News & Discussion: Roads & Traffic

[realstretts]

Why can't some of you just accept that we need both better/more public transport and better road infrastructure?
No offence intended, but your attitudes and mentality are very similar to nimbys and appa members.

I have no problem with better road infrastructure, so long as it is well researched, planned and implemented AND does not come at the expense of promoting other forms of travel (which for the last 50 years it has done). Road infrastructure is by far more expensive to create and even more so to maintain therefore there is need for balanced planning. Following in the footsteps of other major cities around the world who spent billions on roads thinking they would solve societies congestion problems is not the right way to go. Roads solve some, but not all, problems.

I'll state my position here clearly. I am PRO road infrastructure when it is researched, planned and implemented in a beneficial way. In addition I am PRO the promotion of other forms of transport (PT/Cycling).

I am against doing things the same way we have been doing them for the last half century. By definition that sentence is not a conservative one, but a progressive one.

[Wayno]

This is interesting: http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/[email protected] ... 0July+2013

* 85% of Adelaide folk travel to work by car (highest of any Australian city). Melbourne 80%, Sydney 70%, Perth 83% (approximate).
* SA has the highest rate of car ownership in Australia (612 per 1000 people).

[Llessur2002]

Why can't some of you just accept that we need both better/more public transport and better road infrastructure?

Mainly because some of the above points equate 'better road infrastructure' with 'more road infrastructure'. I don't believe the latter is true - certainly not to any great extent.

I believe that we need to make better (i.e. less) use of our existing road infrastructure through better/more public transport (as well as incentives to use public transport and disincentives to driving).

The car parking levy would have been a step in the right direction as well as a yearly increase in CBD car parking prices until we are broadly in line with the other capital cities. This should be combined with a massive increase in public transport funding and an aggressive plan to significantly extend its reach.

Over time people will get the message, gradually switch over to public transport as and when it becomes cheaper and more convenient for them to do so until it loses the stigma it has in Adelaide. Given 20-30 years it'll just become the norm and we just won't need any more roads...

[realstretts]

This paper puts the average distance traveled to work in the Adelaide area at a measly 12.4kms. I cycle 17kms each way to Mawson Lakes. I wonder what percentage of the 85% who take the private vehicle are choosing to drive for a distance of <8kms (easily cyclable)?

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q= ... 0622,d.dGY

[claybro]

Over time people will get the message, gradually switch over to public transport as and when it becomes cheaper and more convenient for them to do so until it loses the stigma it has in Adelaide. Given 20-30 years it'll just become the norm and we just won't need any more roads...

And so we arrive back at the start. In order to attract people to PT there needs to be a comprehensive rapid and frequent network in place. At present all we have is a constantly delayed electrification programme of existing trains...not a single new line planned. The existing trains in some cases have stations placed less than 1km appart, but buses travelling on routes 40km parrallel to trains. An argument over the best use of the Outer Harbor line-with no firm plan. A vague concept of extended tramlines.....with no firm plans. With no plans in place, it has been easy for the government to weasel out of funding. All very lazy! With no funding and little new infrstructure it is too easy for developers just to keep building on the fringes and extending a bus route. Roads which are needed for commerce are clogged with school runs and commuters.
I would just like to see a comprehensive whole system plan for roads, and public transport which is interconnected, planned in stages-over 30years if required and funded.-then stick to it, otherwise in 30 years time..PT use will still not be the first choice in Adelaide, and the roads will still be a shambles.

[rev]

Why can't some of you just accept that we need both better/more public transport and better road infrastructure?

Mainly because some of the above points equate 'better road infrastructure' with 'more road infrastructure'. I don't believe the latter is true - certainly not to any great extent.

Better road infrastructure means building better roads.
The norht south corridor is a good example of this.

I believe that we need to make better (i.e. less) use of our existing road infrastructure through better/more public transport (as well as incentives to use public transport and disincentives to driving).

Money needs to be spent to make better use of it though.

The car parking levy would have been a step in the right direction as well as a yearly increase in CBD car parking prices until we are broadly in line with the other capital cities. This should be combined with a massive increase in public transport funding and an aggressive plan to significantly extend its reach.

What if I'm a disable person with a walking frame, or one of my relatives is, and I/they live in the southern suburbs and need to see a specialist in the city or do some shopping in the city. I/they should pay a parking levy?
What if they have an appointment early in the morning, do you expect a disabled person with a walking frame who can't stand for long periods, to catch a train? Or sit in an uncomfortable bus?

The problem with your opinion is that you are only thinking about what's applicable to you. You aren't taking into consideration that there are over a million people in this state who have different circumstances and requirements and job descriptions to you. That's what makes reading and replying to your posts on this so frustrating.

Over time people will get the message, gradually switch over to public transport as and when it becomes cheaper and more convenient for them to do so until it loses the stigma it has in Adelaide. Given 20-30 years it'll just become the norm and we just won't need any more roads...

See above.
But I agree, in time, with better public transport, people will get used to using it. That doesn't mean we don't need roads or better roads. Which is something I don't think you'll ever want to understand and accept.

[Goodsy]

The only real solution would be a complete overhaul of everything. Which would be in the hundreds of billions of dollars.

So lets recaim the Barker inlet, build a new CBD on it and start over.

[Nathan]

What if I'm a disable person with a walking frame, or one of my relatives is, and I/they live in the southern suburbs and need to see a specialist in the city or do some shopping in the city. I/they should pay a parking levy?
What if they have an appointment early in the morning, do you expect a disabled person with a walking frame who can't stand for long periods, to catch a train? Or sit in an uncomfortable bus?

The problem with your opinion is that you are only thinking about what's applicable to you. You aren't taking into consideration that there are over a million people in this state who have different circumstances and requirements and job descriptions to you. That's what makes reading and replying to your posts on this so frustrating.

And this is the other one that comes up after 'what about tradies and deliveries'. Why shouldn't they pay a parking levy? They're still using the same infrastructure as every one else. There's other ways for people with limited mobility to get around then driving themselves. There's scope for taxis and car share and there's scope for improving public transport so it is more accessible and comfortable for people with mobility issues. Or maybe if the specialist knows a decent amount of their client base requires parking, then they can supply it as part of their service (as some already do).

[rhino]

What if I'm a disable person with a walking frame, or one of my relatives is, and I/they live in the southern suburbs and need to see a specialist in the city or do some shopping in the city. I/they should pay a parking levy?
What if they have an appointment early in the morning, do you expect a disabled person with a walking frame who can't stand for long periods, to catch a train? Or sit in an uncomfortable bus?

The solution to this is sooo simple, and so common, that I'm surprised you even brought it up. There are plenty of needy groups of people who get exemptions from all manner of things.

[Llessur2002]

Rev,

I think you misunderstand or are misstating my views. I am by no means saying that we don’t need roads, nor am I saying we don’t need better roads. What I am saying is that we don’t need substantially more or substantially bigger roads.

The north-south corridor I am largely in favour of – Adelaide can’t really expand to the east and west and we have significant cities and tourist regions to our north and south. It makes sense to have a good, continuous north-south corridor primarily to enable *long-distance* movements (especially freight) along this route. I like the plan, it’s about as much in my back yard as it’s possible to get and I’m giving it a cautious thumbs up.

I also agree that much of our existing road structure could, and should, be improved. Some of the intersections we have are a nightmare and it would make good sense to improve them to increase safety and efficiency. Be this through overpasses, underpasses, tunnels I’m not too fussed. As long as the improvements are well-planned and carefully prioritised I don’t care.

My argument is against blindly increasing road capacity through building new roads and adding more lanes to existing roads. I don’t believe this is a sound long-term strategy to dealing with road congestion as it just puts the problem off for future generations to deal with. I don’t believe this is the right strategy for Adelaide nor any city in the developed world.

I’m advocating removing unnecessary traffic from our existing roads to free up space for necessary traffic. Now, of course I don’t have any data to hand to prove it but I’d bet the shirt off my back that a significant proportion of the peak hour traffic is single-occupant vehicles driven by people who live on viable public transport routes. I know many of them - I have family who live in Glenelg who commute every day by car to the city. I have a friend in Brompton(!) who commutes by car every day to the city. I have friends in Plympton who commute to the CBD each day by car. In my last job I had a colleague who lived a minute’s walk from Goodwood Road tram stop and worked less than 5 minutes’ walk from her house – yet every morning she drove her teenage kids to school in the City and then drove to work. I’ve spoken to all of these people about why they didn’t use public transport and the answer was essentially ‘it just wasn’t for them’.

I don’t think these people are unusual for Adelaide. I don’t think I’m crazy in classing these people, and a huge amount of other people who commute each day by car as ‘unnecessary road users’. They have viable alternatives. If we build more and better public transport then many many more people will have viable alternatives.

What if I'm a disable person with a walking frame, or one of my relatives is, and I/they live in the southern suburbs and need to see a specialist in the city or do some shopping in the city.

Well, then they’ll have a disability parking permit so in places they can't park for free this would provide an easy solution to ensure a concession that offsets the levy. In at least one of my posts above I’ve addressed people with ‘no viable public transport alternative’ – this would obviously include disabled people for whom private car is the only option.

In several of your comments above you’ve essentially accused me of suggesting that no-one in South Australia should drive their cars, that we don’t need any roads and that everyone should just hop on their nearest bus and suck it up. If you re-read my original posts you’ll hopefully see that's not the case.

Anyways, no point in arguing – I was just trying to provide an alternative view to the ‘old Adelaide’ thinking of more roads + more parking = she’ll be right mate.

[rev]

Rev,

I think you misunderstand or are misstating my views. I am by no means saying that we don’t need roads, nor am I saying we don’t need better roads. What I am saying is that we don’t need substantially more or substantially bigger roads.

Well it appears we do have a misunderstanding. From your posts, it seems you are staunchly PT-only. But I guess that's part of the problems when talking via text only.
No harm done eitherway.

My main gripe is with congestion isn't the roads, but the drivers. I find Adelaide drivers to be mostly just plain dumb and slow to react. Which comes back to one of my other arguments from a while ago about the need for better driver training rather then throwing up speed cameras, speed humps, and lowering speed limits.

We do agree it seems on public transport being in need of more funding. The tram network really needs to be expanded, I'm still in as much disbelief as I was when I found out that we had an extensive tram network that was ripped up decades ago. I just can't fathom why any government of any political ideology in this state, would do such a thing. I also can't understand why our state government after over a decade in power, hasn't come up with a detailed plan to build a bigger tram network throughout the CBD, North Adelaide, and other inner suburbs.

Part of the problem with the roads as they are now, isn't only that there is congestion, but that they are utterly crap. And it isn't just maintenance but their design. As for maintenance, it goes well beyond metropolitan Adelaide. Go for a drive to Moonta or Hamley Bridge if Moonta is too far. The state of some roads is shocking. On the way to Moonta there's roads that have patches of bitumen put on, it's disgraceful.

South Road is one example, and the bleeding obvious example since it's our main corridor from north to south.
The ring route is a joke. It needs to be looked at and done properly. A secondary ring route needs to be established further out through the suburbs. We need to recognize that heavy vehicles do not only use South Road, but other roads throughout the metropolitan area.
That is pretty much all that is necessary as far as making bigger roads. The only new road that's going to be created, or would be if they looked at the ring route/s, is the Northern Connector.

I look forward to the day they finish the north-south corridor and give it one name, preferably "something" freeway, just to rub it in the nimby's faces a little.

So essentially what's missing and what's needed, is a comprehensive and detailed transport plan. It'll take at least 15 years to sort this mess out. And the problem with that is that obviously when(or if lol) the Liberals come into government, any project that isn't already well underway with actual roadwork, will likely be cancelled.
And then when Labor comes back into power, they'll have other priorities as the Liberals will have made a mess of this or that. And vice versa of course.

[jk1237]

So what does that say about our city vs others? It is way too easy/cheap to take the car into the cbd so why even consider another option?

yes, exactly. There is little incentive to take PT because driving the car into the CBD and parking is too easy. Just under half of all trips to the CBD are done by PT, whereas all the other big 4 cities are between 70-85%.

Rev, all trams and trains, and about 80% of buses are low floor which means that cater for wheelchairs, so non-argument

Waewick, come on, you cant be serious. Its embarrassing because our over-reliance on cars makes us look like an unsophisticated country town, not a city. Its ridiculous, and the Adelaide establishment are at it again by opposing improvements to public transport by protesting against the new obahn tunnel through the east parklands, which will actually result in a net gain to parkland space. Funny how they don't call for less roads in the parklands, because this would go against their senile conservative values of driving their car everywhere

[muzzamo]

Maybe the solution is two words - Price signal. Make PT financially attractive compared to driving (via whatever method works best. i'm no expert but maybe a congestion tax on certain roads, at certain times of day. Scan registration plates and you receive a monthly 'peak traffic road user' bill - exclude commercial vehicles).

This is very close to exactly what needs to be done.

I disagree that you would remove commercial vehicles from the toll - they need to be there too. Truth is, they would have no problem whatsoever with paying, as the commercial benefit they get from using the road space is far in excess of the price they pay to use the road.

[rev]

Rev, all trams and trains, and about 80% of buses are low floor which means that cater for wheelchairs, so non-argument

I wasn't talking about wheelchairs. But whatever.

Waewick, come on, you cant be serious. Its embarrassing because our over-reliance on cars makes us look like an unsophisticated country town, not a city. Its ridiculous, and the Adelaide establishment are at it again by opposing improvements to public transport by protesting against the new obahn tunnel through the east parklands, which will actually result in a net gain to parkland space. Funny how they don't call for less roads in the parklands, because this would go against their senile conservative values of driving their car everywhere

They oppose it because they are self interest groups. Because it will "split" their park or whatever.
Who knows, like I said these groups should be ignored and marginalized by government and the rest of society.
The problem is that Murdoch Limited gives them all the attention they want, which is then promptly followed by the tv networks trying to keep up with the latest sensationalist over blown bullshit created in the paper.

This is one of the reasons I keep saying we need a second daily paper from Fairfax. Or a daily print of InDaily.
We badly need another news outlet in this state.

[realstretts]

This is one of the reasons I keep saying we need a second daily paper from Fairfax. Or a daily print of InDaily.
We badly need another news outlet in this state.

+1000 the amount of times I hear relatives etc regurgitate Advertiser diatribe makes my brain hurt