[U/C] Ovingham Level Crossing Removal | $231m

Threads relating to transport, water, etc. within the CBD and Metropolitan area.
Message
Author
User avatar
1NEEDS2POST
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 471
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2018 5:01 pm

[U/C] Re: Ovingham Level Crossing Removal | $231m

#241 Post by 1NEEDS2POST » Sun Aug 28, 2022 6:24 pm

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.

User avatar
Spotto
Legendary Member!
Posts: 690
Joined: Wed May 15, 2019 9:05 pm

[U/C] Re: Ovingham Level Crossing Removal | $231m

#242 Post by Spotto » Sun Aug 28, 2022 6:54 pm

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.

User avatar
MT269
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 118
Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2022 1:14 pm

[U/C] Re: Ovingham Level Crossing Removal | $231m

#243 Post by MT269 » 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.

rev
SA MVP (Most Valued Poster 4000+)
Posts: 6020
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2006 12:14 pm

[U/C] Re: Ovingham Level Crossing Removal | $231m

#244 Post by rev » Wed Aug 31, 2022 2:36 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.
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.

alexczarn
Gold-Member ;)
Posts: 91
Joined: Tue Nov 26, 2013 11:13 am

[U/C] Re: Ovingham Level Crossing Removal | $231m

#245 Post by alexczarn » Wed Aug 31, 2022 4:44 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.
I keep seeing plans for the duplication; no idea when the timeframe is.

SBD
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 2519
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 3:49 pm
Location: Blakeview

[U/C] Re: Ovingham Level Crossing Removal | $231m

#246 Post by SBD » Wed Aug 31, 2022 4:50 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.
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.

mawsonguy
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 196
Joined: Fri Dec 20, 2013 8:11 am

[U/C] Re: Ovingham Level Crossing Removal | $231m

#247 Post by mawsonguy » 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.

SBD
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 2519
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 3:49 pm
Location: Blakeview

[U/C] Re: Ovingham Level Crossing Removal | $231m

#248 Post by SBD » Thu Sep 01, 2022 2:44 pm

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?

User avatar
rhino
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 3064
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2005 4:37 pm
Location: Nairne

[U/C] Re: Ovingham Level Crossing Removal | $231m

#249 Post by rhino » Fri Sep 02, 2022 8:31 am

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!
cheers,
Rhino

marbles
Gold-Member ;)
Posts: 62
Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2020 4:22 pm

[U/C] Re: Ovingham Level Crossing Removal | $231m

#250 Post by marbles » 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 :sly:

PD2/20
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 362
Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 2:32 pm

[U/C] Re: Ovingham Level Crossing Removal | $231m

#251 Post by PD2/20 » Sun Sep 04, 2022 2:11 pm

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 :sly:
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.

User avatar
[Shuz]
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 3208
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 5:26 pm

[U/C] Re: Ovingham Level Crossing Removal | $231m

#252 Post by [Shuz] » 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.
Any views and opinions expressed are of my own, and do not reflect the views or opinions of any organisation of which I have an affiliation with.

PD2/20
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 362
Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 2:32 pm

[U/C] Re: Ovingham Level Crossing Removal | $231m

#253 Post by PD2/20 » Sun Sep 04, 2022 10:18 pm

[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?
Last edited by PD2/20 on Mon Sep 05, 2022 2:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
MT269
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 118
Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2022 1:14 pm

[U/C] Re: Ovingham Level Crossing Removal | $231m

#254 Post by MT269 » Mon Sep 05, 2022 1:31 pm

In that .pdf linked to, why are there two 'Torrens Rd's in the map?

PD2/20
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 362
Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 2:32 pm

[U/C] Re: Ovingham Level Crossing Removal | $231m

#255 Post by PD2/20 » Mon Sep 05, 2022 2:42 pm

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.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot] and 24 guests