me, building a North-South freeway is a proven system that will move people and goods in a quick and effective manner across the metro area. They are safe, and for a climate like Adelaide, relatively simple to maintain. Freeways work, I have experienced enough first had to know that. I don’t need to read another report. If it is good enough for Perth why not Adelaide? Is Perth not the most similar city to Adelaide you can think of?

First you need to find the space to double the road system. Where would you find that on the corridors you mention?

I think that I should really clarify what I was referring to when I was discussing these corridors. As Shuz mentioned, Adelaide already has a North-South Freeway, it's just incomplete. We already have the Southern Expressway (which, in a matter of time, will be made a normal two-way road) going from Darlington, outward; then we'll soon have the Northern Expressway (which, will soon be completed) and finally the Northern Connector would make a fine addition to this system. The only thing left is South Road.
Now, South Road is a suburban road that was never intended by Light to stretch the entire length of the city. It only really reached the entire North-South route in the past 30-40 odd years, before that, it ended at about Regency Road or something didn't it (I stand to be corrected). The fact is, to turn South Road into a non-stop efficient, high-speed corridor, land acquisition would be required similarly to building a new freeway. Hence, what, I ask, have you saved in terms of land? Not only that, but the entire road would have to be re-done in terms of widening, resurfacing, bottleneck upgrades, etc. Just build a freeway and be done with it! (Cheers, paulns)
This North-South Freeway of which I talk could follow such a route where it leaves an Interchange at Dry Creek and heads along the Gawler Line (like the Kwinana Freeway in Perth), then go along the current route of James Congdon Drive, before going along the current route of South Road between Mile End and the Emerson crossing. (The reason for this section of South Road being upgraded, is that we have already built the ANZAC Highway underpass, so why waste that money by not utilising it in a long-term plan? ) Then at the Emerson crossing, it can turn away from South Road and travel the remaining route of what the Tonsley Trains travel, before flowing onto the Southern Expressway. ta-da!

North-South_Freeway_Base_Map_with_North-South_Freeway_for_Sensational_Adelaide.jpg (208.53 KiB) Viewed 3389 times

I'm not saying this is the solution, I'm merely presenting an idea.

You want to create first class and second class roads, then charge those who can afford it (the ones driving their Mercs and Audis most likely) to continue to add to congestion. What's PT then? Third class?

Once again, I really should have been clearer with what I said. Just see what I wrote above to understand what I really meant. Once again, my apologies for not being clearer.

...the intention was and still is to remove heavy vehicle traffic from main north and heaslip roads...

...which would then mean safer suburban roads when suburbia engulfs that area, because the freight and the commuters from suburbs further North won't have to travel through those areas. It seems that our Government has learnt from the mistakes of the 70s which is good to see. However if Rann or Hamilton-Smith were posters on Sensational Adelaide, I'd beg of them to not make a similar mistake by 'not completing' the essential North-South Route that this city need for the present and the future.

Really, if you look at the bigger picture - the North-South Corridor is already halfway complete - Northern and Southern Expressway at either end. The proposed Northern Connector (essentially an extension of the NEXY) will just bring that traffic closer to the city, and then its a matter of solving the central alignment (South Road)

Exactly. I agree 100%; see what I wrote above.

Finally, to get the ball rolling again and to rock the boat , there is another Freeway that Adelaide would most certainly benefit from having. That is one to connect the South-Eastern Freeway to the City and the Western, Northern and potentially the Eastern suburbs. There are many possible routes, such as:
[*]creating a tunnel beneath Glen Osmond Road, Fullarton Road, Dequetteville (I think that's how to spell it ) Terrace, Hackney Road and the Northern Parklands, before joining onto the North-South Corridor
[*]Leaving the A-C Highway just before Mt Osmond and cutting through (or tunnelling beneath ) the Eastern Suburbs to join an extensively upgraded Inner-City Ring Route to eventually meet the north-South Corridor
[*]Tunneling beneath Cross Road to join onto the route of the Belair Line to meet the North-South Corridor at Mile End
[*]The list goes on!
Such a freeway would divert freight away from the Eastern and mid-southern suburbs (ie around Cross Road) as well as bottlenecks like the Brittania Roundabout and Richmond Road, east of South Road. Not only that, but it would cater for the growing number of commuters coming from the ever exapanding Hills region. This is a similar (but thanks to the voters of the early 70s, a more expensive) concept to what Rann hopes to achieve with Northern Expressway and Connector.

Cheers,
Adam.

[Aidan]

Hi Adam -

You seem to still be making the mistake of assuming the MATS plan was defeated because of irrational fears that it would turn Adelaide into something like LA. It wasn't. It was defeated because people recognised the enormous damage it would do to inner suburban neighbourhoods, and that improving public transport services would remove the need for a lot of it.

Those objections were valid then and are still valid today. A N-S railway under the City should be given higher priority than a nonstop N-S road corridor, even though we will ultimately need both.

Did Light ever intend South Road to do anything? He resigned not long after completing the surveying of the City and North Adelaide, and died the following year, so I very much doubt he had anything at all to do with South Road.

While it is true that turning South Road into a non-stop efficient, high-speed corridor, would require land acquisition similar to that of building a new freeway, why would you have to make it high speed? Keeping South Road at 60km/h and grade separating the major intersections, replacing some of the other intersections with bridges, and banning all right turns, a non stop corridor could be created without the need for excessive land acquisition.

Although the capacity would be less than a new freeway or tollway, it would be an order of magnitude cheaper. Investing more in public transport would reduce the need to add road capacity, but if more capacity is needed, we could add an underground tollway in the future. In the Not Investigated section of my Investigation Project website, I mentioned the possibility of one running under Marion Road and the old Glenelg railway, elevated above Port Road to near the Entertainment Centre, then underground to Dudley Park from where it could run elevated to the Port River Expressway. But delaying the construction of it would give much more opportunity to react to changing circumstances. For instance, increased development further west might mean that it could make more sense to branch off the Southern Expressway at O'Halloran Hill and run beneath Morphett Road and Findon Road, serving Adelaide Airport directly.

I don't think much of the route on your map. The Gallipoli underpass is already fulfilling a very useful function, and trying to poach it for your tollway would remove that functionality - it might increase toll revenue, but at the expense of terrible congestion on the free roads. Following the route of the railway would blight some residential areas such as Ascot Park. And WTF are you proposing at Emerson? Have you forgotten that the existing overpass would get in the way of your plan? Or are you suggesting removing it and buggering up South Road completely?

[adam73837]

Aidan, I had a look at your plan and I am quite impressed by it. I would also like to repeat that I was not saying that my idea is the solution, I am merely presenting an idea. (That last sentence was not written in anger or frustration, but rather as a kind reminder, in case there had been a misunderstanding)
Now as for the Emerson Crossing, yes I was thinking of 'buggering up South Rd completely' . I think that I failed to mention that I think it would be better to put the railway beneath the actual intersection in order to free up Cross Road and the 'arms' of South Road intersection. Hence my 'whole' plan for that Intersection would be to have free flowing traffic from South Road (North) into the newly constructed 'Tonsley Line Road' with the current exits onto and off of South Road (north) to remain. Meanwhile, South Road (South) would split just before the 'curve' with the northbound lanes going beneath the 'bridge' and the southbound lanes diverting around it. That sounded like a mess and made no sense didn't it? Look, here's a quick sketch (from paint) of what I mean:

Edited_Emerson_Crossing_Satellite_View.jpg (63.1 KiB) Viewed 3236 times

Another reminder to everyone that this is simply an idea, not a proposal that I demand be taken seriously, it is merely an idea and I urge everyone to bring forward their own ideas for the future of Adelaide just as Norman and Aidan have been doing.

But anyway, an even greater 'putting-railway-beneath-an-intersection-in-order-to-increase-safety-and-traffic-flow' priority is the Gawler Railway Line at Salisbury's... Park Terrace I think it is. Sure, they'll put some (apparently) high-tech pedestrian crossing there, but how many incidents or issues will it take for it to have something that other cities around the nation would have already done?

BTW, for those who have not yet seen them and those who doubt that Tollways and Public Transport can successfully exist side-by-side in the 21st Century, take a look at these:

[*]http://www.dip.qld.gov.au/resources/pla ... nsport.pdf
[*]http://www4.transport.vic.gov.au/vtp/index.html

[Norman]

Are you sure though that the train corridor can support a freeway and train lines?

[Cruise]

Are you sure though that the train corridor can support a freeway and train lines?

Well seeing as it runs through a residential area, you would recieve some well deserved backlash to a plan like that.

[adam73837]

Are you sure though that the train corridor can support a freeway and train lines?

No, not the corridor as it is now; land acquisition on either side of the railway (or only on one side) would be required.

Well seeing as it runs through a residential area, you would recieve some well deserved backlash to a plan like that.

Yes, that is true. While people living in those areas would kick up a fuss, let's say, for argument's sake, 15, 000 people would be affected by land aquisition on the Tonsley/ Noarlunga Lines. Compare that with how many people would benefit from using it.

Aidan, I'm not saying that your plan wouldn't be successful, it would, I'm just putting forward some (pie-in-the-sky, if you will ) ideas of my own.

[Cruise]

I live near a railway currently, which i have no problems with noise. but if the current government seriously considered building a freeway along side it with half a chance i'd rip out Pat Conlon's Jugular.

[adam73837]

I live near a railway currently, which i have no problems with noise. but if the current government seriously considered building a freeway along side it with half a chance i'd rip out Pat Conlon's Jugular.

Hi Cruise! On your profile it says that you live in the City Of Playford. Hence, I assume that you have knowledge of that dreaded crossing at Salisbury. What do you, as someone who (possibly) lives nearby, think should be done there?

[rhino]

I live near a railway currently, which i have no problems with noise. but if the current government seriously considered building a freeway along side it with half a chance i'd rip out Pat Conlon's Jugular.

NIMBY!

[Shuz]

I'm led to believe that the original alignment of the Noarlunga Freeway would have gone past only two blocks from my house...

[adam73837]

I'm led to believe that the original alignment of the Noarlunga Freeway would have gone past only two blocks from my house...

Here's a map of it:

MATS_Plan_Overview.jpg (307.24 KiB) Viewed 3103 times

[Aidan]

But anyway, an even greater 'putting-railway-beneath-an-intersection-in-order-to-increase-safety-and-traffic-flow' priority is the Gawler Railway Line at Salisbury's... Park Terrace I think it is. Sure, they'll put some (apparently) high-tech pedestrian crossing there, but how many incidents or issues will it take for it to have something that other cities around the nation would have already done?

They have already done a lot there. First they built the underpass to the north of the station, taking most of the traffic away from the Park Terrace crossing. More recently they constructed emergency escape lanes on the crossing, so that even if a vehicle enters unsafely it won't get stuck in a jam.

Park Terrace will have to be grade separated eventually, but it's not a priority. Torrens Road, Brighton Road, Diagonal (Morphett) Road and Leader Street need it much more urgently.

[adam73837]

But anyway, an even greater 'putting-railway-beneath-an-intersection-in-order-to-increase-safety-and-traffic-flow' priority is the Gawler Railway Line at Salisbury's... Park Terrace I think it is. Sure, they'll put some (apparently) high-tech pedestrian crossing there, but how many incidents or issues will it take for it to have something that other cities around the nation would have already done?

They have already done a lot there. First they built the underpass to the north of the station, taking most of the traffic away from the Park Terrace crossing. More recently they constructed emergency escape lanes on the crossing, so that even if a vehicle enters unsafely it won't get stuck in a jam.

Park Terrace will have to be grade separated eventually, but it's not a priority. Torrens Road, Brighton Road, Diagonal (Morphett) Road and Leader Street need it much more urgently.

Quite right. I hear that Torrens Road is particularly bad in peak hour.