Southern Cross Drive won’t be getting new roundabouts after all

thatsnotme 20 April 2012 27

southern cross drive

Territory and Municipal Services have a note on West Macgregor intersection upgrades.

Due to the projected increased construction costs for the protection and relocation of services on Southern Cross Drive, the upgrade of the Starke Street intersection will not be taking place.

Through the investigation of the proposed intersection upgrade options, it was identified that signalisation of Southern Cross Drive and Florey Drive will provide increased safety and allow works to be delivered within the budget.

Construction for the upgrade is due to commence by the end of April 2012 with practical completion estimated by the end of August 2012, pending weather.

The upgrade works for the Starke Street intersection has been postponed pending the identification of a safe and financially viable option, including signalisation of the existing layout.

So after the initial investigation of potential options to resolve the s***fight that is the Southern Cross / Florey Drive and Southern Cross / Starke St intersections found that roundabouts would be the best solution, we’re settling for some ‘increased safety’ by putting some traffic lights on the Florey Drive intersection, and just letting Starke St traffic fend for itself. Then possibly putting more lights on that intersection at some stage in the future.

Ok, so I get that the roundabout option may have blown out in cost due to existing services (although how in hell this wasn’t known before the plans were drawn up I’ll never know) but I really don’t understand how anyone could think that dealing with these intersections individually will ever work. The problem is that there are two high traffic intersections close to each other, and what happens to traffic at one effects the other.

So now there are lights at the Florey Drive intersection. Cars turning right out of Starke St now have to deal with traffic turning right from SC into Starke – which may be travelling more slowly now due to traffic banked up at the new lights ahead – as well as traffic travelling straight through towards Belco, affected in the same way. Traffic heading towards Macgregor West will hit SC in an uninterrupted line after getting a green light, and traffic turning right onto SC from Florey Drive will do the same thing. In busy times, the Starke St intersection just won’t be able to cop a break.

The Starke St intersection in incredibly bad. Visibility is terrible – when turning either way onto SC, traffic turning left onto Starke blocks visibility, so it’s difficult or impossible to see if there is other traffic travelling straight through. This latest plan won’t fix any of those issues.

I’d also love to know where the community consultation was with these plans. It was pure accident that I found these revisions to the previously announced plans. If I wanted to put an extension out the back of my place, I’d probably need to have a sign out the front, inform the neighbours, sacrifice a goat, and so on. Yet the government can announce one set of plans, then back out of them with nothing more than an update to a webpage, and that’s good enough?

Very disappointed.


View Larger Map


What's Your Opinion?


Please login to post your comments, or connect with
27 Responses to Southern Cross Drive won’t be getting new roundabouts after all
Filter
Order
thatsnotme thatsnotme 3:04 pm 13 Jul 12

I also note that the work that’s happening on the Florey Drive intersection seems to involve a hell of a lot of work to relocate services. There appears to have been a substantial amount of work involving underground pipes, and it looks like they’ve now started to remove the street lighting on the Kippax Centre side of the road, presumably because they’re planning to widen the road in that area.

So relocating services is too expensive, and traffic lights at the Florey Drive intersection is the answer, which involves relocating services, and which will likely make the Starke St intersection even worse.

This is one of those times when a picture really does tell a thousand words… http://i2.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/original/000/010/277/genius-meme.png

Jim Jones Jim Jones 2:59 pm 13 Jul 12

VYBerlinaV8_is_back said :

Perhaps we should put in some more speed cameras (at school zones, for example) on the basis that any and all revenue gained from them is to be spent on upgrading known black spots. That way the idiots can fund the cost of resolving issues such as this one, and nasty intersections and patches of road can be upgraded at zero net cost to the regular tax payer.

WON’T SOMEONE THINK OF THE TRADIES!!!

Jim Jones Jim Jones 2:51 pm 13 Jul 12

Muttsybignuts said :

Drive a few metres further up the road to Spofforth St for a glimpse into the future as to how this will pan out.

Notable that there have been speed vans out on Spofforth Street recently.

Despite all the speed humps, there are still c0ckheads who tool down the street at 80kph and more. I had one tailgating me the other day, who then proceeded to fang down the wrong side of the road at a fecking insane speed.

This is why we can’t have nice things.

VYBerlinaV8_is_back VYBerlinaV8_is_back 2:50 pm 13 Jul 12

Perhaps we should put in some more speed cameras (at school zones, for example) on the basis that any and all revenue gained from them is to be spent on upgrading known black spots. That way the idiots can fund the cost of resolving issues such as this one, and nasty intersections and patches of road can be upgraded at zero net cost to the regular tax payer.

Thumper Thumper 2:42 pm 13 Jul 12

( rumoured to be a Labor good old boy so the Gov kisses arse).

Not a rumour.

PBO PBO 2:41 pm 13 Jul 12

p1 said :

If the intersect(s) are reall that bad (and they are, I live near there too), and they are causing so many casualties, then maybe they should prioritize differently, and put in the best solution at the expense of spending the money somewhere else.

How much did 13 speed humps on Spofforth St cost for example?

Whatever it cost should be made public as should the name of who approved it. This is the stupidest installation that the guvmint has done yet!

Muttsybignuts said :

Drive a few metres further up the road to Spofforth St for a glimpse into the future as to how this will pan out. First some whinger complains that cars drive down their street too fast ( rumoured to be a Labor good old boy so the Gov kisses arse). The Government does what is does best and no doubt organised a consultant to assess the impact of change etc etc etc and 13 speed humps are placed, at decent cost to the tax payer, in 1 street. Naturally, everyone begins to whinge that there is a speed hump every few metres and so now, surprise surprise, some consultant is being paid to assess the impact of the speed humps. No doubt some of them will be removed making the exercise a complete waste of money.
The same will happen at the Florey drive/Southern Cross drive intersection. Claiming they cant afford roundabouts, the Government are putting in traffic lights ( seems like a LOT of work for traffic lights but anyway). As mentioned above, traffic lights will cause long backups in an already over congested area leading to more incidents. I too drive through it every day and it is a major pain in the arse.
After a few months, and no doubt another death, Government will pay some dickhead to reassess the situation, spend a fortune ripping out the traffic lights and putting in roundabouts or whatever else fixes the problem again, at great cost to us.
Meanwhile someone else will lose a father/mother/son/daughter so the Government can save some money.
A complete shambles.

I rarely drive there now as it really annoying, however when one of my mates is with me he points out the house of the guy who made the complaint. Apparently he does not like the golf course either.

Muttsybignuts Muttsybignuts 2:32 pm 13 Jul 12

Drive a few metres further up the road to Spofforth St for a glimpse into the future as to how this will pan out. First some whinger complains that cars drive down their street too fast ( rumoured to be a Labor good old boy so the Gov kisses arse). The Government does what is does best and no doubt organised a consultant to assess the impact of change etc etc etc and 13 speed humps are placed, at decent cost to the tax payer, in 1 street. Naturally, everyone begins to whinge that there is a speed hump every few metres and so now, surprise surprise, some consultant is being paid to assess the impact of the speed humps. No doubt some of them will be removed making the exercise a complete waste of money.
The same will happen at the Florey drive/Southern Cross drive intersection. Claiming they cant afford roundabouts, the Government are putting in traffic lights ( seems like a LOT of work for traffic lights but anyway). As mentioned above, traffic lights will cause long backups in an already over congested area leading to more incidents. I too drive through it every day and it is a major pain in the arse.
After a few months, and no doubt another death, Government will pay some dickhead to reassess the situation, spend a fortune ripping out the traffic lights and putting in roundabouts or whatever else fixes the problem again, at great cost to us.
Meanwhile someone else will lose a father/mother/son/daughter so the Government can save some money.
A complete shambles.

Jim Jones Jim Jones 2:18 pm 13 Jul 12

Jethro said :

wildturkeycanoe said :

It will be interesting to see how far back the eastbound traffic will pile up, preventing a right turn from Starke St. during morning peaks. That will cause a lot of tension and frustration no doubt, leading to the inevitable accident when someone tries to squeeze in to the queue.

Thought I’d revive this old thread.

Driving through the roadworks at the Florey Drive intersection over the past few days has given an indication as to what type of impact traffic lights at Florey Drive will have on traffic coming out of Starke St.

The roadworks are currently using men with signs in place of lights to regulate traffic flow through the Florey Drive intersection. Judging by the amount of time they give to the various sets of traffic going through the intersection, the impact on traffic flow is likely quite similar to the impact the lights will have on traffic flow.

Pulling out of Starke Street has become even more of a shit fight than usual, as traffic heading eastbound on southern cross backs up well past Starke St while they wait for their turn to go.

Why is it that any untrained pleb who uses this road could have predicted this, but the so-called experts doing the actual planning couldn’t?

Yep – it’s a total sh1tf1ght and only going to get worse as West Macgregor fills up further.

I’m still amazed at the amount of c0ckheads who tool down the hill at 80kph or more (weaving through traffic) despite the big flashing ‘SLOW DOWN’ sign and flowers/wreaths left to commemorate people who’ve died on the road.

Anyone who pulls this kinda crap on that stretch of road is a complete f#ckwit.

Jethro Jethro 1:53 pm 13 Jul 12

wildturkeycanoe said :

It will be interesting to see how far back the eastbound traffic will pile up, preventing a right turn from Starke St. during morning peaks. That will cause a lot of tension and frustration no doubt, leading to the inevitable accident when someone tries to squeeze in to the queue.

Thought I’d revive this old thread.

Driving through the roadworks at the Florey Drive intersection over the past few days has given an indication as to what type of impact traffic lights at Florey Drive will have on traffic coming out of Starke St.

The roadworks are currently using men with signs in place of lights to regulate traffic flow through the Florey Drive intersection. Judging by the amount of time they give to the various sets of traffic going through the intersection, the impact on traffic flow is likely quite similar to the impact the lights will have on traffic flow.

Pulling out of Starke Street has become even more of a shit fight than usual, as traffic heading eastbound on southern cross backs up well past Starke St while they wait for their turn to go.

Why is it that any untrained pleb who uses this road could have predicted this, but the so-called experts doing the actual planning couldn’t?

wildturkeycanoe wildturkeycanoe 7:15 pm 25 Apr 12

100% with you Jethro, how can we start a campaign to get this done? Likewise, I’ll support anyone who can organise a solution ASAP.

Jethro Jethro 5:54 pm 25 Apr 12

Jim Jones said :

Jethro said :

This is a disgrace. The Stake Street intersection has an accident there at least once a month, some quite serious.
Whatis the ongoing cost to the community of these constant crashs? How fixing these interesctions properly isn’t a priority is beyond me.

There’s been at least one accident there every friday night since I can remember.

I’m sure there have been. I was basing my comment on the number of accidents I’ve personally seen. You drive past a crash there at least once a month, so obviously the number of actual collisions is far higher.

The Starke St intersection is particularly dangerous. People pulling out of Starke are very often pulling out blind, due to the slip lane. Obviously they should be waiting until the blind spot clears. Kurva’s comment is fair enough… bad drivers cause accidents, not bad roads. But bad drivers on bad roads are a cause for disaster. You may as well remove the bad roads, because good drivers still get caught up in the crashes.

I have had about 5 close calls at the Starke St intersection in the past 3 years. In every case, a driver pulled out blind from Starke St and straight out in front of me. If it weren’t for the fact that I always drive slowly through that intersection and that I have the skills to emergency brake, I would have collided with those cars. Considering the fact I have 3 kids under 4 who sit in the back seat, a collision at that intersection could be very deadly and traumatic if a person, out of impatience, were to pull out of Starke and into the side of my car.

I wonder how many people/families have suffered serious injuries from collisions at this intersection?

An upgrade may cost a few million, but the ongoing cost of constant collisions, constant injuries and the fairly occasional casualty surely warrants the cost of a new roundabout. I would gladly vote for any potential MLA who campaigned on a platform of getting that intersection fixed, and I’m sure that many people in the West Belco area would. It is a dangerous intersection with too many blind spots and too much waiting time, hat causes too many people to make bad decisions to pull out, thereby causing too many serious collisions. The people whose cars are hit by the people pulling out are no way in the wrong, but too often they are the ones who suffer the lifelong consequences of collisions that occur at this intersection.

Jim Jones Jim Jones 3:03 pm 25 Apr 12

Jethro said :

This is a disgrace. The Stake Street intersection has an accident there at least once a month, some quite serious.
Whatis the ongoing cost to the community of these constant crashs? How fixing these interesctions properly isn’t a priority is beyond me.

There’s been at least one accident there every friday night since I can remember.

Jethro Jethro 11:53 am 25 Apr 12

This is a disgrace. The Stake Street intersection has an accident there at least once a month, some quite serious.
Whatis the ongoing cost to the community of these constant crashs? How fixing these interesctions properly isn’t a priority is beyond me.

wildturkeycanoe wildturkeycanoe 9:13 am 25 Apr 12

We can only hope that the new signals will include a bypass lane west-bound on Southern Cross Dr. so that traffic doesn’t build up toward the merge one lane.
Although, this will create a bottleneck when traffic tries to merge into SC Dr turning right from Florey Dr. so it probably won’t work either. Stop all the traffic or you haven’t fixed the problem at all.
It will be interesting to see how far back the eastbound traffic will pile up, preventing a right turn from Starke St. during morning peaks. That will cause a lot of tension and frustration no doubt, leading to the inevitable accident when someone tries to squeeze in to the queue.

p1 p1 10:15 pm 24 Apr 12

Sgt.Bungers said :

As usual, the “If it saves one life, it’s worth it” argument, only applies when it comes to draconian enforcement. When it comes to the government spending money, a cost benefit analysis with our lives apparently comes into play a bit more.

Yup, if it saves only one life it’s worth the cost…. …the cost of traffic lights on one intersection.

p1 p1 10:12 pm 24 Apr 12

thatsnotme said :

Kurva said :

Suck it up princess. You live in a place that is simple to drive in. The only issue with Canberra roads are the people driving on them – THE worst drivers in the country.

So have you ever actually driven in the area in question? Or are you just being a trolling arsehat? My money’s on option number two.

Clearly has also driven extensively in all the other cities, towns and regional areas in the country, while surveying the driving habits of the residents.

Trolling arsehat for sure.

Deckard Deckard 10:03 pm 24 Apr 12

I think if they use lights they need to have them on both intersections. Otherwise traffic heading east will bank up back past Starke St causing problems for people turning right from Starke on to SC Drive.

Could be a real ClusterF

thatsnotme thatsnotme 6:49 pm 24 Apr 12

Kurva said :

Suck it up princess. You live in a place that is simple to drive in. The only issue with Canberra roads are the people driving on them – THE worst drivers in the country.

So have you ever actually driven in the area in question? Or are you just being a trolling arsehat? My money’s on option number two.

Elizabethany Elizabethany 6:44 pm 24 Apr 12

I live near there, and go through those two intersections about 4 times a week, and this is the best news I have heard in a while. One of the main problems with both those intersections is that they ar eso far from traffic lights that there is rarely a good break in the traffic, and people need to take risks to get trough them. One set of traffic lights, while still not as good as two, will help break up the traffic more and make it more predictable. I am hoping it helps with Beaurepaire as well.

Sgt.Bungers Sgt.Bungers 6:26 pm 24 Apr 12

As usual, the “If it saves one life, it’s worth it” argument, only applies when it comes to draconian enforcement. When it comes to the government spending money, a cost benefit analysis with our lives apparently comes into play a bit more.

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top

Search across the site