Sensational-Adelaide.com

Shuz wrote:Aidan, must you question absolutely bloody everything?

I could find answers without questioning... but they'd probably be the wrong answers!

Shuz wrote:
The expensive cost of the Northern Connector is largely attributed to the fact that it requires a lot of property acquisition.

Does it really? I thought it was mostly saltpans that are being abandoned anyway!

The salt-pans is currently owned by the salt-making company - whoever that is.

Sorry to have to question you again, but are you absolutely sure about that? I was under the impression it was a long term lease.

There is a planned sale of the lands to Delfin Land Lease (for the proposed 20,000 homes housing development) and the Land Management Corporation and DTEI - for necessary infrastructure works associated with the development - both care of SA Government. DTEI specifically will need to buy out the road corridor off Delfin/LMC - and they also have to buy properties in the way of the Connector's path - horticulture/agriculture industries surrounding Virginia, part of Globe Derby Park, Bolivar Treatment Plant, wetlands regions owned by Salisbury Council, homeowners. There's a lot of people affected.

There would be some people affected, but most of the route misses them. I wouldn't expect the cost to be high except around Waterloo Corner.

The section of South Road between the PR Expressway and GJ Road is already looking to cost at least $750m, just for a meagre 3km or so section of road. South Road from the Southern Expressway to the PR Expressway is 22km - quick math - that's $5.5b to do the entire South Road, more really because propety is more expensive and subdivided into smaller allotments within the inner-city.

Where did you get the $750m figure from? That's a quarter of a million dollars per metre! How much are they planning to widen the road?

Here, that's where.http://www.sensational-adelaide.com/for ... ?f=9&t=263

That's the figure between the Port River Expressway and Regency Road. That's well over twice as far.

Northern Expressway was always planned to have 3x3 lanes. This was factored in from the start. They've built it 2x2 to accomodate the demand it requires upon its opening, and have the land provision for third lanes when the demand rises. This provision significantly reduces construction costs in future when its needed.

What was the third set of 3 lanes planned to be for? Or do you mean 3+3 lanes?

I meant 3+3. It's the same thing.

Six is the same as nine??? Next you'll be telling me you'll get forty two if you multiply them together

Now could you stop giving everyone grief and not nit-pick at all the tiniest details? :wank:

How big does something have to be before you stop regarding it as the tiniest details?

Yes, nitpicking in the extreme. The vast majority of people who work in transport know that 3x3 lanes means dual carriageway, 3 lanes each way. A simple Google search will show you this.

Now back to the Northern Connector....

DM8 wrote:Yes, nitpicking in the extreme. The vast majority of people who work in transport know that 3x3 lanes means dual carriageway, 3 lanes each way.

Why stop there? Why not say dual portal, 3 lanes each way?

The vast majority of people who work in transport know that 3x3 lanes means three lots of three lanes. And that some people say 3x3 when they mean 3+3.

A simple Google search will show you this.

38 results for "3x3 lanes"
49400 results for "3+3 lanes"
Just because Google gives you some results doesn't mean it's correct.

Now back to the Northern Connector....

OK. The reason I think the first 4 lanes constructed should all be one of the eventual carriageways (probably the northbound one) is that it is likely to be much cheaper. For a start, where bridges are needed, building 2 lanes of each carriageway would mean they'd all have to be constructed before it opens, so the original cost would be much higher. If you look at Elder Smith Road (aka the Mawson Connector) you'll see that the abutments for the bridge over the railway are wide enough for a 2+2 road, but right now the actual bridge carries what will eventually become the westbound carriageway.

If there was a need for intermediate interchanges then there would be a good reason to build 2 lanes of each of the Northern Connector's eventual two carriageways. But as there isn't, it makes sense to save the money.

Aidan wrote:If you look at Elder Smith Road (aka the Mawson Connector) you'll see that the abutments for the bridge over the railway are wide enough for a 2+2 road, but right now the actual bridge carries what will eventually become the westbound carriageway.

Looking at google images the Mawson Connector is a much lower volume road than what the Northern connector will be. Also, is it's speed limit 110km/kr or more like 80km/hr ?

Perth's Roe Highway south of Orrong Road is similar in many respects to the Northern Connector it that it is a high capacity freight route to the Port of Fremantle and built to freeway standard. The following web link shows an image or Roe Highway over South Street. Noth that the bridge over South Street is designed as you suggest (it also has concrete barrier down the middle to keep the opposing flows of traffic seperate) but the road itself either side is designed as 2x2 lane carriageways with sufficient room to add a third lane in each direction within the central median.

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=Roe+Hwy,+ ... 9&t=k&z=16

The speed limit on Roe Highway south of Orrong Road is 100km/hr.

A road in Perth that would be similar to the Mawson connector is Abernethy Road east of Perth Ariport. This too has a single 2-lane carriageway on a bridge structure over a railway line.

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=Roe+Hwy,+ ... 16&iwloc=A

This road south of the bridge has been duplicated since the above image was taken and the speed limit is either 70 or 80 km/hr.

Part of the Sturt Highway upgrade provides an example of a high speed 4-lane road on a single carriageway.

http://www.infrastructure.sa.gov.au/__d ... Fill_A.pdf

Duplicate that and there's enough width in each the carriageways for six lanes of traffic plus an emergency stopping lane. The road geek in me is starting to like this idea.

drsmith wrote: Looking at google images the Mawson Connector is a much lower volume road than what the Northern connector will be. Also, is it's speed limit 110km/kr or more like 80km/hr ?

More like 70 km/h

They could always copy Canberra and build a 1x1 lane freeway!
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source= ... 18&iwloc=A

AtD wrote:They could always copy Canberra and build a 1x1 lane freeway!
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source= ... 18&iwloc=A

1x1 or 1+1?

You don't want to get it wrong, or aidan will grill you.

Hooligan wrote:

AtD wrote:They could always copy Canberra and build a 1x1 lane freeway!
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source= ... 18&iwloc=A

1x1 or 1+1?

You don't want to get it wrong, or aidan will grill you.

1+1 , 1X1 = 1
2+2, 2X2 = 2

Doesn't matter at integers less than 3. But tell me...

How many wheels does a 4X4 sports wagon have?

monotonehell wrote:1+1 , 1X1 = 1

Uhhhm...

AtD wrote:

monotonehell wrote:1+1 , 1X1 = 1

Uhhhm...

Exactly.

Can't we just say something like "a four lane road" ?

Is there any update on the Northern Connector?

Fair shake of the sauce bottle.
http://www.sensational-adelaide.com/for ... 09&start=0
GDE extension, etc, moved above.

rogue wrote:Is there any update on the Northern Connector?

years away but the design and costing is ongoing, word around the camp fire is that it will have to be partially privately funded - PPP

probably wont be a toll road though

before somebody whinges, i know that PPP is public private partnership, not "partially private funded" - but thats what it will be some kind of a hybrid ppp