Sensational-Adelaide.com

mawsonguy wrote: ↑

Sun Jan 14, 2018 8:58 pm

Goodsy wrote: ↑

Sun Jan 14, 2018 1:09 pm

that's definitely the PRexy interchange, I'm assuming they've changed the design to something like this

I think that you are spot on the money. The interesting area is in the North East quadrant which looks like they could be building an off ramp for southbound on the NC to go East on the Salisbury Hwy which then merges with the off ramp for northbound traffic on the Superway going East on the Salisbury Hwy just before it reaches the Highway. Then again it could just be an access road for the earthmoving equipment. A southbound off ramp to go east would only make sense if there wasn't one at the Bolivar Interchange.

I think the green loop needs to be drawn a little further north to match the renders - north of the sort-of-triangular lake in the middle, and closer to the cyan curve. Then it would match closer with the renders and "mystery" earthwork, so probably not the extra left turn. It would be fairly easy (and hard to see yet) to build a branch off the left lane of the blue curve into the right lane of the green one where they are near the same height and close to parallel, but I think that would perturb traffic flow rather badly, so probably shouldn't be created. Dropping down from the blue curve to the current on-ramp might be just as simple if cycling remains banned on that section fo Salisbury Highway.

Just on cycling on the PREXY. It was a major mistake not to build a separated cycling path from Mawson lakes to Port Adelaide parallel with the PREXY. All it has done is force cyclists to ride on the shoulder of a 90km/hr road only metres away from big trucks which is far from smart or ideal for all road users. Its obvious to me that the demand is there by the number of cyclists already using the shoulder of the highway. If DPTI had built a proper cycling route, I could only see those cycling numbers growing.

Goodsy wrote: ↑

Sun Jan 14, 2018 1:09 pm

that's definitely the PRexy interchange, I'm assuming they've changed the design to something like this

That's essentially it.

Page 50 from the Powerpoint presentation from Northern Connector Project - ICN Breakfast - 23 Aug 2016 shows the most complete view of the Southern Interchange that I've seen in the public domain.

https://gateway.icn.org.au/project/3748 ... 1468345768

The Bolivar interchange design in that presentation has changed from the earlier south-side ramps only to include ramps in all quadrants. The clearing footprint suggests it has since changed further to relocate the northbound exit ramp to a loop ramp in the north-western quadrant.

Kasey771 wrote: ↑

Mon Jan 15, 2018 8:46 am

Just on cycling on the PREXY. It was a major mistake not to build a separated cycling path from Mawson lakes to Port Adelaide parallel with the PREXY. All it has done is force cyclists to ride on the shoulder of a 90km/hr road only metres away from big trucks which is far from smart or ideal for all road users. Its obvious to me that the demand is there by the number of cyclists already using the shoulder of the highway. If DPTI had built a proper cycling route, I could only see those cycling numbers growing.

I agree, but I suspect they will decide that the current cycle detour is sufficient, and that banning bikes from the expressway during construction has been successful and should continue.

The government's Cycle Instead website shows there are bike lanes on the Salisbury Highway bridge over Port Wakefield Road. I don't recall noticing much bike lane signage when I have driven over that bridge, or when I have been on the two-lane on-ramp that the supposed bike lane crosses. That is still the recommended "low traffic" route from Mawson Lakes to Port Adelaide, followed by the new detour starting from the service station, then Cormack Road.

Cycle Instead also shows a sealed off-road path in the Barker Inlet Wetlands culvert under Salisbury Highway just west of the tourist information (I think) parking bays joining the unsealed paths through the wetlands on the south side, but not connected anywhere north side of Salisbury Highway. I wonder if this is the plan for the shared path along the Northern Connector to cross Salisbury highway.

drsmith wrote: ↑

Mon Jan 15, 2018 11:01 am

Goodsy wrote: ↑

Sun Jan 14, 2018 1:09 pm

that's definitely the PRexy interchange, I'm assuming they've changed the design to something like this

That's essentially it.

Page 50 from the Powerpoint presentation from Northern Connector Project - ICN Breakfast - 23 Aug 2016 shows the most complete view of the Southern Interchange that I've seen in the public domain.

https://gateway.icn.org.au/project/3748 ... 1468345768

The Bolivar interchange design in that presentation has changed from the earlier south-side ramps only to include ramps in all quadrants. The clearing footprint suggests it has since changed further to relocate the northbound exit ramp to a loop ramp in the north-western quadrant.

And something even more interesting from that document.. The Globe Derby interchange

Goodsy wrote: ↑

Mon Jan 15, 2018 11:42 am

drsmith wrote: ↑

Mon Jan 15, 2018 11:01 am

Goodsy wrote: ↑

Sun Jan 14, 2018 1:09 pm

that's definitely the PRexy interchange, I'm assuming they've changed the design to something like this

That's essentially it.

Page 50 from the Powerpoint presentation from Northern Connector Project - ICN Breakfast - 23 Aug 2016 shows the most complete view of the Southern Interchange that I've seen in the public domain.

https://gateway.icn.org.au/project/3748 ... 1468345768

The Bolivar interchange design in that presentation has changed from the earlier south-side ramps only to include ramps in all quadrants. The clearing footprint suggests it has since changed further to relocate the northbound exit ramp to a loop ramp in the north-western quadrant.

...

And something even more interesting from that document.. The Globe Derby interchange

The Globe Derby drawing shows a full all-movements intersection, but nobody has a contract to build the road to it from Port Wakefield Road.

My question is "What is it for?" It is possible this bridge is needed to carry the sewer pipes over the expressway so that they never have to dig up the road to service them? There is a large pumped main from the old Port Adelaide sewerage works to the Bolivar facility. Maybe someone decided it has to go over the road, not remain under it?

Page 47 shows the bridge elements being built as part of the current project. The Globe Derby interchange bridge isn't one of the nine highlighted.

The GD interchange is a future design element that's not part of the current build.

Plot twist: the GD interchange isn't intended for Globe Derby at all, but for Mawson Lakes.



Although on reflection it looks doglegged.

This could have paved the way for a new arterial route connecting this region with the eastern suburbs but unfortunately Elder Smith Drive is following an incorrect alignment and a short-sighted decision was made in the space reserved for a northwards extension of Walkleys Road in Ingle Farm. First, the reserve for the extension mentioned here:



The 'short-sighted decision':



And what this corridor could have looked like, including the NC:



Yeah, I like my maps

ChillyPhilly wrote: ↑

Mon Jan 15, 2018 1:46 pm

Yeah, I like my maps

I can still see that going ahead

Kasey771 wrote: ↑

Mon Jan 15, 2018 8:46 am

Just on cycling on the PREXY. It was a major mistake not to build a separated cycling path from Mawson lakes to Port Adelaide parallel with the PREXY. All it has done is force cyclists to ride on the shoulder of a 90km/hr road only metres away from big trucks which is far from smart or ideal for all road users. Its obvious to me that the demand is there by the number of cyclists already using the shoulder of the highway. If DPTI had built a proper cycling route, I could only see those cycling numbers growing.

It's against the law to ride your bike on an expressway. There's even big white signs with black writing that say so. Cyclists are morons.

http://mylicence.sa.gov.au/road-rules/t ... k/freeways

Goodsy wrote: ↑

Mon Jan 15, 2018 2:19 pm

ChillyPhilly wrote: ↑

Mon Jan 15, 2018 1:46 pm

Yeah, I like my maps

I can still see that going ahead

No reason why it shouldn't.
Short sighted decisions by councils, because there wasn't an overall state or metro-wide planning authority or plan aside, that screw up there can be corrected with minimal fuss.
Minimal property acquisition. There's enough room to make Walkleys and Sudholz roads three lanes in each direction.

rev wrote: ↑

Mon Jan 15, 2018 5:41 pm

It's against the law to ride your bike on an expressway. There's even big white signs with black writing that say so. Cyclists are morons.

http://mylicence.sa.gov.au/road-rules/t ... k/freeways

if that's the case, then why is there bike lanes and bike crossings all along the PREXY?

Goodsy wrote:

rev wrote: ↑

Mon Jan 15, 2018 5:41 pm

It's against the law to ride your bike on an expressway. There's even big white signs with black writing that say so. Cyclists are morons.

http://mylicence.sa.gov.au/road-rules/t ... k/freeways

if that's the case, then why is there bike lanes and bike crossings all along the PREXY?

Exactly.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Could it be the case that the Port River Expressway is only an expressway by name? Usually they have signs indicating that the expressway is starting, including a sign that tells you what is and is not allowed on the expressway. I have seen them when you enter the Superway but not when you travel along Salisbury Highway and exter the PREXY.

Norman wrote: ↑

Mon Jan 15, 2018 6:06 pm

Could it be the case that the Port River Expressway is only an expressway by name? Usually they have signs indicating that the expressway is starting, including a sign that tells you what is and is not allowed on the expressway. I have seen them when you enter the Superway but not when you travel along Salisbury Highway and exter the PREXY.

There are bike lanes on the Superway as well

edit:: wait no there isnt