The PortBUG has been trying to liaise with the Project Team building a new 16km bikeway alongside the new Northern Connector freeway. For those who don't know this bikeway follows the new roadway South to the current T-junction interchange where South Road meets the Port River Expressway. The NC itself will in effect take South Road northwards beyond the Port Expressway to eventually join up with the Northern Expressway.
It has been a frustrating process thus far! As far as the PortBUG can see, there are some fundamental questions to be asked as to how the new NC Bikeway will actually connect in any secure or useful manner with metro bike networks and routes. We all know that a bikeway can only be of any use if it facilitates secure and convenient travel to target destinations. At present we cannot see how the NC Bikeway can achieve this.
The only information that appears available is an online plan. It shows the NC Bikeway somehow crossing the ramp roads and then Port Expressway itself and joining up with the breakdown lanes/paved shoulders on the Prexy towards Port Adelaide in one direction and Eastwards towards Mawson Lakes in the other. No indication or bridges, underpasses or anything else!
So our fundamental question is how this crossing will be achieved? How does the bikeway safely cross both the Northern Connector’s new ramp ways and the 4 traffic lanes on the Port Expressway itself? These crossings have to be achieved before bicycle users can connect to any metropolitan bike routes or networks, including the bike lanes on the renovated South Road!
In the absence of any bridges or underpasses on the online plans we cannot understand how these crossings are to be achieved, nor can we see that simply linking the NC bikeway to the paved shoulders on the Prexy constitutes any useful connectivity to the Adelaide Metro bike networks at all. 
We have not been privy to the brief that LendLease has been provided with in taking on the NC Project, so we simply do not know what Government requires the project to achieve in building the bikeway. However we cannot believe that the brief does not require effective connectivity in one form or another to existing and proposed bike networks such as:
- the Gawler Greenway
- the East-West Connector between Enfield and Rosewater (along the disused Gillman Rail Corridor)
- the proposed Port Expressway Bikeway.
Nor can we believe that the project brief requires an outcome that puts cyclists at risk in any way!
Neither the PortBUG nor - as far as we can ascertain - any of the Peak Cycling Organisations (BISA, BicycleSA, Cycling SA) in South Australia have been consulted at all about the design of the bikeway or the connectivity issues we're concerned with.
We have raised a number of questions with the NC Project Team and with Minister Mullighan. It seems somewhat alarming that at this stage of the project  the design of the bikeway has not been resolved (construction has actually started on the Southern Interchange at the Prexy/South Rd junction). 
The PortBUG has suggested that there needs to be - in the first instance - some means by which the NC Bikeway can securely cross the Port River Expressway. This seems best done by provision of a steel, prefabricated bridge such as commonly used in the Netherlands and elsewhere. This would keep bicycle users right away from hazards associated with at-grade crossings (walking across ramps etc) and would facilitate DPTI’s connection to the bike routes mentioned.  
We would be interested to know if other bicycle users have more information about the design of this NC Bikeway than we've been able to dig up. It would also be interesting to know if the Peak cycling organisations or any of the other BUGs have been consulted?
I'll attach a snap shot taken from the online plan I've linked to above. I look forward to hearing from others who may be better informed...
Sam P.
Secretary, PortBUG.

Views: 703


Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

From memory the proposed crossing of the Port Expressway is via a culvert prone to flooding. Of marginal usefulness in other words, just like the Dry Creek underpass at Port Wakefield Rd which is often a metre deep.

Cycling infrastructure, merely an afterthought yet again. Sigh.

I hope PortBUG are able to negotiate a more practical solution.

"just like the Dry Creek underpass at Port Wakefield Rd which is often a metre deep."

The group went to cross it again a few days ago, , it's a bloody disgrace !   I believe it's affected by high tides as well ,  + no drainage . Well done whoever designed this  !  

I would love to speak face to face to the engineer who okayed it and ask some pointed questions about his design. It was bad enough before they added the downstream wing wall, now it just traps run off from the highway above. Why wasn't a one way drain valve added at the lowest point? It beggars belief that anyone could sign off on the job and keep a straight face.

Before the downstream wing wall was added at least it would drain out every day:

Oh and in case the engineer thinks "one metre deep" is hyperbolic, I see that it's only around 600mm deep at most. Almost empty by the standards of the Dry Creek I'd say!!!

I asked the northern connector project the same question in March 2017 and got the reply: “The design for the Shared Use Path has not yet been finalised – the drawings noted below are from the reference design that is currently being further developed.

Further information regarding the path will be uploaded on to the website as it becomes available”

From Cycling Aspects of Austroads 2017, page 107 or pdf page 116
Use of existing culverts
. . . A drainage culvert should not cater for cyclist/pedestrian use unless it satisfies the recommendations in Section 7.6.2 of the Austroads Guide to Road Design Part 6: Road Design, Safety and Barriers (AGRD06, (Austroads 2010a)) for drainage, whilst providing adequate vertical clearance. Appropriate warning signs should be installed advising of alternative crossing points for use during higher water flows. A connecting path between the recreational path and the road is always provided to facilitate access to the path and is generally suitable for use as a bypass during high water flows. It is essential that good sight distance is provided to the culvert entrances so that cyclists have adequate warning and can see any debris, silt, etc. that may have built up around and in the culvert during and after these conditions.
If an underpass is used the alignment of the path on the approach should be designed such that users can see through the culvert. Vandal-proof lighting should also be provided in underpasses for shared paths.


Support our Sponsors

© 2020   Created by Gus.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Privacy Policy  |  Terms of Service