Adelaide's Dangerous Roads

[neoballmon]

Found this article, and really, I'm not surprised by any of these..
http://www.prweb.com/releases/2012/8/prweb9829621.htm

After examining almost 275,000 accident claims across Australia between July 2011 and June 2012, the top five crash hot spots in Adealide are:
1. South Road, Edwardstown
2. West Terrace, Adelaide
3. Marion Road, Marion
4. Main North Road, Elizabeth
5. Brighton Road, Brighton

“Each of the crash hot spots in Adelaide that AAMI has identified are both high-traffic and have relatively high speed limits. The Department of Transport does a lot of research and analysis of road conditions to ensure that the safety measures and speed limits in place are appropriate and are there for a reason,” Mr Aitchison added.

“A moment’s lapse in concentration or judgment or letting your impatience get the better of you can easily lead to a crash. Best case scenario you have a fender bender, but unfortunately we also see far worse.”

As part of the 2012 AAMI Crash Index AAMI surveyed* more than 3,700 motorists from across Australia and found that a quarter of drivers admit to having an accident in the last five years. Two thirds (68%) say that accident was avoidable.

Nearly half (45%) of drivers blame other drivers for their accident, while 29% say plain carelessness was a contributing factor in their crash and 28% blame distraction or loss of concentration.

Asking Australians what methods should be employed to make the roads safer and reduce crashes yielded some interesting results, according to Mr Aitchison.

“More than half of the drivers surveyed felt that tougher penalties (58%) and mandatory safe driving courses (56%) would bring down the number of crashes on our roads

Maybe this will give the government a little nudge towards fixing the dreaded Edwardstown intersection stretch. Even a slight syncronisation of these traffic lights could reduce this significantly!

Each of the crash hot spots in Adelaide that AAMI has identified are both high-traffic and have relatively high speed limits

4/5 are 60km/h. Since when does this constitute a 'relatively high speed limit'??

[claybro]

And yet recent posts on this forum would indicate that many think there is nothing particularly wrong South Road at Edwardstown, that conjestion is not a major issue here, it doesnt require major widening, and that 60km/h is an adequate speed limit.

[Aidan]

And yet recent posts on this forum would indicate that many think there is nothing particularly wrong South Road at Edwardstown,

What gave you that impression? Some sort of grade separation is clearly needed.

that conjestion is not a major issue here, it doesnt require major widening,

It doesn't, and I've explained why minor widening would be sufficient.

and that 60km/h is an adequate speed limit.

Adequate and appropriate!

[claybro]

Again then Aidan, can you please explain why we about to spend tens of millions on major widening of the Northern section of South Road ie. the Ridleyton section, where properties fronting South Road have been aquired to allow a proprosed trench., and yet Edwardstown THE MOST CONJESTED section you deem only to need minor widening? It either requires a proper effort to widen all sections, or will prove to be a complete waste of money. Grade separation will not be possible without major widening and significant access reduction (there are currently 4 intersections in a 1km stretch at Edwardstown)..., and only in Adelaide would 60km/h be deemed adequate for the primary arterial road (perhaps we in Adelaide know something that every other city in Australia does not)

[Aidan]

Again then Aidan, can you please explain why we about to spend tens of millions on major widening of the Northern section of South Road ie. the Ridleyton section, where properties fronting South Road have been aquired to allow a proprosed trench.,

A proposed trench in Ridleyton? This is the first I've heard of that, unless you mean the one in Croydon that's nothing to do with widening, but is to take South Road under Grange Road, Port Road and a railway. Or if you mean the Croydon Park section, where trucks currently have to use the right lane to avoid hitting stobie poles, it's unsafe and something needs to be done, but trenching sounds like an avoidable expense (unless you mean for the power cables).

and yet Edwardstown THE MOST CONJESTED section you deem only to need minor widening? It either requires a proper effort to widen all sections, or will prove to be a complete waste of money. Grade separation will not be possible without major widening and significant access reduction (there are currently 4 intersections in a 1km stretch at Edwardstown)...,

Grade separation brings speed and capacity benefits even with no widening at all. And I don't know where you get the idea that it would require major widening. Extending Edward Street over South Road would not require the latter's width to be changed at all.

and only in Adelaide would 60km/h be deemed adequate for the primary arterial road (perhaps we in Adelaide know something that every other city in Australia does not)

We know that making driving faster than taking the train fills the roads up with unnecessary traffic.

[claybro]

[

A proposed trench in Ridleyton? This is the first I've heard of that, unless you mean the one in Croydon that's nothing to do with widening, but is to take South Road under Grange Road, Port Road and a railway

Um, the railway crossing of South Road is in Ridleyton, so that would be the one Aidan

.

Grade separation brings speed and capacity benefits even with no widening at all. And I don't know where you get the idea that it would require major widening. Extending Edward Street over South Road would not require the latter's width to be changed at all.

That takes care of 1 of them, but what about Furness and Corunna.

We know that making driving faster than taking the train fills the roads up with unnecessary traffic.

As trains in Adelaide really ony service suburbs to CBD commuters, and there are no plans to change this the speed of the trains v's road is really irrelevant to the North South road corridor.

[Aidan]

[

A proposed trench in Ridleyton? This is the first I've heard of that, unless you mean the one in Croydon that's nothing to do with widening, but is to take South Road under Grange Road, Port Road and a railway

Um, the railway crossing of South Road is in Ridleyton, so that would be the one Aidan

Apologies, I hadn't realised Ridleyton extended that far south.

Yes, in the absence of a cheaper option I do support it, though I think it might be better to make it shorter snd build a separate bridge for the railway.

Grade separation brings speed and capacity benefits even with no widening at all. And I don't know where you get the idea that it would require major widening. Extending Edward Street over South Road would not require the latter's width to be changed at all.

That takes care of 1 of them, but what about Furness and Corunna.

Corunna can be made left turn only. Furness I'm not sure about, but extending it over South Road is a possibility.

That only leaves Raglan (make left turn only and extend Brooks to Ackland to connect with bridge) plus a few pedestrian crossings asnd other places where pedestrians are likely to cross (replace with footbridges). All other roads can be made left turn only, with Uturn provision under Emerson style overpass at Daws Road.

We know that making driving faster than taking the train fills the roads up with unnecessary traffic.

As trains in Adelaide really ony service suburbs to CBD commuters, and there are no plans to change this the speed of the trains v's road is really irrelevant to the North South road corridor.

Having previously commuted beyond the CBD (from Hallett Cove to Mawson Lakes) I disagree. And there's no way of keeping the CBD commuters off the faster roads.

[rev]

And yet recent posts on this forum would indicate that many think there is nothing particularly wrong South Road at Edwardstown, that conjestion is not a major issue here, it doesnt require major widening, and that 60km/h is an adequate speed limit.

The solution isn't to simply improve our road infrastructure by making roads wider and bigger or whatever.
Part of the solution HAS to involve better educating drivers, and heavily(and I mean heavily) penalize the idiots who do not obey road rules.

If people drive like dick heads, then how good a road is is completely irrelevant.

Increase fines and other punishments to the point that drivers actually have an incentive to obey road rules and drive sensibly.


Probably one of the biggest reasons for crashes in peak hour is tail gating. I bet you most of the crashes in that survey by AAMI involve people tail gating and not giving way when they should.

So your argument about wider roads more lanes blah blah is irrelevant.


When the government gets serious about proper driver education and behavior, we will see a reduction in accidents and deaths. Till then, keep arguing about how to fix roads to save lives.

[claybro]

If people drive like dick heads, then how good a road is is completely irrelevant

I absolutely agree, however part of education of drivers is also about driving to the posted speed limit. Realistically, with a posted limit of 60km/h there are many now that will sit in flowing traffic at 50-55km/h with the fear of speed camera fines/ loss of points, saving fuel or whatever. Added to that is that Adelaide drivers are notorious for not allowing other drivers in or past, and the 2 lane 60km/h road quickly becomes a conjested 40km/h mess. Better road design, greater capacity does allow for these "dickhead drivers" as there is more margin to avoid them.

[neoballmon]

And yet recent posts on this forum would indicate that many think there is nothing particularly wrong South Road at Edwardstown, that conjestion is not a major issue here, it doesnt require major widening, and that 60km/h is an adequate speed limit.

The solution isn't to simply improve our road infrastructure by making roads wider and bigger or whatever.
Part of the solution HAS to involve better educating drivers, and heavily(and I mean heavily) penalize the idiots who do not obey road rules.

If people drive like dick heads, then how good a road is is completely irrelevant.

Increase fines and other punishments to the point that drivers actually have an incentive to obey road rules and drive sensibly.


Probably one of the biggest reasons for crashes in peak hour is tail gating. I bet you most of the crashes in that survey by AAMI involve people tail gating and not giving way when they should.

So your argument about wider roads more lanes blah blah is irrelevant.


When the government gets serious about proper driver education and behavior, we will see a reduction in accidents and deaths. Till then, keep arguing about how to fix roads to save lives.

While you're completely right here, and the problem the majority of the time is driver stupidity, as well as road rage caused by others driving under the speed limit., these issues are greatly reduced by more free flowing infrastructure. Even a slight upgrade to this area would start to reduce stupidity and would decrease the chances of some innocent driver getting rammed from behind.

I'm all for further educating and penalising those that can't get it right, but I would hate for this to make them so scared, that they feel the need to go even slower, and end up doing 45-55km/h (when clear in front) in 60 zones, as Claybro has mentioned

[mshagg]

There's plenty of times through the edwardstown stretch of south road that 45km/hr or less is an entirely appropriate speed to drive. Doing so doesnt make someone a dickhead. A dickhead is someone who tailgates said driver whilst going blue in the face because "they're not driving the speed limit ZOMG WTF". I'd wager most of those accidents are rear enders... and what causes rear enders? People with the mentality of "the limit is 60 I MUST DO 60" are some of the most dangerous on our roads.

Obviously the layout of the road doesnt help. Lots of overflow from the slip lanes putting stationary cars in the right hand lane and freuqent poor light sequences. Both of these things only contribute - the root cause of an accident under both scenarios is people driving too close to the car in front.

[monotonehell]

There's plenty of times through the edwardstown stretch of south road that 45km/hr or less is an entirely appropriate speed to drive. Doing so doesnt make someone a dickhead. A dickhead is someone who tailgates said driver whilst going blue in the face because "they're not driving the speed limit ZOMG WTF". I'd wager most of those accidents are rear enders... and what causes rear enders? People with the mentality of "the limit is 60 I MUST DO 60" are some of the most dangerous on our roads.

Quoted for truth.

[Will]

There's plenty of times through the edwardstown stretch of south road that 45km/hr or less is an entirely appropriate speed to drive. Doing so doesnt make someone a dickhead. A dickhead is someone who tailgates said driver whilst going blue in the face because "they're not driving the speed limit ZOMG WTF". I'd wager most of those accidents are rear enders... and what causes rear enders? People with the mentality of "the limit is 60 I MUST DO 60" are some of the most dangerous on our roads.

Obviously the layout of the road doesnt help. Lots of overflow from the slip lanes putting stationary cars in the right hand lane and freuqent poor light sequences. Both of these things only contribute - the root cause of an accident under both scenarios is people driving too close to the car in front.

If there is plenty of traffic on the road, then most reasonable people would agree that you obviously cannot drive at 60. However, if the traffic is light, why on earth would someone drive 15 to 20 km/hr slower than the speed limit? Whilst, I am not condoning, nor do I participate in tail-gaiting, I cannot hide from the fact that it is inmensely frustrating to be behind someone who hasn't got a worry in the world and thinks they own the road.

[mshagg]

If there is plenty of traffic on the road, then most reasonable people would agree that you obviously cannot drive at 60. However, if the traffic is light, why on earth would someone drive 15 to 20 km/hr slower than the speed limit? Whilst, I am not condoning, nor do I participate in tail-gaiting, I cannot hide from the fact that it is inmensely frustrating to be behind someone who hasn't got a worry in the world and thinks they own the road.

Lol, I cant think of too many times when I've seen that stretch of road quiet - but yes, on a clear day with little to no traffic around then there shouldnt be too much preventing someone from maintaining 60. If they're not comfortable at that speed then better practice would suggest they drive in the left lane to facilitate safe overtaking.

[Aidan]

If there is plenty of traffic on the road, then most reasonable people would agree that you obviously cannot drive at 60. However, if the traffic is light, why on earth would someone drive 15 to 20 km/hr slower than the speed limit?

Because there's a red light ahead?