[U/C] M2 North-South Motorway

[RetroGamer87]

Do you think it will be back to the 2015 version with an elevated road between Tonsley and Edwardstown, or do you think there will be more trench? It will clearly require bridges at several cross streets, but design of exits will need to be careful to ensure that traffic light queues don't trail back into the expressway itself. That seems to be the reason for the proposed flyover at Anzac Highway and the one at Ayliffes Road.

Would be VERY surprised if they built an elevated motorway. The reason it was built up at Wingfield is because the surrounding land is industrial and so no residents are affected, and IIRC something to do with the water table in the area. An elevated motorway through the suburbs would be extremely unpopular; just look at the response from the residents around Hove for a much smaller skyrail that would've had usable community space beneath the structure. An elevated motorway would still have South Road stuck beneath it.

A skyrail sounds kind of cool. I didn't hear any complains about the Melbourne skyrail.

[Saltwater]

I don't think anyone living in the shadows of an elevated motorway would be supportive. Especially in Adelaide where a north-south orientation would mean people on either side would never see a sunset or sunrise from their properties again. Luigi Rossi's proposal for an elevated motorway was quite rightly dismissed by both political parties for requiring substantial property acquisition and the blight on the landscape it would become.

[claybro]

I don't think anyone living in the shadows of an elevated motorway would be supportive. Especially in Adelaide where a north-south orientation would mean people on either side would never see a sunset or sunrise from their properties again. Luigi Rossi's proposal for an elevated motorway was quite rightly dismissed by both political parties for requiring substantial property acquisition and the blight on the landscape it would become.

furthermore-Adelaide is a flat city and very residential. Particularly the Western suburbs. The noise from an elevated structure of vehicles travelling at 80-90 km/h would be heard from a great distance..not ideal at all.

[SBD]

I don't think anyone living in the shadows of an elevated motorway would be supportive. Especially in Adelaide where a north-south orientation would mean people on either side would never see a sunset or sunrise from their properties again. Luigi Rossi's proposal for an elevated motorway was quite rightly dismissed by both political parties for requiring substantial property acquisition and the blight on the landscape it would become.

furthermore-Adelaide is a flat city and very residential. Particularly the Western suburbs. The noise from an elevated structure of vehicles travelling at 80-90 km/h would be heard from a great distance..not ideal at all.

The southern section that was proposed to be elevated was "North of Edward Street to South of Daws Road". That seems to be predominantly industrial and commercial, including Castle Plaza. The stated reasons for elevating this section were:

• This area is predominantly industrial/commercial and includes known contaminated soils that would
  require expensive remediation/disposal if disturbed;
• Lots of side road connections including East-West movements that service local area and facilities
  that do not need to interact onto the N-S Corridor;
• Minimal loss to visual amenity due to duplicating the existing elevated roadway over the rail corridor
  at Cross Road;
• Shallow groundwater along this road section leading to ongoing maintenance effort if an alternative
  treatment was selected;
• Greater flexibility for future rail/road separation as part of Emerson crossing upgrade.

I thought I had heard that the Superway was built to reduce construction risk in the southern one, to reduce construction delay if they discovered part-way through that they didn't know what they were doing. We saw during construction of the Darlington Trench delays due to failing to adequately manage the shallow water table. The Superway also gives a real-world example to measure noise pollution to compare with the current road and with trenched sections, and even to trial noise mitigation options if required.

I have cycled under the Superway, and don't recall thinking it was any louder than the roads I was on. The noise of constant traffic is also less disruptive than the noise of stop-start traffic.

[[Shuz]]

Elevated freeways are only cool if they go through industrial areas basically is the vibe.

[Vasco]

I don't think anyone living in the shadows of an elevated motorway would be supportive. Especially in Adelaide where a north-south orientation would mean people on either side would never see a sunset or sunrise from their properties again. Luigi Rossi's proposal for an elevated motorway was quite rightly dismissed by both political parties for requiring substantial property acquisition and the blight on the landscape it would become.

furthermore-Adelaide is a flat city and very residential. Particularly the Western suburbs. The noise from an elevated structure of vehicles travelling at 80-90 km/h would be heard from a great distance..not ideal at all.

The southern section that was proposed to be elevated was "North of Edward Street to South of Daws Road". That seems to be predominantly industrial and commercial, including Castle Plaza. The stated reasons for elevating this section were:

• This area is predominantly industrial/commercial and includes known contaminated soils that would
  require expensive remediation/disposal if disturbed;
• Lots of side road connections including East-West movements that service local area and facilities
  that do not need to interact onto the N-S Corridor;
• Minimal loss to visual amenity due to duplicating the existing elevated roadway over the rail corridor
  at Cross Road;
• Shallow groundwater along this road section leading to ongoing maintenance effort if an alternative
  treatment was selected;
• Greater flexibility for future rail/road separation as part of Emerson crossing upgrade.

I thought I had heard that the Superway was built to reduce construction risk in the southern one, to reduce construction delay if they discovered part-way through that they didn't know what they were doing. We saw during construction of the Darlington Trench delays due to failing to adequately manage the shallow water table. The Superway also gives a real-world example to measure noise pollution to compare with the current road and with trenched sections, and even to trial noise mitigation options if required.

I have cycled under the Superway, and don't recall thinking it was any louder than the roads I was on. The noise of constant traffic is also less disruptive than the noise of stop-start traffic.

There is plenty of residential in those areas including immediately behind the buildings facing south road. Those houses would face just as much devaluation and loss of amenity as those facing south road at mile end.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Saltwater]

Notwithstanding the disruption during construction, why not a cut and cover type tunnel through the area? Buy out the industrial and commercial properties along the existing road, use the land for temporary diversions and to dig a trench, cover, reinstate the surface roads and return the remaining land to commercial / industrial / medium density housing use?

[Llessur2002]

Kouts was on ABC 891 this morning talking about the NS corridor. Key points were that the reference design is due to be released by the end of the year, there will still be tunnels, and the main amendments to the design are around the tunnel exits - with the priorities being James Congdon Drive, Richmond Road and ANZAC Highway.

The way he was talking about the tunnels didn't really give the impression that there are going to be wholesale changes i.e. long tunnels to short tunnels so am still pretty sure the overall design will be very similar.

[aceman]

Kouts was on ABC 891 this morning talking about the NS corridor. Key points were that the reference design is due to be released by the end of the year, there will still be tunnels, and the main amendments to the design are around the tunnel exits - with the priorities being James Congdon Drive, Richmond Road and ANZAC Highway.

The way he was talking about the tunnels didn't really give the impression that there are going to be wholesale changes i.e. long tunnels to short tunnels so am still pretty sure the overall design will be very similar.

which seems to tie in with the demo that’s currently happening at clovelly park. Some properties are long gone, others are currently being torn down. Some are fenced off and the rest seem deserted with no one around. There’s only a handful that are still operating. same thing applies to the residential properties directly behind.

[rev]

Just imagine the certainty and boost to confidence it would provide property owners and business owners, if there was a clear and well laid out plan for not just the remainder of the corridor, but what's next, how it will be linked with the SEF, and beyond. Even civil firms and contractors would gain as they'd be able to do some forward planning.

[SBD]

Just imagine the certainty and boost to confidence it would provide property owners and business owners, if there was a clear and well laid out plan for not just the remainder of the corridor, but what's next, how it will be linked with the SEF, and beyond. Even civil firms and contractors would gain as they'd be able to do some forward planning.

The plan would be too far out to be helpful to contractors. It would probably be vague enough that property owners would be "not sure" so value would slump for any property that might be needed, or might be nearby.

I'm not even sure it's clear whether any proposed "link" would go across the south of the city ("Short South", tunnel near Springbank, or Cross Road) or up the east side (Portrush Road, GlobeLink etc). It will become an election issue for the election following the start of substantial construction on the last segment of the NSM, I expect.

Evidence of the flipping and flopping for the NSM shows that any "plan" put forward now by the state government is only as good as the next election anyway.

[claybro]

Just imagine the certainty and boost to confidence it would provide property owners and business owners, if there was a clear and well laid out plan for not just the remainder of the corridor, but what's next, how it will be linked with the SEF, and beyond. Even civil firms and contractors would gain as they'd be able to do some forward planning.

The plan would be too far out to be helpful to contractors. It would probably be vague enough that property owners would be "not sure" so value would slump for any property that might be needed, or might be nearby.

I'm not even sure it's clear whether any proposed "link" would go across the south of the city ("Short South", tunnel near Springbank, or Cross Road) or up the east side (Portrush Road, GlobeLink etc). It will become an election issue for the election following the start of substantial construction on the last segment of the NSM, I expect.

Evidence of the flipping and flopping for the NSM shows that any "plan" put forward now by the state government is only as good as the next election anyway.

Not sure I agree with this sentiment. The stop start nature of projects in the state were a big part of the reason the N/S corridor lost momentum, expertise and works...and is still not complete decades after being proposed. Infrastructure Australia have asked state governments (practically begged) of both parties over the years for plans -to spend funding in the state...but to no avail. The link between the SE freeway and N/S motorway is vital, and should already at least have a route planned, if not the finer details, and yet here we are-another change of governement, and changes to plans...holding things up again. A pipeline of ongoing works over the next decade would give contractors and engineering companies the confidence to set up divisions in the state (instead of plugging in workers from Melbourne ad hoc), and assist with reducing the brain drain as these projects require dedicated teams of architects, planners, fabricators, logistical contractors..the list goes on.

[rev]

Just imagine the certainty and boost to confidence it would provide property owners and business owners, if there was a clear and well laid out plan for not just the remainder of the corridor, but what's next, how it will be linked with the SEF, and beyond. Even civil firms and contractors would gain as they'd be able to do some forward planning.

The plan would be too far out to be helpful to contractors. It would probably be vague enough that property owners would be "not sure" so value would slump for any property that might be needed, or might be nearby.

I'm not even sure it's clear whether any proposed "link" would go across the south of the city ("Short South", tunnel near Springbank, or Cross Road) or up the east side (Portrush Road, GlobeLink etc). It will become an election issue for the election following the start of substantial construction on the last segment of the NSM, I expect.

Evidence of the flipping and flopping for the NSM shows that any "plan" put forward now by the state government is only as good as the next election anyway.

It doesn't need to be a final design.
It just needs to be put in stone basically, that yes we will build this or that, we have a wider infrastructure development plan that will be implemented, the finer details of which will be worked out in due course, with the aim of delivering this or that infrastructure by this time frame.

That at least gives contractors and firms some confidence that there will be work happening and they can plan accordingly.

For all we knew with a change in government, Labor could have said nope too expensive to finish the north south corridor, because the Libs spent too much, because of COVID, because of whatever reason they wanted to name, and it could then be decades before anything happens again.

Momentum has been lost on the north south corridor.
What's worse, there's nothing in the foreseeable future that anyone can point to that will come after the remaining section is completed.

We assume there will be something, but it's also just as likely that nothing major will be happening.
Will there be a link from the SEF to the NSM? Will there be something finally done about Portrush Road? Will they do it all and build an actual motorway ring route around Adelaide? Will there be tram extensions in to the suburbs? What? Nobody knows, because there is nobody in government thinking ahead, beyond the next election.

Victoria has infrastructure projects across road and public transport that will take them into the 2040's. Already planned and being worked on.

Then there's home owners and business owners.
Decades ago it was MATS. There were corridors allocated and reserved.
Then it all got scrapped and everything sold off. Then they allowed development to encroach on it all. Even in recent times, with work underway on sections of the north south corridor, they were still allowing new buildings to go up along other sections of South Road.
Then they turn around and say we're going to build tunnels. Then government changes and oooh wait a minute, we need to look at this again..

[NTRabbit]

Kouts was on ABC 891 this morning talking about the NS corridor. Key points were that the reference design is due to be released by the end of the year, there will still be tunnels, and the main amendments to the design are around the tunnel exits - with the priorities being James Congdon Drive, Richmond Road and ANZAC Highway.

The way he was talking about the tunnels didn't really give the impression that there are going to be wholesale changes i.e. long tunnels to short tunnels so am still pretty sure the overall design will be very similar.

which seems to tie in with the demo that’s currently happening at clovelly park. Some properties are long gone, others are currently being torn down. Some are fenced off and the rest seem deserted with no one around. There’s only a handful that are still operating. same thing applies to the residential properties directly behind.

Looks like the same salvage mob has the contract for all of them, so they're just taking it one building at a time since there's not really any rush, cheaper labour costs that way.

[SBD]

Will the "cost blowout" of the new Women's and Children's Hospital be met by changes to this project?

Will it by just pushing the costs "further to the right" (deferring construction), or will it become a cheaper design because the new attitude to heritage means it can be built straight through the Queen of Angels church, Thebarton theatre and Hindmarsh Cemetery?