[COM] South Road Superway | $842m | 3km

[Cint]

Selfish?

The government completely destroyed their property rights through the creation of this underpass and therefore compensation should be paid if it goes ahead. What if someone opened an airport next door to your house? You'd tell them to get stuffed. What if a new one opened some distance away but still affected you? You'd expect compensation.

Property rights that were based on the fact people were forced to stop and participate in a traffic jam outside their store, hence gaining a free advertising advantage at the cost of 1000's of peoples time every day.

Welfare is a bitch.

They are actually getting more free media publicity because of the underpass, than if it was never built. I mean I didn't even know there was a porno store there till I saw it on the news.

[Cruise]

I mean I didn't even know there was a porno store there till I saw it on the news.

Now with that knowledge, have you visited said porno store?

[Omicron]

Selfish?

The government completely destroyed their property rights through the creation of this underpass and therefore compensation should be paid if it goes ahead. What if someone opened an airport next door to your house? You'd tell them to get stuffed. What if a new one opened some distance away but still affected you? You'd expect compensation.

Property rights that were based on the fact people were forced to stop and participate in a traffic jam outside their store, hence gaining a free advertising advantage at the cost of 1000's of peoples time every day.

Welfare is a bitch.

They are actually getting more free media publicity because of the underpass, than if it was never built. I mean I didn't even know there was a porno store there till I saw it on the news.

Just the place to be sneaking out the front door clasping a veiny protrusion of some kind, or a DVD title of dubious origins - one of the busiest intersections in the metropolitan area.

[Prince George]

While people might not have a great deal of sympathy for the traders at this particular intersection, you could consider this to be a foretaste for what a "real freeway" is about. A freeway is predicated on cars not stopping, so parking has to go. More than that, entrances do too; to minimize intersections there is generally a separated access road on either side running parallel to the freeway. So now you've got fast moving traffic that's separated quite far from the buildings on either side, that does make it less likely that people travelling on the road are going to notice the businesses on either side. Small businesses don't tend to flourish in those conditions, what does are the "big box" chains who solve visibility problems by simply being big and building 50' signs.

The other source of conflict for these roads is the difference between the areas that benefit from the freeway and the areas that pay the price of them. If we imagine retrofitting a freeway along South Rd, we would be building on/off-ramps, over/under-passes, sound walls, and access roads through many existing inner neighbourhoods like Ashford, Mile End, Croydon. On the other hand, most of the benefits of the freeway are for long-distance commuters from areas much further south or north of there. Exagerating the situation a little, the net effect of the freeway is to drive down the value of houses in Mile End, but pull up the price in Seaford Rise.

These options feel like a zero-sum game, one side wins and the other loses. Quality transit options have a better chance of being win/win - better connections for outlying areas to important destinations like the downtown, Glenelg, or Marion; less congestion for those that must or want to drive; less impact on neighbourhoods that would have had the freeways built in them.

[rhino]

I can't believe the number of people who fell for that Advertiser story about compensation. From what I've heard, from somebody who does know, compensation was offered and accepted. Also, the Advertiser failed to mention the Vet on the opposite corner of the intersection, who was very supportive of the underpass because of what it meant for transport in Adelaide. It's a sensationalist rag that creates angst in the community for it's own sake. Give it the lack of respect it deserves.

[rhino]

Oh well, looks like we won't see a freeway like the one proposed in the 60's. no thanks to Dunstan, we are now stuck with this issue...

Adam, as has been pointed out several times in these forums, Dunstan only shelved the MATS plan because South Australia couldn't afford it at the time, and his government didn't deem it necessary at that time. It was the Tonkin Liberal Government that actually killed the whole project by selling off the land.

[raulduke]

I wholeheartedly support a North South corridor, but anyone can see that turning South Road into a nonstop route is just not practical, nor feasible.

Main North Rd and Port Rd are options for parts in the North, Port Rd has a massive road reserve capable of accommodating a dual carriageway plus service roads. It could then link in with the Port River Expressway and Nexy.

[monotonehell]

Do we actually need a contiguous expressway from north to south? Considering that most journeys are contained within N-S quartiles of the greater metro area, would it make more sense to concentrate on those short links between areas?

Rail would be a better corridor for continuous freight transport.

[adam73837]

It was the Tonkin Liberal Government that actually killed the whole project by selling off the land.

Really? I was under the impression that it was the Bannon Labor Government that sold off the land and also sent us back quite a few $billion a few years later with the State bank Collapse.
BTW, I don't recall mentioning that Labor/Liberal debate on this topic.

[Pat28]

BTW, I don't recall mentioning that Labor/Liberal debate on this topic.

Before it gets nasty, no Liberal/Labor debates at the moment. Lets agree to disagree - both have their flaws, they are political parties.

[rhino]

It was the Tonkin Liberal Government that actually killed the whole project by selling off the land.

Really? I was under the impression that it was the Bannon Labor Government that sold off the land

Nope.

BTW, I don't recall mentioning that Labor/Liberal debate on this topic.

Oh well, looks like we won't see a freeway like the one proposed in the 60's. no thanks to Dunstan...

[drsmith]

Oh well, looks like we won't see a freeway like the one proposed in the 60's. no thanks to Dunstan, we are now stuck with this issue... ANYWAY, if we don't get a freeway built, I would like to see more than simple band aids at the major intersections. I would intead like to see something like what the RAA's vision is at http://www.raa.net/north_south_corridor.asp?SecID=146 . Just watch the videos towards the bottom of the page.

Is there a continuous video of that somewhere ?

It would be interesting to see the RAA's vision from one end to the other including South Road between the bridges and underpasses.

I also note that the South Road/Sturt Road intersection is missing.

[Hippodamus]

Oh well, looks like we won't see a freeway like the one proposed in the 60's. no thanks to Dunstan, we are now stuck with this issue... ANYWAY, if we don't get a freeway built, I would like to see more than simple band aids at the major intersections. I would intead like to see something like what the RAA's vision is at http://www.raa.net/north_south_corridor.asp?SecID=146 . Just watch the videos towards the bottom of the page.[

Adam, have you even read the book by Jane Jacobs, The Death and Life of Great American Cities..? This urban theorist wrote about the negative affects of freeways from the 60's... we are now in 2008, and after all our knowledge and all the mistakes made with freeways across the world, people still believe they are solutions to freeing congestion and improving efficiency.

This book, ahead of its time emphasises the fact that freeways are not the way to alleviating congestion, because the theory is that once a freeway is built, it's maximum carrying capacity will reach it's threshold as more people use learn about it and start to use it. Eventually, one day the new freeway becomes congested again. Freeways are band aid solutions with detrimental consequences including exacerbation of urban sprawl, divided communities, shifting house prices up in the suburbs while plummetting those values of homes it passes in the innner area, not sustainable circulation solution, de-emphasis on public transport and they promote higher private car usage, and are NOT aesethically pleasing elements in the urban fabric.

I would suggest looking at proactive and pro urbanism cities such as Vancouver (Cananda) and Portland, Oregon (US) which although are western and similar to Australian cities; have turned their backs on freeways, rather; introducing more skinnier streets dispersed across their urban inner areas, with an emphasis on street life, walking, cycling and public transportation usage. Freeways are banned in their inner city and metropolitan areas!

Freeways are not a 21st Century solution. We need to focus on bringing Adelaide up to speed and plan it's future so it is a more sustainable metropolis without the freeways dissecting into our communities.

[monotonehell]

I would suggest looking at proactive and pro urbanism cities such as Vancouver (Cananda) and Portland, Oregon (US) which although are western and similar to Australian cities; have turned their backs on freeways, rather; introducing more skinnier streets dispersed across their urban inner areas, with an emphasis on street life, walking, cycling and public transportation usage. Freeways are banned in their inner city and metropolitan areas!

Freeways are not a 21st Century solution. We need to focus on bringing Adelaide up to speed and plan it's future so it is a more sustainable metropolis without the freeways dissecting into our communities.

Like the point I raised that no one's responded to...

Do we actually need a contiguous expressway from north to south? Considering that most journeys are contained within N-S quartiles of the greater metro area, would it make more sense to concentrate on those short links between areas?

Roads need to match use. PT can take up some of the arterial point to point traffic, but perhaps we should be concentrating on providing intra-urban links rather than cutting vast tracts arbitrarily north to south?

[drsmith]

Freeways are not a 21st Century solution. We need to focus on bringing Adelaide up to speed and plan it's future so it is a more sustainable metropolis without the freeways dissecting into our communities.

What would you therefore suggest for South Road ?