Adelaide's Premier Development and Construction Site
https://sensational-adelaide.com/forum/
It doesn't solve your problems, but for the thousands of people that use it, it does.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.
Like most people I'd be annoyed, but I'm not going to splash my hypocrisy all over a newspaper.Honey of a City wrote: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”?
Power substation relocation is horrendously massive.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.
Doesn't look like it solves any problems for anyoneWaewick wrote: ↑Sat Mar 07, 2020 4:22 pmIt doesn't solve your problems, but for the thousands of people that use it, it does.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.
I don't think your opinion really matters.NTRabbit wrote:Doesn't look like it solves any problems for anyoneWaewick wrote: ↑Sat Mar 07, 2020 4:22 pmIt doesn't solve your problems, but for the thousands of people that use it, it does.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.
Matters no more or less than yours
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.SBD wrote: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.
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)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"?
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?Waewick wrote: ↑Tue Mar 10, 2020 6:36 pmThe 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)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"?
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)
They are also largely in NIMBY suburbs, like we are seeing with this one, it will be a helluva fightSRW wrote: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?Waewick wrote: ↑Tue Mar 10, 2020 6:36 pmThe 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)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"?
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)