[U/C] M2 North-South Motorway

[Patrick_27]

A point worth raising, why has South Australia had to condense it's minuscule amount of federal funding into two dire road projects; while inter-state federally funded road projects are in the tens of billions?... Is this a target at SA for a). being a Labor state and b). not having implemented toll roads? It's absolute rubbish whatever the reason!

[Patrick_27]

Also, interesting tidbit. On page 15 of the Project Assessment Report PDF, is a map showing the project in relation to important sites in the metro area and other transport projects. It shows the planned mass transit of the various tram lines (Prospect, Norwood, Airport, Unley, CityLoop) and the underground rail loop (if you look really closely). But also, it shows a planned mass transit route down Glen Osmond Rd...

I'd say the Unley tram route is actually Mitcham, seems to terminate at the Mitcham train station.

It seems the Glen Osmond mass transit route might be planning to bring the South-Eastern Freeway straight to the fringe of the CBD. However, I myself wouldn't support the idea unless there was a freeway grade city ring route to support it.

[neoballmon]

I've noticed that to turn right from South Road onto Port Road in either direction will require 3 traffic light sets.
One to turn LEFT onto Port Road, then perform half a U-Turn, and be stopped at another set of lights to finish it, then go straight through the Port/South Road lights.
I guess there's not a lot of movement in these directions, and it will greatly free up other movements (right FROM Port Road and Straight through movements).

With a lot of Right turns forbidden onto South Road from the Western side between Torrens and Port, (either Hurtle, Torrens and Port) I think that's definitely more reason to have kept the train overpass going over Queen St, as I think a lot more traffic will use this crossing to get to Port Road now (residents of Day, Robert, Henry and William Streets) and it will most likely become more dangerous.

I also see no mention of Adams Road, except in the figure on page 20 that they've removed the Right turn in. I'm guessing left turn out will still be a stop sign, as there's no room to widen the road (any further than adding to 3rd lane southbound) without acquiring more properties.

Otherwise, I like the plan, and think it looks quite good. Great to see they've kept the wide median right up to Torrens Road for future planning, and that they're realigning the bend after Torrens Road.


Also, something I've always been curious about on these projects; how much of the cost goes to wages.

The estimate of direct full-time equivalent jobs created by the project is approximately 480 per year during construction of the project.

480/y x 4 years, with an average 60k salary = $115,200,000. Quite a big portion!

[ChillyPhilly]

Not being a whingebag here, but this project could carry some serious impacts for the surrounding suburbs. Crossing South Road will now become far more difficult. Driving a short distance between suburbs will be even harder.

I am in favour of shortening the rail overpass, purely for the sake of preserving the nice existing amenity of the immediate surrounds of Croydon station (Queen Street cafes and the popular Railway Lookout Reserve or whatever it's called). However, taking out the level crossing would have also been beneficial.

Agree with others regarding how seemingly ad-hoc the Hurtle-Hawker Streets intersection is. That'd eventually cause more problems than it would address.

Who was the genius that thought it a good idea to put a pedestrian activated crossing at roughly the northern end of the trench? Dangerous.

Also, interesting tidbit. On page 15 of the Project Assessment Report PDF, is a map showing the project in relation to important sites in the metro area and other transport projects. It shows the planned mass transit of the various tram lines (Prospect, Norwood, Airport, Unley, CityLoop) and the underground rail loop (if you look really closely). But also, it shows a planned mass transit route down Glen Osmond Rd...

This would be the 'planned mass transit' for between the CBD and Mt Barker (bus). You can see it in the Integrated Transport and Land Use Plan.

[ml69]

Also, interesting tidbit. On page 15 of the Project Assessment Report PDF, is a map showing the project in relation to important sites in the metro area and other transport projects. It shows the planned mass transit of the various tram lines (Prospect, Norwood, Airport, Unley, CityLoop) and the underground rail loop (if you look really closely). But also, it shows a planned mass transit route down Glen Osmond Rd...

This would be the 'planned mass transit' for between the CBD and Mt Barker (bus). You can see it in the Integrated Transport and Land Use Plan.

Interesting ... I wonder whether this "planned mass transit" may involve widening Glen Osmond Rd to accommodate a permanent bus lane in each direction between the Tollgate and Greenhill Rd?

Any other solutions involving tunnels etc would seem to be overkill?

[spiller]

looks great. the foresight to include on/off ramps out of the trenches for the future is very good, as well as the wide median. I think i prefer the trench down the centre of the road as opposed to the original plan but that hawker/hurtle street intersection is ridiculous. obviously the $$ were not there and traffic volumes crossing south road via this intersection are probably not large enough to justify going under these roads at this point in time.

what is the time frame for completion of this project?

[drsmith]

Construction 2015 to 2018. Project cost $896m.

The non-stop road is being designed for a posted speed limit of 80km/hr.

6.2.1 Design speeds
The non-stop lowered road will be designed for a posted speed of 80 km/h, the speed limit that is planned for much of the non-stop South Road as sections are incrementally completed and connected. It may not be the speed posted on the day of opening. Surface roads will be designed for a posted speed of 60 km/h.

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

Page 68 shows the lane widths. Not all are 3.5m. With the trench, the lane closest to the centre barrier in each direction is 3.2m and the ground level service road lanes are 3.3m.

[spiller]

why wouldn't they just make all of the traffic lanes 3.5m? I can see why the limit would be 80 rather than 90 (because its a relatively short stretch).

[ChillyPhilly]

Also, interesting tidbit. On page 15 of the Project Assessment Report PDF, is a map showing the project in relation to important sites in the metro area and other transport projects. It shows the planned mass transit of the various tram lines (Prospect, Norwood, Airport, Unley, CityLoop) and the underground rail loop (if you look really closely). But also, it shows a planned mass transit route down Glen Osmond Rd...

This would be the 'planned mass transit' for between the CBD and Mt Barker (bus). You can see it in the Integrated Transport and Land Use Plan.

Interesting ... I wonder whether this "planned mass transit" may involve widening Glen Osmond Rd to accommodate a permanent bus lane in each direction between the Tollgate and Greenhill Rd?

Any other solutions involving tunnels etc would seem to be overkill?

Possible. The Government prefers heavy road freight to use both Portrush and Cross Roads (as they are far more suitable for B-Doubles than Glen Osmond). Freight drivers have two options, and it varies from company to company: choose their own route, or follow a route designated by their employing company. In saying this I highly doubt Glen Osmond would ever be widened, so expect a dedicated bus lane in the future. Would love to see a tunnel underneath though, a bus could do the trip in record time with that.

[alexczarn]

I like the apparent future-proofing of this design..

[Westside]

I wonder if there will be any thought given to allowing u-turns on some of the intersections, a la North Terrace along the tram line? With all these left in/out only streets, there will be plenty of traffic needing to U-turn to double back. This will save people having to 'rat-run' to come across a main rd to turn right from.

[claybro]

Not being a whingebag here, but this project could carry some serious impacts for the surrounding suburbs. Crossing South Road will now become far more difficult. Driving a short distance between suburbs will be even harder.

Chilly, if you have lived adjacent to South road at any stage, you should be well aware that the current configuration of south road very definitely has significant impacts on surrounding suburbs. It is virtually impossible at certain times and in certain sections to get across south road now anyway. I would think this proposal significantly IMPROVES not only east west/west east travel, but also the visual impact of the eyesore that is the current set up. The North/South corridor has to go somewhere, other than a tunnel I don't think Adelaide could possibly have a better outcome than this design, for the entire inner metro section of the corridor.

[AG]

I've noticed that to turn right from South Road onto Port Road in either direction will require 3 traffic light sets.
One to turn LEFT onto Port Road, then perform half a U-Turn, and be stopped at another set of lights to finish it, then go straight through the Port/South Road lights.
I guess there's not a lot of movement in these directions, and it will greatly free up other movements (right FROM Port Road and Straight through movements).

With a lot of Right turns forbidden onto South Road from the Western side between Torrens and Port, (either Hurtle, Torrens and Port) I think that's definitely more reason to have kept the train overpass going over Queen St, as I think a lot more traffic will use this crossing to get to Port Road now (residents of Day, Robert, Henry and William Streets) and it will most likely become more dangerous.

The other issue I see is queuing at the Port Road end of Queen Street as well as increased traffic along Rosetta Street. It would rather defeat the purpose of having the three-stage right turn from South Road into Port Road. Likewise coming the other way, it might just be easier to turn right into Manton Street east bound and zig zag through the back streets of Hindmarsh.

[alexczarn]

What's the cost/benefit of attaching Flagstaff Road directly to the Darlington expressway section ?

Or add northbound on-ramps from Marion Road. That's the best idea IMO.

[david.c-s]

You would have thought the opportunity was there to grade separate south an flagstaff relocating the intersection to the expressway .... Hang on that's common sense