Page 17 of 20
[U/C] Re: Ovingham Level Crossing Removal | $231m
Posted: Sun Aug 28, 2022 6:24 pm
by 1NEEDS2POST
ChillyPhilly wrote: ↑Mon Aug 22, 2022 10:08 am
MT269 wrote: ↑Sat Aug 20, 2022 4:39 pm
This has probably been asked 20000 times by now. But why is there still an intersection for Churchill/Torrens Rd?
Wouldn't it have been sensible to plan an overpass/underpass? Or did the LNP intentionally leave it out, in order to gain votes via a future election promise?
It's just typical '
underplanning'. Yes, I just coined this term. I'd like to blame the Libs because they never complete infrastructure projects properly and this was a Marshall Government project, but a lack of future vision and general masterplanning is endemic in SA, no matter who is in charge.
The other underplanned part of this project was not grade separating the pedestrian crossing over the railway tracks. It's not too late to tack this on to the project, but no one else seems keen to do it.
[U/C] Re: Ovingham Level Crossing Removal | $231m
Posted: Sun Aug 28, 2022 6:54 pm
by Spotto
1NEEDS2POST wrote: ↑Sun Aug 28, 2022 6:24 pm
ChillyPhilly wrote: ↑Mon Aug 22, 2022 10:08 am
It's just typical '
underplanning'. Yes, I just coined this term. I'd like to blame the Libs because they never complete infrastructure projects properly and this was a Marshall Government project, but a lack of future vision and general masterplanning is endemic in SA, no matter who is in charge.
The other underplanned part of this project was not grade separating the pedestrian crossing over the railway tracks. It's not too late to tack this on to the project, but no one else seems keen to do it.
It wouldn't have been difficult or much more expensive to copy Elder Smith Road and Mawson Lakes station with stairs and lifts from the road bridge down to the platforms. But common-sense doesn't exist in Adelaide transport planning.
[U/C] Re: Ovingham Level Crossing Removal | $231m
Posted: Wed Aug 31, 2022 11:49 am
by MT269
Regarding Elder Smith Rd, who came up with the genius idea to make the bridge one lane only? During the rail closure, it sometimes took 10-15 minutes to get from the interchange to Salisbury Hwy.
Are there any other cities on earth with such narrow minded 'insights'?
It would've saved more money if it was built as a bi-directional rd. IE one lane for both directions with a directional light at both ends, in the style of the Southern Expressway before it was expanded. The cost savings would've funded a nice lunch at an expensive restaurant for the MPs in question.
[U/C] Re: Ovingham Level Crossing Removal | $231m
Posted: Wed Aug 31, 2022 2:36 pm
by rev
MT269 wrote: ↑Wed Aug 31, 2022 11:49 am
Regarding Elder Smith Rd, who came up with the genius idea to make the bridge one lane only? During the rail closure, it sometimes took 10-15 minutes to get from the interchange to Salisbury Hwy.
Are there any other cities on earth with such narrow minded 'insights'?
It would've saved more money if it was built as a bi-directional rd. IE one lane for both directions with a directional light at both ends, in the style of the Southern Expressway before it was expanded. The cost savings would've funded a nice lunch at an expensive restaurant for the MPs in question.
Adelaide is stuck in a weird zone of build only for what we needed years ago without the population, while at the same trying to build up the population that has already grown.
[U/C] Re: Ovingham Level Crossing Removal | $231m
Posted: Wed Aug 31, 2022 4:44 pm
by alexczarn
MT269 wrote: ↑Wed Aug 31, 2022 11:49 am
Regarding Elder Smith Rd, who came up with the genius idea to make the bridge one lane only? During the rail closure, it sometimes took 10-15 minutes to get from the interchange to Salisbury Hwy.
Are there any other cities on earth with such narrow minded 'insights'?
It would've saved more money if it was built as a bi-directional rd. IE one lane for both directions with a directional light at both ends, in the style of the Southern Expressway before it was expanded. The cost savings would've funded a nice lunch at an expensive restaurant for the MPs in question.
I keep seeing plans for the duplication; no idea when the timeframe is.
[U/C] Re: Ovingham Level Crossing Removal | $231m
Posted: Wed Aug 31, 2022 4:50 pm
by SBD
MT269 wrote: ↑Wed Aug 31, 2022 11:49 am
Regarding Elder Smith Rd, who came up with the genius idea to make the bridge one lane only? During the rail closure, it sometimes took 10-15 minutes to get from the interchange to Salisbury Hwy.
Are there any other cities on earth with such narrow minded 'insights'?
It would've saved more money if it was built as a bi-directional rd. IE one lane for both directions with a directional light at both ends, in the style of the Southern Expressway before it was expanded. The cost savings would've funded a nice lunch at an expensive restaurant for the MPs in question.
The
2005 flyer for the project says it is designed to facilitate future duplication. I guess the traffic model at the time said that would be sufficient for some time. It would be interesting to find out if it's in any kind of long-term schedule for duplication, and what the trigger points are. It was built around the same time as the first stage of the Port River Expressway which was built without bike lanes or shared paths because the "experts" couldn't imagine anybody wanting to cycle along a freight route between Mawson Lakes and Port Adelaide.
[U/C] Re: Ovingham Level Crossing Removal | $231m
Posted: Wed Aug 31, 2022 5:43 pm
by mawsonguy
MT269 wrote: ↑Wed Aug 31, 2022 11:49 am
Regarding Elder Smith Rd, who came up with the genius idea to make the bridge one lane only? During the rail closure, it sometimes took 10-15 minutes to get from the interchange to Salisbury Hwy.
Are there any other cities on earth with such narrow minded 'insights'?
It would've saved more money if it was built as a bi-directional rd. IE one lane for both directions with a directional light at both ends, in the style of the Southern Expressway before it was expanded. The cost savings would've funded a nice lunch at an expensive restaurant for the MPs in question.
If you look at the bridge you will see that the buttresses at each end are double width to accommodate duplication of the bridge. In addition the road reserves at either end are wide enough to accommodate road duplication. So, they did plan ahead. The Integrated Transport and Land Use Plan published in October 2013 (
https://www.dit.sa.gov.au/__data/assets ... e_Plan.pdf) provided for the duplication to take place in the medium (5 to 15 years) to long term (15 to 30 years). Of course, transport planning in this state involves waiting until a road has reached capacity before "investigating" an upgrade thereby making sure that upgrades only occur well after a road has exceeded its capacity.
[U/C] Re: Ovingham Level Crossing Removal | $231m
Posted: Thu Sep 01, 2022 2:44 pm
by SBD
mawsonguy wrote: ↑Wed Aug 31, 2022 5:43 pm
MT269 wrote: ↑Wed Aug 31, 2022 11:49 am
Regarding Elder Smith Rd, who came up with the genius idea to make the bridge one lane only? During the rail closure, it sometimes took 10-15 minutes to get from the interchange to Salisbury Hwy.
Are there any other cities on earth with such narrow minded 'insights'?
It would've saved more money if it was built as a bi-directional rd. IE one lane for both directions with a directional light at both ends, in the style of the Southern Expressway before it was expanded. The cost savings would've funded a nice lunch at an expensive restaurant for the MPs in question.
If you look at the bridge you will see that the buttresses at each end are double width to accommodate duplication of the bridge. In addition the road reserves at either end are wide enough to accommodate road duplication. So, they did plan ahead. The Integrated Transport and Land Use Plan published in October 2013 (
https://www.dit.sa.gov.au/__data/assets ... e_Plan.pdf) provided for the duplication to take place in the medium (5 to 15 years) to long term (15 to 30 years). Of course, transport planning in this state involves waiting until a road has reached capacity before "investigating" an upgrade thereby making sure that upgrades only occur well after a road has exceeded its capacity.
Is there a standard widely-accepted definition of "road capacity"? In particular, is the definition used by traffic managers and infrastructure planners the same as the definition used by a commuter who happens to decide to go to work at the same moment as 50 of their closest neighbours? Is a road "at capacity" if there's a 10-minute traffic delay at 0830 on school days, but 10 seconds between cars at 0930 the same day, after that delay has cleared for iteself?
[U/C] Re: Ovingham Level Crossing Removal | $231m
Posted: Fri Sep 02, 2022 8:31 am
by rhino
SBD wrote: ↑Thu Sep 01, 2022 2:44 pm
is the definition used by traffic managers and infrastructure planners the same as the definition used by a commuter who happens to decide to go to work at the same moment as 50 of their closest neighbours? Is a road "at capacity" if there's a 10-minute traffic delay at 0830 on school days, but 10 seconds between cars at 0930 the same day, after that delay has cleared for iteself?
A very interesting question, I would love to know the answer!
[U/C] Re: Ovingham Level Crossing Removal | $231m
Posted: Sun Sep 04, 2022 9:45 am
by marbles
at the moment it doesnt look like a second port adelaide bound lane could fit, let alone a bike lane on either side of the bridge as well
[U/C] Re: Ovingham Level Crossing Removal | $231m
Posted: Sun Sep 04, 2022 2:11 pm
by PD2/20
marbles wrote: ↑Sun Sep 04, 2022 9:45 am
at the moment it doesnt look like a second port adelaide bound lane could fit, let alone a bike lane on either side of the bridge as well
Which bridge are you referring to? Ovingham or Elder Smith?
The Ovingham project website has a map (
https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com ... PROVED.pdf) showing two lanes westbound and three lanes eastbound as well as shared bike/footpaths on both sides of the bridge when completed. The western ramp couldn't be completed until traffic was diverted off the old Torrens Rd carriageway at Chief St.
[U/C] Re: Ovingham Level Crossing Removal | $231m
Posted: Sun Sep 04, 2022 2:40 pm
by [Shuz]
I think they might regret not having a longer slip lane for traffic going from Torrens Road turning left onto Chief Street.
[U/C] Re: Ovingham Level Crossing Removal | $231m
Posted: Sun Sep 04, 2022 10:18 pm
by PD2/20
[Shuz] wrote: ↑Sun Sep 04, 2022 2:40 pm
I think they might regret not having a longer slip lane for traffic going from Torrens Road turning left onto Chief Street.
How attractive is Chief St for through traffic compared with the Park Tce/Port Rd and Torrens Rd/South Rd alternatives?
[U/C] Re: Ovingham Level Crossing Removal | $231m
Posted: Mon Sep 05, 2022 1:31 pm
by MT269
In that .pdf linked to, why are there two 'Torrens Rd's in the map?
[U/C] Re: Ovingham Level Crossing Removal | $231m
Posted: Mon Sep 05, 2022 2:42 pm
by PD2/20
MT269 wrote: ↑Mon Sep 05, 2022 1:31 pm
In that .pdf linked to, why are there two 'Torrens Rd's in the map?
The road over the bridge continues as Torrens Rd. However the old Torrens Rd still services premises which have addresses on Torrens Rd. The concept of a service road adjoining a main road with the same name is not uncommon.