News & Discussion: Adelaide City Council

[Will]

Love it,

On one hand David advocates for cheap parking in the city and how fantastic it is and the very next paragraph he talks about public transport.

did you not notice the cheaper parking is targeted at casual parkers? people who work in the city have to be there anyway so get them onto PT. Less cars at peak hour is a good thing. Giving casual parkers a better deal will encourage more people to use what the city has to offer. makes sense to me, or am i missing something?

No, you are not missing anything.

Some people on this forum seem to forget there are places or situations when it is not possible or too difficult to use public transport.

Until our public transport is made more reliable and cheaper, will people stop using their cars. I mean, $30.90 for 10 trips! what a rip-off!

[rhino]

$30.90 for 10 trips! what a rip-off!

Not sure if you're serious here or not. BTW it's $3.09 per trip, not $3.90

I get the bus in from Oakbank to the city every day, service is great, for a long trip I'm always in the city within 3 or 4 minutes of the usual time (not sure if that's the scheduled time, but it's very consistant), and $3.09/trip is dirt cheap for a 40km trip. Of course, if I lived in Parkside and had to pay the same price, I might think differently. But then, if I lived in Parkside I'd ride a bike.

[Nathan]

Love it,

On one hand David advocates for cheap parking in the city and how fantastic it is and the very next paragraph he talks about public transport.

did you not notice the cheaper parking is targeted at casual parkers? people who work in the city have to be there anyway so get them onto PT. Less cars at peak hour is a good thing. Giving casual parkers a better deal will encourage more people to use what the city has to offer. makes sense to me, or am i missing something?

No, you are not missing anything.

Some people on this forum seem to forget there are places or situations when it is not possible or too difficult to use public transport.

Until our public transport is made more reliable and cheaper, will people stop using their cars. I mean, $30.90 for 10 trips! what a rip-off!

Or if you happen to live within a reasonable vicinity of your your destination, you can get a 2 section multitrip for a much more reasonable $16.70.

[Will]

$30.90 for 10 trips! what a rip-off!

Not sure if you're serious here or not. BTW it's $3.09 per trip, not $3.90

I get the bus in from Oakbank to the city every day, service is great, for a long trip I'm always in the city within 3 or 4 minutes of the usual time (not sure if that's the scheduled time, but it's very consistant), and $3.09/trip is dirt cheap for a 40km trip. Of course, if I lived in Parkside and had to pay the same price, I might think differently. But then, if I lived in Parkside I'd ride a bike.

Yes, I'm being serious, however I see how in your circusmtance paying $30.90 for 10 trips is not a bad deal.

However, in my circumstance, paying $30.90 to get into the city, when I live 6km away seems excessive, not to mention it would mean having to wake up earlier, having to walk to the bus stop (rain, hail or shine), and getting home later. Furthermore, in my car I choose who comes in.

Some may think I'm lazy or a snob, but when using your car is more convinient, safer and not much more expensive, I really can't see how we will convince people to use public transport.

[crawf]

Maybe it's time we introduce proper zoning for public transport.

Eg..
Zone 1 - Central Suburbs
Zone 2 - Northern, Southern Suburbs and the Adelaide Hills

[rhino]

When I used to use my car for work, the tax man used to give me 56c/km for me to use my car. Not sure what I would get these days, no matter. The point is that I figured that that was how much it actually cost me to run my car, taking into account fuel, wear and tear, serviceing, depreciation, etc. So your 6km trip would cost you $3.36 if the going rate is still 56c/km, plus you would have to pay for parking. Plus you have to contend with traffic, which IMO is not a big deal, but it does mean that you can't be reading a book, watching a movie, making a phone call, sending an email, making a trade on the stockmarket, etc. And you don't get to stretch your legs walking to/from the bus stop.

The point I'm making is that your valid reasons for "driving trumps PT" are invalid for the guy next to you. It really comes down to what you choose to do.

[Alyx]

ADELAIDE City Council wants new State Government planning laws to limit the types of signs erected in Rundle Mall and new buildings to reflect Adelaide's "charm and historic' feel".

It also wants to ensure there is not a stark difference at the boundary between the area of the city where new laws will allow taller buildings and existing residential areas.

The recommendation focuses on where the new Capital City Zone borders residential areas "where developments are of significantly different scale".

It also says signage in Rundle Mall should "strengthen its built character and sense of place".

The council's City Design and Character Policy Committee is responding to the Government's new Development Plan Amendment which allows buildings of 30 storeys or more with Adelaide Airport approval.

The recommendations must be approved at a meeting of the full council on Monday before being put to the Government next month.

Lord Mayor Stephen Yarwood said the council supported the new DPA and felt its suggestions would improve it further.

He said the council was committed to working with the Government to deliver a "vibrant, accessible and liveable city".

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/adelaide- ... 6366096616

[crawf]

Sounds like another beat up by the tiser

[david]

In reply to Mattblack let me say that I am neither a rocket surgeon nor a brain scientist but merely a humble "local" politician. I must admit that on the issue of parking versus public transport I am walking on a policy and political tightrope!

Congestion in the city is not yet at crisis point but it is getting worse and the main cause is private motor cars, most of which are carrying just one person. Those that make the journey to work in the morning and home at night should surely be seriously considering the public transport option. Many factors will affect that choice but one must be the cost of parking. So if Council can increase the cost of long-term parking to more accurately reflect the value of the space occupied then I think I am making a useful contribution to the better enjpoyment of the city for all concerned. Short-term or casual parkers are the life-blood of the city and it is appropriate for us to make parking more attractive for those people. Ideally of course , they would all be on public transport and then we could begin to convert parking stations to affordable residential buildings!

And of course the quality of public transport will only improve withe greater patronage.

David
DLM, City of Adelaide.

[mutt]

thanks David for your propaganda telling the great unwashed they must take up the great unwashed option of public transport at all costs.
remember this is a city that has barely added 100,000 people in the past 2 decades
what kinds of kickbacks are the Adelaide City Councillors getting from the bus companies for increased patronage? can you declare no conflicts of interest here?

[Nathan]

Oh for crying out loud Mutt. It's about balancing various transport options. Whilst they are discouraging private car use slightly, it is not being eliminated. If you absolutely insist on driving so you don't have to breath the same air as all the poor unwashed, then you're still welcome to.

[Waewick]

And of course the quality of public transport will only improve withe greater patronage.

David
DLM, City of Adelaide.

I think this is the key - it is a chicken and egg situation which causes so many problems.

how to we have confidence in a system that has performed so poorly as it is, with even more people on it?

but more people on it = more revenue and more resources

that all being said, Melbourne and Sydney appear to have pretty poor public transport records, even with large patronage.

[rhino]

Perhaps if the Government was prepared to suffer a loss with public transport for the next 5 years or so, subsidise it to the point where it is so cheap that it really compeats with private transport even for short trips, just to get the masses using it, then generally decrease the subsidies as the volume of people using it allows it to better pay for itself. Of course this is only looking at one aspect: cost. No matter how cheap it is, people will not use it if it is unsafe or unreliable, but an increase in service could also be part of the loss sustained for the long term gain.

[mattblack]

In reply to Mattblack let me say that I am neither a rocket surgeon nor a brain scientist but merely a humble "local" politician. I must admit that on the issue of parking versus public transport I am walking on a policy and political tightrope!

Congestion in the city is not yet at crisis point but it is getting worse and the main cause is private motor cars, most of which are carrying just one person. Those that make the journey to work in the morning and home at night should surely be seriously considering the public transport option. Many factors will affect that choice but one must be the cost of parking. So if Council can increase the cost of long-term parking to more accurately reflect the value of the space occupied then I think I am making a useful contribution to the better enjpoyment of the city for all concerned. Short-term or casual parkers are the life-blood of the city and it is appropriate for us to make parking more attractive for those people. Ideally of course , they would all be on public transport and then we could begin to convert parking stations to affordable residential buildings!

And of course the quality of public transport will only improve withe greater patronage.

David
DLM, City of Adelaide.

Thankyou David for a considered and logical argument unlike the tripe in the very next post.

I am wondering though what the policy might be regarding parking that goes beyond those three hours. Does the rate go up considerably (like to $15 - $20 over 3 hours) to discourage over use.

Can I also take this opportunity to congratulate you on the ACC movement strategy. Very encouraging to see the direction that the Council and for that matter the State goverment on these very issues. Will only make for a far more livable and vibrant city in future years.

[monotonehell]

Perhaps if the Government was prepared to suffer a loss with public transport for the next 5 years or so, subsidise it to the point where it is so cheap that it really compeats with private transport even for short trips, just to get the masses using it, then generally decrease the subsidies as the volume of people using it allows it to better pay for itself. Of course this is only looking at one aspect: cost. No matter how cheap it is, people will not use it if it is unsafe or unreliable, but an increase in service could also be part of the loss sustained for the long term gain.

Not sure if you were implying that Adelaide Metro is run at a profit at now.

From what I remember a single adult trip ticket pays for approximately 75% of a bus ride and 50% of a train ride. The rest is made up by the government.