Victory declared on the GDE front

johnboy 7 December 2008 28

Comrade Stanhope is celebrating massive improvements to his pathetic initial efforts to build the vexed Gungahlin Drive Extension.

    Peak-hour traffic on a popular section of the Gungahlin Drive Extension will flow more easily within weeks, with Caswell Drive southbound between the Aranda on-ramp and the City off-ramp to be duplicated by Christmas.

    Chief Minister and Minister for Transport Jon Stanhope said the 1.35km duplication would ease peak-hour pressure caused by slower-travelling merging traffic joining traffic travelling from Gungahlin.

    Scheduled for completion by the middle of next year are noise screening and visual screening for residents of Araba Street, in Aranda, and repaving of the intersection of the GDE and Belconnen Way.

Shame he didn’t build it right the first time around, but I imagine the Gungahlinoids will be thrilled by any improvement in their miserable lot.

Indeed our very own Gungahlin Al has put out a media release welcoming this breakthrough, but venturing up to the front with his bowl and asking for more please.


What's Your Opinion?


Please login to post your comments, or connect with
28 Responses to Victory declared on the GDE front
Filter
Order
Xbikee Xbikee 2:54 am 15 Dec 08

That new “uplifting” piece of additional-shite-road-seal on top of old Gunghalin Drivenear Mitchell makes for interesting semi-flight for Vespas and Bugs …

JC JC 9:10 pm 14 Dec 08

The Barton highway potholes are as a result of a botched hotmix resealing job. I recall it caused a big disturbance at the time.

Growling Ferret Growling Ferret 7:47 am 14 Dec 08

I was impressed with the pot holes on the new bit of GDE. 3-4 metres long and up to a foot deep.

Not a great advertisement for the road construction company.

The Barton Highway potholes near Gold Creek are also something to behold.

JC JC 3:43 am 14 Dec 08

Gungahlin Al said :

Christ JC: what part of “putting down a waterproof bitumen skin first” didn’t you understand??

In Qld I lived on a very dangerous corner on an open road. Many accidents – especially when wet. Main Roads resurfaced the stretch using this exact approach. I meant that there was no water laying on the surface, therefore no aquaplaning. The water runs off the the sides underneath the surface. Making the need for a properly shaped water table for the impermeable layer critical of course, but eminently doable. There was also a proportion of the content that was rubber crumb if I recall correctly – for additional grip.

Didn’t ever say they put down a waterproof layer below the road, the point I was making is the road surface is not porus and the water sure the shit doesn’t drain off through the road surface.

Asphalt and bitumen both have water proofing characteristic, as well as being able to bind aggregate which is why both are used for road surfaces.

Living in Gungahlin you should be able to see daily how roads are built. The basics are as follows. Drainage in the form of ag type pipe is layed down the side of the road. On top of that drains and concrete guttering are built (sometimes the gutter is off the side of the road in the form of an open drain). A road base os put down. It is then sprayed with this water proof membraine you speak of, which is actually there to help bind the base and the surface. Next the road surface goes down. The surface is cambered such that water flows off to the sides to the gutters and hence the drains.

The problem is over time the road craks and allows water to get in, that is when the road needs to be resealed. This can be done by skimming the surface and putting down a fresh layer of asphalt or as is done in Canberra sprayed with a form of tar. The tar if left as is is too slippery hence why they then put down a bed of rocks to form the road surface.

Pot holes come about when the road surface gets water underneath which leads to the base swelling and the surface cracking. If as you say water drains out under the road then please explain what causes pot holes?

Gungahlin Al Gungahlin Al 11:30 am 09 Dec 08

Christ JC: what part of “putting down a waterproof bitumen skin first” didn’t you understand??

In Qld I lived on a very dangerous corner on an open road. Many accidents – especially when wet. Main Roads resurfaced the stretch using this exact approach. I meant that there was no water laying on the surface, therefore no aquaplaning. The water runs off the the sides underneath the surface. Making the need for a properly shaped water table for the impermeable layer critical of course, but eminently doable. There was also a proportion of the content that was rubber crumb if I recall correctly – for additional grip.

JC JC 5:13 pm 08 Dec 08

Gungahlin Al said :

Yes Ant, same sort of thing happened to me when I fell over on our street in Narrabundah – still got the scarred knee to show for it.

JC I beg to differ, and Roads ACT confirmed as much in a ministerial reply to me where they claimed that it was a good road surface.

The hotmix used in suburban streets and what is generally used on open roads can be quite different though. The open road variant involves putting down a waterproof bitumen skin first, then the asphalt over the top is quite porous. This allows rain to run through and off the surface, then drain away to the side underneath – really helps prevent aquaplaning.

You better go check with roads ACT again, because a porus road is what causes potholes. Ie the water gets underneath washes away the road base, which leaves a hole that then colapses. I have never heard of a road draining off underneath, I mean to say think about it, where are the drains? The whole idea of resealing the road is to SEAL it, to put down a water proof layer so that the water doesn’t go in and washes off to the drains or the verge on the side of a road, for one without gutters.

And yes spray pave and resealing are two different things. Both end up with a noisy road surface, that in some ways is good, some ways bad. Oh just to clarify the spary pave is always bloody bad.

H1NG0 H1NG0 3:19 pm 08 Dec 08

They don’t need to make Stanhope look bad, thats the only thing he does well.

Mr Evil Mr Evil 2:44 pm 08 Dec 08

imhotep said :

fozzy said :

… Gary Humphries had John Howard cut the funds available… to make Stanhope look bad.

Ah, a cunning plan indeed. And your evidence for this is?

I suppose John Howard and Gary Humphries also lit the 2003 Fires and also created the Rhodium fiasco to make Jon look bad too?

pug206gti pug206gti 1:51 pm 08 Dec 08

Any word on whether the horrid double-merge off the bottom of the GDE onto Parkes Way will be fixed? I suggest two long laneoneforms for another few hundred metres.

p1 p1 10:02 am 08 Dec 08

And while they are at it, the bit from Barton Highway to the Federal Highway would be nice.

H1NG0 H1NG0 8:22 am 08 Dec 08

1.35km? Are you sure Stanhope? I’d say it would be about 800m at best. Duplicating that small area is a good start, but what about the dual lanes from Barton Highway to Belconnen Way? That is a far bigger problem.

Xbikee Xbikee 6:28 am 08 Dec 08

Baldwin Drive came up rather well after the recent hot mix “re-seal” …

Gungahlin Al Gungahlin Al 5:49 am 08 Dec 08

Yes Ant, same sort of thing happened to me when I fell over on our street in Narrabundah – still got the scarred knee to show for it.

JC I beg to differ, and Roads ACT confirmed as much in a ministerial reply to me where they claimed that it was a good road surface.

The hotmix used in suburban streets and what is generally used on open roads can be quite different though. The open road variant involves putting down a waterproof bitumen skin first, then the asphalt over the top is quite porous. This allows rain to run through and off the surface, then drain away to the side underneath – really helps prevent aquaplaning.

hax hax 12:15 am 08 Dec 08

That’s how Stanhope works isn’t it? Do things poorly, then attempt to look great because they are always ‘improving’ things.

Roads have never been worse. They just don’t do them properly from the start, which I suspect in the end costs more and causes more inconvenience – you have to basically put up with permanent potholes in between cheapo road maintenance which gives you a decent surface for maybe a few weeks.

I think it’s worth saving up and doing roads properly from the start, even if you have to wait a little longer.. but that’s just me

ant ant 9:41 pm 07 Dec 08

Gungahlin Al said :

And suburban streets such as those around Hackett and Watson that have been spraypaved should have hotmix.

Now I know what you’re talking about! Watson had those rough stones embedded in bitumen in the 60s… I grew up in watson and almost ground my big toe down to a stump one day, using my foot to stop/turn my bike. Gawd it hurt and made a mashed mess of my toe.

Very Busy Very Busy 9:12 pm 07 Dec 08

By the time this road is finally completed properly in 2012 it will have taken 7 years to build (twice). What a joke!!! Complete and utter infrastructure mismanagement and the ratepayers of Canberra foot the bill.

And, the peak hour bottleneck on the Caswell drive section has just been moved further south to where William Hovell intersects and forms one lane. If it had to be only single lane initially, you would think that at least the bridges would have been built to accomodate the extra lanes in the future. A blatent non caring waste of our money!!!!

JC JC 8:48 pm 07 Dec 08

Gungahlin Al said :

Bloody spray pave – now the mongrels have gone and laid it over a patch of the original Gungahlin Drive.

Roads such as these should have full-depth self-draining asphalt. Nothing less. And suburban streets such as those around Hackett and Watson that have been spraypaved should have hotmix.

Those roads are not spray pave. They are roads that are normal hotmix that have been resealed. This has been the practice in the ACT for as lonh as I can recall. Bottom line is it is too expensive to reseal roads by stripping them back and putting down hotmix. In places such as Sydney where they do this it is because the road is buggered and needs it, in our case the roads have just become porus.

Spray pave on the other hand is what they used on sections of the GDE. Ie they built a road based, sprayed and put gravel on it. Sure the end result looks the same as a resealed road, but like I said they are two different things. Will agree though GDE and all new major roads should have been done properly with a hotmix surface.

imhotep imhotep 8:42 pm 07 Dec 08

housebound said :

” JS doesn’t need any help from Humphreys or Howard to look bad.”

I agree. I was being sarcastic in my comment. That post of Fozzy’s was one of the least convincing conspiracy theories I’ve heard.

.

housebound housebound 8:36 pm 07 Dec 08

Cunning plan? I’m not so sure Humphreys is quite as malicious as that, or that Howard actually listened to Humphreys or anyone else when it came to funding/non-funding of ACT interests. Why would he – we’re not exactly a marginal electorate.

And anyway, JS doesn’t need any help from Humphreys or Howard to look bad.

imhotep imhotep 8:26 pm 07 Dec 08

fozzy said :

… Gary Humphries had John Howard cut the funds available… to make Stanhope look bad.

Ah, a cunning plan indeed. And your evidence for this is?

.

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top

Search across the site