News & Discussion: Other Transport Projects

Threads relating to transport, water, etc. within the CBD and Metropolitan area.
Eurostar
Legendary Member!
Posts: 767
Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2010 3:44 pm

Re: News & Discussion: Other Transport Projects

Post by Eurostar »

rev wrote:
Sat Apr 18, 2020 6:38 pm
Modbury_Man wrote:
Sat Apr 18, 2020 1:53 pm
Looking on Google Maps I would say a route could be -

Bald Hills Rd, right Old Princes Hwy, left Nairne-Woodside Rd, right Onkaparinga Valley Rd, left Woodside Rd, right Main St Lobethal, left Cudlee Creek Rd, left Gorge Rd, right Tippett Rd, left North East Rd, left Lower North East Rd to Grand Junction Rd. Definitely alot of curves that would need to be straightened out and bridges widened/strengthened!
Nah you wouldn't turn those sorts of roads into a freeway.

For example you would connect a new freeway just before summit road near Mt Barker Summit, and go between Nairne and Blakiston, then over the right of Oakbank up past Woodside and Lobethal, then tunnel through those hills and come out near Paracombe and connect to GJR.
Then turn GJR into a freeway for about 7km up towards the prisons, where it would go north west between the, follow the alignment and interchange at Salisbury hwy..
If they can acquire property for the NSM they can do it for a short stretch of GJR..
Still think we need a proper motorway ring route through the metro though.
A connection between Gepps Cross and Nairne via Grand Junction Road and hills would give truck drivers an alternative to Portrush Road perhaps HV only in hills, one lane in each direction in the hills part with few overtaking lanes.
User avatar
Norman
Donating Member
Donating Member
Posts: 6074
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2007 1:06 pm

Re: News & Discussion: Other Transport Projects

Post by Norman »

Are you taking about using one of the existing roads or a new one? Having a single lane road designated for heavy vehicles through the hills would be pointless, when a truck breaks down the whole system comes to a standstill. It would also be too winding for efficient heavy vehicle movements.
Bob
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 199
Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2017 3:16 pm

Re: News & Discussion: Other Transport Projects

Post by Bob »

The real answer is to ensure the NS MW has a southern connection point to the SE FW so Mel to Per freight can go through Ade seamlessly and any freight that is Ade-Mel is dealt with on the shortest safest and same route as through Ade-Per freight.

The Short South option is the right concept but clearly there needs to be an agreement in principle negotiated so the next stage of a detailed analysis and eventual plan can be established.

You do not want Adelaide bypassed in the long term nor do you want freight from Mel to Ade doing longer trips via a northern route, and worse, having that freight going through northern suburbia creating the same issue as today, just a different and longer route, the Short North option should be dropped out of any State government consideration.
Eurostar
Legendary Member!
Posts: 767
Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2010 3:44 pm

Re: News & Discussion: Other Transport Projects

Post by Eurostar »

To think maybe the current Murray Bridge area should have been used for site of Adelaide
rubberman
Legendary Member!
Posts: 1393
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2007 10:32 pm
Location: ADL ex DRW, ASP, MGB

Re: News & Discussion: Other Transport Projects

Post by rubberman »

Eurostar wrote:
Wed Mar 03, 2021 1:50 am
To think maybe the current Murray Bridge area should have been used for site of Adelaide
In 1836, a port was essential for a remote new colony. The river was barely navigable all year round before the barrages were installed.

Having said that, Governor Hindmarsh preferred Victor Harbor. That would have sufficed till it ran out of space and water, by which time rail technology would have been sufficiently developed to make connections to Murray Bridge...and Melbourne quite feasible. That would have left the Adelaide Plains, the most fertile in the State, to serve as the food bowl, rather than being built upon and thus lost to agriculture.

It also would have meant rail access to the East and North would have been much faster and easier, along with access to the River Murray for drinking etc, and transport in the early days.

Quite an interesting "what if".
SBD
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 1778
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 3:49 pm
Location: Blakeview

Re: News & Discussion: Other Transport Projects

Post by SBD »

rubberman wrote:
Wed Mar 03, 2021 9:46 am
Eurostar wrote:
Wed Mar 03, 2021 1:50 am
To think maybe the current Murray Bridge area should have been used for site of Adelaide
In 1836, a port was essential for a remote new colony. The river was barely navigable all year round before the barrages were installed.

Having said that, Governor Hindmarsh preferred Victor Harbor. That would have sufficed till it ran out of space and water, by which time rail technology would have been sufficiently developed to make connections to Murray Bridge...and Melbourne quite feasible. That would have left the Adelaide Plains, the most fertile in the State, to serve as the food bowl, rather than being built upon and thus lost to agriculture.

It also would have meant rail access to the East and North would have been much faster and easier, along with access to the River Murray for drinking etc, and transport in the early days.

Quite an interesting "what if".
It is an interesting "what if".

Before the barrages, I'm not sure the river at Murray Bridge was reliably fresh enough to drink for even the size town that was envisaged then.

I wonder what were the key planning, development or other decision points that have led to South Australia having one large city that continues to spread and is much larger than our second-largest. The population of Adelaide is 40 times the size of Mount Gambier.

At some points, there must have been deliberate decisions that have (probably unintentionally) led to our current Adelaide-centric demography, rather than having cities of 50-100,000 at places like Mount Gambier, Whyalla, Murray Bridge, Victor Harbor, Port Lincoln, Port Pirie, Port Augusta, Nuriootpa, Naracoorte, Renmark, Wallaroo, Burra, Kapunda, Clare etc. All of those have or had an industrial base at some stage.

Some have had issues with access to fresh water, transport, food or energy, but many of those issues could have been solved with different infrastructure choices that have served Adelaide instead of somewhere else.
Hooligan
Legendary Member!
Posts: 865
Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2009 8:03 pm

Re: News & Discussion: Other Transport Projects

Post by Hooligan »

I thought Port Lincoln was the other main contender as the site for the SA capital?

Code: Select all

Signature removed 
Post Reply