Sensational-Adelaide.com

ChillyPhilly wrote: ↑

Thu Sep 19, 2019 11:56 am

Pretty believable timelines until the end of 2020. Then it gets weird.

I think it's being dragged out not because of other sections, but because of the State Election in 2022.

Yep! It will be complete just in time to remind everyone of what they've done!

At this rate, their only achievement.

IMHO R2P is not much of an achievement on having impact on the voters of greater Adelaide and is not a huge bottleneck either.

You would think if left until next election, both parties will be throwing the kitchen sink at future plans for NSMW as their centrepiece pledge for the next election.

Would it not make sense for the incumbent to therefore have already made the plans and get on with the job of at least breaking ground / demolition of a new new section(s), leaving little option of impact for the opposition in that front.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

rhino wrote: ↑

Thu Sep 19, 2019 12:04 pm

ChillyPhilly wrote: ↑

Thu Sep 19, 2019 11:56 am

Pretty believable timelines until the end of 2020. Then it gets weird.

I think it's being dragged out not because of other sections, but because of the State Election in 2022.

Yep! It will be complete just in time to remind everyone of what they've done!

Is 12 months from "bridge assembly starts" to "bridge opens" that unreasonable? I think it may depend on how much of what drivers see as "the bridge" is built before the engineers consider "bridge assembly" has started. There have been a lot of other bridges of similar length being constructed in other sections. I haven't paid enough attention to how 12 months compares to the timeframes for the Tonsley Boulevard or Waterloo Corner Road bridges for example, or any of the bridges over T2T. Waterloo Corner Road and Bolivar Road are probably the best comparisons as they involve carrying the road up-and-over another road, rather than digging out or using pre-existing abutments.

Vasco wrote: ↑

Thu Sep 19, 2019 12:22 pm

IMHO R2P is not much of an achievement on having impact on the voters of greater Adelaide and is not a huge bottleneck either.

You would think if left until next election, both parties will be throwing the kitchen sink at future plans for NSMW as their centrepiece pledge for the next election.

Would it not make sense for the incumbent to therefore have already made the plans and get on with the job of at least breaking ground / demolition of a new new section(s), leaving little option of impact for the opposition in that front.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Try driving on it on a daily basis, and during peak hours. You come off a motorway, to a regular main road with signalized intersections/crossings, and back onto a motorway eventually. It's an unnecessary headache that causes congestion.
It's also a major thoroughfare hence why billions are being thrown at it, and together with the section of Regency Road from well before Days Road all the way up to past the Main North Road intersection, actually does affect many voters especially during peak hours.

It would have been better long term for everyone if Labor during it's 16 years had gotten on with the job. If they had actually released detailed plans and costings, and started work on all sections. Instead, just like the trams and rail electrification, everything was drip fed to us. And it continues to be drip fed to us under Liberals.
We will probably hear more about the remaining sections of the NS corridor closer to election year.

Well, at least it isn't as drawn out as this...

It's taking that long because the funds weren't allocated till the backend of the forward estimates.

croweater888 wrote: ↑

Thu Sep 19, 2019 1:31 pm

Well, at least it isn't as drawn out as this...

Well, they said a tunnels option for Torrens to Darlington would take around a decade to complete. In that graphic you posted the end completion of the whole project is 2029. It's 2019 now, and there's no sign of what they're going to do with that section, let alone when they will start. So if tunnels are the preferred option for a decent portion of that remaining section, it looks like it will take into the early 2030's at the rate we're going

rev wrote: ↑

Thu Sep 19, 2019 12:47 pm

everything was drip fed to us.

There is an up-side to being drip-fed. It should lower the risk by breaking the project up into more manageable sections.

DPTI is getting experienced at executing billion dollar upgrades now, but imagine if the first substantial project (superway) was a $5 billion dollar project.

The other upside is that it also breaks it up into funding increments that the feds and state seem to be able to fund, resulting in Adelaide remaining a toll-free state (for better or worse).

$5-$10B projects, as seen in Sydney and elsewhere, seem to be predominantly funded by toll-based PPPs. Apparently Sydney has more km of tollway than any other city in the world now.

muzzamo wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 20, 2019 8:38 am

rev wrote: ↑

Thu Sep 19, 2019 12:47 pm

everything was drip fed to us.

There is an up-side to being drip-fed. It should lower the risk by breaking the project up into more manageable sections.

DPTI is getting experienced at executing billion dollar upgrades now, but imagine if the first substantial project (superway) was a $5 billion dollar project.

The other upside is that it also breaks it up into funding increments that the feds and state seem to be able to fund, resulting in Adelaide remaining a toll-free state (for better or worse).

$5-$10B projects, as seen in Sydney and elsewhere, seem to be predominantly funded by toll-based PPPs. Apparently Sydney has more km of tollway than any other city in the world now.

Breaking it up was the right choice. Once the Superway was completed almost as a proof-of-concept, the rest of the sections were pretty well over-lapped so that the corridor as a whole wouldn't be too drawn out; from 2016 to 2019 we've had the Northern Connector, T2T, and Darlington underway simultaneously. R2P prep is underway as Northern Connector winds down and Darlington continues into 2020.

The flaw was we didn't start planning the Torrens to Darlington section soon enough. It's effectively fully isolated from the main phase of motorway construction. As the most complex section of the motorway, if we'd started planning sooner we might've started construction or even prelim works by now and gotten a tighter timeline for the corridor completion. Regardless, a good achievement to compact the other works as close together as they have been.

As reported on 9 News Adelaide yesterday:

Taxpayers facing bill of 98 million dollars for cost of repairs from wall collapse and road extension.
This is made up of 29 million for the cost of repairs and another 69 million for road extensions which was not part of the original plans

Looks like the scope extension from Sturt to Tonsley which was added way back at the beginning of the project and was supposed to have fitted within the initial costings may have had a cost over-run for some reason.

Furyan wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 20, 2019 2:44 pm

As reported on 9 News Adelaide yesterday:

Taxpayers facing bill of 98 million dollars for cost of repairs from wall collapse and road extension.
This is made up of 29 million for the cost of repairs and another 69 million for road extensions which was not part of the original plans

Looks like the scope extension from Sturt to Tonsley which was added way back at the beginning of the project and was supposed to have fitted within the initial costings may have had a cost over-run for some reason.

$29m for reinforcement of the walls seems a bit excessive? And why are taxpayers footing the bill for the incompetence of the engineers and contractors associated with the project?

Patrick_27 wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 20, 2019 3:41 pm

Furyan wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 20, 2019 2:44 pm

As reported on 9 News Adelaide yesterday:

Taxpayers facing bill of 98 million dollars for cost of repairs from wall collapse and road extension.
This is made up of 29 million for the cost of repairs and another 69 million for road extensions which was not part of the original plans

Looks like the scope extension from Sturt to Tonsley which was added way back at the beginning of the project and was supposed to have fitted within the initial costings may have had a cost over-run for some reason.

$29m for reinforcement of the walls seems a bit excessive? And why are taxpayers footing the bill for the incompetence of the engineers and contractors associated with the project?

I think I heard the government intended push-back on the $29 million.

A possible reason why it might be the government's (owner) responsibility is if there had been separate geotechnical/hydrological surveying and analysis first, and these documents were provided to the current contractors. As far as they are concerned, the client said "this is what it's like" so they built accordingly and it fell down. Maybe there is an opportunity to claw some back from the people who did the modelling first, but it can't be blamed on the current contractor if they operated in good faith on dodgy information provided by the client. This is why a lot of contracts bundle everything together - so that it's the contractor's problem if things go pear-shaped later.

I have no idea how the scope extension cost comes back to the government years later.

SBD wrote:I have no idea how the scope extension cost comes back to the government years later.

The same way they've budgeted $61 million to add a couple lanes to the Fullarton Rd/Cross Rd intersection.

The same way Flinders link went from $85m to $125m

muzzamo wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 20, 2019 8:38 am

rev wrote: ↑

Thu Sep 19, 2019 12:47 pm

everything was drip fed to us.

There is an up-side to being drip-fed. It should lower the risk by breaking the project up into more manageable sections.

DPTI is getting experienced at executing billion dollar upgrades now, but imagine if the first substantial project (superway) was a $5 billion dollar project.

The other upside is that it also breaks it up into funding increments that the feds and state seem to be able to fund, resulting in Adelaide remaining a toll-free state (for better or worse).

$5-$10B projects, as seen in Sydney and elsewhere, seem to be predominantly funded by toll-based PPPs. Apparently Sydney has more km of tollway than any other city in the world now.

There is not so much a problem with the implantation drip feed (or stages) rather the drip feed of planning has been a big problem. It's a little bit farcical that a decade after the completion of the superway, and the Souther Expy, there is still no plan for the actual route and method of the remaining sections. Without a plan, when funding becomes available by pork barrelling Feds, SA misses out time and again. This is where the drip feed lets us down. Same with the tram and trains.