[U/C] M2 North-South Motorway

Threads relating to transport, water, etc. within the CBD and Metropolitan area.
Message
Author
how good is he
Legendary Member!
Posts: 1140
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2013 1:26 am
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 63 times

[U/C] Re: North-South Motorway

#4246 Post by how good is he » Tue Dec 10, 2019 11:50 am

So far Labor has stayed silent on their policy/proposal for the final 10.5km. I expect it could be a political issue before the next election [max. 2 years 3 months time]. However if the Libs get tenders, sign contracts in the meantime for it to be a 10-year+ plan then that's it, right?

Nort
Legendary Member!
Posts: 1357
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2010 2:08 pm
Has thanked: 320 times
Been thanked: 189 times

[U/C] Re: North-South Motorway

#4247 Post by Nort » Tue Dec 10, 2019 12:06 pm

SBD wrote:
Tue Dec 10, 2019 10:35 am
Nort wrote:
Tue Dec 10, 2019 10:04 am
zippySA wrote:
Tue Dec 10, 2019 10:02 am
Surely a freight toll needs to be considered? Freight movement is the biggest economic beneficiary for this non-stop corridor - plus they cannot sneak past the toll onto secondary routes due to size (maybe the smaller type trucks can before anyone points this out - but the toll scales can address this to discourage). From memory - the Freight Council is not opposed to some form of cost in return for the efficiency this will provide.
Really wish they would publish some details and reports on how they have assessed the options including funding.
That's a good point, but I wonder how politically viable a freight only toll is.
What model are you proposing for tolls?
  • Government imposes a toll on South road now, and puts the money in the bank in a special fund called North South Motorway? That just gives an excuse not to commit any other money to the project.
  • Private sector bids are invited to build, own, operate? I wonder how high a charge they would need to put on it to cover their costs, allowing for leakage to routes such as Ayliffes Road, Marion Road and Portrush Road.
  • Government builds the new road and charges to use it? Presumably the toll in that case is less than what a private operator would charge, so it has the disadvantages of traffic leakage, and a long period to cover its cost, amid calls to do the same thing for Portrush, Cross, Grand Junction Roads too.
.
I'm not proposing a model, because I don't see any feasible way of implementing them.

User avatar
rev
SA MVP (Most Valued Poster 4000+)
Posts: 4559
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2006 12:14 pm
Has thanked: 404 times
Been thanked: 564 times

[U/C] Re: North-South Motorway

#4248 Post by rev » Tue Dec 10, 2019 12:11 pm

hahaha, wow SA Heaps Good

zippySA
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 136
Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2013 12:29 pm
Been thanked: 9 times

[U/C] Re: North-South Motorway

#4249 Post by zippySA » Tue Dec 10, 2019 1:14 pm

This is why I'd like them to publish some thinking - this is a worthy topic to debate and provide options or at least evidence of consideration to the general public. I think this is an overall problem with politics across the board - this crap about elections being a mandate and hence Government can just implement what they say they were voted in to do. We should be able to see the thinking behind the decisions - then people can draw their own conclusions but at least I for one would be satisfied that they considered all options. Leadership is about then making a decision based upon information - and that I will vote for regardless of blue or red political stripes (or dare I say it green even).
Any of those models could be feasible - and technology should be able to enable some new business models for tolling fixed infrastructure - it cant be that hard

claybro
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 2154
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2012 9:16 pm
Has thanked: 62 times
Been thanked: 259 times

[U/C] Re: North-South Motorway

#4250 Post by claybro » Tue Dec 10, 2019 2:23 pm

how good is he wrote:
Tue Dec 10, 2019 11:50 am
So far Labor has stayed silent on their policy/proposal for the final 10.5km. I expect it could be a political issue before the next election [max. 2 years 3 months time]. However if the Libs get tenders, sign contracts in the meantime for it to be a 10-year+ plan then that's it, right?
We're Labor silent though? I thought it was pretty well established that the remaining section was to be a combination of trench and short tunnels through the inner section then elevated through Edwardstown. Although no hard planning was done, that was the widely distributed concept. It seemed feasible, lowish final impact and the most cost effective.. although nothing will come cheap. Then a change of government.., some fanciful long tunnel rubbish from the Libs, and the kicker was Labor taking up hysteria over heritage in Thebarton.. based on their own original concept. You really couldn't make this stuff up for an episode of Utopia.

how good is he
Legendary Member!
Posts: 1140
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2013 1:26 am
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 63 times

[U/C] Re: North-South Motorway

#4251 Post by how good is he » Tue Dec 10, 2019 3:23 pm

I am talking about what are Labor's [and Liberal's] position going forward to give us the ability to decide [at the next election]. They both need to clearly state their policies esp. if a toll road is an option. It appears to be no.
The options appear to range from $5b - $13b and from 5 yrs to 10 yrs+. So once Lib's give their proposal either they are going to agree on the outcome [unlikely] or Labor needs to clearly tell us their alternative.

Saltwater
Sen-Rookie-Sational
Posts: 29
Joined: Wed May 30, 2018 3:07 pm
Location: Inner West
Been thanked: 11 times

[U/C] Re: North-South Motorway

#4252 Post by Saltwater » Tue Dec 10, 2019 4:53 pm

The government has (had?) committed to publishing the preferred approach for completing the final sections by the end of the year. I don't see why extending construction out would delay an announcement. At the public forum last week, appropriately held at the Thebarton Theatre, local business owners and residents expressed their concerns about how long its taken to know what is happening. Kicking that can down the road another decade does nothing to stop the current angst.

If the state government are smart they will work with the Commonwealth Government ahead of the next state election for a funding announcement. During the recent infrastructure rounds, it felt like SA missed out against WA and Qld, simply because they have projects "shovel ready", whereas SA is still trying to figure out what to do with the final section of South Road.

My preference would be to tunnel under Thebarton & Mile End through to the Gallipoli Underpass as a first stage, given it is currently gridlocked for most of the day already, but I am probably slightly biased living at Mile End.

Spotto
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 287
Joined: Wed May 15, 2019 9:05 pm
Has thanked: 27 times
Been thanked: 81 times

[U/C] Re: North-South Motorway

#4253 Post by Spotto » Tue Dec 10, 2019 5:42 pm

Saltwater wrote:
Tue Dec 10, 2019 4:53 pm
My preference would be to tunnel under Thebarton & Mile End through to the Gallipoli Underpass as a first stage, given it is currently gridlocked for most of the day already, but I am probably slightly biased living at Mile End.
When they get to the southern section I can see them doing a ground level motorway similar to the southern end of the Superway between Gallipoli Underpass and Emerson Crossing. Whether they replace Emerson Crossing who knows but they definitely need to lower the railway. A short tunnel under Edwardstown and either continue the tunnel or an open underpass past Daws Road.

User avatar
[Shuz]
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 2670
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 5:26 pm
Has thanked: 1317 times
Been thanked: 284 times

[U/C] Re: North-South Motorway

#4254 Post by [Shuz] » Tue Dec 10, 2019 6:01 pm

The Emerson Bridge will be duplicated, railway lowered, ground level motorway between Anzac and Emerson, with properties on the western side acquired is a given. No ifs or buts about it otherwise for this particular section.
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.

Eurostar
Legendary Member!
Posts: 707
Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2010 3:44 pm
Has thanked: 8 times
Been thanked: 71 times

[U/C] Re: North-South Motorway

#4255 Post by Eurostar » Tue Dec 10, 2019 6:16 pm

Let's not forget though that the main goal that the Government wants to achieve is a non stop corridor from Gawler to Old Noarlunga. Does the non stop motorway have to follow the South Road exactly?

What I am getting at is there could be a elevated roadway above Port Road and James Congdon Drive between Hindmarsh and Mile End, come down to ground, then trench/tunnel from the area just south of the homemaker centre to south of Richmond School. As for Edward Street intersection that should be changed to left in left out only.

And as I've suggested earlier the motorway should be elevated between Emerson and Tonsley with onramp/offramp at Daws Road

claybro
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 2154
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2012 9:16 pm
Has thanked: 62 times
Been thanked: 259 times

[U/C] Re: North-South Motorway

#4256 Post by claybro » Tue Dec 10, 2019 8:19 pm

Eurostar wrote:
Tue Dec 10, 2019 6:16 pm
Let's not forget though that the main goal that the Government wants to achieve is a non stop corridor from Gawler to Old Noarlunga. Does the non stop motorway have to follow the South Road exactly?

What I am getting at is there could be a elevated roadway above Port Road and James Congdon Drive between Hindmarsh and Mile End, come down to ground, then trench/tunnel from the area just south of the homemaker centre to south of Richmond School. As for Edward Street intersection that should be changed to left in left out only.

And as I've suggested earlier the motorway should be elevated between Emerson and Tonsley with onramp/offramp at Daws Road
Not sure what you are hoping to achieve with that proposal? An elevated road would never be considered in such a tight residential area such as Mile end adjacent to James Condon. I'm not even sure how you would tie such a corridor in with Port Road alingnment at the existing expressway, or why such a deviation is necessary, when the shortest point between Hindmarsh and Richmond is the existing South Road. If it is to avoid the heritage area of Thebarton, then that is possible with a short tunnel, rather than a couple of extra K's of elevated expressway.

SBD
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 1574
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 3:49 pm
Location: Blakeview
Has thanked: 482 times
Been thanked: 121 times

[U/C] Re: North-South Motorway

#4257 Post by SBD » Tue Dec 10, 2019 8:28 pm

zippySA wrote:
Tue Dec 10, 2019 1:14 pm
This is why I'd like them to publish some thinking - this is a worthy topic to debate and provide options or at least evidence of consideration to the general public. I think this is an overall problem with politics across the board - this crap about elections being a mandate and hence Government can just implement what they say they were voted in to do. We should be able to see the thinking behind the decisions - then people can draw their own conclusions but at least I for one would be satisfied that they considered all options. Leadership is about then making a decision based upon information - and that I will vote for regardless of blue or red political stripes (or dare I say it green even).
Any of those models could be feasible - and technology should be able to enable some new business models for tolling fixed infrastructure - it cant be that hard
I don't think any of those models are viable for building a freeway upgrade to an existing road that will remain in some form.

Ultimately, with electric vehicles taking over from petroleum fuel (and fuel tax), I'd support some kind of use-based charge that funds council, state and federal roads. A "congestion tax" could be built in too, but the cost of driving end-to-end on a freeway should be less than the same non-stop journey on the surrounding streets.

SBD
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 1574
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 3:49 pm
Location: Blakeview
Has thanked: 482 times
Been thanked: 121 times

[U/C] Re: North-South Motorway

#4258 Post by SBD » Tue Dec 10, 2019 8:57 pm

claybro wrote:
Tue Dec 10, 2019 2:23 pm
how good is he wrote:
Tue Dec 10, 2019 11:50 am
So far Labor has stayed silent on their policy/proposal for the final 10.5km. I expect it could be a political issue before the next election [max. 2 years 3 months time]. However if the Libs get tenders, sign contracts in the meantime for it to be a 10-year+ plan then that's it, right?
We're Labor silent though? I thought it was pretty well established that the remaining section was to be a combination of trench and short tunnels through the inner section then elevated through Edwardstown. Although no hard planning was done, that was the widely distributed concept. It seemed feasible, lowish final impact and the most cost effective.. although nothing will come cheap. Then a change of government.., some fanciful long tunnel rubbish from the Libs, and the kicker was Labor taking up hysteria over heritage in Thebarton.. based on their own original concept. You really couldn't make this stuff up for an episode of Utopia.
Weatherill Labor had that plan (I agree it sounded reasonable). Something seems to have slowed down before the election, when the next contract should have been at least shovel-ready if not committed. The current Koutssantonis/Malinauskas Labor opposition does not appear to support getting on with the plan - possibly as they don't want the pain of major roadworks in the alternate Infrastructure Minister and Premier electorates until such time as they have both retired.

Possibly the current Liberal Government will come out and say they have considered all alternatives, and the original plan was (roughly) the best available option, perhaps with some tinkering at the edges. We've just had delays while it happened, aand some regional roads got some much-needed upgrades too.

muzzamo
Legendary Member!
Posts: 1003
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2007 4:44 pm
Been thanked: 36 times

[U/C] Re: North-South Motorway

#4259 Post by muzzamo » Thu Dec 12, 2019 2:27 pm

From AdelaideNow:
An elevated roadway should be constructed over South Rd to avoid tunnels and the decade it will take to build them, the Civil Construction Federation says.

As the State Government prepares to release its preferred option to finish the final stages of the North-South Corridor, the federation’s SA boss Phil Sutherland said it should turn its attention to a flyover strategy as used on northern parts of the project.

On Thursday, the first sod was turned for the Regency Rd to Pym St section of the project.

Momentum is building for tunnels to be used for the final two stages, stretching a combined 10.5km, which would complete the state’s most expensive road infrastructure project.

This week, The Advertiser revealed the bid to deliver a non-stop freeway was set to take up to a decade, as the State Government sought to spread out the huge cost of a multibillion-dollar build.

The project is expected to cost more than $6 billion but would cost more if tunnels are used.

A petition has been tabled in State Parliament, signed by more than 700 people, mainly from Adelaide’s western suburbs, calling for a combination of two tunnels, or a single tunnel to be used to complete the project.

The push has been driven by a desire to save homes, businesses and a number of heritage-listed properties, including the Thebarton Theatre, from a wrecking ball.

Mr Sutherland told The Advertiser there was a way to alleviate those concerns, and save time and money, by using an elevated roadway sitting above the final uncompleted section of the project should be considered.

“This approach would significantly reduce the cost of other design options under consideration, including tunnels, avoid the need for contentious property acquisitions, and deliver certainty to businesses along the route frantic about their future livelihoods,” Mr Sutherland said.

“Elevating the final link of the freeway would easily connect the freeway’s current finish point at the River Torrens and run south to the soon to be completed Darlington section.

“This would also allow the existing street level South Rd carriageway to be used as a service road to existing business and suburbs.”

Premier Steven Marshall and Infrastructure Minister Stephan Knoll on Thursday turned the first sod on Regency Rd to Pym St (R2P) section one of the North-South Corridor.

Mr Knoll said the North-South Corridor remained the Government’s No. 1 infrastructure priority

“The R2P project is the next piece of this 78km puzzle,” Mr Knoll said.

“Once this project is complete in 2022, motorists will not have to stop at a single traffic light between the River Torrens and Gawler as they head north into our beautiful regions.”

User avatar
phenom
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 459
Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 1:12 pm
Location: Adelaide CBD
Has thanked: 1042 times
Been thanked: 131 times

[U/C] Re: North-South Motorway

#4260 Post by phenom » Thu Dec 12, 2019 3:34 pm

I think we need some honesty and realism here. I get the vested interests as per this Advertiser article are out in force but let's get real. Tunnels or flyovers still require land acquisition (entries and exits, ventilation shafts, emergency accesses and for raised roads, supports - see the Superway). There's just no way many people anywhere near these won't complain, and especially for the raised roads which will be visible for kilometres around. I'm not saying these should strongly influence the final decision, but politics being what it is, it's always going to be a factor. There's no way to do this which won't inconvenience and annoy quite a few people and that's often the price of 'progress'. Having spent some time working in govt departments, I can only imagine all the weighing up going on of political pressure, cost issues, engineering issues and just plain bureaucratic inefficiency - so I hope we just settle on an approach and stick with it.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Spotto and 10 guests