Toll Roads in Adelaide

Threads relating to transport, water, etc. within the CBD and Metropolitan area.
Message
Author
User avatar
Norman
Donating Member
Donating Member
Posts: 5519
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2007 1:06 pm
Has thanked: 725 times
Been thanked: 1199 times

Re: A Discussion about Tolls (on roads..)

#196 Post by Norman » Wed Oct 24, 2012 5:32 am

Seems like it would be a massive detour going to Glenelg and then back east again, the benefit would be minimal especially at 80km/h. It's better to keep this in an industrial area, not an area that has a residential majority.

Aidan
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 2026
Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 3:10 am
Been thanked: 6 times

Re: A Discussion about Tolls (on roads..)

#197 Post by Aidan » Wed Oct 24, 2012 2:30 pm

That alignment has been previously proposed, though not as a 9 lane freeway. Before a state election soon after the NE O-bahn was extended to TTP, both parties had plans for a southern O-bahn. That was an alternative route option for one of them (the main route option running W of the racecourse) while the other party's plan would have followed the railway from Emerson. After the election the plan was sensibly dropped. But even before the election there was much local opposition and little enthusiasm for either plan.
Just build it wrote:Bye Union Hall. I'll see you in another life, when we are both cats.

User avatar
ChillyPhilly
Legendary Member!
Posts: 1219
Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2008 11:35 pm
Location: Adder-Laid, South Australia.
Has thanked: 236 times
Been thanked: 208 times
Contact:

Re: A Discussion about Tolls (on roads..)

#198 Post by ChillyPhilly » Wed Oct 24, 2012 2:55 pm

ml69 wrote:Just had a thought out of left-field in relation to a north-south corridor alignment, one which I don't think anyone has been proposed before.

From the Darlington intersection of the Southern Expressway, what about a surface expressway (tolled) following Sturt Creek? From there, some property acquisition will be required south of Morphettville Racecourse and along the eastern boundary of the racecourse. A short tunnel will be required under the Glenelg tramline and Anzac Hwy, before surfacing and following the Glenelg railway alignment to eventually join up with a widened James Congdon Drive.

This appears to be wide enough for a 3x3 lane expressway, with noise walls restricting traffic noise for nearby residents. This would make it possible to travel at say 80kmh from the Southern Expressway to James Congdon Drive.

What about the impact on Sturt Creek I hear you say? Well, it's a concrete drain at the moment, not particular scenic. The creek can be contained in a drainage channel underneath the expressway.

There are a number of advantages of this:

- HIgh speed (say 80kmh) 3x3 lane traffic corridor
- If built as a private tollway, no/minimal upfront investment required by the State Government. Even if it needed a "shadow toll" subsidy from the State Govt to make it financially viable, this is still cheaper than the government funding by itself
- No impact on South Rd businesses
- Minimises traffic impact during construction period (likely to be 3-4 years)
- New roadway increases capacity and will better future-proof our north-south corridor than upgrading South Rd
- Lower cost of surface construction vs tunnelling

Of course there will be points to criticise, such as impact on local residential communities where the tollway will pass through. However, I think the impact is not as big as taking out huge swathes of South Rd properties.
Interesting idea and personally I don't mind it, but the negatives of such a proposal vastly outweigh the advantages.
Our state, our city, our future.

All views expressed on this forum are my own.

Reb-L
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 156
Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2011 5:18 pm
Location: Adelaide 5000

Re: A Discussion about Tolls (on roads..)

#199 Post by Reb-L » Wed Oct 24, 2012 3:08 pm

Still, ml69's proposal is a good and constructive one. From a driver's point of view it does not matter much whether the road goes in a straight line - to avoid traffic jams is what counts (and saves juice). And to reduce roadworks on existing roads and to minimize PT disruptions must certainly be an important argument. In the future most new roads/rail will need to be above/below ground in built up areas. The question at this moment is if there are any investors willing to open their wallets for such a project.

claybro
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 1847
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2012 9:16 pm
Has thanked: 44 times
Been thanked: 184 times

Re: A Discussion about Tolls (on roads..)

#200 Post by claybro » Wed Oct 24, 2012 7:03 pm

The Sturt creek reserve has been considered in the past as a transport corriodor,and I do agree 80km/h should be a minimum for our North South route. I also think that tunnelling has been a costly economic disaster interstate. I do not think however a surface tollway, largely through residential suburbia in order to preserve the heavily industrialised eyesore that is South road, would even be contemplated.

neoballmon
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 469
Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2012 10:54 am
Location: Morphett Vale
Has thanked: 8 times
Been thanked: 2 times

Re: News & Discussion: Toll Roads

#201 Post by neoballmon » Wed Nov 14, 2012 4:03 pm

I like this route, but I think if it were to go ahead it would be greatly objected by the Morphettville racecourse and it's patrons. I think the tunnel should also go under there, then under the tram line and Anzac Highway.
I assume there will be over/underpasses at Sturt Road, and at Marion & Finiss Roads, otherwise I wouldn't pay to use the road.
And then, if it was completely separated from all roads, why wouldn't 100k/h be appropriate, given the 3 lanes in each direction?

It's good that Rann kept his word on no toll road in Adelaide, but he's out of office now, and traffic is forever rising, it's about time a large company noticed this and took action towards fixing this.
Looking forward to a free-flowing Adelaide!

User avatar
omada
Donating Member
Donating Member
Posts: 656
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 10:03 am
Location: Eden Hills
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 9 times

Re: News & Discussion: Toll Roads

#202 Post by omada » Thu Nov 15, 2012 1:50 pm

I think future road investment should be more of a toll option. I for one am tired of the mega dollars devoted toward such a selfish and outmoded transportation option such as the motor vehicle. If you want to drive your Falcon and Commodore everywhere, then pay up. The taxpayer should not subsidise this. I am happy for my tax dollars to go toward P.T.

Waewick
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 3381
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 1:39 pm
Has thanked: 53 times
Been thanked: 105 times

Re: News & Discussion: Toll Roads

#203 Post by Waewick » Thu Nov 15, 2012 8:03 pm

omada wrote:I think future road investment should be more of a toll option. I for one am tired of the mega dollars devoted toward such a selfish and outmoded transportation option such as the motor vehicle. If you want to drive your Falcon and Commodore everywhere, then pay up. The taxpayer should not subsidise this. I am happy for my tax dollars to go toward P.T.
See, I already subsidise nearly every piece of infrastructure in the state.

and I'm sick of it

/taxpayer rant

MessiahAndrw
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 135
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2011 10:05 pm
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 2 times

Re: News & Discussion: Toll Roads

#204 Post by MessiahAndrw » Mon Nov 19, 2012 7:00 am

omada wrote:I think future road investment should be more of a toll option. I for one am tired of the mega dollars devoted toward such a selfish and outmoded transportation option such as the motor vehicle. If you want to drive your Falcon and Commodore everywhere, then pay up. The taxpayer should not subsidise this. I am happy for my tax dollars to go toward P.T.
I agree, and we need our voices heard more.
My blog on urban design: http://www.andrewalexanderprice.com/blog.php

claybro
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 1847
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2012 9:16 pm
Has thanked: 44 times
Been thanked: 184 times

Re: News & Discussion: Toll Roads

#205 Post by claybro » Tue Nov 20, 2012 6:16 pm

I think road developements should be paid for by a levy of say 5cents per litre on petrol only. That way private commuters pay, and transport which is largely diesel and taxis which are LPG do not get slugged.

Hooligan
Legendary Member!
Posts: 810
Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2009 8:03 pm
Has thanked: 14 times
Been thanked: 12 times

Re: News & Discussion: Toll Roads

#206 Post by Hooligan » Tue Nov 20, 2012 6:49 pm

claybro wrote:I think road developements should be paid for by a levy of say 5cents per litre on petrol only. That way private commuters pay, and transport which is largely diesel and taxis which are LPG do not get slugged.
Despite that being a good idea i can see it going over like a lead balloon with the general public.

Code: Select all

Signature removed 

muzzamo
Legendary Member!
Posts: 938
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2007 4:44 pm
Been thanked: 15 times

Re: News & Discussion: Toll Roads

#207 Post by muzzamo » Tue Nov 20, 2012 9:07 pm

claybro wrote:I think road developements should be paid for by a levy of say 5cents per litre on petrol only. That way private commuters pay, and transport which is largely diesel and taxis which are LPG do not get slugged.
This is actually quite a poor policy.

There are expensive roads and there are expensive times to use these roads. A petrol levy doesn't give people incentives to use cheaper roads (or to live in areas such that their commute would use cheaper roads), and it doesn't give them incentives to use those roads when congestion is lower.

That said, if we can't have tolls then its probably the next best policy. Road funding should come 100% from fuel taxes. But it needs to include all road users including diesel and LPG.

User avatar
PeFe
Legendary Member!
Posts: 802
Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 9:47 am
Has thanked: 31 times
Been thanked: 96 times

Re: News & Discussion: Toll Roads

#208 Post by PeFe » Mon Dec 03, 2012 1:25 am

Push for motorists to fund $5.5 billion in road upgrades with toll roads
Image

TOLL roads are needed in South Australia to help pay for transport projects vital to economic growth, the peak freight transport advisory group warns.
The South Australian Freight Council will today release a report identifying four transport infrastructure projects - with a combined cost of about $5.5 billion - it believes are critical to the state's future economic viability.
Its calls for toll roads to help fund the projects have been backed by business and transport authorities, including Business SA and the RAA.
Council chief executive Neil Murphy said the State Government must follow the lead of NSW, Victoria and Queensland and pursue private-sector investment to accelerate projects such as a free-flowing North-South corridor through Adelaide.
"The governments have no money, hence they have got to look at alternative funding," Mr Murphy sai.d
"The time has come for both the state and commonwealth governments, and where appropriate the private sector, to increase their investment in this state's freight and logistics infrastructure - creating jobs during the construction phase and longer-term wealth creation and sustainability.
"Toll roads are one option to quicken the pace of infrastructure delivery and should be investigated as a priority, not ruled out before meaningful debate has been had."

Image

The key projects the report identifies are:
A FREE-FLOWING north-south corridor based around a comprehensive upgrade of South Rd, including a proposed tunnel under Port and Grange roads.
AN accelerated road maintenance program to alleviate a maintenance deficit that has increased to more than $250 million.
TRANSPORT infrastructure to support the expanding mining industry, including the development of key deep- water ports and road and rail links to service the mining sector.
ADDRESSING "last mile" road access issues through upgrades and access improvements, and creating more rest facilities on high productivity vehicle routes for heavy vehicles across the state. The council estimates the required upgrades to the north-south corridor would cost more than $4 billion.
The corridor is defined by the State Government as the 78km stretch of road running between Gawler and Old Noarlunga.
It incorporates the Northern Expressway, proposed Northern Connector, South Rd and Southern Expressway.
The South Rd element of the project, particularly the section between the Gallipoli Underpass and Regency Rd, is viewed by industry as the priority element for completion.
Mr Murphy said South Australia was falling behind the rest of the country because it had failed to adequately fix a bottleneck in the middle part of the corridor, which could be fixed by a toll road.
Business SA president and Flinders Ports chief executive Vincent Tremaine said fixing the corridor would be a huge boost for the state's economy.
"Governments don't have a lot of money, certainly our State Government doesn't, so the best way to deal with that is to get a contribution from the private sector," he said.
The RAA said it supported the concept of toll roads as long as there were alternative free routes people could use. Senior manager road safety Charles Mountain said the RAA intended to lobby strongly for funds for an upgraded north-south corridor during the federal election campaign.
"If there is a situation where such a (toll) road will provide considerable improvement in terms of reduction in travel times and crashes and create a greater level of safety, then we would support it, subject to there being a viable free route nearby," he said.
Mr Murphy said Marion and Goodwood roads could provide free options for those not wanting to pay a toll.
A survey of the Sydney toll road system by accounting firm Ernst and Young found it delivered a $22.7 billion economic benefit to NSW and broader Australia. The roads increased NSW's gross state product by $1.9 billion in 2008, rising to an estimated $3.4 billion by 2020.
Transport department chief Rod Hook revealed in June the Federal Government had warned SA that it would not pay for future roads unless the state also had private-sector funding through toll roads.
However, Transport Minister Patrick Conlon said the Government would maintain its no-toll-roads stance "so it will be a decision for future governments".
South Australian Road Transport Association executive director Steve Shearer, who convenes the council's infrastructure committee, said toll roads were a necessity to help ease congestion.


http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/sout ... 6528447487

User avatar
ChillyPhilly
Legendary Member!
Posts: 1219
Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2008 11:35 pm
Location: Adder-Laid, South Australia.
Has thanked: 236 times
Been thanked: 208 times
Contact:

Re: News & Discussion: Toll Roads

#209 Post by ChillyPhilly » Sun Sep 01, 2013 12:31 am

Our state, our city, our future.

All views expressed on this forum are my own.

claybro
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 1847
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2012 9:16 pm
Has thanked: 44 times
Been thanked: 184 times

Re: News & Discussion: Toll Roads

#210 Post by claybro » Mon Sep 02, 2013 5:15 pm

Yes this is an interesting read. With respect to the current state gov. stance on toll roads, well at least they are consistent and up front. They presented a platform of no tolls roads, and probably to our detriment, have stuck with it. What I don't get is Brokenshires' little input into the story. He and his Family first party are holding the government to account over the no toll roads promise. So what is your point Mr Brokenshire? The government promised no toll roads in this term, and there have been no toll roads. But what are Mr Brokenshires suggestions for alternative funding for much needed road upgrades?... that's right I hear only chirping crickets. Message mr Brokenshire...if you want your party to have any credibility, besides the bible belt suburbs, please present your ideas, instead of just wasting energy holding the government to account on a non existent issue.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests