Magill/Portrush Road Intersection Upgrade | $98m

Threads relating to transport, water, etc. within the CBD and Metropolitan area.
Message
Author
User avatar
Norman
Donating Member
Donating Member
Posts: 5896
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2007 1:06 pm
Has thanked: 821 times
Been thanked: 1583 times

Re: Glen Osmond and Fullarton Road intersection upgrade

#16 Post by Norman » Sat Mar 07, 2020 3:46 pm

Given they are a large tenant of the area, along with SA Power Networks, I wouldn't be surprised if they were part of early negotiations as part of the planning process

Waewick
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 3534
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 1:39 pm
Has thanked: 53 times
Been thanked: 143 times

Re: [PRO] Re: Glen Osmond and Fullarton Road intersection upgrade

#17 Post by Waewick » Sat Mar 07, 2020 4:22 pm


NTRabbit wrote:
Waewick wrote:
Wed Mar 04, 2020 9:49 pm
I bet these guys also voted against trams and bus lanes

The intersection needs an upgrade, its unfortunate but needed.

Move on.
It's an intersection upgrade priced 3 times higher than it should be that doesn't solve any problems. It's not opposing trams and bus lanes, it's opposing obvious government rorts.
It doesn't solve your problems, but for the thousands of people that use it, it does.

Waewick
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 3534
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 1:39 pm
Has thanked: 53 times
Been thanked: 143 times

Re: [PRO] Re: Glen Osmond and Fullarton Road intersection upgrade

#18 Post by Waewick » Sat Mar 07, 2020 4:23 pm


Honey of a City wrote:
Waewick wrote:
Wed Mar 04, 2020 9:49 pm
I bet these guys also voted against trams and bus lanes

The intersection needs an upgrade, its unfortunate but needed.

Move on.
Great. Move on. If it was your home and you were not adequately compensated for it’s destruction would you be happy to “move on”?
Like most people I'd be annoyed, but I'm not going to splash my hypocrisy all over a newspaper.

bits
Legendary Member!
Posts: 644
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2014 9:24 pm
Has thanked: 24 times
Been thanked: 119 times

Re: [PRO] Re: Glen Osmond and Fullarton Road intersection upgrade

#19 Post by bits » Sat Mar 07, 2020 8:46 pm


dbl96 wrote: If we accept Portrush Road needs to be widened, why can it not be widened along the eastern side of the road? This would be far less disruptive. Most of the land that would need to be acquired is currently occupied by unattractive, open air car parking.
Power substation relocation is horrendously massive.
North-south motorway project avoided relocating the one in the way at South Road/Port Road. Instead the multi billion dollar project detoured around the substation.

NTRabbit
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 172
Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2018 10:00 pm
Has thanked: 162 times
Been thanked: 67 times

Re: [PRO] Re: Glen Osmond and Fullarton Road intersection upgrade

#20 Post by NTRabbit » Mon Mar 09, 2020 1:08 am

Waewick wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 4:22 pm
NTRabbit wrote:
Waewick wrote:
Wed Mar 04, 2020 9:49 pm
I bet these guys also voted against trams and bus lanes

The intersection needs an upgrade, its unfortunate but needed.

Move on.
It's an intersection upgrade priced 3 times higher than it should be that doesn't solve any problems. It's not opposing trams and bus lanes, it's opposing obvious government rorts.
It doesn't solve your problems, but for the thousands of people that use it, it does.
Doesn't look like it solves any problems for anyone

Waewick
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 3534
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 1:39 pm
Has thanked: 53 times
Been thanked: 143 times

Re: [PRO] Re: [PRO] Re: Glen Osmond and Fullarton Road intersection upgrade

#21 Post by Waewick » Mon Mar 09, 2020 2:46 pm

NTRabbit wrote:
Waewick wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 4:22 pm
NTRabbit wrote: It's an intersection upgrade priced 3 times higher than it should be that doesn't solve any problems. It's not opposing trams and bus lanes, it's opposing obvious government rorts.
It doesn't solve your problems, but for the thousands of people that use it, it does.
Doesn't look like it solves any problems for anyone
I don't think your opinion really matters.

NTRabbit
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 172
Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2018 10:00 pm
Has thanked: 162 times
Been thanked: 67 times

Re: [PRO] Re: [PRO] Re: Glen Osmond and Fullarton Road intersection upgrade

#22 Post by NTRabbit » Mon Mar 09, 2020 11:17 pm

Waewick wrote:
Mon Mar 09, 2020 2:46 pm
NTRabbit wrote:
Waewick wrote:
Sat Mar 07, 2020 4:22 pm


It doesn't solve your problems, but for the thousands of people that use it, it does.
Doesn't look like it solves any problems for anyone
I don't think your opinion really matters.
Matters no more or less than yours

Waewick
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 3534
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 1:39 pm
Has thanked: 53 times
Been thanked: 143 times

Re: [PRO] Re: [PRO] Re: [PRO] Re: Glen Osmond and Fullarton Road intersection upgrade

#23 Post by Waewick » Tue Mar 10, 2020 8:09 am

NTRabbit wrote:
Waewick wrote:
Mon Mar 09, 2020 2:46 pm
NTRabbit wrote: Doesn't look like it solves any problems for anyone
I don't think your opinion really matters.
Matters no more or less than yours
So very true.

And here are with a intersection upgrade that is much needed.

NTRabbit
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 172
Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2018 10:00 pm
Has thanked: 162 times
Been thanked: 67 times

Re: [PRO] Re: [PRO] Re: [PRO] Re: Glen Osmond and Fullarton Road intersection upgrade

#24 Post by NTRabbit » Tue Mar 10, 2020 10:05 am

Waewick wrote:
Tue Mar 10, 2020 8:09 am
NTRabbit wrote:
Waewick wrote:
Mon Mar 09, 2020 2:46 pm
I don't think your opinion really matters.
Matters no more or less than yours
So very true.

And here are with a intersection upgrade that is much needed.
No, here we are with the government spending $98m on a $30m intersection upgrade of debatable need

SBD
Legendary Member!
Posts: 1445
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 3:49 pm
Location: Blakeview
Has thanked: 441 times
Been thanked: 109 times

Re: [PRO] Re: [PRO] Re: [PRO] Re: Glen Osmond and Fullarton Road intersection upgrade

#25 Post by SBD » Tue Mar 10, 2020 1:32 pm

NTRabbit wrote:
Tue Mar 10, 2020 10:05 am
Waewick wrote:
Tue Mar 10, 2020 8:09 am
NTRabbit wrote:
Matters no more or less than yours
So very true.

And here are with a intersection upgrade that is much needed.
No, here we are with the government spending $98m on a $30m intersection upgrade of debatable need
Maybe it is needed, but would starting to extend the North South Motorway from the Torrens past Henley Beach Road be a better use of almost $100m? The more of the NSM that gets built, the more of the through traffic will use Cross Road and NSM instead of Portrush/Hampstead/Grand Junction Roads, easing the pressure on this intersection. Globelink is dead for at least a couple of decades, the "Short South" link only makes sense after the NSM is completed, as it will add to the urban sprawl.

Vasco
Sen-Rookie-Sational
Posts: 45
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2018 9:02 pm
Been thanked: 13 times

Magill/Portrush Road Intersection Upgrade | $98m

#26 Post by Vasco » Tue Mar 10, 2020 1:40 pm

SBD wrote:
NTRabbit wrote:
Tue Mar 10, 2020 10:05 am
Waewick wrote:
Tue Mar 10, 2020 8:09 am
So very true.

And here are with a intersection upgrade that is much needed.
No, here we are with the government spending $98m on a $30m intersection upgrade of debatable need
Maybe it is needed, but would starting to extend the North South Motorway from the Torrens past Henley Beach Road be a better use of almost $100m? The more of the NSM that gets built, the more of the through traffic will use Cross Road and NSM instead of Portrush/Hampstead/Grand Junction Roads, easing the pressure on this intersection. Globelink is dead for at least a couple of decades, the "Short South" link only makes sense after the NSM is completed, as it will add to the urban sprawl.
Maybe yes, maybe no..... but at the end of the day, doesn’t really matter considering it was a political ploy to keep the seat of Sturt in Federal liberal hands.

Anyway if this is costing $100m, be interesting to see them do Torrens to the just prior to HBR (and not even thru it for the same money). As a benchmark R2P cost is $354m.... but anyway think is is prob getting to the wrong thread.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

SBD
Legendary Member!
Posts: 1445
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 3:49 pm
Location: Blakeview
Has thanked: 441 times
Been thanked: 109 times

Re: Magill/Portrush Road Intersection Upgrade | $98m

#27 Post by SBD » Tue Mar 10, 2020 2:04 pm

Back on this topic, I wonder if anybody did the cost comparison for building a bridge/overpass rather than just a much bigger traffic light intersection, after they had decided that even the traffic lights need so much property acquisition.

It is probably the worst intersection on Magill Road, but is it even the worst intersection on Portrush Road/A17, or simply the easiest to "fix"?

Waewick
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 3534
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 1:39 pm
Has thanked: 53 times
Been thanked: 143 times

Re: Magill/Portrush Road Intersection Upgrade | $98m

#28 Post by Waewick » Tue Mar 10, 2020 6:36 pm

SBD wrote:Back on this topic, I wonder if anybody did the cost comparison for building a bridge/overpass rather than just a much bigger traffic light intersection, after they had decided that even the traffic lights need so much property acquisition.

It is probably the worst intersection on Magill Road, but is it even the worst intersection on Portrush Road/A17, or simply the easiest to "fix"?
The Greenhill/ Portrush is terrible, but only from a Greenhill perspective. - given Cohen's are expanding BV, it's going to get more expensive (They can't do the other side is council chambers)

Portrush/GlenOsmond - cost a motza, will need Fed funds

Portrush/Parade or Kensington - terrible but only because they are so close especially with 2 x School crossings nearby each main road.

Portrush/ Payneham - probably the same as Kensignton and probably the best of the bunch.

If I was paying, I'd be doing Portrush/Glen Osmond first then Portrush Greenhill Rd (after Magill Rd Of course)

User avatar
SRW
Donating Member
Donating Member
Posts: 2720
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2007 9:42 pm
Location: City
Has thanked: 714 times
Been thanked: 342 times

Re: Magill/Portrush Road Intersection Upgrade | $98m

#29 Post by SRW » Tue Mar 10, 2020 9:04 pm

Waewick wrote:
Tue Mar 10, 2020 6:36 pm
SBD wrote:Back on this topic, I wonder if anybody did the cost comparison for building a bridge/overpass rather than just a much bigger traffic light intersection, after they had decided that even the traffic lights need so much property acquisition.

It is probably the worst intersection on Magill Road, but is it even the worst intersection on Portrush Road/A17, or simply the easiest to "fix"?
The Greenhill/ Portrush is terrible, but only from a Greenhill perspective. - given Cohen's are expanding BV, it's going to get more expensive (They can't do the other side is council chambers)

Portrush/GlenOsmond - cost a motza, will need Fed funds

Portrush/Parade or Kensington - terrible but only because they are so close especially with 2 x School crossings nearby each main road.

Portrush/ Payneham - probably the same as Kensignton and probably the best of the bunch.

If I was paying, I'd be doing Portrush/Glen Osmond first then Portrush Greenhill Rd (after Magill Rd Of course)
Maybe the equation of doing all these pushes the business case for a SE/FWY to NS/MW link from a medium to short term prospect?
Keep Adelaide Weird

Waewick
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 3534
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 1:39 pm
Has thanked: 53 times
Been thanked: 143 times

Re: Magill/Portrush Road Intersection Upgrade | $98m

#30 Post by Waewick » Tue Mar 10, 2020 11:47 pm

SRW wrote:
Waewick wrote:
Tue Mar 10, 2020 6:36 pm
SBD wrote:Back on this topic, I wonder if anybody did the cost comparison for building a bridge/overpass rather than just a much bigger traffic light intersection, after they had decided that even the traffic lights need so much property acquisition.

It is probably the worst intersection on Magill Road, but is it even the worst intersection on Portrush Road/A17, or simply the easiest to "fix"?
The Greenhill/ Portrush is terrible, but only from a Greenhill perspective. - given Cohen's are expanding BV, it's going to get more expensive (They can't do the other side is council chambers)

Portrush/GlenOsmond - cost a motza, will need Fed funds

Portrush/Parade or Kensington - terrible but only because they are so close especially with 2 x School crossings nearby each main road.

Portrush/ Payneham - probably the same as Kensignton and probably the best of the bunch.

If I was paying, I'd be doing Portrush/Glen Osmond first then Portrush Greenhill Rd (after Magill Rd Of course)
Maybe the equation of doing all these pushes the business case for a SE/FWY to NS/MW link from a medium to short term prospect?
They are also largely in NIMBY suburbs, like we are seeing with this one, it will be a helluva fight

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests